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: 523112
  • *Total Topics: 15575
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 9
  • *Guests: 6
  • *Total: 15

Author Topic: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.  (Read 714035 times)

Offline evolvingape

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 478
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2100 on: April 10, 2012, 11:44:15 AM »
I think this thread is going nowhere until Rosemary will do some new measurements without
the function generator and post new measurements results and a video showing
her new setup with the 555 timer...


So as I am getting too many private complains about her spamming now this thread,
I am closing this thread now.

Rosemary, when you will have a new experiment with the 555 timer , the battery tests and a new
video and measurement results , just contact me privately and then I can
open up the thread again. Until then , just work on your setup and make new videos
and document it only with the 555 timer and forget the function generator whiich puts energy
into the circuit.

Regards, Stefan.

Hi All,
Rosemary Ainsley wanted to do some battery drawdown tests together with user
poynt99so I am opening up again this thread.

Regards, Stefan.

P.S: I am not opening this thread again because of the legal threat I received of
her lawyer, but maybe there will be coming some new evidence from these tests.

As I don´t like to be threaten by legal action I might pull the plug again, if this
thread goes nowhere again and close it again and make a backup as PDF and
post it in the Download archive and remove it from the forum completely.

Where is the battery drawdown test data of the NERD RAT COP infinity device ?

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline picowatt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2036
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2101 on: April 10, 2012, 01:02:40 PM »
Rosemary,

As you can see when look at the scope shots, those major divisions, indicated by the larger "dashes" and the minor divisions by the "dots" are a bit difficult to see.  If your eyes were as worn out as mine, you would moreso appreciate my comment regarding the difficulty in reading the screen.  Also, I always line up an important feature of the trace with a minor division so that it is easier to calculate from the screen.  For example, I would have lined up the zero volts reference line with a minor division to assist in making measurements.  As well, I would have set the trigger delay or horizontal position so that at least one minor division lined up with a cycle start horizontally, which is indeed done in the FIG. 3, as the start of the first full cycle is on a tick mark (not the cycle that begins at the screen far left, but the next positive going edge).

Just so you know my 'scope reading skills can be trusted, I will read your function generator's period from the screen.  This requires measuring horizontally as opposed to vertically.

Again referring to FIG 3, the channel 3 waveform swings positive, stays there for a time, returns to a negative value, stays there for a time, and then the cycle repeats.  I will count the minor divisions between the leading edge of the positive going transitions and arrive at approximately 16.1 minor divisions.  The horizontal timebase is set to 50 seconds per division as per the "50s" at the top left of the screen.  There are 5 minor divisions horizontally per division, so each minor division represents 10 seconds.  Multiplying 16.1 times 10 seconds, I arrive at 161 seconds, or approx. 2.68 minutes.  I can invert that 161 seconds number to arrive at cycles per second, which equals 6.2 milliHertz, which is in good agreement with the readout of 6.17mHz.  The period of time the cycle is at a positive voltage is approx. 1.5 minor divisions, so the cycle is at a positive voltage for a period of 1.5 tmes 10 seconds, or 15 seconds.  From the 161 seconds of the total time, I can subtract the positive cycle portion and arrive at 141 seconds, or 2.43 minutes as the duration of the time the function generator output is a negative voltage.

So, the total cycle time is 2.68 minutes, the period of time within the cycle that the function generator is a negative voltage is ca. 2.43 minutes and the period of time the function generator is at a positive voltage is .25 minutes (15 seconds).  And, the frequency is ca 6.2mHz

Keep in mind that when reading optically, the values will only be as close as one can count divisions and make an estimate of a partial division.  Hence my discussion regarding the use of cursors.  Cursors are movable indicator lines that can be turned on and moved about the screen with the value equal to the distance between them provided by the scope.  This allows measurements to be made without having to resort to this "old fashioned way" where the divisions, or "tick marks" must be manually counted and a bit of math used to determine a value.  I use the cursors all the time.  But on captures as provided in your papers, any measurements desired that are not provided must be gleaned from the screen using the "count the divisions and a bit of math" method.

If we could agree that the captures are being read properly, it would greatly assist in substantive discussions regarding the data that your captures reflect.

PW     

« Last Edit: April 10, 2012, 02:56:23 PM by picowatt »

Offline picowatt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2036
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2102 on: April 10, 2012, 01:37:00 PM »
Rosemary,

The point to all the 'scope related discussion is this.  Documents are often provided that include scope captures or screen shots.  Although the included text may contain information or measurements the author believes are most important to their discussion, there is often a weath of additional data related to those captures or screen shots that is not discussed.  As they say, a "picture is worth a thousand words", and for us "electronics guys", a multi-channel 'scope shot provides an entire chapter's worth of reading.

It is that additional information contained within those chapters, completely related to the papers you present, that I was attempting to discuss with you. 

PW

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2102 on: April 10, 2012, 01:37:00 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2103 on: April 10, 2012, 04:15:45 PM »
Picowatt

If you wish to assert that the voltage during the on time of the duty cycle - and across the shunt - is 12 volts then that is entirely your right.  Feel free.  It is NOT correct.  Not according to my own expert advices.  We all know that the voltage across the battery is DC.  Therefore you cannot possibly assert that the voltage across the battery is offset by -172 volts.  Yet you do.  Unlike the obvious requirement for the battery to be DC coupled we also know that the voltage applied by the signal generator is AC.  Therefore you need to refer to the offset value.  Yet you won't.  So you must do as you wish.  Unfortunately it is NOT correct.  But there is nothing to stop you asserting that you are right.  And by the same token I know that I am right.  Our paper has been vetted by real experts in the art who do NOT - like you - hide behind an internet identity.  And they have NONE OF THEM found reason to complain about the representations related to the that Gate voltage. 

And while I greatly appreciate that lesson in the art of reading the screen display which is very kind of you - it is also, nonetheless, somewhat more elementary than even I require.

Kindest regards
Rosie Pose
I've downloaded the screen shot again for those who are trying to make head or tail of this argument.

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2104 on: April 10, 2012, 04:48:32 PM »
 ;D

 :-X


 :-*
 

(You don't stand a chance, PicoWatt. She has real experts who don't hide behind an internet identity............ but they sure do hide good somehow, because WE HAVE NEVER EVEN ONCE SEEN OR HEARD FROM THEM DIRECTLY, only by reference when Rosie Poser doesn't understand something but wants to pretend she does.)

"those who are trying to make head or tail of this argument"
The only person trying to make heads or tails of this "argument" is you, Rosemary. I don't think there is a single person reading this thread that doesn't understand PicoWatt's several perfectly clear and correct explanations of your scope shots to you. And they all will agree that PW is right and you don't understand what you are talking about.

If there is ANYONE who agrees with Rosemary on this topic they really REALLY should make at least one little post in support of Rosemary's position, with references and checkable citations. Because really, Rosemary needs a little help and support here. ANYONE?

I know there are people reading this thread who think they know how to read a scope. COME ON you silent lurkers. WHERE IS YOUR SUPPORT FOR ROSEMARY?

TURN ON YOUR SCOPE and see for yourself, Rosemary. You don't even have to try to read and understand the operating manual. It is as easy as powering it up and twiddlying some knobs. The offset value will appear in the box, no matter what waveform or AC-DC coupling or channel impedance or ANYTHING. AND: the offset value will always be equal to the DISTANCE, measured in volts according to the channel's setting, from the SCREEN CENTER GRATICLE LINE, to the little underline marker under the channel number displayed at screen left.

WHETHER THERE IS A SIGNAL DISPLAYED OR NOT.

The numbers indicating "ofs" in the channel settings box indicate this trace displacement, nothing more. The TEK doesn't even display the offset in numbers unless you dig for it. But it always ALWAYS displays the offset by the location of the channel markers on the left side of the display.

Remember the 25.6 million Joules "calculation" that was so wrong it was ridiculous, yet took three or four people chiming in for literally WEEKS before she finally had to admit her errors? I do. And this is another case of the same garbage. Rosemary is defending a wrong and indefensible position, and the  only thing that she can come up with in support of her case is "experts who don't hide behind internet identitites" but who are nevertheless invisible and silent.... except in Rosemary's dreams.

And as far as PW's elementary lesson is concerned: Rosemary has been asked similar questions in the past and has NEVER provided an answer that indicates that she has the slightest idea about reading values off of the traces themselves. She has always resorted to numbers in boxes, and doesn't even realize how to use the scope's cursors to give her those numbers in boxes she so adores.

Rosemary, if a waveform has seventeen peaks per 8 and a half  major ticks, and the timebase is set to 0.2 milliseconds per division, what is the frequency of the waveform? Please show your work.

(This little problem can be COMPLETELY answered in less than 60 keystrokes, well under one line of text.)

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2104 on: April 10, 2012, 04:48:32 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2105 on: April 10, 2012, 04:54:34 PM »
And TK - while you're there.  You need to explain how it is that you manage to show the voltage across your load resistor without any phase shifts.  Is it another miracle of the TAR BABY?

Rosie Pose,
 :-*

Offline evolvingape

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 478
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2106 on: April 10, 2012, 05:01:38 PM »
Our paper has been vetted by real experts in the art who do NOT - like you - hide behind an internet identity.

Kindest regards
Rosie Pose

Your "real experts" do not hide behind an internet identity because they have no identity.

They are completely anonymous and have never uttered a word in validating what you say. A figment of your imagination.

YOUR REAL EXPERTS DO NOT EXIST!


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2106 on: April 10, 2012, 05:01:38 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2107 on: April 10, 2012, 05:07:53 PM »
Your "real experts" do not hide behind an internet identity because they have no identity.

They are completely anonymous and have never uttered a word in validating what you say. A figment of your imagination.

YOUR REAL EXPERTS DO NOT EXIST!

No evolvingape.  They're there.  They just would rather not be associated with the sordid nature of slander and allegation that's rampant on this thread address.  Nor do I blame them.  It seems that everyone is determined to root out the identities of those that I associate with - and yet they none of them see any need to expose their own. 

Rosie Pose

Offline evolvingape

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 478
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2108 on: April 10, 2012, 05:17:38 PM »
No evolvingape.  They're there.  They just would rather not be associated with the sordid nature of slander and allegation that's rampant on this thread address.  Nor do I blame them.  It seems that everyone is determined to root out the identities of those that I associate with - and yet they none of them see any need to expose their own. 

Rosie Pose

Your full of shit Rosemary!

I am asking you who your experts are, my name is Robert Mason, as you very well know and have always known.

I SAY YOUR EXPERTS DO NOT EXIST!


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2108 on: April 10, 2012, 05:17:38 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2109 on: April 10, 2012, 05:32:00 PM »
Rosemary, where is YOUR evidence for "phase shifts" that you are talking about? I see none whatsoever in anything you have EVER posted lo these many years.

And I don't give a hoot about the identity of your experts. I don't even care if they exist any more. I just want SOMEBODY somewhere anywhere to chime in and tell us that we've been wrong all this time, that the scope manuals and Agilent documents are wrong, and that YOU ARE RIGHT about your assertions re offset and function generator current, for just two examples.

PRODUCE ANYBODY WHO WILL TELL US THAT YOU ARE RIGHT. Because you have PW, MH, .99, me, and others who are telling you that you are wrong, and the strange thing is... WE ALL CITE PROOFS and REFERENCES that can be checked. And all you can do is to "assure" us that your "experts" haven't complained. Well... the reviewers of your papers are experts and they complained---by dumping your papers into the wastebasket.

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2110 on: April 10, 2012, 05:44:12 PM »
@PW:

Excellent example using the horizontal scale to determine the very slow frequency shown. But there is also a much higher frequency shown on the scope's display. Big "M" means megaHertz, and little "m" means milliHertz, right?

At the bottom of the LeCroy shot above, in the grey stripe that contains the "LeCroy" name, the sample rate and the RTC reading,  there is a figure given as   "  f=2.34324MHz  ".

What does this figure represent? 

(Note where the scope's trigger is set: on the top Yellow CVR channel, right smack dab in the middle of an oscillation burst.)

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2110 on: April 10, 2012, 05:44:12 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2111 on: April 10, 2012, 07:21:58 PM »
And TK - while you're there.  You need to explain how it is that you manage to show the voltage across your load resistor without any phase shifts.  Is it another miracle of the TAR BABY?

Rosie Pose,
 :-*

No, it's an expression of your own wilful ignorance and refusal to communicate clearly and in standard terminology.

Are you talking about the phase relationship shown in Paper 2, Figure 8?

Are these the phase shifts I'm not managing to show?

(For those who are able to understand: The below picture is a zoom of Tar Baby's oscillations, driven by the 555 timer in the standard manner.)

The lesser amplitude trace is taken directly at the battery and is shown at 5 volts per division, and the greater amplitude trace is the voltage drop across the CVR, taken at 0.5 volts per division. I have used the "offset" or vertical position controls to overlay these traces on the center graticle marker, hence the absolute voltage values are lost-- but they are irrelevant for this demo.
(In Rosemary's scope channel boxes, the "ofs" figure would read 0 or close to it.) No horizontal tomfoolery has been applied and the scope is showing the correct phases.

And the normal 180 degree phase difference between a voltage and a current trace can clearly be seen, and additionally a smaller true "phase shift" of a few degrees can just barely be detected, caused by the same effect that will make the integrated multiplication of these two traces right here.... yield an OU result.

Apparently.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=niat7aosgUI

Offline picowatt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2036
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2112 on: April 10, 2012, 07:42:45 PM »
Picowatt

If you wish to assert that the voltage during the on time of the duty cycle - and across the shunt - is 12 volts then that is entirely your right.  Feel free.  It is NOT correct.  Not according to my own expert advices.  We all know that the voltage across the battery is DC.  Therefore you cannot possibly assert that the voltage across the battery is offset by -172 volts.  Yet you do.  Unlike the obvious requirement for the battery to be DC coupled we also know that the voltage applied by the signal generator is AC.  Therefore you need to refer to the offset value.  Yet you won't.  So you must do as you wish.  Unfortunately it is NOT correct.  But there is nothing to stop you asserting that you are right.  And by the same token I know that I am right.  Our paper has been vetted by real experts in the art who do NOT - like you - hide behind an internet identity.  And they have NONE OF THEM found reason to complain about the representations related to the that Gate voltage. 

And while I greatly appreciate that lesson in the art of reading the screen display which is very kind of you - it is also, nonetheless, somewhat more elementary than even I require.

Kindest regards
Rosie Pose
I've downloaded the screen shot again for those who are trying to make head or tail of this argument.

Rosemary,

My apologies Rosemary, but from your response, I see that not only can you not read a 'scope, but as well, you apparently cannot manage to read or comprehend concisely written English word.

I have never asserted "12 volts" regarding the shunt.  Nor have I asserted that the battery voltage is, or must be, offset by -172volts.  The only person who stated that the "ofs" numbers must somehow be used in making measurements was you, not me.

Your responses are very telling.  I now realize that any attempts to have a discussion with you of a technical nature regarding your papers would be pointless and entirely in vain.

I also realize that any discussions of a technical nature "from you" should be considered very carefully and "taken with a grain of salt".

You are indeed your own "technology's" worst ambassador ...

Sincerely,
PW

 

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2113 on: April 10, 2012, 07:42:58 PM »
TK:

I am also curious to know what the 2.34324 MHz means.  In looking at the DSO capture you can see that it is capturing 500 seconds and it can store 500K points (I assume per channel).  So that makes sense to see that the "1kS" on the display corresponds to a sampling rate of 1 kHz.

Note that means that the oscillation waveforms are grossly undersampled because we know the oscillations are in the 2-4 MHz range.  The DSO in this case shows the negative oscillation mode "gate" signal is at 6.17 MHz.  Personally I would want to double check this because of the nature of the setup but let's assume it's right for now.

Even through the waveform is way undersampled, in theory "Monte Carlo" methods could come into play here and the "VV" calculation is actually legit.  But I personally would much prefer to do a "VV" calculation on a tiny tiny sliver of the waveform with at least 8X Nyquist sampling, and try to line up a perfect number of cycles, to see what the "VV" calculation would say in that case.  I am not sure if the scope can sample in the 50-100 MHz range though.

Going back to the subsampling in the DSO capture, I am just not comfortable with a "Double Monte Carlo" "VV" calculation.  I have never played with a DSO and explored what happens when you are subsampled so I am just guessing.

In a way this is all academic because the battery "voltage" is a fake-out.

Rosemary:

You have to be aware of a pattern:  Instead of trying to engage and understand the function generator current flow issue, you are belligerent and put up a fight.  Instead of trying to understand how you read voltages off of the DSO and engaging and trying to learn, you say that you are going to take this up with your "experts."

It's all just you being combative for no reason.  I read PW's discussion of the offset voltages for the DSO and he is absolutely correct - and that's coming from somebody that has barely even used a DSO!  Almost no companies had DSOs in my time.  They were too expensive and probably couldn't store more than 1/1024th the number of samples that today's DSO can store.   :-X

You are just wasting time and energy.  You are talking to experts but you don't want to listen to them and instead you want to fight tooth and nail all the way.  It's the old cliche, you are your own worst enemy.

MileHigh

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2114 on: April 10, 2012, 07:50:09 PM »
I am sensing some convergence here!

Quote
You are indeed your own "technology's" worst ambassador ...

Quote
It's the old cliche, you are your own worst enemy.

 :P


 

OneLink