I love this forum for the replies here - Everyone beat me to it - verbatim down to the perpetual motion machines.
I'm no physicist but IIRC the 2nd law of thermodynamics works in a one way direction - ENTROPY (equilibrium) MUST ALWAYS win (Your cup of coffee doesn't get hotter and hotter after its heated because there are exponentially more particles (air, the cup itself, you touching the cup, you touching the coffee itself) FIGHTING YOUR COFFEE to split the temperature differences.
There is confusion here because "down to the quantum level - things start behaving funny (particles in two places at once - showing two or more polarities at the same time) - The only energy generating devices that I know of, require motion to produce electricity - If QEG worked, there would have to be a feedstock and that feedstock would still ultimately result with a net 0 or more likely a net negative energy cost (same argument for why biodiesel has not yet taken over the world. [
According to this article, On average, there is about a 10 percent reduction in power. In other words, it takes about 1.1 gallons of biodiesel to equal 1 gallon of standard diesel.] The reality is that Fuel companies are Capitalists and would rather be the 1st movers of a cheaper newer technology if it were truly cost effective over petroleum based fuels and lubricants).
What you see and what the "so called scientist touting QEG" see, is an electrical output that is likely caused by something like a reserve power source that is connected. Real scientists will give a hypothesis and through structured experimentation requiring control groups and repeatability, will precisely explain the mechanics and principles at work and also show "proof of work" through the mathematics to PROVE that their technology indeed produces cheaper source of fuel|electricity.
If someone attempts to present a new disruptive level technology and they use vague language that is emotionally charged = RED FLAGS.
I'm not saying that its impossible to eventually have Quantum energy | free energy | zero point energy (we already do - isn't static electricity considered free power that can be generated?) But I am saying that IF SOMEONE DID TRULY make something revolutionary, they aint going to youtube or to 'above top secret' they are working non-stop in their lab to verify repeatability of results and from there, if promising they proceed to patent the design for fear of IP theft, then they license it and make billions of dollars, before recieving a nobel peace prize for pioneering the next phase of power evolution
Does that make sense?
