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.
Amazon Warehouse Deals ! Now even more Deep Discounts ! Check out these great prices on slightly used or just opened once only items.I always buy my gadgets via these great Warehouse deals ! Highly recommended ! Many thanks for supporting OverUnity.com this way.

User Menu

Tesla Paper

Free Energy Book

Get paid

Donations

Please Donate for the Forum.
Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.(Admin)

A-Ads

Powerbox

Smartbox

3D Solar

3D Solar Panels

DC2DC converter

Micro JouleThief

FireMatch

FireMatch

CCKnife

CCKnife

CCTool

CCTool

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Products

WaterMotor kit

Statistics


  • *Total Posts: 898063
  • *Total Topics: 15837
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 4
  • *Guests: 25
  • *Total: 29

Author Topic: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011  (Read 638765 times)

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1185 on: May 08, 2011, 10:20:05 PM »
Guys,

Here are those waveforms on the repeat tests using a standard 9 Ohm automotive solder iron.  Temperature stabilised at around 85 degrees, 64 degrees over ambient.  But the control was different as it was not held inside a vacuum flask.  We didn't up the battery voltage to increase the energy as we ran out of time.

Also a second test done on a bank of LED's.  But I'll leave that to my friend to describe.  Here we had evidence of a battery voltage climbing but it may have been because the current was that low.  Video made of this as well.  Both will be uploaded here when I get my PC back.  Hopefully soon.

Just as a comment.  Those crocodile clips and thin wires not ideal.  We had precarious results to begin with because of loose connections.  All the leads were soldered and we then found that the results stabilised.  Personally I think the results would have improved with thicker copper wire.  But that's purely speculative.

We'll get a schematic downloaded soon - but in essence, the same circuit as groundloop showed but with a different load - obviously, and with the use of only two 'hand to hand' MOSFET's.

From what we're seeing this is relatively easy to apply to just about any appliance that's used for heat.  But obviously - much research required to sort out that switching software and sundry controls.

Kindest regards,
Rosemary

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline Pirate88179

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8366
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1186 on: May 08, 2011, 11:08:42 PM »
"Efficiency" and "COP" are not the same thing Bill, and I would have expected you to know this.

Really?  Then you had better tell all of those fellows over there on your OUR forum this news.  All of the ones that claimed that the JT circuit could never be COP>1 because it is only 40% efficient.  They seem to think these terms are related.  You should correct them as well. Come on man, you are much more intelligent than this.

Bill 

Offline fuzzytomcat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 676
    • Open Source Research and Development
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1187 on: May 09, 2011, 05:06:14 AM »
http://newlightondarkenergy.blogspot.com/2011/05/111-proof-positive.html   >:(
Quote
111 - proof positive
Dear Reader,

As you know my preference is in 'dialogue' as I believe this is the best means to progress this knowledge. Where this dialogue has been progressed is at overunity.com's forum. Here's the link.

click here

Unfortunately Harti, our forum owner, has allowed Glen Lettenmaier full membership with the mandate to flame my thread to death. He's more than qualified to do this - not because he's a debater - but precisely because he is not. He lacks the language skills and the intellectual subtleties required.

I'm not here readers and members to do name calling, do IQ scores or debate and have any dialog with someone whom has a long history of doing just these things, to hide the numerous unanswered questions at hand here and sidetracking this thread Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011 and the claimed results.

This includes a claim here by Rosemary in this thread of a COP > INFINITY device not once but multiple times in her dialog of the postings, most of which are off topic here by design.

Where is the scientific proof that was given to the open source community to substantiate the validity of this claim that has never been posted in this forum before ?

There are forum rules here that apply ....

Quote
You agree, through your use of this forum, that you will not  post any material which is false, defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, adult material, or otherwise in violation of any International or United States Federal law. You also agree not to post any copyrighted material unless you own the copyright or you have written consent from the owner of the copyrighted material. Spam, flooding, advertisements, chain letters, pyramid schemes, and solicitations are also forbidden on this forum.

You agree, through your use of this forum, that you will not  post any material which is false, inaccurate or harassing postings

The above is a qualification to question the finding when no scientific proof or presentation of all the facts concerning the device or devices claiming a COP > INFINITY are only available to the inventor by design.



EXCEPTED FACTS -

1) All COP > INFINITY device information in one place in one post not spread out over eighty (80) pages.

2) A accurate circuit diagram of the claimed COP > INFINITY device .... there are five (5) at least that I know of .... and the one on your blog is incorrect (FALSE) http://newlightondarkenergy.blogspot.com/2011/04/109-simulated-circuit.html#links

3) All sequenced oscilloscope screen shots and data dumps from the day of the test not days before or after for over a minimum of one hour at 6 minute intervals for a total of eleven (11) verified recordings of the COP > INFINITY device.

4) The complete parts list of all the components used to do a scientific replication to verify the results in a verifiable scientific manner of the COP > INFINITY device

5) All the settings of the Function Generator in Hz or Mhz .... including ....  the setting of the DC offset switch ( -10 VDC to + 10 VDC )

6) A complete photographic image set available for verification and review including the top and bottom of any circuit board of the COP > INFINITY device at the time under or during test .

7) A "LIVE streaming broadcast" of the device testing event in real time for 48 hours minimum untouched .... all that's required is a registering for a FREE LIVE streaming broadcast account and a web camera showing the claim of COP > INFINITY



This should be a minimum to claim a COP > INFINITY ......

If the above seven items cannot be done in a excepted verifiable Scientific Method .... the claims made here of a COP > INFINITY mean nothing only FALSE and INACCURATE statements being made.



Glen Lettenmaier
aka FuzzyTomCat

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1187 on: May 09, 2011, 05:06:14 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1188 on: May 09, 2011, 05:12:54 AM »
Guys  - a little about the accuracy of the measurements.

Regarding the shunt or CSR as it's identified on our schematic.  That oscillation that the components find is always within a small range of frequeny which it finds itself.  One needs to factor in the required impedance at that frequency as it effects the shunts.  This in turn requires careful assessment of the inductance of that CSR.  This inductance was carefully measured by the staff at CPUT using their own calibrated and sophisticated equipment.  Once one factors in the required - then the CSR's resistance is factored in at 0.9 Ohms during that oscillation.  This is easily managed on the spread sheet down loads.

Then.  Notwithstanding the required adjustment to the shunt value one is still left with an excess of energy returned to the battery that still needs to be explained.

Regarding the use of the functions generator to apply the required frequency.  This is not ideal.  But it's adequate.  This because when it comes to actually making an appliance then the required signal will be transposable - if that's the word.  In other words the software will be designed around whatever it is that's required as shown by the functions generator.  But one of our members here is working on the design to do without the functions generator.  He tried this again last night but 'blew' one of the chips.  It needs to be redone.  Hopefully he'll be able to get there.  He has re-activated his account here - I believe.  And hopefully he'll be in a position to explain all this himself.

What is of interest and will be shown when we download the video is that his own shunt is non-inductive. Not one of those highly calibrated - high wattage numbers - unfortunately.  You'll notice that the waveforms are not as 'steady' as they were in our own circuit experiment.  This is probably due to the fact that his shunt was not able to tolerate those momentary high wattages.

Regarding any claims at all that there may be a measurement error on our circuit.  That would be interesting to find.  We cannot find it.  And it has been looked at by some highly competent engineers.  If any of you can find it then that would be nice. 

Kindest regards,
Rosemary


Offline poynt99

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 3582
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1189 on: May 09, 2011, 05:31:30 AM »
Guys  - a little about the accuracy of the measurements.

Regarding the shunt or CSR as it's identified on our schematic.  That oscillation that the components find is always within a small range of frequeny which it finds itself.  One needs to factor in the required impedance at that frequency as it effects the shunts.  This in turn requires careful assessment of the inductance of that CSR.  This inductance was carefully measured by the staff at CPUT using their own calibrated and sophisticated equipment.  Once one factors in the required - then the CSR's resistance is factored in at 0.9 Ohms during that oscillation.  This is easily managed on the spread sheet down loads.
If you have not factored in the DC resistance (and by calculation I see you haven't), then the actual value to be used is 0.9 + 0.25 = 1.15 Ohms.

Quote
But one of our members here is working on the design to do without the functions generator.  He tried this again last night but 'blew' one of the chips.  It needs to be redone.  Hopefully he'll be able to get there.  He has re-activated his account here - I believe.  And hopefully he'll be in a position to explain all this himself.
::) I provided a schematic (two schematics in fact) that does away with the FG long ago. You've ignored those I guess.

Quote
Regarding any claims at all that there may be a measurement error on our circuit.  That would be interesting to find.  We cannot find it.  And it has been looked at by some highly competent engineers.  If any of you can find it then that would be nice. 
This has already been done. You've ignored that I guess.

Now regarding the new circuit topology, it would be impossible to accurately determine where the measurement error is without a photo or diagram depicting precisely where the scope probes are placed. I requested this a couple of times already. You ignored those requests I guess.

.99

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1189 on: May 09, 2011, 05:31:30 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline poynt99

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 3582
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1190 on: May 09, 2011, 05:42:45 AM »
But one of our members here is working on the design to do without the functions generator.  He tried this again last night but 'blew' one of the chips.  It needs to be redone.  Hopefully he'll be able to get there.  He has re-activated his account here - I believe.  And hopefully he'll be in a position to explain all this himself.
Blew up a chip....you don't say? Wonder why that would be?  ::)

.99

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1191 on: May 09, 2011, 05:49:19 AM »
If you have not factored in the DC resistance (and by calculation I see you haven't), then the actual value to be used is 0.9 + 0.25 = 1.15 Ohms.

No actually.  The net value is 0.9 Ohms.  And then only during the oscillation phase.

::) I provided a schematic (two schematics in fact) that does away with the FG long ago. You've ignored those I guess.
Not actually.  It's outside my competence to build any circuit at all.  And that's only because I don't have the eyes to manage it.  But nothing's to stop you or anyone else from building it.

And yes.  I remember your quarrel with our measurements.  it was all to do with undersampling, then the position of the ground from the signal generator - and then a general complaint about the inductance on our circuit.  I am actually in need of valid objections.

Now regarding the new circuit topology, it would be impossible to accurately determine where the measurement error is without a photo or diagram depicting precisely where the scope probes are placed. I requested this a couple of times already. You ignored those requests I guess.

Far from it.  I've got those photos.  But you'll have to wait for the download.  My PC was hacked.  It's being fixed.  I seem to remember having explained this ad nauseum.  Anyway.  There it is again.  Hopefully I'll get it back next week. Can't wait.  I'm dying to prove how the position of this before the CSR makes not the slightest difference to those results.

Regards,
Rosie-Posie

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1191 on: May 09, 2011, 05:49:19 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1192 on: May 09, 2011, 05:51:21 AM »
Blew up a chip....you don't say? Wonder why that would be?  ::)

.99

Don't wonder too long Poynty.  It was blown well before he got here to measure anything. 

Regards,
Rosemary

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1193 on: May 09, 2011, 06:01:01 AM »
And guys, I'm reasonably satisfied that there have been many proofs of exceeding unity - certainly on this forum and certainly elsewhere.  And I am also satisfied that these results have FAR exceeded unity if they have not actually achieved COP infinity.  The use of the term COP INFINITY is when the measure of energy from a supply is less than the energy returned to the supply.  Then the co-efficient of performance can no longer be related to 1.  That is what is evident.  It has been publicly demonstrated which is all that is required for proof.  But it has also been video'd and has been carefully recorded in a published report.  Subsequent to that report there has been a revised schematic on a simulated program that CONFORMS IN ITS ENTIRETY to the results that we achieved on our demonstrated device.  And the circuit that is applicable to all this has been posted by Groundloop and now entirely conforms to the required.

The fact that a simulation of this conforms at all is significant.  It not only endorses our own findings but it shows that - in fact - these results are achievable within the context of proven classical measurement protocols. 

That this thread is being 'flamed' at all - is because Harti is allowing it.  He has advised me privately, that he's thinking of 'closing' this thread because he sees that our measurements may be wrong.  Which no doubt explains why Fuzzy is allowed to post here at all.  It's his speciality to kill my threads.  I have addressed every concern that Stefan has mentioned.  With conclusive argument. If, notwithstanding, this thread is locked - IF that happens - and IF I am, indeed banned, then may I impose on you all to consider his reasons for this?  On a suspicion of incorrect measurements?  It seems strange.  I would then confidently predict that when the honeymoon period is over with Romero - that he too will be disgraced or banned.  I do hope you guys will rally.  You really need to take care of him.  And I think you need to pay especial attention to the motives of these forums.  One hopes that they're intended to promote any OU technology.

Meanwhile I'll leave you with this thought.  Whenever I am banned or whenever my threads are locked - it's a consequence of Fuzzy being allowed free reign to do his worst.  Why is he given that much license? 

Kindest regards,
Rosie

ADDED
And edited spelling

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1193 on: May 09, 2011, 06:01:01 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1194 on: May 09, 2011, 06:28:22 AM »
And while I still have a voice here - there's another point.  When you guys start exploring the solid state version of that circuit of Romero's I suspect you'll begin by applying inductors.  Then you'll progress to more and more simplified versions of that circuit.  And then, unhappily, you'll probably end up with the simplest version of all - which is our own circuit.  Which inclines me to think that we've got a solid state version of the same thing.  Results not as clearly evident - but certainly as dramatic in their values.  And certainly usable.  It's just that Romero's is potentially a generator which should, by rights, obviate any need at all to apply our own. 

It'll be interesting to see how Poynty fares on this solid state reach.  It was an early if not first question.

Regards again
Rosemary

Offline eisnad karm

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 35
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1195 on: May 09, 2011, 07:38:37 AM »
RomeoUK has a convincing demo...no batteries needed. He has a few other tricks up his sleeve that can be developed further including an inovative solidstate system.
I think most of the crow has shifted over there. Keep up your work i am sure oneday you will have something that is straighforward.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1195 on: May 09, 2011, 07:38:37 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline poynt99

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 3582
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1196 on: May 09, 2011, 12:41:10 PM »
No actually.  The net value is 0.9 Ohms.  And then only during the oscillation phase.
Indeed it is 1.15 Ohms. Explain How you arrived at your erroneous conclusion?

Familiarize yourself with the facts. Total Impedance (at oscillation) is:

Z = R + jX, where R is the real part (0.25), and jX is the imaginary part (0.9).

Quote
Not actually.  It's outside my competence to build any circuit at all.
YOU, your team, your friends etc. etc. have had those two schematics for some time. The point being, the design was already at hand.  ::)

Quote
And yes.  I remember your quarrel with our measurements.  it was all to do with undersampling, then the position of the ground from the signal generator - and then a general complaint about the inductance on our circuit.  I am actually in need of valid objections.
Incorrect on all counts actually. You've really not been paying attention to anything I've said in the last two weeks (or more). Actually based on my experience, that's probably not the case; it's more a case of misinterpretation of what I've said.

Quote
Far from it.  I've got those photos.  But you'll have to wait for the download.
Good.

.99

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1197 on: May 09, 2011, 12:53:00 PM »
Poynty - I'm taking this our conversation off forum for now.  You can continue to argue here.  I won't.  I will email you.

Rosemary

Offline poynt99

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 3582
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1198 on: May 09, 2011, 08:54:26 PM »
Regarding your email Rose, the post I am suggesting you review is this one:

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=10407.msg284238#msg284238

If something is not clear in that post, just say so and I will try to elucidate on anything you wish.

.99

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1199 on: May 10, 2011, 05:19:29 AM »
Poynty ?  This definitely needs a thread post.  I am not sure that I understand you. You log in certain circuit parameters into PSpice.  You hit the play button and it gives results?  Something like that.  Are you saying that you had to invert your probe positions to find that negative number?

Or are you arguing that it is meaningless precisely because it gave a negative result? 

Sorry that's the best I could do with what you've written.

Kindest regards,
Rosie

 

OneLink