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

Custom Search

Author Topic: Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie  (Read 653959 times)

jibbguy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 352
Re: Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie
« Reply #390 on: July 13, 2009, 04:13:47 PM »
Someone else, from Eastern Europe as well i believe (not that it matters), has replicated at least some aspects of the circuit successfully now.

That and Luc's very interesting related findings make it more like "2 to 2" by my count.  So instead of being "Supreme Court Judges of Technology", some here would appear to have been "demoted" to being just members of the Jury  ;)  But don't worry, this is still an important and worthy position. We can argue the actual percentages of accuracy in these particular "replications" or similar circuits: But that is not the point... Which is that the opinions are NOT monolithic, nor are the present results as "conclusive" as some here make them out to be ;)

So let's wait until we get 8 more peeps (the more the better) to properly build and document this to get a full "Jury of 12 Peers". Thus the questions can be answered, the speculation ended, and the technology either moved forward into multiple applications with much importance both empirically and theoretically... Or "shelved" as being a good idea with much promise and interesting aspects, that didn't pan-out as expected in the end.

Imo one of the reasons we have not gotten more attempts to date here is because of all the constantly repeated negative results: It stands to reason that fewer peeps want to replicate something they heard over and over won't work.... But simply having a failed replication by a person, then trying to use the lack of more attempts as "proof"; does not work either.... Because the people who come to these forums all have their own projects, their own lines of research, and they replicate things on their own schedules... Not anyone else's.

Regarding Energetic Forums: No one there gives a hoot if the Members who frequent the Energy section have anything at all to do with the other sections there. As regards to it being "Religious", that is false: It is "Spiritual" in nature, and falls under the category of "self-help" ; but like i said you can take that part or leave it, and no one will care at all ;) 

What they do care about there is having polite, open-minded, meaningful, constructive, and sincere discussions and debates on technology. This means that those who participate should not attack others for their honestly-held views; nor should they try to use the forum as a advertising campaign for their own opinions, constantly repeating them like irritating ads on TV (or government propaganda)... Growing more insistent and less polite by the post.

Good forums, like this one, embrace the concepts of "Free Speech". However, if the Admins are wise; they do not allow some to use that as a weapon against the general health of the forum. Start you own forum, and see what it takes: It is not so easy to determine the best route, no one can look into another's heart. All there is to go on in making these decisions are the actions of the people in question. If you have been "mis-judged", perhaps you should have thought of that and thus changed your tack when warned, to keep from being "misunderstood". I'm sure the Admins themselves will tell you they are not omniscient; but they also have a duty to the others. And it is important to remember none of this exists in a vacuum: If you are rude and derogatory on another forum (this is a small F-E "world", after all), it can make an effect elsewhere; and it becomes "fair game" for these kinds of difficult considerations; possibly even tip the balance. Thus the danger of "widebanding" your opinions lol ;)

People had their say there; but with some it was becoming repetitious and starting to show signs of deep disrespect and lack of concern towards others, and so they were checked (meaning as in "chess").

No one there was really dissuaded from trying out the circuit, nor was anyone "afraid" of anything (a disgusting and demeaning suggestion).... We should not expect peeps to drop everything else they are doing to start a new build because of one person's results; no matter how insistently they post or how many forums they post it in. When dealing with others we must at least try to view from the other's perspective... If our interest really is finding the Truth, and not pushing our own version of it for some obscure reason. It is important to remember that the louder and more insistent the claims, the more personally invested the one making them becomes (because the "stakes" of possible loss of face grow with each pronouncement)... Thus their objectivity can begin to be legitimately questioned. This of course goes for both sides of any argument: And how this is handled by the person goes to their credibility.

But i believe the real Truth behind this circuit and possible discovery will come out in the end, either way: When the FULL JURY makes the deliberation, and not just the self-appointed Supreme Judges. Is there some critical time factor here that we are missing, that it is so important to rush to judgment? If so please let us know ;)

the_big_m_in_ok

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2087
Re: Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie
« Reply #391 on: July 13, 2009, 04:45:53 PM »
gyulasun said, on Reply #380, this thread:
Quote
I have been unable to access the energeticforum.com since last Saturday afternoon.  First I turned to my internet provider but I still wait for their answer (it was the weekend they have not done anything). 

This morning I have found I cannot access energetic forum from my office either (different internet provider in another location within the city).
From both my home and office I have accessed the forum without any problems for about 2 years now.  And I did not write any word yet in the Rosemary thread... lol
Really?  I just tried a GOOGLE search of "energeticforum" and then clicked on the link to bring up the site at once.  I do admit I'm using a freeware 'Web browser based on Mozilla, which you may not have anything like that to use.

It also occurs to me that some people in public venues(i.e., libraries) sometimes experience problems, while others nearby have no problems at all.  If there was a widespread virus, that shouldn't happen.  Everyone's computer should be affected.  It's also randomly intermittent.

--Lee
« Last Edit: July 13, 2009, 08:36:10 PM by the_big_m_in_ok »

wings

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 750
Re: Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie
« Reply #392 on: July 13, 2009, 05:25:29 PM »
Hi,

I have been unable to access the energeticforum.com since last Saturday afternoon.  First I turned to my internet provider but I still wait for their answer (it was the weekend they have not done anything). 

This morning I have found I cannot access energetic forum from my office either (different internet provider in another location within the city).
From both my home and office I have accessed the forum without any problems for about 2 years now.  And I did not write any word yet in the Rosemary thread... lol

Though I cannot rule out a technical problem en route from my location towards the energetic forum server location, I wrote a polite letter to Aaron, what he thinks on this.

rgds,  Gyula

apart popup use:

http://www.englishtunnel.com/index.php/010110A/687474702s7777772r656r65726765746963666s72756q2r636s6q2s7365617263682r7068703s73656172636869643q313638333536

http://tools.rosinstrument.com/cgi-proxy.htm


henieck

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 29
Re: Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie
« Reply #393 on: July 13, 2009, 05:38:13 PM »
Someone else,has replicated at least some aspects of the circuit successfully now.

That and Luc's very interesting related findings make it more like "2 to 2" by my count.

- on which side did you count my findings (if any). I can tell that this circuit showed that uses 1J to give heat like 3J as well. A bit out of the full context -but no problem with me. Let us make it 3 to 1 - if this is going to increase the number of analysis of this circuit.

Wow- this is like almost everybody has replicated at least some aspects of the circuit successfully now.
« Last Edit: July 13, 2009, 05:59:30 PM by henieck »

henieck

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 29
Re: Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie
« Reply #394 on: July 13, 2009, 06:29:53 PM »
.

TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
Re: Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie
« Reply #395 on: July 13, 2009, 06:35:11 PM »
Absolutely amazing. Another person who cannot read an oscilloscope, apparently.

The 555 timer circuit has been constructed multiple times and tested multiple times by a lot of people. Using the component values in the Quantum article and Groundloop's cleaned up diagram, the circuit generates long, not short, ON times. This has been shown many times by several builders.

I stand by my work and I challenge Joit to a "duel." Send me his timer--or I will send him one that I build--and they can be compared side-by-side on the same oscilloscope. Or we can both send them to an agreed-upon third party for testing. Best is if we could have yet another person build yet another copy of the timer for testing as well. Anyone can then see what components are used, how they are connected, and what the performance is.

I don't know what JOIT is doing; his scope trace certainly does not look like a clean 555 timer trace. But I  and others have published good clear traces that clearly show that I am right and JOIT and Rosemary are wrong.
It's like I'm in Bizzaro World, or something.

Well, at least I know what's right, and I will be happy to demonstrate it and prove it to any detail requested.

I will even draw the parts out of bins and assemble the circuit and test it live on camera if necessary.

But is it really necessary?

TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
Re: Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie
« Reply #396 on: July 13, 2009, 08:01:54 PM »
I think it's pretty clear from this quote that Joit has made some kind of strangeness...

"Witsend the Wave is right, because the Peak from the Pulse can be adjusted with the Pot at the Base from the Transistor,
in what lenght it hits the Base, so alot Transistors should work.
I can adjust the Peak to a standing Triangle or a laying Triangle,
The Peak, what hits the Base can get adjusted over the Pot at the Base,
and therefor you get different Duty Cycles.
And i bet, when i play further around with it, i even get the same Results, as you did at your Tests at the Table from the Quantum Article.
I know, it works, because i had a different Thread about How to get extra Energy from a Coil, where the Point is, that you have to pulse the Coil at the right Moment, and get very much better Results from it.
But the Magneticfield, what is build up in the Coil does matter, when that Point of Time is."

The Peak, of course, should not be triangular at all. The 555 timer circuit, at whatever settings, should be producing a nice rectangular pulse. And the 100 ohm pot in the gate drive will not affect the duty cycle, except when the resistance is reduced to zero or near zero.

ramset

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8073
Re: Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie
« Reply #397 on: July 13, 2009, 08:15:31 PM »
TK
Good to know 99 has your back
I honestly don't understand how you got the bad guy roll,all you did was replicate [as required] this is bizarre

Chet


TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
Re: Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie
« Reply #399 on: July 13, 2009, 08:59:03 PM »
TK
Good to know 99 has your back
I honestly don't understand how you got the bad guy roll,all you did was replicate [as required] this is bizarre

Chet

I understand it quite well. I reacted as I will, when I know for sure that I am right and someone with fewer facts at their disposal attacks me and accuses me of error. That is, I got (and still am) angry, and when Angry I do not mince words.
The very most amazing thing is that, when I reported the duty cycle error, several folks dissed me hard, without even trying it for themselves--even though, in every early post on this issue, I asked for people to build it to see if I had made some mistake.
I even thought that I had been "set up" to take a fall in public. So I built it again, and again. And it's still wrong.

Now, for the readers from over there that might still be interested in what I say::: Figure a 96.3 percent input duty cycle, and run the numbers on the energy calculations again.
And don't forget what Rosemary said: She did not use a FG, she always used a 555 circuit.

Oh, and just for the record, Rosemary, Watts measure Power, Joules measure power over a period of time, which is Energy.
Watts are not Joules, power is not energy. You cannot legitimately do what you are trying to do in your numbers.
Have you studied calculus? Did they cover that before you quit school at  age 16?

And why do you have to ask someone else to try to get the documents you would like to show, concerning your patent applications? Don't you keep important records? I would be perfectly happy to accept your own posts of your copies of the material, I know you wouldn't mislead anyone intentionally. As long, of course, as you post ALL the information.
By the way, Roesmary, have you read your patent application yet?
http://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=23243.msg254872#msg254872

0c

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 278
Re: Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie
« Reply #400 on: July 13, 2009, 09:06:17 PM »
For any electronics dummies trying to make sense of all this like me, here's some 555 timer references that may help understand what all the "duty cycle" arguments are about. I especially like the animation in the first one.


555 Tutorial with a nice animation
http://www.williamson-labs.com/555-circuits.htm#timing

555 and 556 Timer circuits
http://www.kpsec.freeuk.com/555timer.htm#dutycycle

LM555 - ASTABLE OSCILLATOR CALCULATOR
http://home.cogeco.ca/~rpaisley4/LM555.html#3

Astable 555 Square Wave Calculator
http://www.csgnetwork.com/ne555timer2calc.html

555 Frequency Calculator
http://www.electronicdesignworks.com/utilities/555_frequency_calculator/555_frequency_calculator.htm

555 Component Finder
http://www.electronicdesignworks.com/utilities/555_component_finder/555_component_finder.htm


Looks like the waveform may depend on where you take your measurements.

gyulasun

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4117
Re: Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie
« Reply #401 on: July 13, 2009, 09:29:46 PM »
.....

It also occurs to me that some people in public venues(i.e., libraries) sometimes experience problems, while others nearby have no problems at all.  If there was a widespread virus, that shouldn't happen.  Everyone's computer should be affected.  It's also randomly intermittent.

--Lee

@Lee
Thanks for your answer, I tried 3 different web browsers Mozilla Firefox, Google Crome and Explorer, all reported the energeticforum.com could not be found...   

@wings

Thanks for the links, tried the first one and the energeticforum.com has loaded immediately.... now I can see it!  Without your link I cannot see it.

So what is the conclusion for my case?  My IP address (both at home and at the office) have been blocked? Can someone explain?
(I asked a friend to load it on his own computer yesterday, he lives near to the city where I am but he could not see it either, found the same error message, this may mean IP addresses for my country are blocked or there is somewhere a technical problem inside or near to my country which got out of function and blocks us?)

Thanks, Gyula

PS To the rest of the Folks here: sorry for the off topic!

henieck

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 29
Re: Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie
« Reply #402 on: July 13, 2009, 09:44:01 PM »

jibbguy, you made so strong point about the strong point that I am affraid that now we have to wait untill the FULL JURY makes the deliberation, and not just the self-appointed Supreme Judges. Is there some critical time factor here that we are missing, that it is so important to rush to judgment? If so please let us know ;)

TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
Re: Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie
« Reply #403 on: July 13, 2009, 09:58:48 PM »
For any electronics dummies trying to make sense of all this like me, here's some 555 timer references that may help understand what all the "duty cycle" arguments are about. I especially like the animation in the first one.


555 Tutorial with a nice animation
http://www.williamson-labs.com/555-circuits.htm#timing

555 and 556 Timer circuits
http://www.kpsec.freeuk.com/555timer.htm#dutycycle

LM555 - ASTABLE OSCILLATOR CALCULATOR
http://home.cogeco.ca/~rpaisley4/LM555.html#3

Astable 555 Square Wave Calculator
http://www.csgnetwork.com/ne555timer2calc.html

555 Frequency Calculator
http://www.electronicdesignworks.com/utilities/555_frequency_calculator/555_frequency_calculator.htm

555 Component Finder
http://www.electronicdesignworks.com/utilities/555_component_finder/555_component_finder.htm


Looks like the waveform may depend on where you take your measurements.

You mean, like Northern vs. Southern Hemisphere?

Actually it looks like whoever designed Rosemary's 555 didn't know about these (standard) circuits, because I don't see any diodes in these, and there also are more capacitors in her 555 circuit.

I took the measurements in my basement kitchen, with a 1 megohm impedance oscilloscope. Actually, now three different oscilloscopes: the Philips, which does NOT EVEN HAVE a trace invert or polarityreversal function; the Tektronix which does, and the Fluke 199 which also does, and also has a cycle select function that also could be reversed.
That's right, the Fluke-O-Scope has 2 modes that could have been selected in error...which means only one out of 4 possibilities will give the "correct" duty cycle, that is, one that goes in the right direction on the display and is also calculated correctly by the scope software.

Tonight I will be looking at the behaviour of the circuit with a Hitachi VC-7504.

If I can figure out how to turn it on.

fuzzytomcat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 676
    • Open Source Research and Development
Re: Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie
« Reply #404 on: July 13, 2009, 10:14:22 PM »
So what is the conclusion for my case?  My IP address (both at home and at the office) have been blocked? Can someone explain?
(I asked a friend to load it on his own computer yesterday, he lives near to the city where I am but he could not see it either, found the same error message, this may mean IP addresses for my country are blocked or there is somewhere a technical problem inside or near to my country which got out of function and blocks us?)

Thanks, Gyula

PS To the rest of the Folks here: sorry for the off topic!

Hi Gyula,

It is entirely possible that your country ISP is banned, many forums block out trouble areas because of continued abuse from IP addresses .... some are shown here in a previous post of mine.

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=3893.msg139759#msg139759

Fuzzy