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

Custom Search

Author Topic: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011  (Read 741285 times)

atomicX

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 54
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #390 on: March 27, 2011, 07:09:00 AM »
Congratulation Rose... Sorry I'm late. :)

rensseak

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 330
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #391 on: March 27, 2011, 08:52:59 AM »
I have found interesting bit of information about parasitic oscillations of MOSFETs in PARALLEL (the condition is to have more than one!):
www.microsemi.com/micnotes/APT0402.pdf

PETT oscillations, PETT = P lasma E xtraction  T ransit  T ime.

http://www.mourick.com/parasitic_oscillations.html

nul-points

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 995
    • Doc Ringwood's Free Energy blog
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #392 on: March 27, 2011, 10:00:33 AM »
The problem is that the circuit isn't workig.  I think it's the functions generator.  If it is - then I can only test this on Monday because that's the only time I can get another cable.
...
Rosemary

hi Rosemary

i was reading the PDF on parasitic oscillations linked by kEhYo77 and wondered if the following excerpt might be reason for the circuit not working at the moment

  "Such an oscillation condition...can cause over-voltage transients on the gate...and can even lead to uncontrolled, sustained oscillation and destruction of one or more devices"
 
is it possible that one or more of the MOSFETs has died and is stopping the correct switching action of the remainder?

just an idea

regards
np

<<EDIT #1>>
interesting, also, that rensseak's link to PETT describes the parasitic oscillation as a negative resistance event!  (although i don't recall it clarifying whether it's negative differential resistance, or the real thing)

<<EDIT #2>>
i've been a bit concerned about the suggestions to generate the parasitic oscillations by just connecting a negative voltage across the gate - the driving waveform from the SigGen is after all a dynamic waveform, not just a collection of two DC levels - ie., it also contains transients

so we shouldn't overlook the possibility that the parasitic oscillation is 'triggered' by a transient, before being able to sustain during a suitable state of the input (ie. the negative level)

this possibility seems to be supported by some of the info in the links mentioned above (eg., example oscillations are shown to follow either the 'ON' or the 'OFF' signal transient, or both, at the gate, depending on gate input resistance, production characteristics of the MOSFET die, and/or parasitic inductances in the circuit under test)


http://docsfreelunch.blogspot.com
 
« Last Edit: March 27, 2011, 11:02:18 AM by nul-points »

neptune

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1127
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #393 on: March 27, 2011, 12:06:40 PM »
@Poynt99 .What I actually said in my post was ,"If we want to be pedantic" . I did not specifically say you were pedantic . You ask , how was my post helpful in any way . I was hoping to encourage people to think outside the box , and see things in a new perspective . So I still say there is nothing magical about the battery terminals . I did not say there is anything wrong with measuring there . So please , lets avoid flame wars and leave it at that
@nul-points . You say that applying a constant negative voltage at the gate may not work because there are no transients and you could be right . Harti makes the point that it might be necessary to disconnect and reconnect the 9 volt battery a few times to start the oscillation . And HE could be right . And for less than $5 we could find out the truth .     

nul-points

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 995
    • Doc Ringwood's Free Energy blog
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #394 on: March 27, 2011, 01:23:18 PM »
@nul-points . You say that applying a constant negative voltage at the gate may not work because there are no transients and you could be right . Harti makes the point that it might be necessary to disconnect and reconnect the 9 volt battery a few times to start the oscillation . And HE could be right . And for less than $5 we could find out the truth .     

hi Neptune, greetings from the sunny south of England!

i agree

my point is that in electronics (as in so many things), the history of how something reached a state can be as germaine as the state itself

i'm not saying that we shouldn't try a DC negative gate drive setup - or that it is mistaken

i'm saying that the 'low' state of a SigGen output is only half the picture of what happened immediately prior to the start of the parasitic oscillations - and that we should bear that in mind when we try to understand what is happening on Rosemary's experiment

my EDIT #2 above gave some supporting evidence from those links that such oscillations *can* be caused by transitions (in either direction)

our job as 'ou investigators' should be to discover what is 'necessary and sufficient' to recreate unusual energy phenomena

in this case, a negative gate drive may well be 'necessary' - but not 'sufficient'


i didn't mean to be contentious - just thorough

there seems to be an abundance of woolly-thinking in the OU field - and i've certainly contributed my share!  ;)


kind regards
np


PS in your quote above, it appears that Harti & i are essentially saying the same thing - just using a 9V DC gate drive on its own may not be sufficient to start the oscillations - it may be necssary also to add transitions to the steady DC condition

Harti quite rightly suggests that this could be achieved by simply disconnecting & reconnecting the 9V DC a few times

of course, in a circuit with plenty of reactance, we shouldn't ignore the possibility of frequency playing a part, either - so it *could* turn out that just the addition of a few transitions is not sufficient to trigger the oscillations - this could bring us back possibly to a SigGen being necessary to provide frequent/regular transitions!

who said 'breaking the stranglehold' of Classical scientific dogma was going to be easy?!?  :)


http://docsfreelunch.blogspot.com
 
« Last Edit: March 27, 2011, 01:49:48 PM by nul-points »

neptune

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1127
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #395 on: March 27, 2011, 03:10:14 PM »
Hi Nul-points, and Greetings from Lincolnshire in the cold misty North of England . You are preaching to the converted , so to speak, in that I agree 100% with your last post .We must leave no stone unturned . The 9 volt battery and pot idea is a simple cheap starting point . As Rosemary says this effect is not frequency dependent , mechanical switching becomes possible for experiment . Rose talks about frequencies as low as one cycle every 3 seconds!. If the constant neg bias does not work , we could use two battery and pot circuits to pulse the gate pos and neg alternately using a microswitch to change them over .Microswitch could be operated with a variable speed DC motor driving a cam , or you could even operate it with a pendulum .These methods might be easier for some than 555 circuits which normally only pulse between pos and zero .With two bias batteries , you could vary the voltage of pos and neg pulses independently . My point is that experimentation at this level could be cheap .Not everyone has a function generator

neptune

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1127
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #396 on: March 27, 2011, 04:02:07 PM »
Just read the article linked bykEho77 in reply number385 , and also the one linked by rensseak in reply388 . We can learn much from these .For a start , if we can not get the circuit to oscillate , try different wire lengths on the gate connections . If driving the gate with a pulse generator , a potentiometer of 100 ohms to 1Kohms between the generator and gate is desirable . Further study needed here . There is talk of the gate wiring acting as an aerial .Is this the purpose of the aerial, picking up electronic noise ,on Ismael Avisos car ?

Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #397 on: March 27, 2011, 04:15:11 PM »
Right, Part 2 then.

What will happen to our PVbat calculation if rather than using this agreed upon equation:

PVbat = V(P1 - P4) x V(P3 - P4)/0.25

we make a small change and use this instead:



PVbat = V(P2 - P4) x V(P3 -P4)/0.25

What happens to the PVbat calculation?

.99
Ok.  Poynty Point.  Still struggling to find relevance here.
 
"PVbat = V(P2 - P4) x V(P3 -P4)/0.25" refers.

Actually I'm going to change this entirely.  You tell me.  And this time look at the entire circuit assuming R = 1 Ohm.  What is the current flow here?  And how do you calculate this?  Then.  What is the current flow at R2 given that R = 1000 Ohms and what is the current flow at R3 given that R = 0.25 Ohm.

Let us know Poynty.

Kind regards
Rosemary

CHANGED 

Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #398 on: March 27, 2011, 04:35:32 PM »
And guys, the switch is now switching like an angel but I can't get any power through to the load.  I think we've shaken a cable loose and I can't, myself, get in there.  I'll try and get someone to fix this tomorrow. 

Sorry about the delay Poynty.  The probes still positioned as required.  Hang fire.  We'll get there. 

Kindest as ever,
Rosemary

BTW - Many thanks for the good wishes Atomicx.  But the credit is not mine - I assure you.  The team rallied with that demo.  I was just a spectator.

Kindest as ever,
R

And rensseak and nul-points - nice references and nice points.  I also have no idea how that oscillation is actually triggered.  It was a big surprise.  But it seems to just want to keep going.  And there's no question that there's some heavy duty current there.  It shows up in the battery voltage drop - and climb.  But I still have to show that with the probe directly across a 24 volt supply. 

And another point for our Poynty.  I can't span a 12 volt battery.  I made a mistake.  The best I can do here is 24.  But that should do the trick - presumably.  I'll keep those connections to the barest minimum.  And I'll film it.  So you'll see where the probes are positioned. 

Again,
Rosemary 

Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #399 on: March 27, 2011, 04:59:19 PM »
Rose talks about frequencies as low as one cycle every 3 seconds!.

Neptune?  I'll see if I can find that scope shot.  It's not one cycle per 3 seconds.  It's actually one cycle per 2.7 MINUTES at the lowest setting.  I'll see if I can find it to post it.  Actually just recalculated this.  More like 2.5 minutes.  But that's still a long time.  And no evident ringing down or up at each transition.

Hang 10. I'll see what I can do.  Not the best around this internet thing.

I think this is it.  Here's hoping.  Yes.  Just look at the 50sec per division in the top left hand corner. 

Kindest, as ever,
Rosie

edited
« Last Edit: March 27, 2011, 05:36:55 PM by Rosemary Ainslie »

Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #400 on: March 27, 2011, 05:17:56 PM »
Here's another one.  It shows it more clearly.

I've actually got these printed in colour and intend framing them. 

ENJOY

 ;D

The channels
1 = shunt
2 = battery
3 = gate
4 = drain

The math trace - on D - is the product of v shunt and v battery.  NOT WATTS.  But in as much as it's negative then vi is definitely negative indicating energy returned to the battery.  As I've mentioned - an embarrassment of riches.  Because at this level of power that battery should be cooking with charge.  UNLESS, as I'm hoping, current flow turns out to have nothing whatsoever to do with the flow of electrons.  That's the ONLY departure from mainstream thinking that we've introduced.  And even here - there are those theoretical purists who have known this since forever.

Rosemary

ADDED - and since I'm on a role here, and if anyone's interested.  Here's some comments related to electron current flow.  Possibly a bit critical.  LOL.

http://newlightondarkenergy.blogspot.com/2010/11/more-on-inconvenient-truths.html

Bubba1

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 80
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #401 on: March 27, 2011, 05:31:26 PM »
 
Power is ALWAYS vi dt.  Or Volts x amps x time.  THAT's it.  You can try and argue this till the cows come home Poynty....

Rosemary

Power is volts x amps.  Volts x amps x time is Energy.

Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #402 on: March 27, 2011, 05:34:11 PM »
Power is volts x amps.  Volts x amps x time is Energy.

Exactly my point Bubba.  vi dt.

alexandre

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #403 on: March 27, 2011, 05:46:39 PM »
Instantaneous Power : P = V * I

Energy is the integration of instantaneous power over time.

Only if the instantaneous power is constant you can forget the integration and just multiply V*I*t

Hope we can narrow the uncertainties.

-Alex

neptune

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1127
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #404 on: March 27, 2011, 05:53:33 PM »
Sorry Rosemary . Another Senior Moment there! This business of one cycle every 3 Minutes is just so Gobsmacking that my subconscious keeps trying to tell me its 3 seconds . This makes it even easier to drive the microswitch at realistic frequencies for experiment with a pendulum .Although at one cycle/3 minutes you would need one hell of a pendulum . As I said a while back you could actually switch it manually with a stopwatch .