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: 1
  • *Guests: 9
  • *Total: 10

Author Topic: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims  (Read 249064 times)

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #375 on: February 11, 2014, 09:04:13 PM »
AlaskaStar has indicated, for the record, that he is NOT the person to whom The Boss refers in his statements that I quoted above. The Boss must have been thinking of someone else. So at least Ainslie got something right.... she apparently hasn't been engaged by AlaskaStar before now, according to him.



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 #376 on: February 11, 2014, 09:08:59 PM »
One could easily get the idea that she says a number of things just to try and rile you up.  For someone who says that she doesn't watch your videos she sure likes to link and critique them.

Something that is in that blowup is interesting:  Notice the earth ground symbol that is printed next to each of the BNC connectors.  That should have given them a clue about what they needed to do in order to hook up the function generator as documented instead of the way that they actually did for all but the August 11 tests.  They owe Poynt99  big for suggesting to them that they disconnect the mains earth ground on their function generator.

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #377 on: February 11, 2014, 10:50:22 PM »
Ainslie's insulting and mendacious comments about my videos hardly rise to the level of "critiques". She does not even try to refute specific points with outside checkable references, facts, or proper demonstrations of her own. She repeats over and over silly things that have long been known to be false, or which are easily demonstrated to be false simply by looking and paying attention to the content of my videos. Further, it has been clear for a long time that even the "tenth-grade" level of pitch is too much for her. She does not have the academic prerequisites, the intellectual capacity, or the proper mental models necessary to grasp or understand what is happening in my videos, even though they are as simple as I could possibly make them.

Just ask her what the mosfet Drain voltage should be in "her" circuit when the mosfet is ON and conducting, and see what she says.

Yes, her cheap, basic Chinese Function Generator always has the chassis, and the BNC shields, connected to the line cord's Ground wire. The only way to isolate the "black" output lead from the chassis and line ground is to cut off the ground pin in the cord, or use a line ground-lift adapter. However, my F43 Function Generator, a superior bit of test equipment made in the USA, has, in addition to its 40 V p-p output, also a built in Chassis Isolation switch and all its BNC connectors are insulated from its chassis. Simply by flicking this switch, I can isolate the F43's "black" output lead from the chassis and line-cord ground. Of course, using a BNC patch cord to connect the FG to another, grounded instrument re-establishes the ground connection. All of this is waaaaaay over the head of Ainslie and her crew, though. Since my instrument does not have "numbers in boxes".... she believes that it is somehow inferior to hers, when in fact the truth is the exact opposite.

(Image shows the F43's rear panel chassis isolation switch; I have since moved this function to the front panel for convenience.)

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #377 on: February 11, 2014, 10:50:22 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #378 on: February 12, 2014, 01:45:41 AM »
A neophyte can buy a half million dollar oscilloscope and still mess up ordinary measurements.  A craftsman who understands both circuits and the test instrument can make good measurements using equipment that goes for pocket change on eBay.  The measure of a craft person's skill is not the equipment that they have or must have, but what they can do with the equipment that they do have.

I would have to investigate, but I am pretty sure that safety regulations now prohibit interrupting an earth safety ground connection with anything that can open the circuit, such as a switch.  Safety regulators are more concerned with keeping people alive than making measurements convenient.  In a modern environment, the ground loop would have to be isolated by floating the oscilloscope probe or probes.  It's kind of a burden for people working on stuff out of their own pockets.  But if you think about it, even a few thousand for a good non-contact current probe is a small insurance cost to a company lab if that prevents personal injury or death.

Even with safety regulations as they are, I know people down the street who floated 220VAC line equipment for test convenience.  If they had any kind of insurance aware safety compliance people then that invitation to electrocution would not have happened.  Insurers and employers are even more adverse to paying personal injury or wrongful death claims as they are missing Bob at the company picnic.


Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #379 on: February 12, 2014, 02:15:57 AM »
Yes, it can be dangerous to interrupt an instrument's chassis ground. The isolation switch on the F43 does not isolate the instrument's chassis/power supply section from the line cord ground, it only isolates the "signal ground" from the chassis (and so from the system's line cord ground.) It is very rare that this function is needed or desired, hence the original switch location on the rear panel of the instrument. My "rack" is so tightly stacked, though, that it is difficult for me to reach around behind the instrument, so I installed a switch in the front panel.

I believe Ainslie found out for herself just what a good groundloop can do, when she decided to take a reading "across the load" while she had all her other probes hooked up as normal. Recall that her early Quantum article work was done with a fully isolated Fluke 123 or 199 ScopeMeter, which allows 600 volts difference between the channel ground references, so one may connect this scope any which-a-way with relative impunity. Not so the LeCroy! All the probe references are connected together at the chassis and also back to the line cord. So she wound up hooking one probe's reference to the 72 volt battery negative, and another probe's reference to the battery positive, when she tried to scope "across the load". I believe this was the event that caused her to have to purchase the borrowed scope, and have it sent out for repair and calibration.
This is not the only "oops" that Ainslie has committed wrt her equipment, either.


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #379 on: February 12, 2014, 02:15:57 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #380 on: February 12, 2014, 02:46:23 AM »
Usually when someone hooks up probes incorrectly, they fry only the probe and/or the probe cable.  It takes some really serious current to damage the BNC connector or anything past the internal frame.  Ms. Ainslie's unfortunate accident could have happened to anyone.  I have been in labs that had to be cleared for days after an ESD bench ground lead ended up doing double duty as a protective ground.  The fried insulation gave off toxic gas and tripped the fire protection system.  The lab was a mess.

20-20 hindsight is easy.  That said, a $700. differential isolation probe would have protected Ms. Ainslie against that accident.  Unfortunately a good DC - >1MHz non-contact current probe costs about as much as the oscilloscope.

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #381 on: February 15, 2014, 04:47:34 PM »
My, my how things change over the years.

Remember when Ainslie's claims were like "the batteries don't discharge at all, because energy is being created in the circuit elements and returned to the batteries, while boiling water with no measurable current drawn from the source" ?

Now it appears that Ainslie's claims have degenerated -- perhaps "decayed" is a better word -- to something more like "two batteries, powering two different loads with two different discharge schedules, will last different lengths of time before they reach some low terminal voltage."

Well, triple-whoopie-dingding!! Send in the clowns! What an earthshaking result that is! .......... NOT.

There is just one Little problem: The energy OUT from the batteries will never exceed the energy put INTO the batteries to charge them up in the first place, and the energy SUPPLIED TO EACH LOAD (in this case the complete circuit, whatever it might be) by the batteries, or DC control power supply, will never be less than the ENERGY DISSIPATED BY THOSE LOADS during the experimentation.

Wait.... isn't that two Little problems? Sorry....

Poynt99, I wouldn't be so worried if I were you. Ainslie's kludgewerk is so drastically _inefficient_ that proper testing will clearly show, just as it always has in the past, that maintaining any given temperature of her load, using her "oscillations", will always require more power input than a simple DC source and straight wires would require to maintain the same temperature in the same load. As you poynt out, simply comparing the battery "capacity" using Ainslie's naive methodology is not a valid test of an overunity claim, but even so, I'd still wager that testing using her own "protocols" would nevertheless fail to support her claims. Which is why we won't be seeing any real data from such tests, coming from her.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #381 on: February 15, 2014, 04:47:34 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #382 on: February 15, 2014, 05:04:54 PM »
Ms. Ainslie and her collaborators already established Aug. 11 that the battery to heating element power efficiency during the oscillations is only about 20%.  A conundrum that Ms. Ainslie and her collaborators now face is how much wire should they put between their test set-up and the batteries?  Do longer wires enhance or hinder each:  power, power efficiency, and battery desulfanation?

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #383 on: February 15, 2014, 07:50:02 PM »
"Watts of energy". Again. Still. After all these years.

One awaits eagerly the next Little foot-in-mouth pronouncement from the amazing Ainslie.


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #383 on: February 15, 2014, 07:50:02 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #384 on: February 15, 2014, 08:42:51 PM »
"Watts of energy". Again. Still. After all these years.

One awaits eagerly the next Little foot-in-mouth pronouncement from the amazing Ainslie.
Well yes confusing power and energy is a bad problem, but the argument that she is trying to make is not entirely off the mark.  It is clear to me that she is advancing the very simple idea that if one gets more energy (sustained power across some time interval) out than in, then something extraordinary is going on.  She is obviously convinced that this is the case despite last summer's demonstrations.

Where things can run awry quickly is if power and energy measurements get mixed-up.  Ms. Ainslie writes as though she has some technical professionals conducting her experiments, so there is hope that measurements and comparisons will be kept straight. 

The current debate seems to be over how to evaluate if a circuit offers a benefit to a battery.  Poynt99 has objected to comparing a battery loaded by a straight resistance versus a battery connected to a pulsating load.  A low pass decoupling filter between the battery and the test assembly would eliminate that distinction.  The question is whether Ms. Ainslie would accept insertion of such a low pass filter.  I would think that as long as it is placed at the battery and that she can observe that it has virtually no impact on the waveforms that she observes at her test assembly that she would accept such a filter.  Two copies of the filter could be built so that the test arrangements are identical between the DUT and the control, but for the DUT and the control heater resistor themselves.

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #385 on: February 16, 2014, 04:11:19 PM »
Ainslie continues to bleat, like a lost she-goat wandering through the maze of a city's downtown streets. She has no clue as to navigating the landscape so she does what she does best: she bleats. Again she complains about my work.... and as usual she cannot actually refute any single LITTLE thing I've done. She can't take any video of mine and point out the specific details she would like to dispute.... because she cannot dispute my FACTS at all.

Not only that..... but she is slowly lurching towards performing her testing in the manner that I have been using for years. Her "team" of incompetent blunderers must be paying attention, even though she herself is too ignorant and arrogant to understand. Neither has she ever withdrawn the utter lies that she has been telling about me and my work, even after her falsehoods are exposed for all to see in the images of her own posts. Bleat, bleat bleat, the poor lost she-goat wanders through a landscape she cannot possibly ever understand. It would be sad, if it weren't so utterly comical.

She mentions her Doctor Garret in a rather disparaging manner. Do we think that this is the same Doctor Garret who is now Chief Scientist in Queensland Australia? Hmmm.... I really wonder what he himself would have to say about the things Ainslie is attributing to him.

Quote
Prior  to joining CSIRO, Geoff led South Africa’s national science agency, the CSIR,  as President and Chief Executive from 1995, following five years as Executive  Vice President: Operations. He was named South Africa’s ‘Boss of the Year’ in  1998, and ‘Engineer of the Year’ by the South African Society of Professional  Engineers in 1999.

http://www.chiefscientist.qld.gov.au/about/bio.aspx

Phone: +61 7 3224 7630
 Email: info@chiefscientist.qld.gov.au
 Street address: Level 25, 111 George Street, Brisbane



Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #385 on: February 16, 2014, 04:11:19 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7617
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #386 on: February 16, 2014, 04:23:42 PM »
I smell another crash and burn if she tries to do another round of public demos.

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #387 on: February 16, 2014, 04:25:55 PM »
Dear Professor Garrett

For some years now we have been examining the claims of one Rosemary Ainslie, who believes that she has discovered that a simple electronic circuit, found in the back of every power mosfet data sheet, can somehow produce more energy than is required to operate the circuit. She has mentioned you as being one of the early examiners of her claims and her experiments.

As you can see in the attached image of her blog post, made on Sunday, February 16, 2014, she mentions you rather disparagingly and makes certain definite claims as to your role in the affair. She goes as far as to accuse you of suppressing data. She says that your actions were "immoral" and that you were too "scared" to release her data: "Sadly he did NOT have the courage needed for faithful scientific evaluation to be duly reported and recorded." (sic)

These claims about you are rather remarkable, but are actually commonplace coming from Ainslie. Previous statements she has made have turned out to be utter misrepresentations of the facts. So we are hoping that you yourself can give us a description of your actual role in Ainslie's experimentation in those early days.

Please be aware that Ainslie has mentioned you frequently and indeed seems to be blaming you, at least in part, for the lack of acceptance of her claims in the mainstream scientific community. Some of her critics find these statements of hers to be literally incredible, such as the quote above maligning your scientific integrity.

We would really like to hear your side of the story, to put the matter to rest once and for all.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter. We will be eagerly awaiting your reply.

Sincerely, I remain
(actual contact info redacted)

attachments: images of posts from Ainslie's forum mentioning Doctor Garrett

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #388 on: February 16, 2014, 04:30:54 PM »
I would like to invite anyone who shares my concerns to join me as signatories for the above email, which I will be sending off in a day or two.

Offline The Boss

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 52
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #389 on: February 16, 2014, 10:12:30 PM »
I would like to invite anyone who shares my concerns to join me as signatories for the above email, which I will be sending off in a day or two.


You have my personal contact information. Sign me on.

 

OneLink