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: 83532
  • *Latest: kelvin1

  • *Total Posts: 514341
  • *Total Topics: 15304
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 2
  • *Guests: 12
  • *Total: 14

Author Topic: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims  (Read 249057 times)

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7617
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #255 on: January 18, 2014, 07:17:25 PM »
Hey!  I found a nugget of high comedy:

Quote
NOTA BENE.  The current flow measured directly at the negative terminal of the battery shows NO discharge during the 'OFF' period.  Therefore?

 :-*

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #256 on: January 18, 2014, 08:02:57 PM »
Hey!  I found a nugget of high comedy:

 :-*
I know the quote sounds obvious and foolish.  Had Ms. Ainslie's quote been true it would have been very significant.  It would have meant that the battery was not supplying power during the intervals when the breadboard circuit was going through its big oscillations.  During the August 11 demonstrations those were the only times that the heating element was powered. 

Ms. Ainslie's quote refers to the function generator negative voltage interval, AKA the Q1 "OFF" intervals.  She has things backwards:  During the August 11th demonstration, current only flowed during the function generator negative voltage intervals, AKA Q1 "OFF" intervals of her papers and June 29 demonstration.  The current flow during the Q1 "OFF" interval is is the oscillatory current measured both at the white breadboard fixture and at the batteries that results from linear operation of the Q2 MOSFETs.   During those oscillations some small amounts of current passed through the drain to gate, drain to source, and gate to source parasitic capacitance of Q1.

For all tests conducted during the August 11, demonstration, the function generator's maximum positive excursion was ~2V which was insufficient to bias Q1 on.  Ms. Ainslie has consistently referred to the periods of function generator positive swing as the Q1 "ON" periods.  And they would be were the positive excursion set well above the IRFPG50's Vgs of 4V.

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #257 on: January 19, 2014, 03:56:27 PM »
We should also explicitly note that the oscillations of Q2s are partially turning those transistors on, biasing them into their linear operation region. They aren't turning on fully, and so their drain-source resistance is even higher than the nominal Rdss of 2.0 ohms each (4 in parallel would have an aggregate resistance of 0.5 ohms when fully ON). This means that the power dissipation in these transistors is relatively high during the oscillations. We can recall that the August 11 demonstration showed around 13 to 15 Watts of power coming from the battery stack in the Q2-oscillation, no Q1 current, configuration, and that this produced a temperature rise of about 21 degrees C in the load resistance. Ainslie declined to complete the Phase 4 DC control test, so reference was made to the temperature calibrations in "Paper 1".... which showed that a DC power of around 2 or 3 Watts was sufficient to produce a 20 degree temperature rise in the load. The exact values can be heard toward the end of the video clip below. The "missing power" is heating up the mosfets, mostly, although according to my measurements a significant amount is also being radiated as RF at the oscillation frequency. That's right.... there is actually more power being dissipated by the internal resistance of the partially-on mosfets during oscillation, than there is in the load resistor. A comprehensive examination of power in this circuit should have the entire circuit, mosfets and everything, immersed in a known quantity of oil, and the temperature measurements should be made on the oil. In this way the total power dissipation of the entire circuit could be compared to the power drawn from the battery. If there is any hope for experimental support for Ainslie's conjectures, the _total_ power dissipation of the entire circuit must be compared to the battery (plus FG) power contributed to the circuit.

What's the "TL;DR" ?

Since this is the last bit of data we have from Ainslie, we completely reject her current set of claims made without evidence. In the video clip, we can hear her waffling about: But but... when you weren't watching us, we got completely different results from the same settings. That gets a ROFL, for sure ! All of Ainslie's OU results happen when there is no one watching, no record is made and nobody knows just how settings were set. When people are watching and parameters carefully measured and recorded, HER OWN DATA indicate that there is only normal circuit behaviour happening, in a _grossly inefficient_ heater circuit, if heat at the load is the only consideration. However, the total power dissipation of the circuit was not monitored in these or any other sets of Ainslie experiments.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nhpL86xo34w


Ainslie's current claim seems to be that the batteries, when used with her circuit at her operating parameters, will outlast their amp-hour ratings compared to the same batteries, making the same heat at the same load, using DC alone. How exactly is this test to be arranged? How do you use the same batteries and the same load to provide DC current to make the same heat as the Ainslie circuit makes? Do you limit the current with an inline rheostat (dissipating power there)? Do you use PWM or some other chopping scheme? Do you use a _different load resistor_?

Note once again in the posts imaged below, how Ainslie makes false allegations against me, without being able to provide any references at all to support her ridiculous claims. Where did I EVER say that a FG could not be tuned to a negative offset? Nowhere, that's where. Ainslie simply lies. Since I've demonstrated the offset function time and time again, her foot is once again seen to be stuck firmly down her throat. To what does she refer when she says I  ENTIRLY omitted 'time' in my analysis of power? We have seen Time and Time Again that Ainslie cannot tell the difference between Power and Energy and does not understand the difference between a Quantity (Joule) and a Rate (Watt). Ainslie is over her head in any discussion of Power and Energy, because she does not understand the relationship between the two and does not have any math beyond simple arithmetic.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #257 on: January 19, 2014, 03:56:27 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #258 on: January 19, 2014, 04:52:41 PM »
TinselKoala the short summary is that Ms. Ainslie's best and most recent demonstrations completely refute her claims.   Nothing can change that but new data that supports her claims.  There is no sign of such data from any source.

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7617
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #259 on: January 19, 2014, 05:46:22 PM »
There is a lot of drama in flux, it's just like the good old days.  The issue of battery discharge rates and how much energy you can extract from a battery was covered by PicoWatt but I don't think it was ever acknowledged.  Rosemary is proposing swapping the batteries, so she should get symmetrical results.  THEN? lol

As long as she gets a pair of brand new batteries then let her rip Rosie!  Let's hope she can find someone to run the tests for her.  There is the technical challenge of setting up the right load resistor for the control experiment.  It would be a fun challenge to do a really good thermal setup and plan the execution of the test.  You could take a trip to a big-box hardware store and whip up something quite easily.  Get some styrofoam and some plastic pails and some insulation.  How many pails of water should my battery energy heat up?  How will I agitate it?  What should I use for a delta-t?  Should I measure the the thermal time constant of my insulated water vessel to make sure it is not likely to affect my results?  How do you check the batteries?

There is enough drama right there to fill a full season of episodes.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #259 on: January 19, 2014, 05:46:22 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Pirate88179

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8369
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #260 on: January 19, 2014, 06:13:38 PM »
MH:

But what happens when she heats that water to 104 degrees C?  I mean, she claims to have done that before.  This tells me that her temperature measurement skills are no better than her electronics skills.  Therefore, I would doubt any results she obtained from the experiments you, and others, have suggested.

I also do not see the need for such large batteries, and so many of them.  It would take a very long time to run down the control set.  A charged supercap should be used instead making it a matter of hours for the control to be performed, not days, weeks or months.

Of course, then she will claim that part of the "magic" in her circuit is in the batteries themselves and removing them would change the results.  I think we should not expect her to perform any tests or experiments of a scientific nature, or we will be waiting a loooong time.

Bill

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7617
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #261 on: January 19, 2014, 06:23:29 PM »
Bill:

Quote
But what happens when she heats that water to 104 degrees C?  I mean, she claims to have done that before.

It's due to the high pressure atmosphere around Rosie.  Enough to make your ears pop.

MileHigh

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #261 on: January 19, 2014, 06:23:29 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #262 on: January 19, 2014, 09:22:47 PM »
There is a lot of drama in flux, it's just like the good old days.  The issue of battery discharge rates and how much energy you can extract from a battery was covered by PicoWatt but I don't think it was ever acknowledged.  Rosemary is proposing swapping the batteries, so she should get symmetrical results.  THEN? lol

As long as she gets a pair of brand new batteries then let her rip Rosie!  Let's hope she can find someone to run the tests for her.  There is the technical challenge of setting up the right load resistor for the control experiment.  It would be a fun challenge to do a really good thermal setup and plan the execution of the test.  You could take a trip to a big-box hardware store and whip up something quite easily.  Get some styrofoam and some plastic pails and some insulation.  How many pails of water should my battery energy heat up?  How will I agitate it?  What should I use for a delta-t?  Should I measure the the thermal time constant of my insulated water vessel to make sure it is not likely to affect my results?  How do you check the batteries?

There is enough drama right there to fill a full season of episodes.
The test procedures that Ms. Ainslie has proposed are woefully inadequate.  They are also out of left field.  Until she improves her efficiency by about 5X she is outperformed by wires.  In order to show unambiguous gain she needs to improve by about 10X and get ~30W instead of ~3W when drawing ~15W from her batteries.  If she should ever get to the point that it looks like she is getting much more out of the heater than she draws from the batteries then she can try run down test following some reliable protocol.  If she jumps the gun then there are more or less two possibilities:  She and her collaborators will make gross mistakes and generate worthless data, or they will find that they don't get improved battery performance delivering the same heat as an appropriately selected resistor and wires while drawing the same amount of power from the batteries as does her current circuit.

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #263 on: January 20, 2014, 03:58:34 AM »
Quote
Can someone here please help me with a simple self-oscillation circuit using my Inductive Resistor Heater Element as one of the circuit components and a minimum of other components like the MOSFET. It must also operate in a pulse width mode ... IOW with a well defined 'ON' period and a well defined 'OFF' period. I envision a tank circuit of some sort that 'clips' itself somehow. If it's not possible to use the element in the circuit that controls the MOSFET, that's OK. I just need a generic sort of design that can be adjusted. I'm trying to eliminate any parasitic loads that waste energy so my next slate of tests stand a chance of success.  I just haven't been able to get a 555 to properly control my driver chip ... it always fall short on the "crispness" end. If I could eliminate the driver chip, that would be great, but properly controlling a Power MOSFET at 500K+ Hz and 5% to 20% duty cycle usually requires one.

Thanks in advance,

Greg

That is not hard to arrange.  Do you want the non-oscillating period to saturate the switch conducting or not conducting, or do you need all three states:  oscillating, conducting, and off?  Since many MOSFET drivers accept logic inputs you can sharpen your 555 by using a logic gate such as a 74alvc1g14 with a resistor and diode to clip the input or by running the 555 from the same supply as the logic gate.  An inverting gate such as the xxx14 will make things easier on you anyway because 555's configured as astable multivibrators like to make long on duty-cycles.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #263 on: January 20, 2014, 03:58:34 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #264 on: January 20, 2014, 03:18:10 PM »
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sIANNRpl6FA

(posted on July 13, 2012)

The same technique can be applied to the much higher-frequency circuit that is currently in Ainslie's "box". Inverter gates can be daisy-chained with little propagation delay, so one can have both inverted and noninverted outputs simultaneously depending on how many inverter gates you use. For higher speed and low power use one might choose a different inverter than the 4049.


Driving a power mosfet (IRFP460) at about 4 MHz using a self-triggering Class E amplifier circuit:
(no chips, mosfet gate is driven directly from a biased pickup loop under the main coil)

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

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #265 on: January 20, 2014, 03:39:14 PM »
MH:

But what happens when she heats that water to 104 degrees C?  I mean, she claims to have done that before.  This tells me that her temperature measurement skills are no better than her electronics skills.  Therefore, I would doubt any results she obtained from the experiments you, and others, have suggested.

I also do not see the need for such large batteries, and so many of them.  It would take a very long time to run down the control set.  A charged supercap should be used instead making it a matter of hours for the control to be performed, not days, weeks or months.

Of course, then she will claim that part of the "magic" in her circuit is in the batteries themselves and removing them would change the results.  I think we should not expect her to perform any tests or experiments of a scientific nature, or we will be waiting a loooong time.

Bill

Several points, Bill. By Ainslie's own admission, in forum and blog posts that I have displayed before....

Actually, Ainslie and her mob never actually measured the actual water temperature. Actually. What they "actually" measured was some combination of element and water temperature, since the thermocouple is attached directly to the element housing metal.

Furthermore, the 700 or 800 milliliters of water (her accounts vary) wasn't actually boiling , at any time in Ainslie's trials, even at the cited temperature of 104 degrees. "There were small bubbles" at the hot element where she immersed it.

Note that the blog report, made on or about the day of the actual trial, uses very different language than is used in the "paper 1" description of the same trial. "Wasn't actually boiling" becomes "takes water to boil". "We never measured the temperature of the water" becomes "the water temperature was...."  and so on.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #265 on: January 20, 2014, 03:39:14 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline minnie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1244
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #266 on: January 20, 2014, 03:52:16 PM »
Hi,
   trouble is these folk won't do a simple test because they can't. Instead of using a huge
amount of stored energy in the form of a bank of massive lead batteries why not use
something like 2ah. cells. If they're not draining the batteries the small cells should last
for days. I'll bet they wouldn't though!
                             John.

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #267 on: January 20, 2014, 03:52:38 PM »
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sIANNRpl6FA

(posted on July 13, 2012)

The same technique can be applied to the much higher-frequency circuit that is currently in Ainslie's "box". Inverter gates can be daisy-chained with little propagation delay, so one can have both inverted and noninverted outputs simultaneously depending on how many inverter gates you use. For higher speed and low power use one might choose a different inverter than the 4049.
The CD4049 works fine for that with the only limitations the asymmetric drive strength and limit to about 5V operation.  What a lot of people don't realize is that another 555 can be used to make an inverter that has the same high drive strength and wide supply voltage range that make the 555 a very useful part.  I've shown an example here that can produce the stated Quantum Magazine timing very precisely. 

The second 555 acts like an inverter with input hysteresis of Vcc/3.   When the input voltage exceeds the pin 6 threshold value of Vcc * 2/3, the 555's internal latch clears, and the output goes low.  The discharge pin also conducts which can be useful in some cases.  When the input signal falls below the pin 2 trigger value of Vcc * 1/3, the 555's internal latch sets, and the output goes high.  CMOS 555's have propagation delays of about 100ns, and rise and fall times of about 150ns.  With the addition of two resistors, this circuit can be used to take a logic level input.  Just connect a voltage divider of R/2R resistors from the logic power supply to the pin 5, control voltage input.  For example with a CMOS 555 use  5K to the logic supply and 10K to ground.  The switching thresholds will be 2/3 of the logic supply for high to low, and 1/3 of the logic supply for low to high.

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #268 on: January 20, 2014, 04:02:42 PM »
Sure.

There is an even easier way to "fix" the duty cycle issue in the exact Quantum 17 circuit, though. You will note that in the original circuit the 555 clock is powered by its own battery. This makes the duty cycle invertible by the use of the Secret of DPDT.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVePUJJVAlc   (September 7, 2013)




Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #269 on: January 20, 2014, 04:07:29 PM »
Hi,
   trouble is these folk won't do a simple test because they can't. Instead of using a huge
amount of stored energy in the form of a bank of massive lead batteries why not use
something like 2ah. cells. If they're not draining the batteries the small cells should last
for days. I'll bet they wouldn't though!
                             John.
John lead acid batteries are low rate devices.  They will wear out quickly if you charge or discharge them in less than 10 hours.  Going to smaller batteries would just restrict them to lower powers or expose the batteries to damage.

Other cells like NiCd, NiMH, or most Li-Ion can handle charging and discharging in an hour without degradation.  I don't recall seeing anything her theory that Ms. Ainslie says is so important that depends on a lead acid cell.  An additional advantage of going from lead acid to Li-Ion would be that the charging efficiency of Li-Ion is much better than lead acid.  Decent Li-Ion batteries can be purchased for $1.00/W or less.  A 20Wh - 40Wh battery would be plenty for the sorts of experiments they were doing.

 

OneLink