Language: 
To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
  the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.

GDPR and DSGVO law

Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding

User Menu

Google Search

Custom Search

Author Topic: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011  (Read 670061 times)

Offline infringer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 800
    • mopowah
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #480 on: April 02, 2011, 11:01:57 PM »
Rosemary,

I see good applications with this technology in heating of air and water do you have any plans to use this technology for those applications? Or is there a better way to apply this technology I know you have stated led lighting. Do you have any circuits prefabbed up for sale in lighting or heating I would like to test the tech in real world situations not do math or theories if it lights up a light or heats whatever for the average life of the battery we have a real life application sounds simple enough to me ...

What is the real challenge of putting this device into a real life application other then yourself holding yourself back you are not seeking a patent this circuit is open and free as you said. If you build it people will buy it if it works as promised.

Offline hartiberlin

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8012
    • free energy research OverUnity.com
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #481 on: April 03, 2011, 04:11:25 PM »


The approach and technique you are discovering and exploring has been used in switch-mode power supplies for almost fifty years, so your discovery is not new but it's very cool knowledge that lots of other smart circuit guys use all the time.  I really enjoyed the the last few sentences in the Personal Anecdote section.  Good advice!  :)

As I said before,
simulations in this case do not apply, because the new physics is not yet programmed into them.

The ou effect comes inside the battery as in Bedinis devices.

Offline poynt99

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 3582
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #482 on: April 03, 2011, 04:24:13 PM »
As I said before,
simulations in this case do not apply, because the new physics is not yet programmed into them.

The ou effect comes inside the battery as in Bedinis devices.

Then would you agree Stefan that it is imperative to obtain an accurate measurement of INPUT power from the battery?

Here is a method that appears to work well, without the need for an oscilloscope:

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=10564.msg280282#msg280282

.99

Offline WilbyInebriated

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3141
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #483 on: April 03, 2011, 10:09:34 PM »
poynt, thanks for your continued efforts. re: this method you propose, have you 'provided this works in all cases and is not erroneous'?

Offline poynt99

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 3582
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #484 on: April 04, 2011, 02:17:59 AM »
poynt, thanks for your continued efforts. re: this method you propose, have you 'provided this works in all cases and is not erroneous'?

Other than in the sim, I have not.

An important caveat, and this applies even with scope probes, the leads should be kept "normal" to any current-carrying wiring so as to minimize induced voltage. Also, it would be of benefit to provide some Faraday shielding around the bulk of the apparatus to minimize EMI.

I will have to bring out the old "switching device" from a couple years back and try this. If I can get close correlation between a scope measurement and the proposed meter measurement, I think we're good to go.

.99

Offline Magluvin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5886
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #485 on: April 04, 2011, 08:33:28 AM »
Hey Rose

Here is a link location of 3 posts in a row that you may want to see.

I show that I start with a 10uf cap at 1000v, and only make 2 conversions and end up with a 10uf cap at 1001.25v  !!!

Its very simple. And Im tired.   ;]

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=8841.msg280380#msg280380

Mags loop+

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #486 on: April 04, 2011, 10:11:03 AM »
Hi all.  So nice to get back here.  I couldn't get any connectivity since Saturday.  Don't ask why.  It's an endless - endless battle all of which simply adds more 'scope' to my general complaint against whoever it is that wants this technology silenced.  But we're battling on.  And right now we're connected. 

I'll answer your posts individually.

Kindest regards,
Rosemary


Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #487 on: April 04, 2011, 10:57:40 AM »
Rosemary,

I see good applications with this technology in heating of air and water do you have any plans to use this technology for those applications? Or is there a better way to apply this technology I know you have stated led lighting. Do you have any circuits prefabbed up for sale in lighting or heating I would like to test the tech in real world situations not do math or theories if it lights up a light or heats whatever for the average life of the battery we have a real life application sounds simple enough to me ...

What is the real challenge of putting this device into a real life application other then yourself holding yourself back you are not seeking a patent this circuit is open and free as you said. If you build it people will buy it if it works as promised.

Hi infringer.  Not sure of the question.  There is indeed no patent - and the entire impossibility of ever applying a patent - is the first point.  Even if it were a 'novel' appliction of using the heat produced from parastic oscillations - the fact is that the knowledge of this potential use is now PUBLIC KNOWLEDGE.  It's published in the public domain - on my blog.  So.  Unfortunately, it seems that I've shot myself in the foot - if my intention was EVER to patent any part of this technology.

Then. I most certainly want to get this to APPLICATION phase.  It would be nice if we all worked towards this.  It's no good knowing of an economical means of generating electricity without also exploring all possible ways of applying it.  Specifically what's holding me back is that I want to advance the 'concepts' related to the thesis.  I am of the opinion that when the 'thinking' is better understood then the applications will be less 'haphazard' based, as they are at present - on a mishmash of thinking and mainstream concepts.  I will take the liberty of again pointing to my blog post related to this.  But I also see, from the lack of comments related to my explanation that it's still as clear as mud.  LOL.   I'm going to work on a series of diagrams that I hope will make that explanation clearer.  In fact - I've started on this already.  As they say.  A picture is worth a thousand words.

I've also been given to understand that it's possible to generate motorised energy from heat.  That's another string to this bow.  It's also feasible to generate steam from this application.  Either way - presumably those type of applicaions can also be considered. 

But to get back to my point.  We also need to get some kind of academic evaluation of these anomalies.  Because without this any applications may be considered fraudulent - or intended to fraudulently misrepresent the benefits in this technology.  That's an ongoing battle.  Right now I need to change out my functions generator because it's simply not working.  Not corrupted - as nul-point thinks - as it was brand new out the box and has simply NEVER worked.  That's a quick exercise and should be completed before the day is finished.  But when I've got the circuit operational then I intend doing some more demos - this time with our EXPERTS in attendance - as no single Electrical Engineering expert attended our previous public demo.  But I shall be taking the precaution of insisting on approval of the measurement protocols prior to that meeting.  That way - the argument will be settled in advance and the evidence evaluated on the merits of that argument.  This is one way of avoiding the advantage that our detractors enjoy - by raising an endless stream of objections - regardless of the evidence - but always AFTER the event.  An example is that we now USE a functions generator as previously required by Poynty et al.  But we are now told that we MUST RATHER USE A 555.  Or, another example - measurements must be AVERAGED - and that it is incorrect to apply integrated power analysis.  Which diametrically opposes all previous advises and, indeed, some lengthy debates on the subject.  Or as another example until we eliminate ALL INDUCTANCE on the circuit ALL OUR MEASUREMENTS ARE ERRONEOUS - as Humbugger tries to imply.  All nonsense.  But they'll use those excuses forever.    We need EXPERTS.  Not these amateurish excusions by some dedicated detractors.

Which does not imply that we've got sufficient proof of infinite COP.  But we certainly have unequivocal proof of COP>1. 

GOOD LUCK infringer - if you're going to test this and if you find an application.  There's nothing to stop you - legally - or in any way at all.

Kindest regards
Rosemary

http://newlightondarkenergy.blogspot.com/2011/04/101-repost-of-8-inconvenient-truth.html
And lest any readers of this think that I"m entirely impartial - here's my apologia
http://newlightondarkenergy.blogspot.com/2010/11/belated-tribute-to-our-scientists.html

 ;D
« Last Edit: April 04, 2011, 11:44:59 AM by Rosemary Ainslie »

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #488 on: April 04, 2011, 11:12:25 AM »
Actually Guys, that's it.  I certainly won't comment on Humbugger's input until it becomes appropriate.  And nor will I  reply to Poynty's points until he re-establishes my right to read his forum.  Not that I want to be registered please note.  He has denied me the right to READ his forum by the simple  expediency of blocking my IP address.  And he knew of this ONLY because I had previously registered and then de-registered from OUR.com.  Which I still maintain is an abuse of that knowledge.  I joined the forum and gave that address in good faith.  One must wonder at that need to refuse me access to my work or rights to see where and if this technology is still being discussed.  And IF IT IS NOT being discussed then  WHY BLOCK ACCESS AT ALL?  What level of small minded spite is coming into play here?  Very strange.  One could almost think that he doesn't like me.  Golly.  Not sure that presonal preferences matter.  And not sure that he should be allowed to continue with his comments here - unless this is resolved.

Right now I can't even read all the work that I've done there.  It's all barred to me.  I don't think I've ever come across this level of pettiness.  The only good news is that he's 'locked' that thread.  But they're free to discuss me as they do - all over the place.  And apparently it's vitally important that I NEVER SEE THOSE COMMENTS.  Actually there's NO justification for this.  Just excessive spite and petty mindedness.  Hopefully Poynty will see this for himself and LOSE THAT BLOCK.

Just to let you all know about this malice and - just to let you know that clearly I must be some kind of a threat to his forum bias.  Strange.  When they also state that I'm rather presumptuous to even consider myself an idiot.  LOL.  I would almost be inclined to think that they're trying to equate this technology with Lawrence's.  Clearly the two have NOTHING IN COMMON.

Kindest regards,
Rosemary.

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #489 on: April 04, 2011, 11:17:21 AM »
Mags - I've only just got my connectivity back.  I'll try and go through your argument later today and by tomorrow morning at the latest.  Thanks for the added info.

Kindest regards,
Rosemary

Offline neptune

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1127
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #490 on: April 04, 2011, 07:59:57 PM »
Infringer talks about applications .This is something we would all like to see . However , I personally feel that this will not happen in the immediate future , until a little bit more experimental work is done . There are two kinds of people into technology . We have the theoreticians and the practical engineers . Both are essential to the advancement of technology . But they tend to look at the world in two separate ways . I personally am more of an engineering mindset . To Rosemary , her thesis is everything , and rightly so .To me and perhaps a lot of other people , getting a predictable controllable reliable device is what matters .I would be wonderful if the Academics embrace this . But to arrange that will not be easy . The alternative as I have said before , is to follow the same path as Rossi [he of the cold Fusion device] and show some thing working , thus making the views of the academics irrelevant .

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #491 on: April 04, 2011, 08:15:10 PM »
Infringer talks about applications .This is something we would all like to see . However , I personally feel that this will not happen in the immediate future , until a little bit more experimental work is done . There are two kinds of people into technology . We have the theoreticians and the practical engineers . Both are essential to the advancement of technology . But they tend to look at the world in two separate ways . I personally am more of an engineering mindset . To Rosemary , her thesis is everything , and rightly so .To me and perhaps a lot of other people , getting a predictable controllable reliable device is what matters .I would be wonderful if the Academics embrace this . But to arrange that will not be easy . The alternative as I have said before , is to follow the same path as Rossi [he of the cold Fusion device] and show some thing working , thus making the views of the academics irrelevant .

Neptune, those are good points.  My problem is not so much that I'm not interested in applications - but that it's just WAY outside my competence.  You guys probably don't realise it.  I have never even changed a plug.  Truly a self-confessed clutz.  I say this with a certain amount of reluctance as the Our.com detractors will, no doubt, use this to deny that I have any competence at all.  But when it comes to technical - then you guys are MUCH NEEDED. But I also know that when you can wrap your minds around some REALLY SIMPLE concepts then - what I've been pointing to - you guys will be able to FULLY unfold.  Again.  Outside my competence.  I just - so badly - want those concepts to be understood. The more so as they're simple.  But by the same token - they will make a world of difference and an entirely different world. And we need that difference.

Take care Neptune.  And so grateful that we've got your moderate reasonable sensible input.  It's a required balance to my own enthusiasm.  ALSO.  Your argument also carried with the Wright bros and - many similar.  So.  Go for it. And frankly, I think the cost of developing an application won't be much different to the cost related to more testing of this circuit.  That's been done to death.  I think so - anyway.  Let's measure it in the real world.  That would be so, so nice.

Kindest regards,
Rosie

Offline infringer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 800
    • mopowah
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #492 on: April 05, 2011, 01:36:03 AM »
Rosemary,

I stand behind you in the fact that you show an anomaly. But I do think there should be a simplistic way of putting this into an application it would easily show weather results are skewed or not.

I am not sure of the scopes in general but I do know that all electronics are subject to power glitching of some sort whether it is a faster cycle or low voltage or what have you even stuff with watch dog timers, anti glitching measures and so forth has been glitched for different reasons many times it is done intentionally to defeat security measures on electronic devices but I am not hip to the hardware in a scope or a meter for that matter to know that they are not prone to these fluctuations in power causing the erratic readings its not entirely an impossibility in my mind but my mind is less educated then your own.

Oddly it appears you may be on to something your theory was interesting on why it works talking about the atom and then shortly after I read something about an test they did with the LHC showing there may be another particle due to the fact that where two particles hit the ejection direction is predictable with in an error tolerance of 0.07% which is rather stunning it made me think of your theory with slight correlation to it.

I guess I wish you the best and would like to see something running a cop>1 is free energy and could be applied to generate energy if you had made a larger unit the COE should remain the same but you should get more excess energy thus providing an application for energy generation I would assume anyways.

Forgive me for my ramblings no I really do not wish to create your device or patent any portion of your device it is not my style I guess I was looking for a silencer for you and probably talked a bit to sharply.

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #493 on: April 05, 2011, 06:30:42 AM »
Rosemary,

... I guess I was looking for a silencer for you and probably talked a bit too sharply.

LOL.  I suspect there's some truth in the complaint that I 'talk' or 'write' far too much.  Just make allowances Infringer.  I am most anxious to share something.  Rightly or wrongly I feel I'm in the same kind of position as Christopher Columbus - when he pointed to the vast American continent.  He must have been pretty 'gob smacked'.  And I'm trying to point to something much, much bigger. 

I've just read another analolgy to this.  If we took all the particles out of all the atoms of everyone alive today - we'd make a brick the size of your average sugar cube.  Approximately 1/2" x 1/2" x 1/2".  That points to an awful lot of so called empty space.  I've simply proposed that all that space? -  it's 'chock-a-block' filled with magnetic fields.  And that's important - in a way.  Because IF it's right - then it also means we've rather 'under used' all that potential.  But for all that it sounds simple - it's actually mind bendingly subtle.  Bubbles within bubbles.  Anyway.  I'll spare you the details.  But in the wild hope that there are any still interested in this, and in the equally wild hope that anyone may yet read this - here's my blog link to the thesis. A work in progress - but it's getting there. Sorry if this appears to be 'off topic'.  It actually does have some residual relevance to this thread.

Kindest regards,
Rosemary

http://newlightondarkenergy.blogspot.com/2011/03/98-model.html

edited typos

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #494 on: April 05, 2011, 06:55:03 AM »
Hello Magzy - I've still not managed to understand your argument.  But the fault is mine.  I don't know anything about those capacitors.  I definitely see an increase in voltage across the 2nd cap - presumably having been fed to it by the first cap.  And am I right in saying that the first cap was charged from a battery to a max of 10 volts?  So.  If the second cap is in excess of 100 volts - then, to my mind that's unequivocal proof.  But I've also read nul-point's measurement and I simply don't know enough about this to measure it. 

What i would say is this.  If you and woopy can get some work out of the second cap that exceeds the energy 'in' then no-one could complain.  Quite apart from which - what I do know is that we have to challenge all mainstream predictions if we're ever going to get through on these arguments.  And for that you get 10 out of 10.  Well done Mags.  Keep up the good work and let's see that WORK number.  I know that you two work as a neat team.

Sorry it took me so long and then I could do so little with the information.  I was absolutely locked out of internet access through the weekend.

Take care Mags.  I've written you while I was down.  I'll see if I can find that draft and send it along.

Kindest as ever,
Rosie