Now.  As he shows that circuit - THAT IS INDEED HOW WE CONFIGURED IT -  BUT ONLY FOR THE TEST DEMONSTRATION - Poynty's inclusion of the Q2's excepted.  THAT IS ALSO HOW WE DEMONSTRATED IT.  But it is NOT how we have configured it in all other tests.  Correctly and properly the ground of the functions generator is attached DIRECTLY to the Gate at Q2 - MARK D on the video.  And correctly - the shunt or CSR - is DIRECTLY IN SERIES WITH THE NEGATIVE RAIL OF THE BATTERY SUPPLY SOURCE.

You changed the configuration, ok. Why was it so difficult to get you to simply admit that long ago, and why have you changed it?

If that is what you have indeed done, then I will not question it, but I would like to see a new updated photo of both the top and bottom of the board. At the very least, could you please indicate on the drawing I made (which shows the CSR in series with the battery) where the probe is on the CSR, and which end has the probe tip and which end the probe ground? If you prefer just to tell us, that's fine too.

btw, is the Source of Q1 now connected directly to ground as the diagram shows?

Thanks,
.99

With the changes then, this diagram is representative of how the circuit is now connected?

If so, could you please let us know the probe positions for the battery and CSR?

Thanks,
.99

From Rose:

Quote

Guys - please note.  There is absolutely NO WAY that one can do any power analysis on any circuit that has a waveform that is more complex than a direct current.  Certainly it cannot be applied to the waveforms we're generating here.  I do hope you realise this.  And in as much as no-one has challenged all this nonsense I'm concerned that perhaps the most of you do not know this.  If you doubt it - then look it up.

Where do we "look it up"?

WTF?  Poynt is doing the exact same set of measurements at the exact same points in the exact same circuit you have been doing ever since day 1.  And showing the exact same results.  His use of averaging (being done AFTER the real-time point by point multiplying) is exactly the same as your own use of averaging: MEAN AFTER MULTIPLY. 

That full set of measurement done the same exact way you have always done it serves only to show that the sim agrees rather precisely with your bench testing when done in exactly the same way.

Then, after doing the work to replicate your circuit, your tests and your results almost to the millivolt, showing the validity of the simulation rather convincingly, Poynt goes on to move the scope probes and the shunt to the proper locations to allow for a true direct unpolluted measure of the battery voltage and the battery current.

He continues to use the same real-time point-by-point sample multiplying technique just as you always have done and then takes the mean of the resulting power trace, just as you have always done.  The results clearly show a large net drain from the battery and a very low efficiency of power delivery to the heating element through the circuitry. 

HE CAREFULLY POINTS OUT AND AS TESLASET HAS CLEARLY VERIFIED (AND I VERIFY AS WELL) THAT THE PSPICE W PROBE USES THE CONVENTION OF STATING A DRAIN FROM THE BATTERY AS A NEGATIVE POWER. 

Why don't you just quickly put your shunt right at the battery negative terminal itself and take a good look?  It's not hard to do.  It will show you immediately that the net current is draining the battery and not charging it.  No need for lengthy battery runs at all.  No need for further confusion.

Rosemary, your arguments are so thoroughly "straw-man" based and so poorly stated at that, that you really should take a break from your incoherent ranting and just try to absorb what has been clearly shown:

The simulation behaves exactly like your circuit.  When measured wrongly, exactly as you measure, the results agree with your results.  When measured properly, the very low COP and gross inefficiency of powering a heating element using MOSFET parasitic oscillations is revealed clearly.  End of story.

No amount of rude insults, calling people dogs and vermin and stupid, will change these well-demonstrated facts..

Humbugger

That was a great post Hum!  Sorry it was missed.

.99

@poynt99
Yes its a pity cheeseburger like my real ID here and many others got put in the sin bin.
@Rosie...i was delighted to see that you have devised a way to measure the heat output. Still no way to check the battery properly..however if the volts of the battery do increase and are maintained its a start in the right direction. One thing I am confused about...do you measure the battery voltage at the terminal of the battery? I am dumbing the questions down so the greater audience can break it down into simple terms that we can all understand.
Also what was the time it took to heat the water and the volume?
You made claims this was the first device using ZPE to heat water...technically you could be right if we assume what you have is working. But how far are we off for a practical application. The reason I ask is people like Rossi although have not demonstrated everything beyond reasonable doubt is getting main stream academics involved and to date he has something that goes close to ZPE as far as effect. he does use some hydrogen and nickle and a catalyst in small quantities but gets one hell of an effect. if his device or the black light power one pans out in the near future in reality it makes your project redundant other than a curiosity.
Kind Regards as always
 

Rosemary,

I have updated my drawing, is this correct?

GL.

Not quite Groundloop. But I've thought of something.  I could sketch what's needed - scan it and then send it to you.  Then you could make sense of it better.

Many thanks for your efforts nonetheless.

Kindest as ever,
Rosie

added I should be able to do this during the morning.  I still have your email address.  I'll get back to you here.

Sorry - another problem  It seems everyone is still on holiday.  Labour day in SA - I'll need to get this to you tomorrow.

@eisnad Karm . Whilst I am a big believer in Rossi`s technology , I can not see how it makes Rosemary`s circuit redundant . Initially at least , the E-cat will be used to feed the grid I suspect . Rose`s circuit is much cheaper , and will lend itself to people living off-grid by choice or necessity
    IRFPG50 Mosfets can be bought on Ebay from Hong Kong .

Guys - I need to share something with you all - at the risk of boring you all to tears.  I have, once before, actively assisted in bringing a replication to full on view and proof here on these forums.  What happened was I was persuaded that all parties involved were, indeed, active in their promotion of any new and challenging scientific truths.  What I did, deliberately, was allow them to take over the commentry - and I did this, thinking that they would then use their skills to promote this.

To my horror - what actually happened, and that with relative ease, was at the conclusion of that 'replication' I was attacked as if I were some kind of harbinger from hell.  There was a brutal attempt made to separate me from this work.  Not a bad thing, in and of itself.  Indeed, I'd welcome it.  But this was then coupled with a DENIAL of any benefits in this technology and the systematic removal of the results from public view.  You will remember - perhaps - how Ashtweth advised all and sundry - in terms that were utterly degrading - if somewhat inarticulate - that I was NOT TO BE TRUSTED.  And this was followed by Fuzzy's absurdly colourful links and rather immoderate statements - painted loud and in colour - also followed by terse commentary that was certainly as inarticulate as Ashtweth's.  Both showed a certain need for a more liberal use of a spell check and a basic schooling in simple grammer.  But the truth is that any thinking person would be well able to discern those excesses.  And certainly their arguments were based on entirely unsubstantiated allegation. 

BUT IT WORKED.  NOTWITHSTANDING.  That's the point.  Threads were no sooner opened than they were locked. Fuzzy rifled my photobucket - found out which institution was opening their labs to a review of these results - and then wrote to the parties concerned to advise them that I was stealing his technology and that I had no rights to refer to any paper at all.  Can you, for a minute, just picture the damage this did?  Fortunately those people who were approached - did their own review of the facts and those communications were dismissed - in their entirety.  But that delayed things as our own project was replaced with others during that interval where they considered things.  And I was left for the most part of that year without the supervision that would otherwise have been relegated.  Then.  As if that wasn't enough Laurel and Harvey systematically approached and still do approach - each and every member who shows/showed interest in this technology - on their private messaging system to advise them that I was/am a liar and that this technology was/is a hoax. 

Eventually the only voice I still had was on Poynty's forum.  But there were no threads unlocked - for my easy access - to discuss any developments at all.  I was now on campus - full time -and had much to share.  But my hints were ignored.  And now I was now hounded by MileHigh, Pickle and anyone who chose to to say exactly what they wanted.  There was no attempt to moderate and when I appealed to Poynty to do something was told that I should just 'cope'.  Eventually I deregistered and - then - they went through that fiasco of abusing their knowledge of my internet address to lock me out of view of their threads while they discussed me at leisure.  I then wrote Poynty to advise him that this was certainly immoral if not illegal and that I would take action.  Whereupon he wrote me the most scathing of some many scathing emails that I've been in receipt of - to advise me that I am 'a fool' and that I am 'not a scientist'. 

Now.  This is and was really the point where there was a serious breach in our relationship.  But I am only interested in the technology.  I really don't care what part I play in this.  And until these last interventions - I sincerely supposed that Poynt was looking to find the 'truth'.  We all know he's talented.  We also know that he's very interested.  And he certainly, at it's least, also acknowledged those results on his simulator.  So.  There was hope.  BUT.  With these interventions into my computer - with these ridiculous attempts to separate me from my posts - with these endless references to entirely irrelvant schematics - with a fence straddling that should be doing him some serious physical damage - with this dialogue that presumes the RIGHT to question everything and SAY nothing - with the tolerance of some seriously questionable posts on his forum - with the laughable denial of my own answers - THEN WHAT?  It would be reckless IN THE EXTREME to allow him license to take over this thread.  And that's what I'm needing.  I DO NOT HAVE THE TIME TO SPEND HERE.  I don't have the skills that you guys are looking for.  I need someone and - right now I don't know where to turn. 

If I felt for one minute that there could be someone who could take over here then I could fade out.  I have NEVER wanted 'fame' - certainly I don't want any more notoriety.  It's no fun seeing the kind of extreme venom that results from all this polarised opinion.  And more to the point.  I'm just not that well.  I don't have the energy levels needed to protect this technology.  And again.  What I'm seriously frightened for is that this fragile 'early' knowledge is then appropriated by anyone at all who then tries to 'make it their own' - as was attempted in that earlier replication. 

So.  My earnest request to you all is this.  PLEASE.  Ignore Poynt's posts.  They are made in the sincere effort to flaunt a disrespect for me that they can then appropriate the technology AS REQUIRED.  Just bear in mind that I do no-one any harm.  I have unfolded some knowledge that has been hidden from convention because of certain 'mind sets' related to energy transfer.  And my abilities at logic are really good.  Nor does one need training for this.  Just common sense.  I am deserving of considerably more respect than either he or Pickle allow and considerably more than the poisonous slurs that they indulge in on their forum.  But this appeal to discount his endless commentaries is not made on this basis.  It's made on the basis that I sincerely doubt that he intends progressing anything at all.  I suspect he has a mandate.  And I'm sure he will champion that in favour of any genuine admission.  And I see an entirely immoral and opportunistic use of whatever he needs to - to reach that object.  And then - as happened before - he'll position himself to deny everything. I don't think this technology will survive another such attack.

Kindest regards,
Rosemary

ADDED