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 Members: 83537
  • *Latest: Skyrob

  • *Total Posts: 514441
  • *Total Topics: 15310
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 0
  • *Guests: 11
  • *Total: 11

Author Topic: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims  (Read 249661 times)

Offline Groundloop

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 1738
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #90 on: September 09, 2013, 01:38:24 PM »
Thanks GL... that's a good idea, having the firing of the NE2 triggering the thyristor.... But there has to be some way of disconnecting the coil so that the cap discharge goes only into the battery and can't be shunted by the coil. It would be nice to have a "double throw" thyristor!
I'll see if my local supplier has any, if he does I'll test it in the circuit mod you suggest. Thanks!
But I still need to disconnect everything but the battery during the "dump" if it is to work right. I don't need extra power dissipation in the load -- load heating -- but I would like to make the battery "self-charge". If the basic concept tests out I'll just eliminate the "heat" aspect, put in a heavier inductor and see what happens. Soon I expect to discover a Bedini battery charger or something like that in there!
 ;)

TK,

I do not think the capacitor will be dumped into the coil and mosfet. The battery resistance is very low, typical
some few tens of milli Ohm. The coil resistance and mosfet reistance combined is much higher. So almost all
the capacitor charge will go into the battery. But I agree with you, the circuit should be disconnected during
the discharge cycle. One way to do it is to "tap" the gate signal of the SCR and use that as a "disable" signal
to the 555 IC. That way the 555 does not pulse the gate of the mosfet when you are discharging the cap.

GL.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline poynt99

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 3586
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #91 on: September 09, 2013, 02:54:20 PM »
A very neat trick with that switch TK.  ;)

I agree with GL, most of the charge should bypass the coil and go into the battery.

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #92 on: September 10, 2013, 01:35:21 AM »
Well, I was thinking that the impedance of the coil-mosfet was lower than the battery impedance so power would be wasted in them. But if you both don't think it's an issue that's good enough for me to warm up the soldering iron.
And if it's not an issue then I can just use the neon itself as the switch, right? Just run the neon from the positive pole of the cap, over to the positive batt terminal. Then when the neon fires at around 125 V + Vbatt  it will pulse the battery directly.
What do you think?
(I've got it running this way now, with the 1n4007 in series with the neon. It fires at around 155V and pulses back into the battery. I haven't seen a voltage rise yet, but that might be because I'm running in the underpowered 555 "oscillatory" mode which allows some load heating and yields a DC current of 40-60 mA.)

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #92 on: September 10, 2013, 01:35:21 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline poynt99

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 3586
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #93 on: September 10, 2013, 02:03:22 AM »
TK,

If you use the neon as the switch (how much peak current can those things handle?) when that cap lets go thru the neon, it should be a quick discharge. If the discharge is limited by that 220 Ohm resistor, then yes not only are you wasting power in that resistor, but because you won't be utilizing the high coil impedance from the transient nature of the discharge, then you may lose some charge to the coil/MOSFET as well (not much though).

So ideally, get rid of the resistor and like you say, jumper the neon directly from the cap+ to the Bat+ with a short heavy wire.

At least that's how I see things... 8)

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #94 on: September 10, 2013, 02:20:00 AM »
Yep, I think I'll put the cap and neon right at the battery positive pole, with the fast diode right at the coil low end and run the spike feed over to the cap with a transmission line.

The neon flashes bright purple with the 1n4007 in series, I haven't tried it yet with nothing in series, but I was thinking I might go down to 47 uF on the cap for faster cycle time and less current thru the neon.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #94 on: September 10, 2013, 02:20:00 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Groundloop

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 1738
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #95 on: September 10, 2013, 03:44:33 AM »
Yep, I think I'll put the cap and neon right at the battery positive pole, with the fast diode right at the coil low end and run the spike feed over to the cap with a transmission line.

The neon flashes bright purple with the 1n4007 in series, I haven't tried it yet with nothing in series, but I was thinking I might go down to 47 uF on the cap for faster cycle time and less current thru the neon.

TK,

>>bright purple

Using the Neon bulb as a high current carrying switch will quickly burn off the neon gas and make the
bulb useless. If you want a high current switch then use glow starters for fluorescent light.
The glow starters for fluorescent light has a neon gas filled bulb with a beam metal switch inside.
The beam metal switch will close by the temperature change from the neon light.

GL.

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #96 on: September 10, 2013, 04:32:17 AM »
You are right, I think I've already ruined a couple of them doing this! Fortunately I still have 60 or so new ones and another 30 that I can salvage from my HV Field Yardstick.

The firing voltage goes up and up until after 10 or so fires they don't want to trigger at all ...  But I get nice purple flashes with the Bedini SGM system and it doesn't wear out the neon, just blackens the glass.... weird huh.

Right now I have the cap down to 47 uF, a diode and a 10R in series with the (new) neon, and it's firing bright orange now, not in the purple region any more.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #96 on: September 10, 2013, 04:32:17 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Groundloop

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 1738
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #97 on: September 10, 2013, 09:43:53 AM »
You are right, I think I've already ruined a couple of them doing this! Fortunately I still have 60 or so new ones and another 30 that I can salvage from my HV Field Yardstick.

The firing voltage goes up and up until after 10 or so fires they don't want to trigger at all ...  But I get nice purple flashes with the Bedini SGM system and it doesn't wear out the neon, just blackens the glass.... weird huh.

Right now I have the cap down to 47 uF, a diode and a 10R in series with the (new) neon, and it's firing bright orange now, not in the purple region any more.

TK,

A third way to make a feedback circuit is to make a high voltage Joule Thief with a third winding.
The third (L3) winding must be impedance matched to your input battery (Eg. few turns).
The L1 and L2 must have a lot of turns and be impedance matched to you high voltage cap.
Just a thought................. :-)

GL.

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #98 on: September 11, 2013, 02:05:14 PM »
Thanks, GL, that circuit is very like some Bedini chargers I've worked with. But I know lots of ways to recirculate power in various circuits. I'm trying to get some kind of worthwhile, or at least interesting, effect from the original Quantum-17 circuit published by, but apparently never actually used by, Rosemary Ainslie and BC Buckley. And which is allegedly being examined Yet Again by Donovan Martin and a team of boffins, to the man, in Cape Town.


Meanwhile, I'm dashing off a short email to my old colleague Rupert:

Hey Rupert

What do you think of this bit of "new physics":

Quote
If the photon comprises two zipons then the zipon would be half the size of the photon.  It is proposed that velocity and mass have an inverse proportional relationship.  So, if the photon moves at the speed of light (C) then the velocity of the zipon would be 2C.  And as velocity and mass are inversely proportional so, if the mass of the photon were given as 1, (as a ratio) then the zipon would be 0.5.  If the electron comprises 3 truants then its mass would be 0.5 x 3 = 1.5.  And, if the proton comprises three electrons then, each electron would comprise 0.5 for the quark.  3 quarks having no volume is 0.5 x 3 = 1.5.  Four times bigger for the orbital zenith of the second truant is 1.5 x 4 = 6.  And four times bigger for the orbital zenith of the third truant is 6 x 4 = 24.   The second and third truant only have two dimensions of volume as they manifest within a prescribed space, that merry-go-round referred to in the field description.  Therefore, 3 second truants, having length and breadth is 6 x 6 x 3 = 108.  3 third truants having length and breadth is 24 x 24 x 3 = 1728.  This gives a mass of 1837.5, minus 1.5 for the quarks that have neither volume or mass, giving a total of 1836. Some variation of this number is, no doubt, required to accommodate the spherical shape of the truants, but it’s complex – a 2 dimensional sphere.

Pretty remarkable, isn't it? And also a lot of nonsense, of course.

μ = mp/me = 1,836.15267245(75).
http://physics.nist.gov/cgi-bin/cuu/Value?mpsme

Does that difference count as "some variation required to accommodate a two dimensional spherically shaped truant?"
No doubt.

How's that for a hoot?

Cheers-- and I remain
Your old pal,
--TK

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #98 on: September 11, 2013, 02:05:14 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline conradelektro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1679
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #99 on: September 11, 2013, 03:11:34 PM »
@TinselKoala:

I played extensively with feedback from a Joule Thief circuit to the battery which is driving the circuit. I tried feedback "from the back EMF of the L2 coil" and feedback with a L3 coil.

The Joule Thief circuit should draw as little power as possible (which means very high impedance coils L1 and L2, high resistance of R1, L3 could have low impedance).

Let's replace the battery with a big electrolytic capacitor, e.g. 10.000 µF.

Now let's do the following test (see attached drawing):

- The electrolytic capacitor (the one which is replacing the battery) is charged to 5 Volt (or any other Voltage which fits the Joule Thief circuit in use) from an external power source (e.g. with a lab power supply), the Joule thief circuit is running.

- Switch off the external power supply and measure the time till the Voltage over the cap has dropped to 3 Volt (with a stop watch and a Voltmeter over the cap).

Do the test with and without the feed back. With the feedback the measured time should be longer, because one recovers some energy.

But I never could get a longer time. The time measured for the Voltage drop always was the same, with or without the feedback.

May be I did something wrong?

Greetings, Conrad

P.S.: the additional diode is not necessary in this circuit, but it would be if feedback comes from the Drain of the transistor (back EMF of L2).

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #100 on: September 11, 2013, 07:05:14 PM »
@Conrad: No, I don't think you did anything wrong, it's an excellent test. Time must be measured very carefully... I wonder if there is a way to run "sidebyside" simultaneous comparisons so that precise timing is less of a problem.

It seems that your test indicates that the overall amount of energy in the system is the same, whether you use the diode and "recycle" connection or not. So either there isn't any benefit from the inductive ringing/discharge/spike, or whatever benefit there may be is getting lost in the system somehow and not being used. Perhaps it's radiating away as RF, or heating something you aren't measuring.

But how about this: Instead of putting the recycle output back to the run battery/capacitor, put it into an external battery or capacitor.

So you would be comparing the run time of the "control" system with no charge transfer, to the run time of the experimental system that put some charge on the external cap. The experimental system should be expected to run for a shorter time. Then you could run again, but powered from the external cap only, and time that run time.

So now you have the control system, compared against the (experimental system on main cap + experimental system on external cap) total run time.

This way, if there was any benefit from the energy in the inductive ringdown spike, it would be collected in the external cap rather than disappearing into the circuit to be squandered, radiated or dissipated. There will be losses in the cap system of course but these should be easy to understand and quantify.



Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #100 on: September 11, 2013, 07:05:14 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline conradelektro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1679
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #101 on: September 12, 2013, 04:06:30 PM »

But how about this: Instead of putting the recycle output back to the run battery/capacitor, put it into an external battery or capacitor.

So you would be comparing the run time of the "control" system with no charge transfer, to the run time of the experimental system that put some charge on the external cap. The experimental system should be expected to run for a shorter time. Then you could run again, but powered from the external cap only, and time that run time.

So now you have the control system, compared against the (experimental system on main cap + experimental system on external cap) total run time.

This way, if there was any benefit from the energy in the inductive ringdown spike, it would be collected in the external cap rather than disappearing into the circuit to be squandered, radiated or dissipated. There will be losses in the cap system of course but these should be easy to understand and quantify.

I did the following:

There is an L3 and it drives a LED lamp.

The energy consumed by the circuit is higher if the LED lamp shines and it is lower if L3 is not connected to anything.

Sorry, no precise numbers just a rough quantification. But it was very easily visible, 20% to 50% more energy consumed.


Another observation with very low power pulse motors (a few mW down to 100 µW):

When the back EMF of the drive coil was "used in any way" (e.g. putting a LED there or feedback to battery via a Shottky diode), the power consumption rose a little (up to 10%). Could have been the forward current of the LED or diode, but I do not think so.

------------

Your measurement idea is interesting, I will think about it.

Greetings, Conrad

Offline OscarMeyer

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 74
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #102 on: September 13, 2013, 03:11:01 AM »
Hi Conrad,
I was just wondering what your circuit had to do with Rosemary's? 
 
Oscar

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #103 on: September 13, 2013, 06:28:35 AM »
Hi Conrad,
I was just wondering what your circuit had to do with Rosemary's? 
 
Oscar

Just which "Circuit of Rosemary's" are you referring to?

The one published in the Quantum magazine, but never actually used?

The one determined by S.Weir to exist in the recently found box, that could not have been in there in 2002 since it has a chip with a 2007 date code, a P-channel mosfet in addition to an IRGP450--- which she never reported using --- and only a single potentiometer hooked up?

The one gestured to by Donovan Martin in the 2011 demo, showing a single mosfet and no Black FG hookup?

The one he claimed in the same demo, with 5 mosfets in parallel?

The Actual one used by them, discovered by .99?

The two different ones in the retracted papers, neither of which show the Black FG lead in the place actually used?

The "FTC" schematic that Glen used for the IET and IEEE submissions?

Or the Unclamped Inductive Test circuit that is in the back of just about every power mosfet data sheet?


Just which is "the" circuit of Rosemary's that you are talking about? And just what concern is it of yours anyway? Do you have some work of your own you would like to talk about? Please feel free to do so.

Meanwhile, maybe you can explain this bit of word salad:
Quote
Guys, very simplistically - here's logic behind superluminal velocity.  Forgive the elementary explanations - but it's the best I can manage.  Just for purposes of this argument - assume a wheel diameter at say 1 meter.  4 wheels to the car.  Therefore for every complete turn the wheel covers a distance of 1 meter.  And it makes that complete turn every second.  Therefore, for each minute it is able to cover 1 meter per turn, per second x 60 seconds - being 60 meters per minute.  Now we take the second car that has a wheel diameter of precisely 2 meters.  4 wheels to the car.  So.  For every complete turn the wheel covers a distance of 2 meters.  And IT makes the complete turn every 2 seconds.  Therefore, for each complete turn it is able to cover precisely twice the distance albeit that it too is traveling at 60 meters per minute.  The difference?  It's simply in the number of complete turns.  Now.  Let's draw this distinction.  The frequency at which the 2 meter diameter wheel makes each turn - is half the frequency of the 1 meter diameter wheel.  And this is PRECISELY equivalent to the size of those wheels.  That's UNARGUABLE.

Offline Pirate88179

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8369
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #104 on: September 13, 2013, 07:03:02 AM »


Meanwhile, maybe you can explain this bit of word salad:

"Guys, very simplistically - here's logic behind superluminal velocity.  Forgive the elementary explanations - but it's the best I can manage.  Just for purposes of this argument - assume a wheel diameter at say 1 meter.  4 wheels to the car.  Therefore for every complete turn the wheel covers a distance of 1 meter.  And it makes that complete turn every second.  Therefore, for each minute it is able to cover 1 meter per turn, per second x 60 seconds - being 60 meters per minute.  Now we take the second car that has a wheel diameter of precisely 2 meters.  4 wheels to the car.  So.  For every complete turn the wheel covers a distance of 2 meters.  And IT makes the complete turn every 2 seconds.  Therefore, for each complete turn it is able to cover precisely twice the distance albeit that it too is traveling at 60 meters per minute.  The difference?  It's simply in the number of complete turns.  Now.  Let's draw this distinction.  The frequency at which the 2 meter diameter wheel makes each turn - is half the frequency of the 1 meter diameter wheel.  And this is PRECISELY equivalent to the size of those wheels.  That's UNARGUABLE."


What happened to Pi x Diameter?  A 1 meter diameter wheel will not travel 1 meter per rev.  UNARGUABLE?  Oh well.

Bill

 

OneLink