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

User Menu

Google Search

Custom Search

Author Topic: Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie  (Read 578073 times)

Offline jibbguy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 352
Re: Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie
« Reply #2760 on: January 15, 2010, 01:00:50 AM »
"Heat" isn't useful? Lol even down here in South Florida i wish i had an "Ainslie Heater" device lately; it has been brutally cold the last two weeks by our usual standards. 

We admit there are no whirring lights, no spinning magnets here... And the "Entertainment Value" of it is kinda like the difference between watching an adventure TV show, and reading a fairly dull book, lol. But dull books can have some very important information in them. 

The circuit is specifically balanced for a specific result; which it provides. A CFL or incandescent would not provide the same effect as the hand-made heating element with specifically-wound resistive wire does (although the work of ~Imhotep~ and others have shown that there can be somewhat similar effects with CFL's). We could certainly add a light in series, but all that would do is run the battery down faster, it would have to be subtracted from the total to get back to true figures, so it hardly seems worthwhile just for show. If we removed the heating element the "effect" and efficiencies would be gone too... As seen by Fuzzy's great work and by others with trying different loads.

But there are literally thousands of possible things to try yet; different materials, circuit components, frequency ranges, etc.  That's why we are hoping universities takes this work on, so it CAN be tested and verified in the mainstream, and all those different things tried... So someday soon someone can go buy an "Ainslie Heater" at Kmart ;)

All are invited to invent new applications for it (that's the Open Source way after all!), and this will be an important aspect for the future of its development.

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie
« Reply #2761 on: January 15, 2010, 01:04:38 AM »
"Heat" isn't useful? Lol even down here in South Florida i wish i had an "Ainslie Heater" device lately; it has been brutally cold the last two weeks by our usual standards. 

We admit there are no whirring lights, no spinning magnets here... And the "Entertainment Value" of it is kinda like the difference between watching an adventure TV show, and reading a fairly dull book, lol. But dull books can have some very important information in them. 

The circuit is specifically balanced for a specific result; which it provides. A CFL or incandescent would not provide the same effect as the hand-made heating element with specifically-wound resistive wire does (although the work of ~Imhotep~ and others have shown that there can be somewhat similar effects with CFL's). We could certainly add a light in series, but all that would do is run the battery down faster, it would have to be subtracted from the total to get back to true figures, so it hardly seems worthwhile just for show. If we removed the heating element the "effect" and efficiencies would be gone too... As seen by Fuzzy's great work and by others with trying different loads.

But there are literally thousands of possible things to try yet; different materials, circuit components, frequency ranges, etc.  That's why we are hoping universities takes this work on, so it CAN be tested and verified in the mainstream, and all those different things tried... So someday soon someone can go buy an "Ainslie Heater" at Kmart ;)

All are invited to invent new applications for it (that's the Open Source way after all!), and this will be an important aspect for the future of its development.

Really well said Jibbs.  Needed a second posting here.  LOL. ;D

Offline Ken the Great

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 85
Re: Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie
« Reply #2762 on: January 15, 2010, 02:17:25 AM »
Creating heat is not useful work. No matter how many people want to join you.

How many products do we have in our society that create heat? Everything electrical creates heat. This heat has nothing to do with useful work.

If you want to use a heating element to heat water, then that would be useful work. I suggested a light because of the ease one can visually see the results. So hook up the heating element and do some useful work.
Until you do saying "heat isn't useful" is not worth addressing.

I will wait for the results of the heating element experiment.

I have seen so many devices that seem to create more energy than they use, with measuring the inputs and outputs, that are not what they seem to be. This to me is just another one.

I hope it works. I personally need more than measurements to be convinced.

I would rather see this be real than be a measurement fluke.
Too many times the results of poor measuring tools and techniques are the problem. A simple phase shift has caused many to proclaim something that was not true.

Remove the battery and make the system closed loop, THEN heat some water. That would convince me immediately.

Any credible experiment that shows work being done, not by merely measuring the inputs/outputs.

Have Fun    8)


"Don't feel bad because others do not feel obligated to believe what you believe, simply prove it, or go back to church alone."






Offline jibbguy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 352
Re: Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie
« Reply #2763 on: January 15, 2010, 02:38:37 AM »
Generating heat is certainly doing "work".

For one thing, without boilers there would be no power grid to begin with (unless you happened to live within an area served by Hydroelectric dams). That is the "work" that allows for a modern society.

Heated gas expansion is what is behind Diesel and ICE . Heat is what creates wind. Photons generate heat when they collide with matter; heat is what allows life to exist in the first place.

Heat is the ultimate "work".

Concerns and veiled accusations of "poor measurement" could possibly have some weight, if they were specific: They are not. If one is interested in detracting from the work done here, perhaps they should take the time to do more than make vague, unsubstantiated negative comments with no real meaning.

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie
« Reply #2764 on: January 15, 2010, 02:42:42 AM »
Creating heat is not useful work. No matter how many people want to join you.
Golly Ken the Great.  There's heating of homes, heating of heaters, heating of water.  Which example does not create useful work?

How many products do we have in our society that create heat? Everything electrical creates heat. This heat has nothing to do with useful work.
Again.  This statement is just so profoundly wrong as to be laughable.  On average more than 90% of the average household utility bill goes into heating things.

If you want to use a heating element to heat water, then that would be useful work. I suggested a light because of the ease one can visually see the results. So hook up the heating element and do some useful work.
At last.  Yes we do that.  We use a resistive element to heat water, oil, air, name it.  All you need to do, thanks to Fuzzy's hard work here, is scale up the element and apply it to an average household hot water cylinder.   

Until you do saying "heat isn't useful" is not worth addressing.
Not quite sure of your point here. 

I will wait for the results of the heating element experiment.
No need to wait.  The results are out there.  You need to check out the link that I'll add when I've finished this post.

I have seen so many devices that seem to create more energy than they use, with measuring the inputs and outputs, that are not what they seem to be. This to me is just another one.
I sincerely hope not.  This experiment is itself a replication of a published claim.  I think the benefits here have been unequivocally proven.  All that remains is to publish the paper.  And as Jibbguy has mentioned, that's the hard part.  But it won't be from lack of trying if this is never done.

I hope it works. I personally need more than measurements to be convinced.
We have so many measurements that if we printed them out on A4 size paper font size 12, they would fill tomes of books more than 6 feet high. Surely that's enough?

I would rather see this be real than be a measurement fluke. Too many times the results of poor measuring tools and techniques are the problem. A simple phase shift has caused many to proclaim something that was not true.
It's difficult to call something a fluke when it's been measured to the stringent standards applied and described in our paper and that when it's shown, over and over and over again with the repetition of sunrise at the equator.  No fluke here.   

Remove the battery and make the system closed loop, THEN heat some water. That would convince me immediately.
We're not that anxious to convince you - not that it wouldn't be fun.  But the evidence is there if you want to check it out.  We're more anxious that you design those heaters and scale it up and make use of it.  That's the object of these tests. 

http://www.scribd.com/doc/23455916/Open-Source-Evaluation-of-Power-Transients-Generated-to-Improve-Performance-Coefficient-of-Resistive-Heating-Systems


Offline Ken the Great

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 85
Re: Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie
« Reply #2765 on: January 15, 2010, 03:02:20 AM »
Harnessing the power of heat can do useful work. However creating heat does not equate to useful work automatically.

For instance your refrigerator creates heat, but if it is the summer time that heat being pumped into the interior of your home is ANYTHING BUT USEFUL.

Now can you tell the difference? If not then that would be a problem you need to address.

Now I will say again, PROVE IT!. No measuring only experiments. Those are too easily faked or misrepresented due to ignorance.

I do not need to see a drawing or theory. Just make it closed loop and extract 1 watt of useful power.

I hope the device is real, but the comment "We're not that anxious to convince you" speaks volumes.

Have Fun    8)











Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie
« Reply #2766 on: January 15, 2010, 03:09:21 AM »
clearly you are not prepared to read the paper nor follow the experiments - so I can't help you.  We're showing - from memory - about 6 watts on the load, and it's costing something less than 1 watt from the battery.

The evidence is there.  But to see it you may need to check the link.  I get it you're more interested in posting replies than actually checking the claim.  Which is fine.  But then you can't seriously expect any more answers from us.  Life's too too short.

Offline Ken the Great

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 85
Re: Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie
« Reply #2767 on: January 15, 2010, 03:13:54 AM »
So how much water was heated in the experiments?

What temperature was the water heated to?

I think you have explained all I need to hear. No closed loop, No OU.
No water actually heated.

I shall now place you in the box.

Have Fun    8)

Offline jibbguy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 352
Re: Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie
« Reply #2768 on: January 15, 2010, 03:14:00 AM »
Thank you for agreeing about Heat.

You are essentially being "lazy" here: You have no idea if this is valid or not.

This is perfectly evident for everyone reading this to see. Please go over this thread, and come up with a specific complaint if you feel that dis'ing this is so important. We will get back to you then.

But i am afraid that simply "not liking it" is not a valid complaint ;)

Offline Ken the Great

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 85
Re: Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie
« Reply #2769 on: January 15, 2010, 03:49:59 AM »
I did not agree with you at all.

Your claim about heat is erroneous based on assumptions which are not relative to all circumstances. I was clarifying, not agreeing. The refrigerator example proves my point.

I am not making the claim of OU. You people are. I am simply saying prove it with USEFUL WORK. The term useful seems to be escaping your grasp.
So because I asked to see some useful work being done, I get ridiculous explanations about heat which are irrelevant to what I said.

USEFUL work.

I have looked at the original design, I have seen it before. If you are as handy as you believe you are, simply make it closed loop. I HOPE IT WORKS!!! The claim is 6 watts output to one watt input. Well if that's the case and I am only requesting one watt of useful work. that would leave you with 4 extra watts!!!

That should be easy. However unless you agree to try this.

ITS ALL TALK. And will remain all talk. I take this position because of the emotional instability of those responding to me.

Every attempt to make OU devices closed loop cause imminent failure, with the exception of one device.

I was going to share an idea, but I will refrain from that at this point in time. I mean it is obvious that anyone else who might have input is not welcome here.   

One of us is being lazy that is for sure, so lazy they cannot even make accurate statements or quote me accurately. However I am used to being misquoted, and the like, so that isn't a problem.

Ad hominem positions are also the lazy way out. Hmm some people seem to be taking that position also. You can have a pile of measurements 400 feet high, that doesn't impress me. However someone felt that was a milestone in their work, the amount of paper they had. HAAHAHAHA

Maybe you could light the pile of papers to heat the water? LOL

I can see jibbguy now, with the back of his TV off hovering over the transformer in the back because he is cold.  Hey it can't be useless heat, Your claim is all of it is useful. LOL,


Have Fun 8)
















Offline Ken the Great

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 85
Re: Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie
« Reply #2770 on: January 15, 2010, 05:08:58 AM »

 Fortunately I'm in the 'reasonable, kind hearted decent, fair minded, considerate, polite  group. 


All I can do is laugh.
You sir are not a truth teller. Look at your last 2 posts to me, then your self claim here in this quote. They do not line up.

Emotional instability always leads to moral instability.
I would not use any of the adjectives you lay claim to when reading your response to my post. 
In fact quite the opposite.
I now have no doubts about placing you in the box.

Have Fun   8)


Offline WilbyInebriated

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3141
Re: Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie
« Reply #2771 on: January 15, 2010, 05:33:59 AM »
All I can do is laugh.
You sir are not a truth teller. Look at your last 2 posts to me, then your self claim here in this quote. They do not line up.

Emotional instability always leads to moral instability.
I would not use any of the adjectives you lay claim to when reading your response to my post. 
In fact quite the opposite.
I now have no doubts about placing you in the box.

Have Fun   8)
what else have you put in the box (cornfield) little boy? perhaps you should put some of that talk of yours in the box? for a guy that seems to despise 'talkers' you sure do alot of it... come to think of it, i haven't seen you demonstrate anything but talking and delusions of grandeur.

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie
« Reply #2772 on: January 15, 2010, 06:52:35 AM »
what else have you put in the box (cornfield) little boy? perhaps you should put some of that talk of yours in the box? for a guy that seems to despise 'talkers' you sure do alot of it... come to think of it, i haven't seen you demonstrate anything but talking and delusions of grandeur.
Willby.  YOU'RE BACK  ;D  :-* Thank God.  Hope you had the best of holiday cheer and glad to see those swords drawn.  LOL. Such a happy surprise. This troll is a mental defficient.  He is unable to read the paper and is drivelling on in the hopes that we don't reference this and also to drone out any evidence of clarity and logic in our answers.  I'd delete his posts if it mattered.   

Offline Vortex1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 518
Re: Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie
« Reply #2773 on: January 15, 2010, 09:51:53 AM »
Speaking of putting things in boxes, here's one test the Ainslie group or Sean will never do. They prefer to hide behind obfuscation.

Total power measurement and proof of overunity for the ORBO, Ainslie or any device that requires some electrical input is really rather simple, no complex instrumentation or number crunching of noisy "data". This is especially valid when you are claiming COP's in excess of 17.

Obtain a styrofoam cooler and a cheap Radio Shack or equivalent indoor/outdoor thermometer.

Place the device to be tested into the styrofoam box and attach the "outdoor" probe to the inside of the lid.

Note the ambient temperature and the container temperature.

Start the device to be tested and let it run, logging temperature at several intervals. Also record power input to the device.

When the temperature inside the container has stabilized at some higher value record this and the external ambient temperature.

Now replace the device previously tested with a resistor and supply just enough power to the resistor until the same temperature rise above ambient is obtained.

Note the power required to obtain the same temperature rise above ambient. Compare the two power inputs.

Since all of the heating power to the devices (in the first test with the device and second test with the resistor) is captured and measured at the top inside of the container (less that lost through the thermal resistance of the styrofoam box, which is a constant in each test), we thus have a rather reasonable assesment of any overunity developed.

All of the heating power includes: ohmic, frictional (bearings and air friction), switching device losses etc. It does not include electromagnetic radiation losses, but the container can be modified to include this if necessary with a Faraday shield. EM losses however should be very small. If necessary, a small frictional load can be attached to the rotor, it's heat will also be collected inside the container.

For those claiming it is too difficult to measure input power to the device because of complex waveforms involved, use a wall power supply and plug it into a Kil-O-Watt meter ($30). Note the unloaded power drain (power disconnected from the DUT). Then note power with the DUT connected. The Kil-O-Watt meter also includes power factor corrected readings, VA, and true Watts. The wall power supply can also easily be characterized for its contribution to the loss chain.

Kind regards...V

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie
« Reply #2774 on: January 15, 2010, 12:34:09 PM »
Hello Vortex1

That test you describe.?  Its done and fully accounted in that paper where we offered the link.  We don't however use that styrofoam box.  But nor do we need to as the degree of heat dissipated at the resistive load is high enough to prove the point.

It intrigues me that this information is freely available and yet none of you have actually studied it.  In any event, I must hand it to you that you explained the required parameters very clearly. 

http://www.scribd.com/doc/23455916/Open-Source-Evaluation-of-Power-Transients-Generated-to-Improve-Performance-Coefficient-of-Resistive-Heating-Systems

Here it is again, for good measure.