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: 514341
  • *Total Topics: 15304
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 2
  • *Guests: 6
  • *Total: 8

Author Topic: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims  (Read 249065 times)

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #300 on: January 25, 2014, 09:03:11 PM »
That's right, and that's why I've suggested before that the entire circuit, including the mosfets and the load element, should be immersed in oil and the temperature of the entire system should be monitored. Knowing the quantity of the oil and its specific heat (0.84 for mineral oil USP) , and having a container with a known measured thermal leak rate, will allow the honest researcher to compare the input _energy_ from the battery or DC power supply to the _total energy_ dissipated by the entire circuit over a reasonable time period. A simple negative bias supply to produce 100 percent oscillations, or an adjustable 555 clock, can be included in the oil-immersed circuit, thus removing the power dissipation within the FG that occurs in the present test setup.

This procedure will avoid any assumptions about where any extra energy could be coming from in the system, and would reveal it if it did occur. What if Ainslie's excess thermal energy is created in the load element but dissipated in the mosfet(s)?  (We already know it isn't dissipated in the load element, from the previous demonstrations.)

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline Magluvin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5772
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #301 on: January 25, 2014, 09:59:12 PM »
That's right, and that's why I've suggested before that the entire circuit, including the mosfets and the load element, should be immersed in oil and the temperature of the entire system should be monitored. Knowing the quantity of the oil and its specific heat (0.84 for mineral oil USP) , and having a container with a known measured thermal leak rate, will allow the honest researcher to compare the input _energy_ from the battery or DC power supply to the _total energy_ dissipated by the entire circuit over a reasonable time period. A simple negative bias supply to produce 100 percent oscillations, or an adjustable 555 clock, can be included in the oil-immersed circuit, thus removing the power dissipation within the FG that occurs in the present test setup.

This procedure will avoid any assumptions about where any extra energy could be coming from in the system, and would reveal it if it did occur. What if Ainslie's excess thermal energy is created in the load element but dissipated in the mosfet(s)?  (We already know it isn't dissipated in the load element, from the previous demonstrations.)

Hey T

How about 2 separate immersion tanks. 1 for the load and 1 for the other circuitry. This way being that the load is most likely the hottest, its heat wont affect the other components adversely, as it shouldnt in a well designed product.

Mags

Offline Magluvin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5772
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #302 on: January 25, 2014, 10:01:56 PM »
being that the load is most likely the hottest,



Well, it should be. ;) In 2 containers the difference would be found.

Mags

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #302 on: January 25, 2014, 10:01:56 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #303 on: January 25, 2014, 10:02:09 PM »
TinselKoala, the situation does raise a number of considerations.  Your proposal would establish a much better overall balance measurement and is far more favorable to Ms. Ainslie.  If her thesis that the heater resistor operates as a power generator were correct then her past set-ups were poorly disposed to demonstrate as such.  August 11, the measured power drain was ~15W.  The heating element temperature rose by an amount equivalent to ~3W.  If the heating element was net less than 1/5th the effective resistance of the current paths it connected to, then there could have been an anomalous behavior that Ms. Ainslie and her collaborators did not see because it would have appeared as more power dissipated in the other elements:  The function generator and the MOSFETs that they did not measure.

This raises challenges for Ms. Ainslie, because it presents more or less three divergent test paths all with their own pitfalls.

Option 1) Attempt to measure all the circuit power.
A. Replace the function generator with a voltage source but do not use a 50 Ohm resistor.  One of the lead acid batteries could be used to provide low impedance power for this purpose.
B. Replace the function generator with a voltage source.  Use a 50 Ohm resistor located in the oil bath to serve as the source ballast resistance previously provided by the function generator.

Option 2) Attempt to reduce the external resistances to a minimum.
Replace the function generator with a voltage source but do not use a 50 Ohm resistor.  One of the lead acid batteries could be used to provide low impedance power for this purpose.

A. Leave Q2 operating in its linear region as it does now.
B. Suppress linear operation of Q2.
i. Replace sustained oscillations with only leading edge / trailing edge ringing.
ii. Configure a the heater resistor into a tank circuit so that Q2 can operate Class C or D with minimal losses.

All Option 2) require reconfiguring the power source, as does Option 1) A.  The closest option to doing exactly what they have in the past is Option 1) B.  I think that it may be beyond them to implement any of these options.  They are things that Greg (GMEAST) should think about as he works his way towards conducting new experiments of his own.

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #304 on: January 25, 2014, 10:05:46 PM »
Hey T

How about 2 separate immersion tanks. 1 for the load and 1 for the other circuitry. This way being that the load is most likely the hottest, its heat wont affect the other components adversely, as it shouldnt in a well designed product.

Mags
The way that the circuit has been configured, during Q2 (Q1 "OFF") operation that is hypothesized to provide the "benefit", very little of the circuit power comes out as heat from the heating element.  Almost all of it is lost inside the function generator and in the MOSFETs.  If Q1 is biased on deep into the constant resistance region of the MOSFET, then during those times, most of the circuit power evolves as heat from the heating element.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #304 on: January 25, 2014, 10:05:46 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #305 on: January 25, 2014, 11:33:35 PM »
Hey T

How about 2 separate immersion tanks. 1 for the load and 1 for the other circuitry. This way being that the load is most likely the hottest, its heat wont affect the other components adversely, as it shouldnt in a well designed product.

Mags

It complicates the measurement process. However, IF the total energy output in the single tank experiment is found to be greater than the input, it would be worthwhile to do your suggestion as a second experiment. If the single tank experiment doesn't show an excess... why bother with the more complicated version?

Also, you'd be surprised at how hot those mosfets can get. The reason they changed from the single mosfet version on its little heatsink to the 5 mosfet version with larger heatsinks was an attempt at making the circuit able to handle higher currents without overheating the transistor. It would have worked that way too if they hadn't made their wiring mistake, and then locked themselves into it.

Interestingly, if you reverse the Q1 and Q2s connection to the circuit, leaving one Q2 and having 4 Q1s in parallel, the circuit handles high current much better and still can oscillate just fine in the negative bias condition. Furthermore, this is just the configuration given as the "wrong" version, which still can be viewed here:
http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/files/Proposed%20variation%20to%20Faraday%20s%20Lines%20of%20Force.pdf

Note the subtle but highly significant difference between the schematic in that paper, which Ainslie still counts as the "official publication", and the current (claimed) one here:
http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/files/Experimental%20Evidence%20of%20a%20Breach%20of%20Unity.pdf

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #306 on: January 26, 2014, 07:49:59 PM »
No comment about the schematics?
These two posts of the daft manuscripts on Rossi's JNP are the only "official publications" of any of Ainslie's documents, other than the Quantum magazine article from 2002.

Yet these two "official publications" contain two different schematics purporting to describe the same experiment. And NEITHER of them actually represents the true circuit they used.... the Ainslie team has _always_ used the Black FG lead (marked " - " on the schematics) connected at the common circuit ground at the negative battery pole. The only time they may have done otherwise was the August 11 demo.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #306 on: January 26, 2014, 07:49:59 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #307 on: January 26, 2014, 08:28:07 PM »
Both links throw 403 and 404 errors. 

If you watch the August 11 video they did set up with the FG black lead connected to the Q1 source side of the CSRs as in the papers.  They were able to do that because they followed Poynt99's suggestion of isolating the green mains safety lead at the end of the function generator power cord.  At the point in the video where Donovan Martin made the function generator black lead connection to the correct side of the CSRs Ms. Ainslie can be heard protesting.

Offline Pirate88179

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8369
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #308 on: January 26, 2014, 08:41:08 PM »

I received this message also.

Bill

"Forbidden You don't have permission to access /files/Proposed variation to Faraday s Lines of Force.pdf on this server.
Additionally, a 404 Not Found error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request.
 
 Apache Server at www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com Port 80"

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #308 on: January 26, 2014, 08:41:08 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #309 on: January 26, 2014, 09:27:00 PM »
My fault, I apologize. Apparently one cannot link directly to the .pdf stored on Rossi's server.

Please try these links to Rossi's JNP pages which host the files, then select "read the whole article" or "download the ZIP file" .

http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=645  (part one)

http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=679  (part two)


Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #310 on: January 26, 2014, 11:25:23 PM »
My fault, I apologize. Apparently one cannot link directly to the .pdf stored on Rossi's server.

Please try these links to Rossi's JNP pages which host the files, then select "read the whole article" or "download the ZIP file" .

http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=645  (part one)

http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=679  (part two)
Here is a side by side comparison of the three circuits:

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #310 on: January 26, 2014, 11:25:23 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #311 on: January 26, 2014, 11:33:24 PM »
Thanks for doing that, it makes the differences very clear.

When the "Q-array" circuit made its debut, they claimed that it had all 5 mosfets in parallel, and the schematic presented (in the famous First Demonstration video, which Ainslie claimed "she did not post") was the one below.

The accompanying narration by Donovan Martin tells us that there are "5 mosfets in parallel" while he gestures to this diagram and to the circuit on the white breadboard.

Note that the Black or " - " FG lead isn't even shown. However, the video itself is clear enough so that one may see that the Black FG lead is connected in the usual place: at the common battery negative, rather than on the transistor side of the CSR as it should be.

People tried to replicate Ainslie's reported results using this schematic for about a month, before Poynt99 analyzed the video and determined the "Q-array" Q2 antiparallel configuration was _in fact_ what was used, contrary to Ainslie's deliberate deception. Yes.... deliberate deception, not a mistake, according to Ainslie herself. She even expressed her regret... not that she deceived us, but that Poynt99 caught her out so soon !!! She actually wanted to continue the deception longer.

It's because of things like these that one simply cannot trust reports of _anything_ from Ainslie. Only raw data and perhaps photographs can be trusted. 

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #312 on: January 26, 2014, 11:49:22 PM »
TinselKoala, OK here are all four circuits on one drawing:


Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #313 on: January 27, 2014, 12:03:10 AM »
And of course the verbal "five mosfets in parallel" could be drawn as well (please don't bother) .... it is significantly different from just a single mosfet in that the aggregate ON state resistance is 1/5 of the single mosfet's 2 ohms value, hence as you point out the load heating will be more efficient in the ON state, with significantly less power wasted in heating the mosfets.

So that makes 5 significantly different circuits Ainslie has presented, purporting to describe the same experiment. The fully correct circuit was not used until August 10-11, 2013; the circuits in the two daft manuscripts were _never_ used, and the 2011 demo's single mosfet and 5 parallel mosfet circuits were simply lies.



Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #314 on: January 27, 2014, 12:38:04 AM »
And of course the verbal "five mosfets in parallel" could be drawn as well (please don't bother) .... it is significantly different from just a single mosfet in that the aggregate ON state resistance is 1/5 of the single mosfet's 2 ohms value, hence as you point out the load heating will be more efficient in the ON state, with significantly less power wasted in heating the mosfets.

So that makes 5 significantly different circuits Ainslie has presented, purporting to describe the same experiment. The fully correct circuit was not used until August 10-11, 2013; the circuits in the two daft manuscripts were _never_ used, and the 2011 demo's single mosfet and 5 parallel mosfet circuits were simply lies.
Circuit D. has an annotation that the narration describes Q1 as five MOSFETs in parallel.  Since that drawing is one they presented, I did not want to alter it. 

 

OneLink