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 657937 times)

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #510 on: April 07, 2011, 05:45:03 AM »
Guys - my circuit is STILL down.  We've changed the functions generator and we've bought and replaced 2 FETS.  I've had no less than 3 people trouble shoot and - right now - no-one has resolved the problem.  We hopefully, have a really competent guy coming on Friday afternoon to look at what gives.   We are absolutely not able to get any energy onto the element.  Everything's flatlined except for the switch.  That's now working like an angel.  Which is why I'm STILL not able to report here.  Apologies.  There's a gremlin in the works.  We worked on this for 4 hours - again - last night - and still nothing.   Very odd and very frustrating.  The circuit is so simple.  The connections easily tested.  Everything seems as usual.  Yet we can't get anything to work - except now we can get that switch at full volume.  Definitely something was wrong with the previous functions generator as we could not get any significant voltage across the switch.

meanwhile all I can do is wait. 

Rosemary   

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #511 on: April 07, 2011, 06:12:56 AM »
Magsy - which is why I'm looking forward to - at least - getting some upbeat news from you.  I get it that the 'real life' applications of that circuit do not perform as expected by the sim.  Stefan's been saying this since the start of this thread.  All I know is that if you apply 'x' and then end up with 'x' plus anything at all - then that's unequivocally - from the system and not from the supply.  The argument is elegant.  And I'm not sure that anyone can contradict it.

What intrigues me is that your claim was immediately followed by a disclaimer.  Never missed a heartbeat.  And - predictably - it was from Poynty.  I'm of the opinion that there's a certain urgency creeping into this subject as OU evidence is becoming rather commonplace.  It's still being argued that the evidence is always based on poor measurement - and incompetent experimenters.  But in your case you can show the gain with a simple mulitmeter.  And I may be rightly described as an experimental clutz - but those that built and demonstrated this circuit - certainly are not.

But what really intrigues me is this.  Poynty denies that there is any oscillation through the battery.  This is why I'm committed to showing a waveform with the probes directly across those terminals.  Yet his own simulations show this exact waveform.  How can it be that my own waveforms are wrong yet the sim waveforms are right?  I just can't get my head around this.  In fact, from what I can see - the sim and real life experiment can both duplicate that wild and extended parasitic oscillation.  And that, really, was the object of that demonstration.  There is no question we showed a gain - even based on Poynt's need for AVERAGING - and even on really high wattage dissipation at the load.  But that oscillation results in two diametrically opposed waveforms - and when that is evident then the advantage is always to a level of energy efficiency that at it's least - exceeds classical allowance.

Anyway.  I'll need to get my setup set up.  Then I'll get back here.  And Magsy - yet again - I do not think that anyone will be able to contradict YOUR evidence.  At least we've got that.  I think we'd all enjoy seeing a video on this - but I know that it's time consuming and I also know that you guys fit in these experiments when and as you can.  So.  Again.  Very well done.  And, as ever, I'd be awfully grateful if you'd keep us posted here. 

Kindest,
Rosemary

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #512 on: April 07, 2011, 03:39:42 PM »
Hi guys,

Just had a brief excursion into OUR.com where sundry members are rollicking through post after post with the characteristic wild and ever urgent denial of any evidence of overunity on our circuit.  I see that the audience applaud all that really bad, psuedo scientific, argument.  And there's a general sense of hysteria as one after the other try one argument after another - to deny all our evidence.

At the moment they're rather pinning their hopes on the Poynt's call to average.  You can certainly average the results if you did not also switch that current.  And to refer to it as 'reflected' voltage - or anything at all - does not lessen the energy in that voltage.  But.  I keep advising them and they keep ignoring that advice.  GUYS - EVEN IF WE APPLY AND AVERAGE we get INFINITE COP. 

In any event.  They're unquestionably right.

IF we had used less sophisticated DSO's - then there would have been strong argument against the evidence.  As it is we use very sophisticated DSO's and that's now the basis of their denial.

IF we had averaged - then there would have been strong argument against the evidence.  As it is we did not use averages and yet that's the basis of their denial.

IF we had factored in inductance and reactance - then there would have been an even stronger basis for their denial as the numbers become even more beneficial.  And as we did not factor this in then that's become the basis of their denial. 

If we had only got a benefit from low wattage dissipation then that would have been the basis of their denial.  As it is we get benefit - infinite COP at both high and low wattage dissipation and yet this is the basis of that denial.

This result will only ever be considered valid IF - we eliminate all inductive/conductive material on the circuit - IF we do away with a battery supply source and ONLY use capacitors - and then ONLY AND IF we then measure something that conforms to classical prediction.

I suppose that's fair.  Or maybe not so much 'fair'.  Just COMPREHENSIVE.  Golly.

Kindest regards,
Rosemary

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #513 on: April 07, 2011, 04:00:22 PM »
Don^t worry meine liebe Rose.

 ;D

I'm a bit of a socialist myself.  LOL.
« Last Edit: April 08, 2011, 10:03:06 PM by hartiberlin »

Offline Doctor No

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 262
    • NSPAP
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #514 on: April 08, 2011, 02:28:33 AM »
How do You think, when people come to the mind: 1. 10y. after last drop of oil will be pumped out 2. Barrel oil 》300 USD (next year) 3. After we drop 1 MT device on Fukushit (October).     Yours Dr Adolf

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #515 on: April 08, 2011, 03:42:53 AM »
Hi again Magsy.  It seems that there was an error in your calculations.  It's disappointing - but we're depending on your resilience and that all energetic intellect.  As woopy says - it's almost proof of OU all on its own.  I think we're all rather relying on you to find that invincible argument. So. Don't give up that elusive design.  It seems that our own is simply never going to cut it - certainly not on these forums.

And this is for Dr No.  The good news is that the price of petrol just keeps going north.  That's catalyst enough to change our dependencies.  It's not only toxic for the environment - but I think Nature Herself is working to put it out of reach.  I am reasonably certain that it's a simple thing to get energy back to the battery on motors - which means that it should be feasible to apply this to our electric cars.  In theory it would result in less battery weight to more energy out - and a longer duration of those batteries notwithstanding.

Until a day or so ago - I've rather tried to encourage others to think applications.  I sort of saw my own input as being restricted to my very limited knowledge.  But I've been discussing a very simple design configuration with a friend.  I'll sketch it and then photograph it and then see if I can manage to upload it here.  But it's a design I've referred to before.  And until I do this, here's a description - for those who care tp wrap their minds around it.

Two batteries in series - negative to positive and positive to negative.  Battery one has our circuit leading to the negative of battery two.  Battery two has our circuit leading to the positive of battery one.  Switches need to work in antiphase - and since it is evident that these oscillations do not depend on switching frequencies - then - also theoretically - it may work with a reed switch - and diodes across those switches.  Then.  As I see it - the one battery will also - always - discharge into the second to recharge it.  Surely that's a closed system?  Something like that.  Perhaps Magsy can see what he can do with this on a simulator.

Also.  I've now taken the trouble - yesterday - to inform an influential scientist at local government level - here in Cape Town.  A surprising level of interest.  Also surprising to me is that he had never even heard of our efforts here.  I forget that our contributions on the internet are still very much a minority thing and that the general public are ENTIRELY unaware of it.  It will be interesting to see where that discussion goes.  A lot of questions - a discussion spanning over an hour - and - dare I say it - a sense that there was enough residual interest to actually explore these claims of ours.  We'll see.  In the face of repeated disappointments - then I'm not sure I can invest in too much hope.  But without some hope I think that all our efforts here would be a complete waste of time.

Anyway.  That's the best I can manage for now.  Hopefully it's something to keep some heart and hope in these extraordinary reaches of ours.

Kindest regards,
Rosemary

Offline Magluvin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5884
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #516 on: April 08, 2011, 06:02:32 AM »
Hey Rose

Its weird. A couple days ago I could wake up and knew that i had it.
Now, hmmm.   hmmmm.    but Im bouncing back.

We still gained positive ideas that is not widely known to all.
I see it has all been done before. Maybe not all.  ;]

As for your setup, there will be many that want to see those batteries charging.  Its common simple proving grounds. Like Steorn, even when some of the projects even worked at all, there was no real convincing. 
Perhaps if you concentrated on getting enough charge back to the batteries, to say get each one to be above 13v when the circuit is running, this would be a sure winner for you. Im not sure what you think on that kind of plan.
Small amounts of energy can be produced with a radiant energy charger ir a crystal radio. But most really want the beef.
So if we have an amplifier of the 3rd kind, the crystal radio can then be the source, because the amplifier of the 3rd kind has beef. Its the 3rd kind that will get quick notice.;]

 

Heck, I thought I might have had it. If the circuit used low inductance, the freq of operation with skimming, that would be impressive. lol I think I worried more about MORE and neglected important things.
But in your setup, now your at the point of more is better planning. ;]

My real issue was thinking my stages, by the 3rd stage took me over the top more than 2nd.  But what was happening is, I got stuck in to the habit of, when I only had to put 2 caps during testing in series, the outcome WAS 10uf to 5uf, divided by 2.   So when I got to the 3rd and 4th stages, instead of dividing how many caps,as there were more than 2, I relied on my habit of divide the total capacitance by 2.   ::)

The sim acts up with too much going on, switches open and closed everywhere and the sim doesnt like open ended diodes in the circuit with big things happening in connection with them. So I was doing stages independently.  Ant least we didnt waste months on it and still have more to do.  ;)

Lol  when point had posted that he saw 5uf and I saw 20uf, I drew it on papaer and bam, I new I was wrong.  So I thought quickly if I still had gain with 2 stages(4 caps to series), I made the same golly ;] mistake I had been making and quickly posted that I would post a solution at lunch.  Went home and spent 40min finding I was in
Disney Land from hell.  I was all day, what was I thinking!!! Stupid mistake. Should have put it together to make sure, but I was running the stages as a single stage in the sim, and just making my own conversions, with mistakes. Thats a sad story. lol

Thanks for everything Rose  =]
Im not goin anywhere. ;]

Mags

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #517 on: April 08, 2011, 07:50:40 AM »
Hi Magsy.  I had a bad night.  But I've got through it.  I can't run that test on batteries unless I buy another set - and I simply cna't afford it Mags.  And the batteries that were donated will take WAY too long to drain - if ever.  I haven't got the patience or the time or the interest to prove it that way.  My experience is that when we did give this as proof we weren't allowed to pubish the data.  So.  I've given up on using that argument.  But it SHOULD NOT BE REQUIRED.  The waveforms, the numbers, the evidence is absolutely as dependable as is required.  It's just that the facts are unpopular and therefore are being contended.   And that they're not even using valid argument is entirely lost on their readers.  It's all a bit disheartening and intellectually disgusting.  Still there's possibly some good financial compensation to wallow in all that disgusting intellectual abuse.

I know you'll bounce back Mags.  There's just way too much interest there.  Maybe you can try out that circuit I mentioned on your sim.  And please - DON'T ask for battery voltage to climb.  It's diametrically opposed to the thesis.  I just can't see how this can happen.  I can see it climbing fractionally - to its full potential.  But if a 12 volt battery climbed to 14 or 17 volts - as I've seen from a recharge - and it did it from our circuit - then it would also disprove the thesis at a very fundamental level.  It would be very bad news.  If that's the data that you guys are looking for - then it would be really bad news for me.

Anyway.  Take good care.  Hopefully you're already asleep and will read here when you wake up.

Kindest as ever,
Rosie

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #518 on: April 08, 2011, 08:21:13 AM »
I've sort of found my way to a really exciting thread guys.  Life may yet be worth living.  I'll post a link here if I can manage it.  Anyway it's that thread on cold fusion. 

GREAT NEWS
Rosmary

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=10230.msg280805#msg280805

Offline Poit

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 295
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #519 on: April 08, 2011, 08:45:23 AM »
I've sort of found my way to a really exciting thread guys.  Life may yet be worth living.  I'll post a link here if I can manage it.  Anyway it's that thread on cold fusion. 

GREAT NEWS
Rosmary

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=10230.msg280805#msg280805

When you finalise the open source of your project, you will post full schematics of the invention here.. right?

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #520 on: April 08, 2011, 08:50:32 AM »
When you finalise the open source of your project, you will post full schematics of the invention here.. right?

Poit?  Not sure which circuit you want.  I've always made full disclosure.  If you're talking about the one I outlined for Magsy - then I still need to sketch that and get some way to upload it here.  But the schematic is described.  Just two of those circuits of mine but two systems feeding - back to back - into two separate supplies.  I sort of see it as a closed system - and - just maybe - the principle will then be better explained. 

Let me know.  I'm not sure what you're asking.

Kindest,
Rosemary

Offline b4FreeEnergy

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 8
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #521 on: April 08, 2011, 09:17:38 AM »
…
Also.  I've now taken the trouble - yesterday - to inform an influential scientist at local government level - here in Cape Town.  A surprising level of interest.  Also surprising to me is that he had never even heard of our efforts here.  I forget that our contributions on the internet are still very much a minority thing and that the general public are ENTIRELY unaware of it ...
 
Hi Rosemary,

You could not have put it any better! As good as nobody reads on these forums. Nothing changed, you still get the ‘weird’ looks if you talk about even the ‘distant’ possibility of free energy.  Even worse, suppose I could build a free energy device put it into my car and drive to work with it. None of my colleagues would believe me if I proudly showed my special car to them …
 
By the way, did you had any reporting in the newspapers in Cape Town after your demonstration?
Anyway, I keep up hope and maybe one day it will finally happen that we use the technology we already seem to have for a rather long time iso hiding it!

Best regards, B

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #522 on: April 08, 2011, 09:29:57 AM »
Hello B.  So nice to see you around.  I have NOT managed to get any kind of newspaper report on this.  But there's some outside chance that there could be a program depending on the advices of just two experts.  If I can show them - and IF they see an anomaly - THEN... MAYBE.  It's all up in the air and I'm tired of living in the stratosphere.  But I'm pressing on pressing on.  Something's got to give - eventually.

Take good care B.

Kindest as ever,
Rosie

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #523 on: April 08, 2011, 04:08:24 PM »
Well Guys - we're up.  AT LAST.  Now I'll be able to get some decent arguments against Poynt's 'averaging' requirements - AND we'll be able to demonstrate this to our experts.  WHAT A PLEASURE.

I'll post plenty here later today and tomorrow.

Kindest as ever,
Rosemary
 


Offline neptune

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1127
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #524 on: April 08, 2011, 05:44:01 PM »
Hi Rosemary .You are in the middle of a difficult time .Just remember that the darkest hour is just before the dawn .I feel that if you still can not get your device working , the problem could still be in the Mosfets as not all mosfets are the same even if they are supposed to be . I was going to say that extraordinary claims need extraordinary proof , but I have been well and truly reprimanded by Wilby for saying that ! So unpopular claims will need extraordinary proof . I know how you like to stand on your own two feet ,but if you decide to start a collection for some smaller batteries , I hereby pledge £20 . It is funny you should mention cold fusion because I believe that is what will cause a massive shift in peoples perception .And that by the years end . Hows this for irony .Rolls Royce are building a massive new factory in the UK to manufacture parts for our new nukes .Hopefully it will be finished in time to make Rossi Nickel reactors!Rosie , above all keep the faith and be happy .