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: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.  (Read 807959 times)

Offline hartiberlin

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8001
    • free energy research OverUnity.com
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1005 on: March 14, 2012, 06:31:21 PM »


Then.  Regarding the function generator.  I have designed a test that will first be run to prove whether or not the function generator is responsible
for this extra energy - as you claim.  Where would we be if we did not allow experimental evidence to guide us?  I would have thought?

Regarding TK's videos - they only prove that the function generator CAN supply energy - ....


You always will get energy into the circuit via the STRAY Capacitance of the
gate to source and gate to drain STRAY capacitances.

It might just work out for a few Watts only, depends on this oscillation frequency, but this will recharge a bit your batteries and
thus it is very important to do the battery status test before and after the experiment and not to use anymore the function
generator at all.

Regards, Stefan.


Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1006 on: March 14, 2012, 06:42:21 PM »
You always will get energy into the circuit via the STRAY Capacitance of the
gate to source and gate to drain STRAY capacitances.

It might just work out for a few Watts only, depends on this oscillation frequency, but this will recharge a bit your batteries and
thus it is very important to do the battery status test before and after the experiment and not to use anymore the function
generator at all.

Regards, Stefan.
Harti, here's the extent of our claim. I confidently predict that there will be almost NO discharge of energy from the experimental test when the control will be flat.  I think it would be unreasonable to propose that this amount of energy is supplied from capacitance related to the transistors.  Or indeed to anything.  But it is, in any event, immaterial.  I will simply position a non inductive shunt resistor at the output of the function generator to show the energy that is either being put out by that generator or being returned to it. 

I'll try this again.  We CANNOT GET THE REQUIRED CONTROL OVER THE SWITCH with a 555.  Therefore we can't do the higher wattage test.  And I'm NOT about to engage in a test that's restricted or limited to 5 watts or less.  It's neither significant at these levels - nor conclusive.

Regards
Rosemary

Offline poynt99

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 3582
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1007 on: March 14, 2012, 07:34:07 PM »
I would propose if we must stay with the FG, that two LEDs be installed in series (in reverse polarity of each other similar to how I showed them in the battery line) with it so that IF there is any appreciable power at all going through the FG, it will be indicated by which LED is lit, if any.

I'd prefer this over another scope channel with a CSR.

Offline hartiberlin

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8001
    • free energy research OverUnity.com
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1008 on: March 14, 2012, 09:14:52 PM »
I would prefer to have the Function generator out of the circuit as we don´t know what kind of ground loop noise
it was generating together with the grounded scopes and other measurement devices...

There could easily humming groundloop currents exist.

If you are a musician, you know what I mean by this, if you ever had humming problems when connecting
many equipments to a mixer or a PA.

Maybe Rose can just use the 9 Volt Battery trick to get  the oscillation started and use the negative threshold voltage
of the 9 Volt battery and a pot for it.

ALso the capacitance of a gate to source or gate to drain electrodes of a MOSFET transistor
can be in the nanoFarads range, so if you use higher frequencies, this "Straycap" can really put some power
into your circuit.

Regards, Stefan.

P,S, I deleted my last post about Glen, which I received from another user.

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1009 on: March 14, 2012, 10:23:46 PM »
Guys.
 
I am very happy to run those tests subject ONLY to the unequivocal approval of not less than 2 academics - that the protocols are sufficient.  Since this was the result of our previous COP>17 tests then I'm applying the same conditions here.  IF the control batteries deplete to 10 volts each - against the supply batteries that may, correspondingly, not lose more than one half of a single volt each - then that would constitute an 'win' of the experiment over the control - tested not less than twice - as detailed.

BUT.  I am NOT running this experiment for your benefit Harti - nor for anyone's.  I am running the tests to establish unequivocal proof that our unity barriers can be defeated.  The reach is more comprehensive than to satisfy either you or Poynty Point.  It needs must also satisfy our experts.  Else the entire event will fade from recognition.  This is not meant to denigrate the work that is done on these forums.  It is just that by virtue of the eccentricity related to our interests in over unity -  we will ONLY reach this very same audience.  And there is no way that this technology can be progressed without mainstream involvement.  Now.  I may be able to get a couple of experts to 'engage' prior to publication of our paper.  I don't know.  I'll certainly try for it.   But I most certainly WILL get their co-operation once our papers are published.  And we're reasonably certain that this due - in fairly short order.

But.  Between now and then, there's a lot of groundwork that needs doing.  I personally have to find a way to get this onto real time monitoring that it can be seen on the internet - which represents a learning curve for me.  I have to source those batteries and I have to get our scope calibration certified.  I also need to access some more voltmeters to monitor the battery voltages as I gave mine to someone to enable the advancement of this technology.  Little did I know.  In any event.  I also need to establish the parameters for the control and then purchase the appropriate resistor.  And I then need to find the 'team' that are prepared to monitor this that we can give it some kind of supervision on an hour to hour basis.  You must remember that my time is relatively free.  My collaborators all work for a living.  I'm not happy to impose - except possibly on a loose 'shift' basis.  I also, ideally, need to get a data logger in both tests to validate the results.  And again - that's not only a learning curve but I suspect it will all require more than one computer.  Which may represent yet another outlay.  All of which is going to cost me both in time and money.

Now.  The thing is this.  Can you Harti - or Poynty - explain what inducement you offer me when neither of you even have the courtesy of addressing me by name?  Either Rosemary - or Rosie.  My friends and even my staff call me Rosie.  Everyone else calls me Rosemary. Take your pick.  I answer to either.  But I will not be subject to the continuing humiliation of being addressed by neither.  If you, Harti - or you Poynty - wish to INSTRUCT ME in any matter at all - then PROCEED THAT INSTRUCTION WITH THE USE OF MY NAME AND THEN CONCLUDE THAT INSTRUCTION WITH A WORD OF THANKS.  That's a nominal courtesy.  And I deserve NO LESS.  And IF you, like TK and those other trolls here - choose to continue to address me through the 3rd person singular or plural - as if I am not even here - then I take it that I am under NO OBLIGATION to even acknowledge your post. 

That courtesy is REQURED.
Regards,
Rosemary 

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1010 on: March 14, 2012, 10:27:25 PM »
Harti, here's the extent of our claim. I confidently predict that there will be almost NO discharge of energy from the experimental test when the control will be flat.  I think it would be unreasonable to propose that this amount of energy is supplied from capacitance related to the transistors.  Or indeed to anything.  But it is, in any event, immaterial.  I will simply position a non inductive shunt resistor at the output of the function generator to show the energy that is either being put out by that generator or being returned to it. 

I'll try this again.  We CANNOT GET THE REQUIRED CONTROL OVER THE SWITCH with a 555.  Therefore we can't do the higher wattage test.  And I'm NOT about to engage in a test that's restricted or limited to 5 watts or less.  It's neither significant at these levels - nor conclusive.

Regards
Rosemary

It's nice to have you admit finally that your original Quantum article circuit, where you used a 555 timer and claimed COP>17, cannot work.

And let me point out YET AGAIN that your famous test described in the quote where you betray your ignorance about power and energy and math.... that test only applied A FEW WATTS to your load, by your own numbers--- when the calculation is done correctly--- as it has been done by at least 4 other people besides me.

ETA: It appears that the reported test applied, by my calculation, an average of about 56 Watts to the load... that is, 331,000 Joules per 6000 seconds, or about 56 Joules per second. More than I thought... but much less than Rosemary's figure of 4170 Watts.... that is, using her figure of 25 million Joules applied over the 100 minutes of the test.

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1011 on: March 14, 2012, 10:34:41 PM »
It's nice to have you admit finally that your original Quantum article circuit, where you used a 555 timer and claimed COP>17, cannot work.

And let me point out YET AGAIN that your famous test described in the quote where you betray your ignorance about power and energy and math.... that test only applied A FEW WATTS to your load, by your own numbers--- when the calculation is done correctly--- as it has been done by at least 4 other people besides me.

Golly TK.

Can you not understand the written word?  Or is this YET another attempt to denigrate our technology?  We cannot get the control over the 555 switch to dissipate NOT LESS THAN 50 WATTS - which is our nominal target for these tests.  I explained this. As Poynty puts it RTFP.  Or are you suggesting that the function generator is able to apply that much energy?  Which would be a truly remarkable feat.

Kindest as ever,
Rosie Pose.

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1012 on: March 14, 2012, 10:40:09 PM »
Golly TK.

Can you not understand the written word?  Or is this YET another attempt to denigrate our technology?  We cannot get the control over the 555 switch to dissipate NOT LESS THAN 50 WATTS - which is our nominal target for these tests.  I explained this. As Poynty puts it RTFP.  Or are you suggesting that the function generator is able to apply that much energy?  Which would be a truly remarkable feat.

Kindest as ever,
Rosie Pose.

Golly, Rosemary.... you claim that your test put out 25,000,000 Joules in a hundred minutes. Now that's a remarkable feat.
Or is it just a wrong calculation and a lying claim on your part?
Quote
We've taken a little under 900 grams of water to 82 degrees centigrade.  We ran that test for 90 minutes.  Then we upped the frequency and took that water up a further 20 degrees to 104.  We ran that part of the test for 10 minutes.  Ambient was at 16.  Joules = 1 watt per second.  So.  Do the math.  4.18 x 900 grams x (82 - 16) 66 degrees C = 248 292 joules per second x 90 minutes of the test period = 22 342 280 joules.  Then ADD the last 10 minutes where the water was taken to boil and now you have 4.18 x 900 grams x (104 - 16) 88 degrees C = 331 156 joules per second x 10 minutes = 3 310 560 Joules.  Then add those two values 22 342 280 + 3 310 560 = 25.6 Million Joules.

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1013 on: March 14, 2012, 10:51:52 PM »
I would prefer to have the Function generator out of the circuit as we don´t know what kind of ground loop noise
it was generating together with the grounded scopes and other measurement devices...

There could easily humming groundloop currents exist.

If you are a musician, you know what I mean by this, if you ever had humming problems when connecting
many equipments to a mixer or a PA.

Maybe Rose can just use the 9 Volt Battery trick to get  the oscillation started and use the negative threshold voltage
of the 9 Volt battery and a pot for it.

ALso the capacitance of a gate to source or gate to drain electrodes of a MOSFET transistor
can be in the nanoFarads range, so if you use higher frequencies, this "Straycap" can really put some power
into your circuit.

Regards, Stefan.

There IS a way to obviate ALL GROUND ISSUES related to the use of the function generator.  I need to check with the manufacturer that it's possible to use it in this way - but if so we'll simply apply a two pronged plug - as is used on that Tektronix that we loaned. That's certainly doable and will obviate the need for that 555 test.  But I'll have to find out if this is possible.

Also. I am NOT about to test anything outside our circuit.  We have staked our claim in that paper - and that paper is related to that precise circuit. Nor will I. There is NO value in us doing any other circuit test as the ONLY objective is to prove the claim in the paper. 

Regards,
Rosemary

Offline eatenbyagrue

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 203
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1014 on: March 14, 2012, 10:54:13 PM »
Golly, Rosemary.... you claim that your test put out 25,000,000 Joules in a hundred minutes. Now that's a remarkable feat.

25 million is alot, to the point where I am a little concerned about safety.

Rosemary, are you concerned that if this circuit is replicated that the excess energy produced from it will have a negative impact on the earth?  In theory, you could have quite a large explosion when you have unlimited energy produced from a small space.  Nature has evolved to naturally deal with under-unity sources of energy, which are limited in nature, but this unlimited energy could really pose a challenge.

Do you have any suggestions for those of us who plan to use this circuit for home heating and so forth?  How can we use this energy safely so that it does not wreak havoc on earth climate?

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1015 on: March 14, 2012, 10:58:23 PM »
25 million is alot, to the point where I am a little concerned about safety.

Rosemary, are you concerned that if this circuit is replicated that the excess energy produced from it will have a negative impact on the earth?  In theory, you could have quite a large explosion when you have unlimited energy produced from a small space.  Nature has evolved to naturally deal with under-unity sources of energy, which are limited in nature, but this unlimited energy could really pose a challenge.

Do you have any suggestions for those of us who plan to use this circuit for home heating and so forth?  How can we use this energy safely so that it does not wreak havoc on earth climate?

LOL eatenbyagrue.  I'm not sure.  Come to think of it - it is somewhat alarming.  :o Hopefully there's been a minor miscalculation somewhere there. 

Thanks for this post.  I've had my first laugh of the day.

Kindest regards,
Rosie
 ;D 8)

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1016 on: March 14, 2012, 11:33:30 PM »
Hello MileHigh

I see you're still muttering there.  You may very well be right.  It may be that the battery is entirely responsible for generating all  that energy.  It may be that there is nothing to this claim - nor this circuit.  In which case?  We'll find out from the experimental evidence.  Which is as it should be. 

MileHigh - you're 'ace' at electronics.  I know this.  Do one of your famous analyses and explain the positive half of the waveform and it's path.  But don't put in the nonsense about the moving through the function generator terminals.  Because you must remember that there's a negative signal at that Q1 Gate.  The current can't pass through there.  And the config is EXACTLY as I sketched it.  I REALLY want to know some viable explanation. 

And I LOVE your choice of poetry.  Dylan is absolutely my favourite poet - and the greatest artist EVER - let alone from the 60's. 

Kindest regards,
Rosie Pose.

Offline SeaMonkey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1292
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1017 on: March 15, 2012, 01:17:26 AM »
Rosemary,

It has been a very long while since I've commented
and I'm very delighted to discover that you're in
good spirits and intellectually as agile as ever!!

Now I need to get caught up on what's been going
down...
- - - - - Added thoughts:

Woa!!  Some pretty potent happenings have gone
down!!

I should also like to thank Stefan for being so
accommodating and so tolerant.

Regarding all of the flames and Trollerization-
you have reason to be very proud Rosemary.
The psychological implications (regarding the
Trolls) are really quite revealing.

Obviously, the Trolls hold you in very high
regard; even admire your intellect and tenacity.
At the same time it arouses feelings of inferiority
within them which they simply cannot brook.

Love-Hate at work.  Freud was correct about one
thing - men develop attitudes which affect their
ability to interact with women from their Mothers.

The conduct of the Trolls does not reflect well on
that relationship.  What compels them to attack a
woman so viciously?  What are they revealing to
the World about themselves?

Congratulations to you Rosemary!  You've done
well.

Offline Magluvin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5884
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1018 on: March 15, 2012, 01:34:36 AM »
lol  Muttering.  Priceless 

Mags

Offline Magluvin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5884
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1019 on: March 15, 2012, 04:54:10 AM »
I want to understand something here...

When Roses circuit is in oscillation, can that oscillation, positive peaks and negative peaks, be measured at the battery? To say, if I had a hypothetical current meter in line at the battery terminal, will I see the same "current" fluctuations at the load?

If so, and we used the hypothetical dual LED, input/output test proposed earlier, one led works in one current direction and the other led when the current is in the opposite direction, then the contention is that only one of those LEDs is going to light, showing that total currents are only flowing in 1 direction in Roses circuit when in oscillation???  From the battery? Never ever into the battery? Never? Never ever? Oscillation definition?

That would be saying that only DC flows through the circuit at any time, no?

What happened to the oscillation? That "alternating current" through the circuit during oscillation? That alternating current would have to flow through one led at a time depending on the phase. This one lights, then that one lights with each phase of operation. No? 


In my opinion, Using LEDs as a throughput, even many on each branch, it would change the circuit quite a bit from the original form. No? Voltage drops, limited currents... as compared to the original circuit.

How much AC current is flowing in the unmodified version of of Roses circuit, during each phase of oscillation? Peak AC current, each direction of oscillation, is what I would be interested in knowing.

Only 1 led lights.  hmm.

Mags