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

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: 514818
  • *Total Topics: 15318
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 1
  • *Guests: 24
  • *Total: 25

Author Topic: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims  (Read 250969 times)

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #1080 on: May 29, 2014, 05:18:26 AM »
That's fascinating because  he seems to be saying that he's had a working free energy machine for years, but has kept it to himself.  Then he goes on ot say that he bypassed the body diode of the MOSFET when ... wait for it ... the body diode should not ever forward bias, and he got improved results. 

When the MOSFET turns off, current flowing from the battery positive terminal through the resistor / inductor has formed a magnetic field that will develop an EMF as the circuit is interrupted such that positive convention current will continue to flow in the same clockwise path:  Battery + => resistor / inductor => intermediate circuitry => Battery -.  The EMF causes the voltage at the MOSFET drain to rise: increasing the reverse bias across the body diode.  A diode across the resistor/inductor through a low inductance path relative to the battery - connection such as through a bypass capacitor, or a TVS across the MOSFET source drain can protect the MOSFET.  I think that the likely reason that Ms. Ainslie ended up with the IRFPG50 MOSFET was that she probably blew a bunch of lower voltage MOSFETs.  A fast gate driver applied to the IRFPG50 would blow it as well.  Note TinselKoala's results when he added the two transistor gate buffer to his circuit.  OTS drivers can deliver many times the gate current as that quick and dirty gate driver.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #1081 on: May 29, 2014, 05:48:15 AM »
Those folks are living on some other planet.

I think that anyone who claims COP (in the sense we usually use it here, however incorrect it might be), anyone, I say, who claims COP 2 or over should also be required to provide a coherent realistic explanation for why they haven't been able to self loop it. If they can't do that, with data.... then there isn't any point in listening to them any further.

And no, "the dog ate my clipleads" isn't a good enough explanation.



Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #1082 on: August 28, 2014, 04:25:52 AM »
The delusions and lies continue. Note how she completely misrepresents our findings and her own data. Note that she still relies on the utter FABRICATION of the data. Note how "Brian Little" has become "Alain Little" in her fevered fantasies! Just when I thought that the liar Rosemary Ainslie could provide no more amusement, she rises, as if from the dead, with her mouldy old compendium of misrepresentations, mendacities, lies and delusions.

Alain Little ! How does she even find her way to breakfast in the morning, I wonder?

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #1082 on: August 28, 2014, 04:25:52 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #1083 on: August 28, 2014, 09:01:45 AM »
It is from the other side of the looking glass.  We have been through her data and your excellent experiments many times.  Her own tests performed June and August 2013 showed that her measurements posted in the Paper 1 and Paper 2 were fouled.  Her June 2013 demonstration showed both that they had obtained their Paper 1, Figure 3 oscilloscope readings by connecting their oscilloscope probe to the wrong place, and that the wiring and cement resistor inductance fouled readings even if taken at the correct circuit nodes.

Straight from "Memento" or "Shelter Island" given a reality she does not like, she chooses to feed herself the fantasy that the proven invalid measurements are correct.  Given the reliable measurements taken at the battery of actual battery power draw much greater than thermal energy delivered to her heater load, she concocts a bizarre fantasy that no the heater load is actually generating power that mysteriously circulates without heating the heater.  It is beyond bizarre. 

What is almost equally bizarre is that the some of the very folks who rail here about supposed disinformation and suppression of facts cheer her on without doing anything to straighten her out.  And rather strangely none of them seem to have done anything to apply their skills at repeating her experiments.  Ms. Ainslie says straight out that she is not an experimentalist.  If these folks really believe that she is onto a fabulous untapped energy source, why are they sitting still?  Why haven't they put together the trivial circuits used by Ms. Ainslie to advance across the new frontiers she claims to have discovered?

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #1084 on: August 28, 2014, 11:01:53 AM »
Exactly. Why haven't they? One reason is that Ainslie's story kept on, and keeps on, changing. What circuit would you use in your attempt? Nobody, _to this day_, knows the actual circuit used by her in ANY of her experimentation, except that performed live on camera under the guidance of Steve Weir. Recall that the original Quantum Magazine article posted a circuit diagram that cannot produce the stated frequency and duty cycle used. Recall that there were FIVE DIFFERENT schematics claimed for the 5-mosfet circuit, and that Ainslie and her thrall Donovan Martin actually LIED about the actual circuit used in the original video demonstration, lying actively about it for nearly a month on this forum, misleading many people who tried to simulate and build that circuit. That demonstration has been covered up by Ainslie but is still available on my YT channel.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neME1s-lEZE

Yet MY work on this project is fully documented in excruciating detail and anyone who wishes to can repeat MY work and they will note that they obtain the same results I present. But nobody, not even Ainslie herself and her team of sycophants, have been able to reproduce her CLAIMS by honestly using the circuits she published, and the only way to reproduce the fabricated data presented in her many-times-over REJECTED manuscripts is to cheat, in the same way that she did, either by not having properly connected test equipment, or simply lying about the circuit's performance, or both.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_w5yaRi25bc

Ainslie's resurrection of this zombie is pseudoscientific misconduct of the worst kind. Not only were her original reports of this cargo-cult kludge of hers full of errors, mendacity, fabricated data and outright lies, she now tries to re-spin the thing with even more misrepresentations and lies.

Go ahead, believers, build and test the circuits, if you can discover what they actually are. Be sure to report your results accurately and honestly.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #1084 on: August 28, 2014, 11:01:53 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #1085 on: August 28, 2014, 11:36:18 AM »
I think that there are a few points that deserve highlighting.

Ms. Ainslie's 555 circuits as she depicted them in the "Quantum" magazine article have been proven unable to produce the waveforms represented in the article.
Ms. Ainslie did say that she intentionally misrepresented the circuit used in the "five parallel" MOSFET demonstration.
Ms. Ainslie's own demonstrations of June and August 2013 established that the measurements in the Paper 1 and Paper 2 publications were not as represented.
Ms. Ainslie's own demonstrations showed that her circuits draw much more battery power than her heating elements evolve as heat.
Ms. Ainslie ran her demonstrations to the point that she was satisfied that there was no hope of them demonstrating the gains that she wanted, and then cut the demonstrations short.
Ms. Ainslie withdrew the papers 1 and 2 based on the results of her own demonstrations :  June and August 2013.
Ms. Ainslie later decided without new data to "reinstate" the papers.
None of Ms. Ainslie's supporters have produced evidence that supports Ms. Ainslie's claims for any variation of her circuits.


Offline Acca

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 556
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #1086 on: August 28, 2014, 12:00:20 PM »
To memoryman Tinselkoala and MarkE  are shills resident trolls who destroy any sense of any real debate that should happen here .......

as you can read for yourself it's too bad that these trolls are squatters here ... on overunity dot com

"self appointed so called experts are just high count trolls"

Acca...


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #1086 on: August 28, 2014, 12:00:20 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #1087 on: August 28, 2014, 12:07:55 PM »
To memoryman Tinselkoala and MarkE  are shills resident trolls who destroy any sense of any real debate that should happen here .......

as you can read for yourself it's too bad that these trolls are squatters here ... on overunity dot com

"self appointed so called experts are just high count trolls"

Acca...
We are discussing established points concerning Ms. Ainslie's claims, in light of the contrasting fantasies that Ms. Ainslie continues to serve up.  If you disagree with any of the statements made, you are free to debate them.

Offline memoryman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 749
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #1088 on: August 28, 2014, 02:25:42 PM »
If I am a troll, then I am not very active.
Instead of calling people names, stick to refuting their excellent analysis of the technical issues. If YOU don't have the expertise to do that, how can you judge someone else's?
Mark E and TK earned my respect by their comments. With > 50 years of hands-on electronics design and repair myself, I bow to their superior capabilities.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #1088 on: August 28, 2014, 02:25:42 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #1089 on: August 28, 2014, 04:21:14 PM »
To memoryman Tinselkoala and MarkE  are shills resident trolls who destroy any sense of any real debate that should happen here .......

as you can read for yourself it's too bad that these trolls are squatters here ... on overunity dot com

"self appointed so called experts are just high count trolls"

Acca...

Let us be reminded that ACCA will post photos that he THINKS might be you, or me, or anyone else, without any support or confirmation that the photo actually DOES represent the person he is stalking/trolling. ACCA wants to violate my privacy.

Yet ACCA cannot refute anything I have ever posted on this forum. He cannot provide checkable outside references, facts from reliable sources or demonstrations of his own that refute me. Most especially IN THIS THREAD concerning ROSEMARY AINSLIE's claims... ACCA is impotent, ignorant and a mere rabble-rousing troll. He has nothing at all substantive to contribute. Where is his construction of the Ainslie circuit? Where is his raw data record, his thermal time-temperature graphs, his OPEN AND FREE DISCUSSION of the Ainslie circuit and her claims?

Nowhere, that is where. Acca is another blowhard, thumbless troll who cannot DO for himself. He cannot present coherent and viable arguments concerning FACTS so he resorts making posts like the above, being utterly impotent to do anything else.

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #1090 on: August 28, 2014, 04:29:08 PM »
I think that there are a few points that deserve highlighting.

Ms. Ainslie's 555 circuits as she depicted them in the "Quantum" magazine article have been proven unable to produce the waveforms represented in the article.
Ms. Ainslie did say that she intentionally misrepresented the circuit used in the "five parallel" MOSFET demonstration.
Ms. Ainslie's own demonstrations of June and August 2013 established that the measurements in the Paper 1 and Paper 2 publications were not as represented.
Ms. Ainslie's own demonstrations showed that her circuits draw much more battery power than her heating elements evolve as heat.
Ms. Ainslie ran her demonstrations to the point that she was satisfied that there was no hope of them demonstrating the gains that she wanted, and then cut the demonstrations short.


Let us add and _emphasize_ here that Ainslie was UNABLE to reproduce the "Figure 3" scopeshot and other similar ones, unless her scope was either improperly connected, or not connected at all, to the testpoints stated.  This demonstrates once and for all that Ainslie and her team posted FABRICATED DATA. Indeed, these particular scopeshots represent the MAIN CLAIMS in the manuscripts: that no current flows during high heat evolution, as shown in the Figure 3 scopeshot. Yet NO CORRECTION, no editing, has ever been done. Ainslie's left-handed and cynical fake "retraction" of the manuscripts does not mention the fake data and the fake scopeshots STILL APPEAR, being as they are the CORE DATA, in all of the various editions and edits of the daft manuscripts. The definitive experiment PROVING these facts was performed by Ainslie and her team themselves under the guidance of Steve Weir and Ainslie-- as you can hear above-- acknowledged the impossibility of producing those scopeshots honestly. Yet they remain in the "papers" to this day.

Quote
Ms. Ainslie withdrew the papers 1 and 2 based on the results of her own demonstrations :  June and August 2013.
Ms. Ainslie later decided without new data to "reinstate" the papers.
None of Ms. Ainslie's supporters have produced evidence that supports Ms. Ainslie's claims for any variation of her circuits.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #1090 on: August 28, 2014, 04:29:08 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #1091 on: August 28, 2014, 04:46:26 PM »


Let us add and _emphasize_ here that Ainslie was UNABLE to reproduce the "Figure 3" scopeshot and other similar ones, unless her scope was either improperly connected, or not connected at all, to the testpoints stated.  This demonstrates once and for all that Ainslie and her team posted FABRICATED DATA. Indeed, these particular scopeshots represent the MAIN CLAIMS in the manuscripts: that no current flows during high heat evolution, as shown in the Figure 3 scopeshot. Yet NO CORRECTION, no editing, has ever been done. Ainslie's left-handed and cynical fake "retraction" of the manuscripts does not mention the fake data and the fake scopeshots STILL APPEAR, being as they are the CORE DATA, in all of the various editions and edits of the daft manuscripts. The definitive experiment PROVING these facts was performed by Ainslie and her team themselves under the guidance of Steve Weir and Ainslie-- as you can hear above-- acknowledged the impossibility of producing those scopeshots honestly. Yet they remain in the "papers" to this day.
I thought the points covered the infamous Figure 3 that was to be gloriously demonstrated June 2013.  When Poynt99 asked them to run a quick initial test, they hemmed and hawed, and then admitted they could not reproduce.  Then Ms. Ainslie tried to go off on some other tangent of "benefit".  That is before they went off to dinner without telling anyone.  The wait proved worth it when Steve guided them through measurements that showed to even Ms. Ainslie's satisfaction that Figure 3 was the result of connecting the scope probe on the wrong side of the current sense resistors.

I think it is difficult to say with certainty that they knew Figure 3 was BS when they published Paper 1 and Paper 2.  If they did they would much more likely refused Steve's guidance.  I think it is moot now, because Ms. Ainslie did withdraw the papers based on her own demonstrations. As far as I am concerned, she fabricated the data when she "reinstated" the papers having already found out for herself that the representations are false.  I think that is similar to the license Ms. Ainslie gave herself when she announced that they had misrepresented the five "parallel" MOSFET demonstration.  Ms. Ainslie does not seem to understand that taking a license to lie comes at great cost to one's own credibility.

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #1092 on: August 28, 2014, 05:49:04 PM »
So you think that a set of instrumental readings that indicates an _impossible_ condition, the zero current flow when the mosfet is receiving 12 volts to the Gate... should just be accepted as accurate by the claimants, including the engineer Donovan Martin,  and find its way into not one, not two, but at least FOUR different manuscript versions and IEEE journal submissions, without being checked for accuracy and reproducibility by the claimants?

And then that those same instrumental readings are not withdrawn _even after they are proven and acknowledged_ to be impossible, incorrect, "errors"... since, after all, they are the main supporting bits of data for the claims made in the manuscripts. Without those claims of anomalously high heat without corresponding current flow... the entire "thesis", which is really just a bunch of hand-waving conjectures, collapses under the weight of prevarication and misrepresentation.

Well, considering the incompetence, prevarication, disrespect and outright lies we have seen soundly demonstrated in three video presentations... I suppose that is possible.

Next you will be trying to convince me that Donovan Martin didn't know he was... er... misrepresenting...  "what you see before you" in the first Demo.

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #1093 on: August 28, 2014, 06:27:02 PM »
So you think that a set of instrumental readings that indicates an _impossible_ condition, the zero current flow when the mosfet is receiving 12 volts to the Gate... should just be accepted as accurate by the claimants, including the engineer Donovan Martin,  and find its way into not one, not two, but at least FOUR different manuscript versions and IEEE journal submissions, without being checked for accuracy and reproducibility by the claimants?

And then that those same instrumental readings are not withdrawn _even after they are proven and acknowledged_ to be impossible, incorrect, "errors"... since, after all, they are the main supporting bits of data for the claims made in the manuscripts. Without those claims of anomalously high heat without corresponding current flow... the entire "thesis", which is really just a bunch of hand-waving conjectures, collapses under the weight of prevarication and misrepresentation.

Well, considering the incompetence, prevarication, disrespect and outright lies we have seen soundly demonstrated in three video presentations... I suppose that is possible.

Next you will be trying to convince me that Donovan Martin didn't know he was... er... misrepresenting...  "what you see before you" in the first Demo.
No that is not what I am saying.  What I am saying is that as ridiculous as what they published is, I can't prove what they knew when they published.  But, there is no question as to what Ms. Ainslie knew when she decided to "reinstate".  The fact that she has very deliberately elected to put her name and her fellow authors' names to what she has emphatically acknowledged is completely false is academically intolerable.  Why anyone, especially Mr. Martin allow their names to be associated with what they know is false boggles my mind.  The only thing that I can think of is that they feel the publications are so obscure that this will not come back to haunt them.  They could be right about that.

Offline Rigel4

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 41
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #1094 on: August 28, 2014, 06:27:17 PM »
TK,
Please check your PM.
R

 

OneLink