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

Tesla Paper

Free Energy Book

Get paid

Donations

Please Donate for the Forum.
Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.(Admin)

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: 84193
  • *Latest: eirik

  • *Total Posts: 897200
  • *Total Topics: 15809
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 2
  • *Guests: 13
  • *Total: 15

Author Topic: Rosemary Ainslie COP>17 Circuit / A First Application on a Hot Water Cylinder  (Read 266638 times)

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie COP>17 Circuit / A First Application on a Hot Water Cylinder
« Reply #765 on: November 04, 2010, 04:07:52 AM »
And may I add.  Without that required measuring instruments - then the resonance must be accidentally achieved and the actual measure of the energy delivered and dissipated will only ever be a thumb suck.  It is NO WONDER it's eluded detection for so long.  I realise now that the likelihood of it EVER being shown is almost zero to nothing. 

The thing is that I expected this result so went to the trouble of getting the right scopemeters that could be DC coupled precisely to show that value.   You've got to expect it to first measure it.  Else it can be happening - all over the place - without there being the slightest recognition of the fact.  In other words - it's been with us since day dot.  It's just not been seen.  Resonance is NEVER a desirable condition in the applictions that switching circuits are used for.  It's only reference that I know of is as an 'aperiodic Hartley oscillation' and that's buried in text books closely followed by advice as to how to 'get rid of it'

Harvey tries hard to befuddle you all about the complexities of measurement - Glen tries hard to keep the results from public view.  Both of them go to absurd lengths to shout obscenitites about my character, my motives, my abilities - or lack of them, but they're only following an agenda.  They're trying very hard to kill this technology - or they're trying to disassociate me from it's disclosure.  Unfortunately whether they convince you or not - the TRUTH WILL OUT.  This is not rocket science.  It's simple, really SIMPLE science - easily measured within the constraints of the correct scopemeters and easily proved against the performance of batteries against their watt hour ratings.  I see my contribution to all this as being sufficiently SIMPLE MINDED to expect precisely this result.  I am and was not clever enough to find the reasons for it NOT TO WORK.

And while I may have harboured untold doubts about the accuracy of the circuit schematic as it related to the 555 - I have NEVER doubted the efficacy of this RESONANCE.  It's been evident from nearly the very beginning of all our tests. 

Regards,
Rosemary 

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie COP>17 Circuit / A First Application on a Hot Water Cylinder
« Reply #766 on: November 04, 2010, 04:51:54 AM »
The reasons that I am now exploring other ways of 'showing' this energy is because I realise now that the whole CONCEPT of current flow relating to electrons and stored energy - is SO entrenched - that it would need a bulldozer to move it.  The slim hope is that the campus test results will be that bulldozer.  But even if it isn't - what we will have, and it WILL, I think, be a first, is the unequivocal proof of that COP>1 from a forum that is entirely respectable.  This much has been lacking.  But I also foresee the kind of debate that goes on here - obviously with more articulation and relevance as the debate will be amongst experts.

My overriding interest however is in the thesis.  All I'm actually doing - at this stage of this exercise is to try and get you all to understand that there's this field - all over the place - that simply keeps outside our eyeshot.  Can't be seen.  Can't be measured.  But it's there - in 3 different forms.  1 dimensional fields are those active little numbers that held the early hydrogen atoms together in those early suns.  This is the source of the electromagnetic force.  2 dimensional fields that hold the nucleus and the electrons together as energy levels.  This is the source of strong nuclear force.  They also hold solar systems together and - writ large - whole galaxies together.  Then there are those 3 dimensional fields that describe the magic of the torus.  Here is the SOURCE of our gravitational force.  The torus moves the atoms.  It is the magnetic field construct that generates our gravitational field.  But all three are simply different magnetic fields - or different sizes of magnetic fields.  Sort of like BUBBLES WITHIN BUBBLES.     

I'm now trying to find those experiments that can prove the WHOLE of that thesis rather than only the first.  That first is just WAY TOO CONTENTIOUS.  If I can find the right configurations of magnetic fields - then their proof will, I hope, be more readily understood.

Regards,
Rosemary

ADDED

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie COP>17 Circuit / A First Application on a Hot Water Cylinder
« Reply #767 on: November 04, 2010, 06:36:45 AM »
LOL  I see that Glen is posting the whole of these comments on his own thread.  This because he does not have that innate originality to vary his own posts.  Else all you'd be seeing is more and more of those repetitive highly coloured shouts that point to blocked links or deleted posts. 

I need to discuss something here which has only really hit me since I've been banned from Energetic Forum.  I've logged in there under the name Gabriel.  That way I can - at least - access my own earlier work to read it and - probably to copy it but not from the message text.  In any event.  Here's the thing.  As a registered user I can access the work - but I CANNOT access any links.  This means that readers there are also not able to access those links.  Now. I have always written for the benefit, not so much of the members - but for the benefit of the readers.  It's apparent that not only are there many more such.  But they don't comment.  They just read.  And I've always seen this very much in line with our 'silent majority' who - unlike the NOISY MINORITY who simply shout the odds - they are in fact the representative majority with a democratic authority.  In effect - that readership is the real value of these forums.  That's where there's always a chance that the 'message' can be spread - or understood. 

Now.  Let's put speculations out of the equation as to what Glen's motives are - for the time being.  Let's just look at the facts.  IF indeed that silent majority cannot access the 'links' as I cannot access the links - then there's an enormous percentage of the reading public who are ALSO now entirely removed from that data.  Effectively by removing all those posts as Glen did -  he's effectively also removed ALL SIGHT OF THAT DATA from the majority of the reading public there.  Whatever the motive - he's INDEED been able to HIDE all that good news from the vast majority of readers there - and yet he can PRETEND that he has not done so.  LOL

I also know that he's REALLY good on the internet.  He has admitted as much to me.  So again.  Without speculating let's again look at the 'facts' of his refusing to post his work here.  Original work posted on OU.com cannot be patented.  That's the fact.  Therefore - if he were to post his work on these forums then he would not be able to patent it.  Therefore, I put it to you that he is refusing to post this because he is witholding to himself - the right to patent that as original work.  I can't think of ANY other reason for him witholding that data.

There was a time when we were best of friends.  I often asked him to post the data on OU.com as this was as required a vehicle of promoting that work as was EF.Com, OUR.com or indeed any dot com that could advance this.  He would lapse into muttering about bandwidth and space availabiltiy and explained that it was IMPOSSIBLE.  Being a confirmed ignoramus on the internet I believed him.  That is - I believed him until Wilby showed - with such impeccable skill - what a load of unsubstantiated BS Glen was indulging.  But Wilby's comments here were immediately followed by some entirely irrelevant graphics intended to throw the comments off the page and out of focus.  It's not that Glen does not know how to format.  He simply pretends that he cannot when it he needs to hide the argument - very much as he does with my posts.

In any event - back to the argument.  My considered opinion is that Glen knows EXACTLY what he's doing by not posting original work here.  He DARE NOT.  Else he'd need to put paid to it as open source property.  I think, what I need to do - is to post it for him.  As he claims that it IS open source - then I don't think he'd have any valid objections to my doing so.  Certainly I would need to acknowledge it as his own work.  But that's it.  And IF he HOWLS with objections - then here's my question.  Why would he?  Is he not interested in advancing these desirable technologies?  Or is it because he thinks it does not work after all?  Certainly he's not coming out clearly on either side of that heavily loaded argument.  And he really needs to.

Regards,
Rosemary
BTW I've now written to Harti to find out what our rights are here.  My personal opinion is that there's actually NOTHING to prevent that posting of original work - as Glen insists that his interests regarding this are to benefit OPEN SOURCE.

ADDED

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rosemary Ainslie COP>17 Circuit / A First Application on a Hot Water Cylinder
« Reply #767 on: November 04, 2010, 06:36:45 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie COP>17 Circuit / A First Application on a Hot Water Cylinder
« Reply #768 on: November 04, 2010, 07:07:23 AM »
What I need to add here is this.  Glen achieved what I never did.  He knew how essential it was to publish waveforms.  I, unfortunately, did not realise this.  I think, in retrospect, had I also included waveforms in that paper of mine it may have been more readily advanced to review.  But I am - unfortunately - an amateur, or as I prefer to think of it - a dilletante - in matters scientific.  Therefore I did not know better.

And while I'm at it - he had heavenly instrumentation to do just this.  But by the same token - I rather suspect that he actually never knew how to use it to maximise the required results.  He tuned it to a certain required level of voltage over the load resistor - where he knew that the resonance was then in line with a required gain.  But he should have tuned it to the DC coupled value of the voltage over the shunt.  He also seemed to labour under the delusion that it required LONG leads to the battery.  This is entirely NOT required - but it does - allow more material in the circuit to afford a resonance.

And I also need to pay tribute to his skills at a build.  They are impeccable.  Indeed - they're the finest builds I've seen on the forum - with the possible exception of one other member at EF.com who unfortunately does not post here that often.  Which is none of it intended to detract from the manifold skills of those many, many talented members here. 

Regards,
Rosemary

BTW It is my considered opinion that this is the reason he was not able to duplicate the same level of efficiencies that we were.

ADDED
« Last Edit: November 04, 2010, 08:00:54 AM by Rosemary Ainslie »

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie COP>17 Circuit / A First Application on a Hot Water Cylinder
« Reply #769 on: November 04, 2010, 07:57:53 AM »
And Truthbeknown - I do not THINK that academics are reading here.

Rosemary.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rosemary Ainslie COP>17 Circuit / A First Application on a Hot Water Cylinder
« Reply #769 on: November 04, 2010, 07:57:53 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline fuzzytomcat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 676
    • Open Source Research and Development
Re: Rosemary Ainslie COP>17 Circuit / A First Application on a Hot Water Cylinder
« Reply #770 on: November 04, 2010, 08:14:28 PM »
Howdy reading members and guests,

Rosemary has referenced the time line for my testing and evaluation of the "Mosfet Heater Circuit" and here it is available for you ......

***************************************************************************************

TEST #1      http://www.energeticforum.com/69858-post2878.html   October 04, 2009

TEST #2      http://www.energeticforum.com/69966-post2890.html   October 05, 2009

TEST #3      http://www.energeticforum.com/70105-post2899.html   October 06, 2009

TEST #4      http://www.energeticforum.com/70432-post2942.html   October 09, 2009

TEST #5      http://www.energeticforum.com/70771-post2951.html   October 13, 2009

TEST #6      http://www.energeticforum.com/71062-post2961.html   October 15, 2009

TEST #7      http://www.energeticforum.com/71364-post2970.html   October 18, 2009

TEST #8      http://www.energeticforum.com/73814-post3108.html   November 07, 2009

TEST #9      http://www.energeticforum.com/74402-post3126.html   November 14, 2009

TEST #10      http://www.energeticforum.com/74594-post3133.html   November 16, 2009
   
TEST #11   http://www.energeticforum.com/75431-post3164.html   November 24, 2009

TEST #12   http://www.energeticforum.com/75770-post3172.html   November 26, 2009

TEST #13       http://www.energeticforum.com/75803-post3177.html   November 27, 2009   ( used in IEEE submittal )

TEST #14   http://www.energeticforum.com/76303-post3199.html   December 01, 2009

Scribid - IEEE authorised public release of "PRE PRINT" document   December 01, 2009
http://www.scribd.com/doc/23455916/Open-Source-Evaluation-of-Power-Transients-Generated-to-Improve-Performance-Coefficient-of-Resistive-Heating-Systems
 
TEST #15   http://www.energeticforum.com/76980-post3244.html   December 08, 2009

TEST #16   http://www.energeticforum.com/77118-post3248.html   December 12, 2009

PREFERRED MODE OF OPERATION - 5-Hour "NON STOP" video - TDS 3054C   January 09, 2010
http://www.livestream.com/opensourceresearchanddevelopment/video?clipId=pla_6d255c76-9e9a-42ae-a565-fbc698e0b6df

PREFERRED MODE OF OPERATION - 5-Hour "NON STOP" video - 2445A      January 24, 2010
http://www.livestream.com/opensourceresearchanddevelopment/video?clipId=pla_b2e705b9-bf90-4bee-8009-2b323d8bc7ae

PREFERRED MODE OF OPERATION - 5-Hour "NON STOP" video - DPO 3054   January 31, 2010
http://www.livestream.com/opensourceresearchanddevelopment/video?clipId=pla_12671fda-04e2-403e-8560-ab593683a646

IEEE      Immediate rejection of 10-0207-TIE submittal                      February 01, 2010

TEST #17     http://www.energeticforum.com/84885-post10.html      February 02, 2020

TEST #18      http://www.energeticforum.com/84888-post11.html      February 03, 2010

TEST #19     http://www.energeticforum.com/84893-post12.html      February 03, 2010

TEST #20     http://www.energeticforum.com/84896-post13.html      February 03, 2010

TEST #21   http://www.energeticforum.com/84899-post14.html      February 04, 2010

TEST #22     http://www.energeticforum.com/84906-post15.html      February 05, 2010

TEST EVALUATION "UN-CONCLUSIVE" DUE TO BETTER EQUIPMENT USED - DPO 3054   May 02, 2010
http://www.energeticforum.com/93746-post74.html

Scribid - IEEE unauthorised public release of 10-0207-TIE submittal   July 07, 2010      ( fifth rejected IEEE version )
http://www.scribd.com/doc/26240411/PROVING-OVER-UNITY-THE-HARD-WORK-OF-MANY-DEDICATED-OPEN-SOURCE-MEMBERS

E-MAIL WITHDRAW OF TEST #13 DATA TO ROSEMARY AINSLIE / CC: all AUTHORS   July 07, 2010

PUBLIC WITHDRAW OF TEST #13 DATA               October 27, 2010  (  same withdraw context as e-mail sent to Rosemary Ainslie )
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=9898.msg262086#msg262086


***********************************************************************************************************


I'm sure myself and other IEEE submittal authors will be adding to this time line found above ...............


Regards,
Glen
.

Offline truthbeknown

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 98
Re: Rosemary Ainslie COP>17 Circuit / A First Application on a Hot Water Cylinder
« Reply #771 on: November 04, 2010, 08:42:03 PM »
And Truthbeknown - I do not THINK that academics are reading here.

Rosemary.

But WHY not? Surely since you are working with some at the Trade School on campus you have told them about all of your documentation on your thread on OU.com? Oh pufft..thats right..you have not posted any of the work going on there..

 ;)
Truthbeknown

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rosemary Ainslie COP>17 Circuit / A First Application on a Hot Water Cylinder
« Reply #771 on: November 04, 2010, 08:42:03 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline fuzzytomcat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 676
    • Open Source Research and Development
Re: Rosemary Ainslie COP>17 Circuit / A First Application on a Hot Water Cylinder
« Reply #772 on: November 05, 2010, 08:59:46 AM »
Howdy reading members and guests,

It's just a misperception or misrepresentation not sure of Rosemary's url link or file access facts .....

This is one of the unfortunate truths that happens when a forum member gets banned ..... the denial of your IP address and/or username by default done through the forums administrators access software options. This means any web url's or file links to click on in the site your banned from won't work .... like being locked outside your home and not being able to get in, unless alternative methods are used which do not violate a site or forums "Terms of Service" policy.

One example is using a web url or link proxy server  http://www.proxy4free.com/  it will give you limited access to a site or forum your banned from by giving you a temporary or proxy IP address that hasen't been banned, then entering the site with a user name shown only as a guest.


LOL  I see that Glen is posting the whole of these comments on his own thread.  This because he does not have that innate originality to vary his own posts.  Else all you'd be seeing is more and more of those repetitive highly coloured shouts that point to blocked links or deleted posts. 

I need to discuss something here which has only really hit me since I've been banned from Energetic Forum.  I've logged in there under the name Gabriel.  That way I can - at least - access my own earlier work to read it and - probably to copy it but not from the message text.  In any event.  Here's the thing. As a registered user I can access the work - but I CANNOT access any links.  This means that readers there are also not able to access those links.  Now. I have always written for the benefit, not so much of the members - but for the benefit of the readers.  It's apparent that not only are there many more such.  But they don't comment.  They just read.  And I've always seen this very much in line with our 'silent majority' who - unlike the NOISY MINORITY who simply shout the odds - they are in fact the representative majority with a democratic authority.  In effect - that readership is the real value of these forums.  That's where there's always a chance that the 'message' can be spread - or understood. 

Now.  Let's put speculations out of the equation as to what Glen's motives are - for the time being.  Let's just look at the facts.  IF indeed that silent majority cannot access the 'links' as I cannot access the links - then there's an enormous percentage of the reading public who are ALSO now entirely removed from that data.  Effectively by removing all those posts as Glen did -  he's effectively also removed ALL SIGHT OF THAT DATA from the majority of the reading public there.  Whatever the motive - he's INDEED been able to HIDE all that good news from the vast majority of readers there - and yet he can PRETEND that he has not done so.  LOL

I also know that he's REALLY good on the internet.  He has admitted as much to me.  So again.  Without speculating let's again look at the 'facts' of his refusing to post his work here.  Original work posted on OU.com cannot be patented.  That's the fact.  Therefore - if he were to post his work on these forums then he would not be able to patent it.  Therefore, I put it to you that he is refusing to post this because he is witholding to himself - the right to patent that as original work.  I can't think of ANY other reason for him witholding that data.

There was a time when we were best of friends.  I often asked him to post the data on OU.com as this was as required a vehicle of promoting that work as was EF.Com, OUR.com or indeed any dot com that could advance this.  He would lapse into muttering about bandwidth and space availabiltiy and explained that it was IMPOSSIBLE.  Being a confirmed ignoramus on the internet I believed him.  That is - I believed him until Wilby showed - with such impeccable skill - what a load of unsubstantiated BS Glen was indulging.  But Wilby's comments here were immediately followed by some entirely irrelevant graphics intended to throw the comments off the page and out of focus.  It's not that Glen does not know how to format.  He simply pretends that he cannot when it he needs to hide the argument - very much as he does with my posts.

In any event - back to the argument.  My considered opinion is that Glen knows EXACTLY what he's doing by not posting original work here.  He DARE NOT.  Else he'd need to put paid to it as open source property.  I think, what I need to do - is to post it for him.  As he claims that it IS open source - then I don't think he'd have any valid objections to my doing so.  Certainly I would need to acknowledge it as his own work.  But that's it.  And IF he HOWLS with objections - then here's my question.  Why would he?  Is he not interested in advancing these desirable technologies?  Or is it because he thinks it does not work after all?  Certainly he's not coming out clearly on either side of that heavily loaded argument.  And he really needs to.

Regards,
Rosemary
BTW I've now written to Harti to find out what our rights are here.  My personal opinion is that there's actually NOTHING to prevent that posting of original work - as Glen insists that his interests regarding this are to benefit OPEN SOURCE.

ADDED


********************************************************************************************************************


Panacea-BOCAF On-Line University - (complete file)
http://www.panaceauniversity.org/Rosemary%20Ainslie%20COP17%20Heater%20Technology.pdf  ( non-stop ongoing 290 page - 15.47MB PDF file )

Energetic Forum - "Mosfet Heating Circuits" (complete file)
http://www.energeticforum.com/inductive-resistor/5359-mosfet-heating-circuits.html  ( February 06,2010 )

Open Source Reasearch and Development "LIVE" 24/7 web broadcasting (with video library)
http://www.livestream.com/opensourceresearchanddevelopment

PREFERRED MODE OF OPERATION - 5-Hour "NON STOP" video recordings of live broadcasts
http://www.livestream.com/opensourceresearchanddevelopment/video?clipId=pla_6d255c76-9e9a-42ae-a565-fbc698e0b6df  (Tektronix TDS 3054C - January 9, 2010)
http://www.livestream.com/opensourceresearchanddevelopment/video?clipId=pla_b2e705b9-bf90-4bee-8009-2b323d8bc7ae (Tektronix 2445A - January 24,2010)
http://www.livestream.com/opensourceresearchanddevelopment/video?clipId=pla_12671fda-04e2-403e-8560-ab593683a646 (Tektronix DPO 3054 - January 31, 2010)

Microsoft SkyDrive Public - ** FILE REPOSITORY ** Mosfet Heating Circuit (complete photo, image and data gallery)
http://cid-6b7817c40bb20460.office.live.com/browse.aspx/.Public/Mosfet%20Heater

Microsoft SkyDrive Public - ** FILE REPOSITORY ** Rosemary Ainslie (complete Quantum article data, patent applications information)
http://cid-6b7817c40bb20460.office.live.com/browse.aspx/.Public/Ainslie


Regards,
Glen

.

Offline fuzzytomcat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 676
    • Open Source Research and Development
Re: Rosemary Ainslie COP>17 Circuit / A First Application on a Hot Water Cylinder
« Reply #773 on: November 05, 2010, 11:59:09 AM »
Howdy reading members and guests,

I would assume that most would know when you put your information on the web without any restrictions, without copyrights, all rights reserved or trademark notices like myself does, the public can use it with no strings attached except for gross misrepresentations, it's in the public domain and any patents are out of the question.    The "Mosfet Heating Circuit" is not patentable !!

I have made comments at Energetic Forum on Patents ..... and how there stolen from the inventor .....

http://www.energeticforum.com/90969-post21.html

Quote from: FuzzyTomCat;90969
Hi everyone,

There is one "exclusive" draw back to having the big alternative energy device when doing a patent .... and at the present time there is some 5,000 odd that has been taken by this amendment added in the late 1950's :suprise:

United States Patent Law: Title 35, Part II, Chapter 17, Sections 181-188  (link)   (page 44 of 88)

Quote
35 U.S.C. 181 Secrecy of certain inventions and withholding of patent.

Whenever publication or disclosure by the publication of an application or by the grant of a patent on an invention in which the Government has a property interest might, in the opinion of the head of the interested Government agency, be detrimental to the national security, the Commissioner of Patents upon being so notified shall order that the invention be kept secret and shall withhold the publication of an application or the grant of a patent therefor under the conditions set forth hereinafter.
Whenever the publication or disclosure of an invention by the publication of an application or by the granting of a patent, in which the Government does not have a property interest, might, in the opinion of the Commissioner of Patents, be detrimental to the national security, he shall make the application for patent in which such invention is disclosed available for inspection to the Atomic Energy Commission, the Secretary of Defense, and the chief officer of any other department or agency of the Government designated by the President as a defense agency of the United States.
Each individual to whom the application is disclosed shall sign a dated acknowledgment thereof, which acknowledgment shall be entered in the file of the application. If, in the opinion of the Atomic Energy Commission, the Secretary of a Defense Department, or the chief officer of another department or agency so designated, the publication or disclosure of the invention by the publication of an application or by the granting of a patent therefor would be detrimental to the national security, the Atomic Energy Commission, the Secretary of a Defense Department, or such other chief officer shall notify the Commissioner of Patents and the Commissioner of Patents shall order that the invention be kept secret and shall withhold the publication of the application or the grant of a patent for such period as the national interest requires, and notify the applicant thereof. Upon proper showing by the head of the department or agency who caused the secrecy order to be issued that the examination of the application might jeopardize the national interest, the Commissioner of Patents shall thereupon maintain the application in a sealed condition and notify the applicant thereof. The owner of an application which has been placed under a secrecy order shall have a right to appeal from the order to the Secretary of Commerce under rules prescribed by him.
An invention shall not be ordered kept secret and the publication of an application or the grant of a patent withheld for a period of more than one year. The Commissioner of Patents shall renew the order at the end thereof, or at the end of any renewal period, for additional periods of one year upon notification by the head of the department or the chief officer of the agency who caused the order to be issued that an affirmative determination has been made that the national interest continues to so require. An order in effect, or issued, during a time when the United States is at war, shall remain in effect for the duration of hostilities and one year following cessation of hostilities. An order in effect, or issued, during a national emergency declared by the President shall remain in effect for the duration of the national emergency and six months thereafter. The Commissioner of Patents may rescind any order upon notification by the heads of the departments and the chief officers of the agencies who caused the order to be issued that the publication or disclosure of the invention is no longer deemed detrimental to the national security.
(Amended Nov. 29, 1999, Public Law 106-113, sec. 1000(a)(9), 113 Stat. 1501A-566, 582 (S. 1948 secs. 4507(7) and 4732(a)(10)(B)).)


Sections 182 through 188 are really interesting !!

Good Luck !!

Best Regards,
Glen
:)

What has been avoided by Rosemary Ainslie is in any response in her "Intellectual Property Rights" as a INVENTOR of PATENT APPLICATIONS that are in her name.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_property
Intellectual property (IP) is a term referring to a number of distinct types of creations of the mind for which property rights are recognized—and the corresponding fields of law.[1] Under intellectual property law, owners are granted certain exclusive rights  to a variety of intangible assets, such as musical, literary, and artistic works; discoveries and inventions; and words, phrases, symbols, and designs. Common types of intellectual property include copyrights, trademarks, patents, industrial design rights and trade secrets in some jurisdictions.


My question is how can a INVENTOR without the knowledge of electronic circuitry or electronic component operation or capability of construction of a electronic circuit INVENT a electronic circuit for a PATENT ?? and how can someone claim INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS as Rosemary Ainslie does on that electronic circuit ??

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=9645.msg254309#msg254309
http://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=23243.msg255644#msg255644
http://www.energeticforum.com/59001-post169.html
http://www.energeticforum.com/61040-post798.html
http://www.energeticforum.com/61453-post920.html


Regards,
Glen
.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rosemary Ainslie COP>17 Circuit / A First Application on a Hot Water Cylinder
« Reply #773 on: November 05, 2010, 11:59:09 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline b4FreeEnergy

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 8
Re: Rosemary Ainslie COP>17 Circuit / A First Application on a Hot Water Cylinder
« Reply #774 on: November 05, 2010, 01:15:15 PM »
Hi Glen,

Apart from the never ending cat-fight between you and Rosemary, did you meanwhile make any progress with this circuit? I would be great to hear some positive news once in a while … We’re still burning oil, BP can pollute huge areas in the Gulf of Mexico, nobody seems to care much and everything just continues like before. Not the slightest sign there will be a change shortly! I have the feeling that if I don’t look at this forum and come back after 5 years, you and Rosemary are still bickering, nothing much changed and we’re still burning oil … ;-)

Cheers,
B

Offline truthbeknown

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 98
Re: Rosemary Ainslie COP>17 Circuit / A First Application on a Hot Water Cylinder
« Reply #775 on: November 05, 2010, 07:26:03 PM »
Hi Glen,

Apart from the never ending cat-fight between you and Rosemary, did you meanwhile make any progress with this circuit? I would be great to hear some positive news once in a while … We’re still burning oil, BP can pollute huge areas in the Gulf of Mexico, nobody seems to care much and everything just continues like before. Not the slightest sign there will be a change shortly! I have the feeling that if I don’t look at this forum and come back after 5 years, you and Rosemary are still bickering, nothing much changed and we’re still burning oil … ;-)

Cheers,
B


So Umm B, Can you tell us whatever happened with YOUR test data and apparatus you built? How did Rosemary HELP you in getting things accomplished? We know she could not help GADH with answers to his questions. How did things go for you?

 :)
J.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rosemary Ainslie COP>17 Circuit / A First Application on a Hot Water Cylinder
« Reply #775 on: November 05, 2010, 07:26:03 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline doozy2

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5
Re: Rosemary Ainslie COP>17 Circuit / A First Application on a Hot Water Cylinder
« Reply #776 on: November 05, 2010, 08:33:24 PM »
I happen to know that Rosemary is not able to read or answer any posts here.  Not at the moment.  But she will.  And Glen - I will make it my personal mission to see you in hell if she does not get around to deleting your crap.

And I am not threatening you.  That is my promise.  You are an inarticulate imbecile.  b4FreeEnergy - you are way too polite.  The guy is a dirty con plagiarist who is trying to kill this work so that he can steal it.  Just tell it like it is.  How anyone can give him the space for all that crap is beyond me.  Who even reads it?  What a half wit.


Offline fuzzytomcat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 676
    • Open Source Research and Development
Re: Rosemary Ainslie COP>17 Circuit / A First Application on a Hot Water Cylinder
« Reply #777 on: November 05, 2010, 08:34:24 PM »
Hi Glen,

Apart from the never ending cat-fight between you and Rosemary, did you meanwhile make any progress with this circuit? I would be great to hear some positive news once in a while … We’re still burning oil, BP can pollute huge areas in the Gulf of Mexico, nobody seems to care much and everything just continues like before. Not the slightest sign there will be a change shortly! I have the feeling that if I don’t look at this forum and come back after 5 years, you and Rosemary are still bickering, nothing much changed and we’re still burning oil … ;-)

Cheers,
B

Hey B,

I was wondering where you went .... good to hear from you !

Well after I posted this over at Energetic forum .....

http://www.energeticforum.com/93746-post74.html    POST #74      ( May 02, 2010 )
Quote from: FuzzyTomCat;93746

Quote
Originally Posted by Harvey  View Post
Thanks Glen,

As always I am impressed by your work

I was trying to do some basic calculations on how long your two batteries can sustain a 5.5 watt load. I come up with about 104 hours, does that sound right? They are each 12Ah batteries so there is 24Ah of charge in them. A basic DC breakdown is 5.5W / 24V = 0.229A. 24Ah / 0.229A = 104 hours.

So all we need to do now is run for more than 104 hours on those batteries and we have pretty good proof that we have extra energy coming from somewhere else And that's not even counting the lost energy in MOSFET or CSR to heat. Good Stuff!

ETA: Oh, I almost forgot - if we conclude that those Gel-Cell (edit: wait, those or Liquid Acid?) batteries are discharged when they reach 10V each, then that would be a drop of 4V over the 104 hours. That would give us a 0.0385V (38.5mV) drop per hour. So for the 5 hours we would have expected a minimum of 193mV drop not counting the energy spent on the MOSFET and CSR. Our results show only 110mV drop in that time frame, 83mV short of the linear projection. So you can see why we think we are getting energy from somewhere. Either that, or our battery discharge is not linear And BTW, it only gets better for us if we conclude the battery voltage should be lower than 10V when discharged (of course we all know that the battery voltage needs to be measured under specific load conditions)

Hey Harvey,

I'm sorry it took so long to do a detailed overview of the "LIVE" broadcast I did in the "Open Source Research and Development" channel on the January 9, 2010 5 Hour non stop video recording.

This video as you are aware is one of the best ever recorded representation of the preferred mode of operation but only in a non stop 5 Hour video. I'm sure that many members and guests don't realize the difficulty in capturing this effect for the purpose of recording the data properly and if given the time looking at the recorded video everyone can see the problems that we face in getting accurate data.

The constant 24 volt battery bank voltage fluctuations going up and down the Mosfet "drain" spike oscillating from 500 to 900 volts, battery voltage down the Mosfet spikes, battery voltage up the Mosfet voltage to normal operating range, back and forth over and over.

I have tried to get as close to this mode of operation in   Test #13    which was used in the IEEE submittal Open Source Evaluation of Power Transients Generated to Improve Performance Coefficient of Resistive Heating Systems the team including yourself did, and in   Test #22 but never being able to record the data scientifically correct because of the circuits complex oscillating waveforms. I don't think everyone, members and guests understands that the Test #13 was done with a Tektronix TDS 3054C which has a maximum resolution of 10K of data spread over a 10 x 10 grid or divisions so each one has 1k of data samples separately for each of the 4 channels. The data collected in Test #22 was with a Tektronix DPO 3054 which has a maximum resolution of 5M of data, but I used the 100K which is spread over the same 10 x 10 grid or divisions so each one has 10k of data samples separately for each of the 4 channels ..... ten ( 10 ) times the data of the TDS 3054C used in Test #13.

The problem being we need to find a method of capturing the data continuously in real time, there's nothing wrong with Tektronix TDS 3054C or the DPO 3054 these are the finest instruments I've ever used and are extremely accurate, but if you push the acquire button at the wrong time you can appear to get conflicting or skewed data, not the case .... were you before the spike, during the spike or after the spike when the data was collected. I had a allotted dedicated set time to record the data, It was the time frame I used with the 6 minutes or as fast as the data could be physically collected with the finest equipment I had at my disposal.

I am in total agreement with you that something "good" is happening in the Mosfet Heating Circuit and can be plainly seen in the recorded videos, we just need to somehow get a streaming real time data recording. Maybe by somehow obtaining a   Real-Time Spectrum Analyzers from Tektronix or some other method to verify the data findings as you suggested, the equipment I previously used as good as it is, just isn't enough to totally capture what is occurring during the preferred mode of operation.

Best Regards,
Glen
:)

There was this paragraph in the posting on my evaluation after reviewing the data for two months ......

I am in total agreement with you that something "good" is happening in the Mosfet Heating Circuit and can be plainly seen in the recorded videos, we just need to somehow get a streaming real time data recording. Maybe by somehow obtaining a   Real-Time Spectrum Analyzers from Tektronix or some other method to verify the data findings as you suggested, the equipment I previously used as good as it is, just isn't enough to totally capture what is occurring during the preferred mode of operation.

This is when I stopped the research because of the lack of a better test instrument to get accurate readings that could be used without question of the results, and the beginning of the heated attacks and allegations from Rosemary including her expression of "intellectual property" rights on my and Harvey's work.

But to be continued .....

Best Regards,
Glen
 :)

Offline fuzzytomcat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 676
    • Open Source Research and Development
Re: Rosemary Ainslie COP>17 Circuit / A First Application on a Hot Water Cylinder
« Reply #778 on: November 05, 2010, 08:49:25 PM »
I happen to know that Rosemary is not able to read or answer any posts here.  Not at the moment.  But she will.  And Glen - I will make it my personal mission to see you in hell if she does not get around to deleting your crap.

And I am not threatening you.  That is my promise.  You are an inarticulate imbecile.  b4FreeEnergy - you are way too polite.  The guy is a dirty con plagiarist who is trying to kill this work so that he can steal it.  Just tell it like it is.  How anyone can give him the space for all that crap is beyond me.  Who even reads it?  What a half wit.

What do we have here ??? a reincarnated Rosemary Ainslie "TROLL" ..... good thing IP addresses are traceable ..... ever heard of "TERMS of SERVICE" ??

Offline doozy2

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5
Re: Rosemary Ainslie COP>17 Circuit / A First Application on a Hot Water Cylinder
« Reply #779 on: November 05, 2010, 09:29:51 PM »
What do we have here ??? a reincarnated Rosemary Ainslie "TROLL" ..... good thing IP addresses are traceable ..... ever heard of "TERMS of SERVICE" ??

What a joke.  If I am a troll - you imbecile - then what does that make you? 

Are you surprised that Tektronix refused to lend you any more equipment?  I saw it coming sure as sun up.  What you need is a long session with a straight jacket.

 

OneLink