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 848703 times)

Offline Groundloop

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 1736
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #930 on: March 12, 2012, 05:43:23 PM »
For your amusement:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMU23e0m3T0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HK9TNFuvM2k

Note that the circuit is mostly powered by the Function Generator, and it may actually be possible in some cases for the Function Generator to.... charge the battery.

TK,

Can you also try using a 9 volt battery with a 10K resistor in series with the 9 volt battery
as a negative bias for the mosfets and see if you get oscillations?

GL.

Offline poynt99

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 3582
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #931 on: March 12, 2012, 06:01:49 PM »
Rosemary,

You've cleverly dodged my question 5 times. Remember, the one about what your implied significance is of the oscillation in the simulations? Nicely done.  ;)

Let's review those dodgy responses:

Hello Poynty Point,

Not sure what you're asking.  Is there something there that's ambiguous?  Let me know.
Kindest regards,
Rosie Pose

Poynty Point?  Just read the follow up post.  That's the reason I included these observations.  Still not sure of your question.

LOL  No Poynty Point.  I'll pass if you don't mind.  I've already posted it over twice.

Really Poynty Point?  You'd appreciate a link?  For my part I'd appreciate knowing who it is that you're trying to address here?  Which of us readers are you proposing must rally to earn your appreciation.

Who exactly are you talking to?

Your technique is somewhat subtle (but abunantly obvious), yet effective. How or where did you learn this technique?

I asked nicely 5 times, and all 5 times my question was deflected. Clearly you are uncomfortable answering that question.

Here it is again:

With reference to achieving the oscillation in a simulation; so what?

What exactly are you implying is the significance of this?   

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #932 on: March 12, 2012, 06:48:20 PM »
TK,

Can you also try using a 9 volt battery with a 10K resistor in series with the 9 volt battery
as a negative bias for the mosfets and see if you get oscillations?

GL.

I presume you mean _instead_ of the FG hookup. In other words, eliminating the groundloop and providing a straight DC drive to the circuit in place of the FG hookup.
Negative bias meaning I supply negative polarity to the point in the circuit where the FG's "positive" connection is made, right? And then "positive bias" means I supply positive polarity at this point.

Here are the results. There are 4 cases:
1)  9V battery providing negative bias thru 10K, with 3 volt battery pack _disconnected.
Result: Output trace goes to steady  - 0.5 V DC, no oscillations whatsoever.
2)  9V battery providing negative bias thru 10K, with 3 volt battery pack connected.
Result: Output trace goes to +3 V DC as soon as 3 volt pack connected, no oscillations; connection of 9V makes no discernible effect at all.
3)  9V battery providing _positive_ bias thru 10K, with 3 volt battery pack _disconnected.
Result: Output trace goes to steady  + 2.0 V DC, no oscillations whatsoever.
4)  9V battery providing _positive_ bias thru 10K, with 3 volt battery pack connected.
Result: Same as Result 2.

In brief: my version of the circuit does not oscillate when supplied with DC from the 9v battery+10K combination instead of the FG.

Offline eatenbyagrue

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 203
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #933 on: March 12, 2012, 07:11:17 PM »
I love your name, by the way.  REALLY neat.

Oh you have played Infocom's Zork?  I was often without a torch.

Anyway, I am glad to be in a position to lend some moral support to a hard working inventor like yourself.  I was also in a position once where I started my own venture and had to deal with criticism, so I empathize with your position.  Keep up the good work!

Offline Groundloop

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 1736
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #934 on: March 12, 2012, 07:16:57 PM »
I presume you mean _instead_ of the FG hookup. In other words, eliminating the groundloop and providing a straight DC drive to the circuit in place of the FG hookup.
Negative bias meaning I supply negative polarity to the point in the circuit where the FG's "positive" connection is made, right? And then "positive bias" means I supply positive polarity at this point.

Here are the results. There are 4 cases:
1)  9V battery providing negative bias thru 10K, with 3 volt battery pack _disconnected.
Result: Output trace goes to steady  - 0.5 V DC, no oscillations whatsoever.
2)  9V battery providing negative bias thru 10K, with 3 volt battery pack connected.
Result: Output trace goes to +3 V DC as soon as 3 volt pack connected, no oscillations; connection of 9V makes no discernible effect at all.
3)  9V battery providing _positive_ bias thru 10K, with 3 volt battery pack _disconnected.
Result: Output trace goes to steady  + 2.0 V DC, no oscillations whatsoever.
4)  9V battery providing _positive_ bias thru 10K, with 3 volt battery pack connected.
Result: Same as Result 2.

In brief: my version of the circuit does not oscillate when supplied with DC from the 9v battery+10K combination instead of the FG.

TK,

Thank you for taking time to test this.

>>Negative bias meaning I supply negative polarity to the point in the circuit where the FG's "positive" connection is made, right? And then >>"positive bias" means I supply positive polarity at this point.

Yes, the above is correct.

>>In brief: my version of the circuit does not oscillate when supplied with DC from the 9v battery+10K combination instead of the FG.

My circuit does oscillate in your 2 case. Try another main input voltage, like 0 to 12 volt, and see if you get any oscillations.
I never get any oscillations with a positive bias.

GL.

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #935 on: March 12, 2012, 07:27:05 PM »
TK,

Thank you for taking time to test this.

>>Negative bias meaning I supply negative polarity to the point in the circuit where the FG's "positive" connection is made, right? And then >>"positive bias" means I supply positive polarity at this point.

Yes, the above is correct.

>>In brief: my version of the circuit does not oscillate when supplied with DC from the 9v battery+10K combination instead of the FG.

My circuit does oscillate in your 2 case. Try another main input voltage, like 0 to 12 volt, and see if you get any oscillations.
I never get any oscillations with a positive bias.

GL.

Well. That's interesting.

My FG has the capability to provide a DC output, varied by the offset control in the same manner as before. When I use the DC output of the FG, I get steady oscillations, with or without the batterypack, when the DCvoltage from the FG is offset to a certain value, both in the positive and the negative direction.

So, my circuit does oscillate when given DC from the FG, both positive and negative biased, but at different values.


ETA: OK, I tried with an adjustable PS. I get the exact same results as with the 9V battery, no matter what the applied voltage. That is, the same +2 VDC for positive bias, and -0.6 VDC for negative bias, from 0 to 15 VDC applied at the FG location from an external PS, plugged into the common ground.
 
 So my circuit only wants to oscillate when it's hooked to the FG. I have another, less sophisticated signal generator, the WaveTek VCG Model III, that I can try as well.

Offline fuzzytomcat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 676
    • Open Source Research and Development
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #936 on: March 12, 2012, 07:44:36 PM »
Howdy reading members and guests,

Some videos for viewing ....

Rosemary Ainslie ( aka witsend, aetherevarising, dooziedont or ?? )



"GREETINGS FROM SOUTH AFRICA"
 http://www.modvid.com/play/Assorted_Images/Greetings_From_South_Africa   :o

A personal "GREETING" from Rosemary


"ROSEMARY AINSLIE CIRCUIT DEMONSTRATION 12 MARCH 2011"  -   ( Held at CUPT Cape Town, South Africa )
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fyOmoGluMCc

This is a scripted video demonstration from paid college students showing a proposed COP>INFINITY device
Where 15 qualified electrical engineers view the historical event of COP INFINITY 
( http://www.overunity.com/10407/rosemary-ainslie-circuit-demonstration-on-saturday-march-12th-2011/msg284366/#msg284366 )
Please note that the wiring shown on the component board assembly "top and bottom" is labeled differently .....


FuzzyTomCat
 8)

Offline Groundloop

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 1736
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #937 on: March 12, 2012, 07:48:25 PM »
Well. That's interesting.

My FG has the capability to provide a DC output, varied by the offset control in the same manner as before. When I use the DC output of the FG, I get steady oscillations, with or without the batterypack, when the DCvoltage from the FG is offset to a certain value, both in the positive and the negative direction.

So, my circuit does oscillate when given DC from the FG, both positive and negative biased, but at different values.


ETA: OK, I tried with an adjustable PS. I get the exact same results as with the 9V battery, no matter what the applied voltage. That is, the same +2 VDC for positive bias, and -0.6 VDC for negative bias, from 0 to 15 VDC applied at the FG location from an external PS, plugged into the common ground.
 
 So my circuit only wants to oscillate when it's hooked to the FG. I have another, less sophisticated signal generator, the WaveTek VCG Model III, that I can try as well.

TK,

Put your variable power supply at the battery input of your circuit and keep the 9 volt
battery (with 10K in series) at the BIAS input.

GL.

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #938 on: March 12, 2012, 08:00:49 PM »
TK,

Put your variable power supply at the battery input of your circuit and keep the 9 volt
battery (with 10K in series) at the BIAS input.

GL.

Oh...OK, I misunderstood. I'll give it a try.

I tried the WaveTek just now and it produces the same oscillations as the F43, but I can't vary the offset or provide straight DC with the WaveTek, only can vary the output voltage... but it behaves the same as the F43 when I reduce and increase the power.


ETA: OK, I tried it using the Elenco XP-581 variable PS hooked into where I had the 3v pack before. I get the same results, except instead of the battery voltage I see whatever I've dialed into the PS, from 0 to 20 VDC. No oscillations when using the 9v battery as positive or negative bias; the same oscillations as before when I use either the WaveTek or the F43 FG. The LEDs light better, even when I just have the PS turned on but no output voltage.
My circuit likely isn't the same as yours: I have the LED in parallel with a relatively heavy inductor in the load. But I've found that the value of the inductor doesn't seem to change the behavior much.

Offline Groundloop

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 1736
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #939 on: March 12, 2012, 08:21:19 PM »
Oh...OK, I misunderstood. I'll give it a try.

I tried the WaveTek just now and it produces the same oscillations as the F43, but I can't vary the offset or provide straight DC with the WaveTek, only can vary the output voltage... but it behaves the same as the F43 when I reduce and increase the power.


ETA: OK, I tried it using the Elenco XP-581 variable PS hooked into where I had the 3v pack before. I get the same results, except instead of the battery voltage I see whatever I've dialed into the PS, from 0 to 20 VDC. No oscillations when using the 9v battery as positive or negative bias; the same oscillations as before when I use either the WaveTek or the F43 FG. The LEDs light better, even when I just have the PS turned on but no output voltage.
My circuit likely isn't the same as yours: I have the LED in parallel with a relatively heavy inductor in the load. But I've found that the value of the inductor doesn't seem to change the behavior much.

TK,

Thank you for providing the test.

You probably need more inductance to get the oscillating going without the function generator.

Thanks,
GL.

Offline fuzzytomcat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 676
    • Open Source Research and Development
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #940 on: March 12, 2012, 09:52:02 PM »
Howdy reading members and guests,

For the record for those whom are not familiar with my past objections "PLEASE" read the attached posting from July 1, 2011.


Although the subject matter discussed by Rosemary is mostly interaction with others in a BASHING matter ..... the fact is about claims of devices by Rosemary are all on RECORD and other forums over the years, by me or others hence the no arguing from knowledgeable Open Source members who know her mode of operation ( MO ), creating pages of nonsense unrelated to Rosemary's devices. These arguments by Rosemary create pages of nothing from her but rubbish from the continued questioning from us on how she got the results for the data presented, to reproduce the claims of Rosemary's COP>17 or now the COP>INFINITY . The burden of PROOF is Rosemary's not mine or anyone else, we are here for the FACTS and only FACTS, if Rosemary can't answer our questions HERE how in the world can she possibly answer any so called Academic experts in the field of electronics if it's about the device claim of operating with a COP greater than INFINITY.

WE ARE NOT CONCERNED "HERE" WITH A THESIS OR HOW IT MAY RELATE TO ROSEMARY'S "CLAIM" IF EVEN REMOTELY POSSIBLE, IT'S ALL ABOUT A COP "CLAIM" !!

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

http://www.overunity.com/10407/rosemary-ainslie-circuit-demonstration-on-saturday-march-12th-2011/msg293556/#msg293556       Reply #1753 on: July 01, 2011, 07:34:54 PM

Quote from Rosemary Ainslie http://www.overunity.com/10407/rosemary-ainslie-circuit-demonstration-on-saturday-march-12th-2011/msg293530/#msg293530
Quote
WRONG AGAIN.  THERE HAVE BEEN MANY REPLICATIONS.  THE MOST SIGNIFICANT IS THE ONE THAT FUZZY TOM CAT MANAGED.  BUT HE CLAIMED that it was ACTUALLY HIS DISCOVERY   :o NOT A REPLICATION AT ALL.

None of us EVEN CONSIDER THAT ANY VARIATION OF THIS CIRCUIT CONSTITUTES A DISCOVERY.  THEN WHEN HIS PUBLIC LOST ALL THEIR CREDIBILITY HE THEN TRIED SOMETHING NEW.  HE THEN  RAN A WHOLE LOT OF TESTS THAT WERE DESIGNED TO FAIL.  THEN HE WITHDREW THE RESULTS THAT SHOWED THAT IT WORKED.  BUT.  HE HAS STILL LEFT OUR PAPER SHOWING A FULL REPLICATION ON HIS SCRIBD FILE.  SO.  WE NONE OF US KNOW WHAT THE HELL HE IS CLAIMING.  NOR DO I CARE.  THAT CIRCUIT IS NOW SO OLD HAT THAT IT'S ALREADY OBSOLETE.  THIS NEW CIRCUIT IS WAY, WAY MORE EFFECTIVE.

Rosemary your a lying sack of dog do do .....

1) If I actually did a scientific replication of your DEVICE I demand you show proof of your bogus claim of your device including any and all device photos , images and data files of the replication, as you stated in many postings on many forums that you have all this in your possession and refuse to show to anyone in the open source community.

2) I have never claimed your piece of junk as a discovery of mine ..... as I stated in many posts in many forums "SHOW PROOF" of a link in a posting or anything where I claimed this .... you cheep excuse for a liar 

3) So I did testing to throw the results off .... you better have proof of this you ..... I'm sick of your lies and so is everyone else.

4) The scribid file is a optional electronic preprint that was released prior to the submitting of the paper to IEEE and is "NOT THE SAME CONTENT, TEXT OR FORMAT AS THE FIVE TIME REJECTED SUBMITTAL"


May I remind everyone ( ROSEMARY ) again ...... and again .... what is a replication !!!!!!!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_%28scientific_method%29
Reproducibility is the ability of a experiment or study to be accurately reproduced, or replicated, by someone else working independently. It is one of the main principles of the scientific method.

The results of an experiment performed by a particular researcher or group of researchers are generally evaluated by other independent researchers who repeat the same experiment themselves, based on the original experimental description (see independent review). Then they see if their experiment gives similar results to those reported by the original group.



http://rosemaryainslie-publicblog.blogspot.com/

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

RE-PRINT from original

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #941 on: March 13, 2012, 12:23:30 AM »
Fuzzy, thanks for linking that video of Rosemary's demonstration. I am very happy to see that the oscillations in my circuit are the same as those shown in that demonstration. It's too bad that the presenters didn't show the response to perturbations the way I did... but perhaps they had their hands full.

Incidentally... or maybe not so much.... here's a document that explains the relationship between voltage and state-of-charge in lead acid batteries.... and "silver calcium" batteries are a type of lead-acid.

http://www.scubaengineer.com/documents/lead_acid_battery_charging_graphs.pdf

Note that, for moderate discharge rates, the voltage doesn't drop below 12 volts until the battery is down to less than 20 percent of its full charge capacity. And that's while tested under load; no-load testing might show 12 volts on an almost completely discharged battery.

Offline poynt99

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 3582
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #942 on: March 13, 2012, 12:42:29 AM »
http://www.scubaengineer.com/documents/lead_acid_battery_charging_graphs.pdf

Note that, for moderate discharge rates, the voltage doesn't drop below 12 volts until the battery is down to less than 20 percent of its full charge capacity. And that's while tested under load; no-load testing might show 12 volts on an almost completely discharged battery.

Good point TK. I was wondering what the full charge voltage is on those battery types. At the time of that video demonstration, each battery would be at an average of 12.4V. (62V/5).

Offline fuzzytomcat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 676
    • Open Source Research and Development
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #943 on: March 13, 2012, 12:45:48 AM »
Fuzzy, thanks for linking that video of Rosemary's demonstration. I am very happy to see that the oscillations in my circuit are the same as those shown in that demonstration. It's too bad that the presenters didn't show the response to perturbations the way I did... but perhaps they had their hands full.

Incidentally... or maybe not so much.... here's a document that explains the relationship between voltage and state-of-charge in lead acid batteries.... and "silver calcium" batteries are a type of lead-acid.

http://www.scubaengineer.com/documents/lead_acid_battery_charging_graphs.pdf

Note that, for moderate discharge rates, the voltage doesn't drop below 12 volts until the battery is down to less than 20 percent of its full charge capacity. And that's while tested under load; no-load testing might show 12 volts on an almost completely discharged battery.

Hi Tk, I though some may find the video of the demonstration interesting for some members and guests, it also may be hard to find with the many screen names Rosemary ( dooziedont ) has.

The "silver calcium" batteries information does make sense with the apparent usage with experimentation and the duration of setting around with Rosemary's work. I remember there was some kind of battery the US government had back in WW11 or there about, used in generals jeeps or important equipment with platinum in them not silver, when discharged and letting them set for some time they would recharge themselves so I've heard.

 8)

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #944 on: March 13, 2012, 12:48:31 AM »
And as if any further nails would seal the coffin any tighter....

Putting a small capacitor in series with the "positive" FG connection kills all oscillations by blocking the DC current path through the FG.


ETA: I notice that lately Rosie is denying that her oscillations occur when the battery is disconnected. But earlier, when asked about this point, she said something different.


Quoting Rosemary:
Quote
"Its a pity though that we cannot get ANY oscillation without the circuit linked to our batteries."

"That oscillation MOST CERTAINLY occurs while the battery is disconnected."

"We have a circuit that generates a ROBUST self-sustaining oscillation that persists for the duration that a battery is entirely disconnected from the circuit."

Am I allowed to ask which statement is true.... or would that be expressing rampant pseudoskepticism again?