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 670993 times)

Offline powercat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1091
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1650 on: June 27, 2011, 11:03:53 AM »
And since I'm on a roll - let me give a synopsis of Poynty's argument.  Here it is.  The simulation shows an INFINITE COP ONLY if we factor in the connecting leads.  Without those leads there is NO  INFINITE COP.

And TK's argument - something on the lines of Fuzzy - HE could not achieve COP > ANYTHING AT ALL - therefore there is no COP>ANYTHING AT ALL. 

And MileHihigh's argument - his personal BEST.  How can we CLAIM results that are greater COP 1 when standard science does not ALLOW THIS.  Therefore are we wrong.

And so it goes.  All these thousands of posts and always that same argument.  I personally think that these posts eventually reach a certain critical mass and then they JUST COLLAPSE.  And I think we're well over that point.

I'm preparing a detailed account of the absurdities of all these arguments and will post in on my blogspot.  Meanwhile I really need to say goodbye to you all.  I'll post here again when we've finished that paper.

Rosemary

I omitted CAT's reasons.  He thinks that Fuzzy is a good guy and that anything Fuzzy claims is just perfectly OK.  And as for MaMags.  He doesn't think.  Ever.  He just echoes everyone else - not unlike my little 2 year old granddaughter who echos her own big sister.  It would be rather sweet if it weren't also so utterly destructive.

Anyway.  Bye for now.  I've got another paper to prepare before we submit the one that's now finished.

You will pick on small detail and not address the main point, and you will also repeat what you said before ( this is not your blog) please interact with the reasonable requests made by members here for you to do new tests.

You can't tell me of any member on this forum that has produced OU with your circuit, because nobody has.

Here are few videos for members on the forum, they are other members that didn't make videos who also failed in their attempts to match your claim of OU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XrwgEb5ac_w
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZM8BBa7_Zpc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4x0wQJrc9To
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-GBS3sKcB8g
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=trip8gjoxMQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HpaP__5Kd38

Do something different Here on This forum,and stop ignoring reasonable requests for tests. or stop claiming OU on This OverUnity Forum.

A big conspiracy, it would appear that anyone that says your circut doesn't workor or indicate's measuring error, is then part of that conspiracy.
Many members have made reasonable requests that you ignore including Stefan,Mr Mag amongst others,but you ignore them and carry on regurgitating your same old arguments.

Go on Rosie proof that 99 is wrong in his analysis and makes something that runs and runs and put it on the Internet after all,
 (Quote from Rosemary)
"All one needs are the the measurements and some reasonable account of the apparatus that produces those measurements".

The fact still remains that no one here can reproduce your claims of OU, and you are not willing to do anything to change that deadlock, apart from use this forum as your soapbox and blog.

« Last Edit: June 27, 2011, 03:12:29 PM by powercat »

Offline Bubba1

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 80
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1651 on: June 27, 2011, 02:08:30 PM »
Joules = 1 watt per second.
Still wrong

So.  Do the math.  4.18 x 900 grams x (82 - 16) 66 degrees C = 248 292 joules
Agreed, but by multiplying by 90, you are saying that it took 1 minute to raise that 900 grams of water 66 degrees Celsius and kept providing that same amount of energy every minute for 90 minutes, which would equal 22,346,280 joules.  Is that what you did?  How long did it take the 900 grams of water to increase in temperature 66 degrees C?  If we knew that, the power could be worked out.  As it is, raising 900 grams of water 66 degrees C in one minute would be 248,292 joules / 60 seconds = 4138.2 watts, still a hefty figure.  Again, this is important: how long did it take the 900 grams of water to increase in temperature 66 degrees C?

Offline WilbyInebriated

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3141
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1652 on: June 27, 2011, 08:38:57 PM »
Still wrong


from the wiki...

One joule can also be defined as:

    * The work required to move an electric charge of one coulomb through an electrical potential difference of one volt, or one '"coulomb volt" (C·V). This relationship can be used to define the volt.
    * The work required to produce one watt of power for one second, or one "watt second" (W·s) (compare kilowatt hour). This relationship can be used to define the watt.

Offline Bubba1

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 80
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1653 on: June 28, 2011, 04:11:10 AM »

from the wiki...

One joule can also be defined as:

    * The work required to move an electric charge of one coulomb through an electrical potential difference of one volt, or one '"coulomb volt" (C·V). This relationship can be used to define the volt.
    * The work required to produce one watt of power for one second, or one "watt second" (W·s) (compare kilowatt hour). This relationship can be used to define the watt.

I can't tell if you agree with me or not. ???
Rosemary said Joules = 1 watt per second.
Wiki says Joules = Watt-seconds.
They are not the same thing.
Watts per second = watts divided by seconds.
Watt-seconds = watts times seconds
One way to make sense of the words "watts per second" is if at the beginning of a second you were consuming 1 watt.  At the beginning of the next second, you were consuming 2 watts.  That would be a change of 1 watt per second.

Offline evolvingape

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 478
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1654 on: June 28, 2011, 04:49:05 AM »
I can't tell if you agree with me or not. ???

This is Wilby attacking your logic here with logical fallacies, you can safely say if your disagreeing with Rose then he is not agreeing with you.

Shortly he will ask you how much energy EXACTLY is contained in a battery, when you cannot answer him (because nobody knows) he will not say anything but will have implied that because you cannot answer that simple question everything else you say has no merit.

I expect him to change tack soon as the "energy in the battery" routine is getting old and people are catching on... maybe something like "what happened before the big bang?" would be more appropiate, or perhaps, "what did God have for breakfast last Thursday?".

 ::)

RM :)

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1655 on: June 28, 2011, 07:02:55 AM »
I can't tell if you agree with me or not. ???
Rosemary said Joules = 1 watt per second.
Wiki says Joules = Watt-seconds.
They are not the same thing.
Watts per second = watts divided by seconds.
Watt-seconds = watts times seconds
One way to make sense of the words "watts per second" is if at the beginning of a second you were consuming 1 watt.  At the beginning of the next second, you were consuming 2 watts.  That would be a change of 1 watt per second.

Bubba - watts per second is watts x seconds.  The difference between Joules and Watts is that Joules quantify the work done and Watts quantify the power needed to get that work done.  Therefore work is given in Joules - and power to perform that work is given in Watts.  Where I'm on sticky ground is the caloric value of those Joules that I computed.  This because there's an implicit relationship between 4.18 Joules required to heat 1 gram of water by one degree centigrade.  Does that relate to the time?  I just don't know. 

So.  Here's the question.  I'd be glad if you could work it out for me.  10 minutes to take the water to a steady plus/minus 66 degrees above ambient.  This temperature held for a further plus/minus 70 minutes.  Then the settings changed - and the temperature taken to plus/minus 88 degrees above ambient over another plus/minus 10 minutes.  Test period duration was 100 minutes or 1.6 hours.  Then - I stopped the experiment because I suspected I was looking at a runaway wattage on that final setting.  Bit too too nervous to let it continue higher.  I'd be glad if you could give me that number in Joules.  Be much appreciated.

Rosemary
BTW - in case this is also needed for that calculation.  It cooled down to ambient within something under 1.6 hours.  Not sure if that's significant.

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1656 on: June 28, 2011, 07:15:00 AM »
This is Wilby attacking your logic here with logical fallacies, you can safely say if your disagreeing with Rose then he is not agreeing with you.

Shortly he will ask you how much energy EXACTLY is contained in a battery, when you cannot answer him (because nobody knows) he will not say anything but will have implied that because you cannot answer that simple question everything else you say has no merit.

I expect him to change tack soon as the "energy in the battery" routine is getting old and people are catching on... maybe something like "what happened before the big bang?" would be more appropiate, or perhaps, "what did God have for breakfast last Thursday?".

 ::)

RM :)

RM this is nonsense.  I have just dipped in on this thread and just seen this.  I can read NOTHING about anyone attacking anything in Bubba's or Wilby's posts.  We're all asking questions and finding answers.  Can you please try and  keep your gratuitous and unsolicited and inappropriate comments off this thread.  It would be appreciated.

Offline powercat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1091
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1657 on: June 28, 2011, 12:42:25 PM »
Attack anyone that disagrees with you  ::)
Ignore all reasonable requests to do new tests  ::)
Keep claiming OU regardless of the fact that no one here can reproduce those results  ::)
If they think your circuit doesn't work or you made a measurement error, they are in a conspiracy  ::)
Ignore all the requests and keep using this forum as an advert for your work  ::)

This is not going to go away, this forum is not your blog, stop ignoring reasonable requests from members here.

You will pick on small detail and not address the main point, and you will also repeat what you said before ( this is not your blog) please interact with the reasonable requests made by members here for you to do new tests.

You can't tell me of any member on this forum that has produced OU with your circuit, because nobody has.

Here are few videos for members on the forum, they are other members that didn't make videos who also failed in their attempts to match your claim of OU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XrwgEb5ac_w
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZM8BBa7_Zpc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4x0wQJrc9To
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-GBS3sKcB8g
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=trip8gjoxMQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HpaP__5Kd38

Do something different Here on This forum,and stop ignoring reasonable requests for tests. or stop claiming OU on This OverUnity Forum.

A big conspiracy, it would appear that anyone that says your circut doesn't workor or indicate's measuring error, is then part of that conspiracy.
Many members have made reasonable requests that you ignore including Stefan,Mr Mag amongst others,but you ignore them and carry on regurgitating your same old arguments.

Go on Rosie proof that 99 is wrong in his analysis and makes something that runs and runs and put it on the Internet after all,
 (Quote from Rosemary)
"All one needs are the the measurements and some reasonable account of the apparatus that produces those measurements".

The fact still remains that no one here can reproduce your claims of OU, and you are not willing to do anything to change that deadlock, apart from use this forum as your soapbox and blog.

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1658 on: June 28, 2011, 02:51:15 PM »
Hi Cat.  I must thank you for the critical excesses in your posts.  It generates a flood of emails and I am then reminded how supportive are the most of our readers here to our hard work.

You 'trolls' never learn.  ::)  It really is true.  All publicity is good publicity.  LOL.

 ;D

Kindest regards,
Rosie


added
Actually I'm beginning to realise that the KISS OF DEATH to this work of ours would be to get support from the likes of you.  You guys hopelessly underestimate the intelligence of our readers.  It's really rather insulting.
 

Offline MrMag

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 754
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1659 on: June 28, 2011, 03:14:48 PM »
Hi Cat.  I must thank you for the critical excesses in your posts.  It generates a flood of emails and I am then reminded how supportive are the most of our readers here to our hard work.

You 'trolls' never learn.  ::)  It really is true.  All publicity is good publicity.  LOL.

 ;D

Kindest regards,
Rosie


added
Actually I'm beginning to realise that the KISS OF DEATH to this work of ours would be to get support from the likes of you.  You guys hopelessly underestimate the intelligence of our readers.  It's really rather insulting.


That's great to hear rose. We can keep on posting until we get enough people here that maybe you will actually do the simple test I requested.

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1660 on: June 28, 2011, 03:18:08 PM »
Still wrong
Agreed, but by multiplying by 90, you are saying that it took 1 minute to raise that 900 grams of water 66 degrees Celsius and kept providing that same amount of energy every minute for 90 minutes, which would equal 22,346,280 joules.  Is that what you did?  How long did it take the 900 grams of water to increase in temperature 66 degrees C?  If we knew that, the power could be worked out.  As it is, raising 900 grams of water 66 degrees C in one minute would be 248,292 joules / 60 seconds = 4138.2 watts, still a hefty figure.  Again, this is important: how long did it take the 900 grams of water to increase in temperature 66 degrees C?

Thanks Bubba.  It took about 10 minutes for the element resistor to first heat up to above 250 degrees.  It was getting too hot.  So I ONLY THEN inserted it in water.  Then it took about 10 minutes to take the water temp to a stable temp of 82 degrees or thereby.  (ambient was at 16).  Then I ran it at that heat for a little over an hour.  Then I flipped to a higher frequency and it took the water temp to boil - in a little UNDER 10 minutes.  Does that help?

All I can tell you is that about an hour after finishing that experiment I was about to throw away the water.  I then remembered that I needed to establish how much water there was and I couldn't find anything to measure it in.  It was late and dark so I left that for the morning.  When I did measure the water it was only 0.7 liters.  But that did NOT cover the element - which is where it was when I first inserted it in water.  That level required precisely 0.87 liters.  I therefore suppose that some of that water must have dissipated in steam - and or evaporation.  But what I DO know is that when I was about to throw away that water I also noted that it was now back to ambient - cold to the touch.  Unfortunately I DID NOT take the temperature.

Thanks again,
Rosemary 

And Bubba - I am NOT interested in the 'power' as I KNOW that it cost the battery nothing.  What I want to know is HOW MANY JOULES was dissipated as WORK?  Because I also KNOW that the most that bank of batteries can deliver is 5 x 12 x 40 amps.  Over time therefore it is 5 x 12 x 40 x 60 seconds for 60 minutes.  I've got that from the battery suppliers.  And I misquoted the amount of batteries.  It should have read 5 NOT 6 as I erroneously referenced. 

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1661 on: June 28, 2011, 04:21:57 PM »
Bubba - a friend has just sent me this

What unit is equivalent to watts per second?
In: Home Electricity, Math [Edit categories]

Ads
ImproveAnswer:
"Watts per second" would be the same as "Joules per second per second".
You'd use that monstrosity to describe how fast the rate of energy consumption
or dissipation is growing or shrinking.

We really have to twist our arm behind our own back to come up with that, and
in our practice of Electrical Engineering for the past 37 years, we've never seen
that unit needed or used. It's probably safe to say that such a unit has no physical
significance or practical application.


Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_unit_is_equivalent_to_watts_per_second#ixzz1QZtg9Oa0
 
 
Prefix or symbol for watt is: W

Prefix or symbol for joule per second is: J/sec

One watt converted to joule per second equals = 1.00 J/sec
1 W = 1.00 J/sec
 
Regards
 

Offline powercat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1091
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1662 on: June 28, 2011, 04:33:49 PM »
Hi Cat.  I must thank you for the critical excesses in your posts.  It generates a flood of emails and I am then reminded how supportive are the most of our readers here to our hard work.

You 'trolls' never learn.  ::)  It really is true.  All publicity is good publicity.  LOL.

 ;D

Kindest regards,
Rosie


added
Actually I'm beginning to realise that the KISS OF DEATH to this work of ours would be to get support from the likes of you.  You guys hopelessly underestimate the intelligence of our readers.  It's really rather insulting.


You are so predictable in your response, again and again you fail to recognise the fact that the more you avoid the main issue the more it is clear that your circuit does not do what you claim.

You are insulting this forum with your attitude. This is not your personal blog please interact properly with members reasonable requests for new tests.

In your response you will pick on small detail and not address the main point, and you will also repeat what you said before ( this is not your blog) please interact with the reasonable requests made by members here for you to do new tests.

You can't tell me of any member on this forum that has produced OU with your circuit, because nobody has.

Here are few videos for members on the forum, they are other members that didn't make videos who also failed in their attempts to match your claim of OU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XrwgEb5ac_w
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZM8BBa7_Zpc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4x0wQJrc9To
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-GBS3sKcB8g
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=trip8gjoxMQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HpaP__5Kd38

Do something different Here on This forum,and stop ignoring reasonable requests for tests. or stop claiming OU on This OverUnity Forum.

A big conspiracy, it would appear that anyone that says your circut doesn't workor or indicate's measuring error, is then part of that conspiracy.
Many members have made reasonable requests that you ignore including Stefan,Mr Mag amongst others,but you ignore them and carry on regurgitating your same old arguments.

Go on Rosie proof that 99 is wrong in his analysis and makes something that runs and runs and put it on the Internet after all,
 (Quote from Rosemary)
"All one needs are the the measurements and some reasonable account of the apparatus that produces those measurements".

The fact still remains that no one here can reproduce your claims of OU, and you are not willing to do anything to change that deadlock, apart from use this forum as your soapbox and blog.

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1663 on: June 28, 2011, 04:46:50 PM »
FINALLY AN ANSWER.

Here it is.  1 x 40 ampere hour x 12 volt battery = 40 x 12 volt = 480 Watt Hour battery.

480 Watt Hour battery can, THEORETICALLY - deliver 480 watts per second, for a period of 1 hour.

So the math was right - in principle.  5 x 480 Watt Hour Batteries can deliver 480 watts x 60 seconds x 60 minutes x 1 hour.  That comes to THEORETICAL CAPACITY RATING OF 8.640 Million Watts.

We dissipated in excess of 22 Million Joules - I think?  Can you check this Bubba?

Regards,
Rosemary

Offline powercat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1091
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1664 on: June 28, 2011, 05:20:02 PM »
That's great to hear rose. We can keep on posting until we get enough people here that maybe you will actually do the simple test I requested.

Hi Mr Mag
Yes
I hope she will do your simple test, the situation of her using this forum for advertising and grandstanding has gone on for too long.

We may as well allow anyone to come on this forum and open a thread and claim what they like,
those scammers on you Tube could have a field day.
How to run your house on free energy by Magniworks. ;D

On this forum you are expected to interact to prove your claim, if you are claiming OU,I think that is reasonable.