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 Posts: 897180
  • *Total Topics: 15807
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 2
  • *Guests: 30
  • *Total: 32

Author Topic: Rosemary Ainslie COP>17 Circuit / A First Application on a Hot Water Cylinder  (Read 266560 times)

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
@ashtweth_nihilisti,

I wonder why are you so much emphasizing on the scope? Scope should be the least of your worries once you have proper probes and once you understand the intricacies of the data processing. So, let's start with the probes -- what are they and what are you actually measuring? Here in this forum there are some pretty sophisticated participants and it will be a good idea to post the schematics under study and the details as to how you actually do the measurements so that we can hear some competent input. I have already expressed this opinion, and I'll say it again, measurements are the only part of this project worth considering and they have to be done right.

I, for one, would be willing to do some study on the board you said you can donate. I have a Tektronix DPO 2024, a Hall effect based current probe and four passive voltage probes that come with the scope. On the side of equipment the voltage probes are the weakest link. I've discussed that extensively in the Steorn thread and I'll keep discussing it. However, there's another problem which I found to be of even greater significance -- the data processing -- which seems to be overlooked. No wonder, as I already said in the Steorn thread, it is highly uncommon, if not absent altogether, for academics to carry out the power measurements we're talking about. I found out that academics in prestigious universities will not touch such measurements with a ten foot pole. So, the expectations that academics will embrace these studies does not seem realistic. These studies have to be carried out, however, and, like I said, we should give them some more thought here.

Omnibus I've read this post more carefully.  I take it you want to measure the actual resonance over the load.  This would be ambitious.  I do know that this is precisely the measurement that ABB concentrated on and where they could NOT get a resolution as the apprarent energy on the load was in excess of the energy evidenced as heat.  But as both exceeded the supply the anomaly remained.  But it's a very difficult sum you're attempting.  And as heat is an empirical proof of the energy dissipated - it serves its purpose. 

But indeed.  If you're up for this - I think there would be many of us who would like to see that measurement.

Regards,
Rosemary

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Guys - notwithstanding the imminent possibility of being banned for, yet again telling some uncomfortable truths, let me address yet another post from Ashtweth.

Hi WilbyInebriated, Thats the whole point of what we are saying, and your reading about the technology thanks to my efforts for 5 months plus Glens, Harvey's , Aaron's, Jib's and Andrews . Glen is merely trying to warn of his experiences nothing more.
It seems that any material contribution here by me is entirely ignored or discounted or denied.  And more to the point - had we not put up a fight and had Stefan not organised this thread - then no-one - anywhere at all, would be reading about this.  The only reference outside of this forum is in that MOSFET heating circuit thread which denies any benefit.   :o  Go figger. 

If people email or PM Glen, talk about the technology dont worry about the feuds. Glen and Harvey are perfectly willing to help experimenters. They will just get distracted if you mention the RA incident.
Let me deal with each piece of misinformation as it comes up.  If Glen were committed to the technology I would be happy to endorse this advice that you defer to him when and if anyone does replications.  BUT.  Unless the arguments in the Mosfet Heating Circuit are entirely CONTRADICTED then he sees NO MERIT in this technology.  He is either lying off forum or on forum.  One way or another - the two stances simply do not marry.  On record is the unambiguous albeit contradictory statements that - there is no extra energy - that the technology is dangerous - that the Tektronix DPO3054C DPO was inadequate for purposes of measuring - that there is NO WAY KNOWN TO SCIENCE OR MAN to do a measurement - and on and on.   Off forum and through these PM's he seems to be assuring you all that you can defer to him or to his data - and that he'll do what?  Guide you all into the realisation that there is no benefit in this technology?  To me that seems somewhat absurd.  Wouldn't it be more to the point to just refer you to that psuedo scholarly multipurpose treatise in the thread to call a halt to further studies at inception?  I would have thought?  Unless he's now rethinking that nonsense and perhaps a little timid that you'll all prove it for the nonsense that it is.  Maybe he just needs to get back into the argument - so to speak - and try and retain some authority on a subject.  God knows his authority is entirely suspect - as of now.

So as long as every one takes this in  and takes this advice, we can ALL get on with the job.
What job?  Nothing has been done other than a copy of an element which is entirely inappropriate for the task.  Nothing has been progressed - and why should it?  Again.  That thread stands testament to Glen's and Harvey's opinion that there is no merit in the technology.  Change that thread - and perhaps there can be some reason to defer to these self-appointed authorities.  I assure you all that there is more talent and more required critical assessment here than was ever evident at EF.com.  There are NO experts there.

Rose wont discuss all this if you stick to her circuit, some how she is not all bad.
Not sure of the definition of 'BAD' but again it's wrong on both counts.  Firstly I will discuss exactly what's required - with or without Ashtweth's permission.  And indeed, if BAD is because I see a continuing need to contradict Ashtweth and set the record straight then indeed I am BAD.  But it's a matter of perspective and a matter of opinion.  LOL

If Rose mentions the incident , just try and get her talking about the circuit, Rose eventually gets back on track.
LOL.  My purpose here is dedicated to the following.  A detailed account of the trials that are to be reported on an application designed at not less than 100 watts.  A detailed account of the thesis that requires that COP>1 result.  A detailed account of the history of those members who are actively engaged in discrediting the technology and my good name along with it.  ALL of these aspects are critical - lest the truth be buried and people be duped into thinking that there are those who are apparently promoting OU technology when they're actually hiding some nefarious hidden purpose.  :o  God alone knows what.  ::)             

It was impossible for us to do at the other forum, so i hope we can do better over here.
What a shameless parade of unsubstantiated nonsense.  I spent 5 months defending myself against allegations that were entirely unfounded.  And Ashtweth claims that I initiated this?  I had no time to do anything other than defend and defend.  And all the while I had the dubious pleasure of seeing those lies posted on that Mosfet Heating Circuit?  Dear God.  Ashtweth is a masterful propogandist if these statements actually carry any credibility at all.

If Glen does PM you take it under advisement or what ever but do not encourage this behavior it distracted us ALL for months, so i have to speak up now.
The complaint here is Glen's messaging to the members.  It is now thoroughly discouraged and I'm delighted to see this.  I think Ashtweth and Glen will be hard pressed to deny this covert technique that they both indulge.  Ashtweth's contribution is to email Stefan to get me banned or he will have no respect for Stefan.  LOL. 

My results are almost in and will be posted but not in this thread, until this forum is cleaned up.
Panacea's results have been almost in since May of this year?  I rather think they dived head first into Orbo technology and as this is not resulting in the unequivocal proof they were hoping they're now diving back into this technology of ours.   

In any event guys.  Frankly I'd be happy - on whatever basis this technology is advanced.  But I would rather prefer it that you defer to those who are not actively seeking to kill it.  Somehow I suspect they've disqualified themselves - on that very basis.

Kindest regards,
Rosemary
http://www.scribd.com/aetherevarising

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Hi Bill, whether its a mistake or not, it doesn't matter, if people want to be distracted then read about it all on the sky drive account, Glen has done his part, after that we all still have to come back to try and find a person with a good scope who can tune boards and we all can test them. Please dont do that to Glen he certainty does not deserve that, he is under some stress  so lets all try and remember who's side we are on.
Exactly WHAT is being said here?  In the first instance the information should be on the COP>17 Rosemary Ainslie thread where it was first posted.  In the second instance there's a perfectly good scope made available for furthering this technology which Aaron should have forwarded to anyone who requires it.  I know this because I donated it.  Instead of which he has appropriated this scopemeter after just two months of work on the circuit.  And what exactly is being done to Glen?  I believe it is Glen who is frantically trying to get involved in these experiments as he's blown it on the Mosfet Heating circuit where he claims NO ADVANTAGE.  And he is now in a panic lest people discover he was lying.  So he's on a confusing errand to somehow pretend that he's actually all for this technology and he's referring rather belatedly - to the evidence?  Curioser and curioser.   

You should have no trouble with this circuit, if you have a 200mhz scope or better, if some one on OU.com has that, boards could be tuned
Again.  I made that scope available - it cost me plus/minus 3 500 us dollars.  This has now be snaffled and my work buried and until very lately indeed - no further interest in this technology. 

AND tested with a walk through from us and the  biggest independent dissemination of the open work could commence.
I hear the familiar echoes of Harvey's vocabulary here.  Were you on line with him Ashtweth.  Was he advising you on Skype?  The downside of this suggestion is that - while it may be interesting for those members who wish to partake in this - it is absolutely NOT required.  If you wish to do this then start your own thread - ideally on your own forum.  Oh wait.  You've got a thread there.  Pity is that no-one's interested.  Then ask Stefan if you can start your own thread here dedicated to replications.  This thread is NOT about replications.  Nor will I ever again rely on replications in this.  It has shown itself too seductive and the replicators then try and claim sole discovery.  And this will open a can of worms as it relates to threats of independent IP claims. I've learned my lesson.


The advantage of having open source engineers ALL displaying replications from this one scope tuning out let is the Academia wont be able to ignore that, they can ignore one engineer , ask Tom Valone about focus Fusion, no one is policing the academia  i would like a better plan then a thesis and ONE little replication (Rose wants the paper submitted to academia)
Let me disabuse you IMMEDIATELY on this score.  I have NO interest in submitting a paper on this experiment.  And sleep easy here Ashtweth.  The subject is now VERY MUCH with our academia.

A whole bunch of boards and independent results is impossible for them to ignore, i have always said this,
Pity you didn't come up with this suggestion before Ashtweth.  It may have carried some plausible evidence of your actual interest. 

so i hope we can find some people, il donate a board and resistor, there are many here who would also get boards and do tests. Mean time it will be a while till i can tune this board here sadly. If i find an out let you are all welcome to send me your boards to tune.
I suggest you work this one out first.  The skills here are more than sufficient to get the right tuning. 

Rosemary

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Sponsored links:




Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Guys, here's the thing.  You must yourselves decide what to do here.  I know for a fact that there are members who are interested in replication.  I really don't want to be involved.  Start your own thread?  May be a way around it.  I would assure you that you'd do better with than without assistance from the EF.com crowd - but that's your decision.  Certainly you won't go far wrong in duplicating Glen's switching circuit.  And I'll be able to give you details on the minimum requirement for those resistors.  And - with luck - we may be able to persuade Aaron Murakami to make the scope available to anyone within reasonable reach?  Not sure that this will happen without some payment towards shipping.  But I know shipping costs in US are not as onerous as here in SA.

I must say - I'm not exactly on the same page as Omnibus but I would actually prefer him to get hands on here than otherwise.  And he could certainly advise you all on the techniques to evaluate the power which is something that is entirely lacking at EF.com.  Frankly between him and Sm0ky I reckon you'll be able to find new and better and that's what's needed. 

Anyway - whatever you decide - I'll fall in.  But what is not negotiable is that this thread be used for those replications.  That's just not going to happen.  I've been burned here and burned badly.  Not really ready to go through that again.

Kindest regards,
Rosemary

Offline Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Rose:

Not to confuse and muddle your topic any more than it is but.....

Your above post sounds so familiar to the stuff we have been working on dealing with the JT circuit and the Stubblefield coil.  There have been many arguments where the energy is coming from...I should say discussions because that is what they were, but the consensus is that the coil is the energy source and the dipole is created within.

I just wanted to mention this in case folks here have not been following our work on the other topics.

As I have said over 2 years ago....most of these topics here on OU are related in some way or another. (In my humble, uneducated opinion)

Bill

Can't agree more. If real, all this has the same origin. Unfortunately, most of it is a result of measurement errors or cannot be sustained there are no such.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Sponsored links:




Offline Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
@sm0ky2,

The half of the wave collapsing freely as a source of free energy may sound plausible but there's no experimental evidence to prove that's the case.

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Can't agree more. If real, all this has the same origin. Unfortunately, most of it is a result of measurement errors or cannot be sustained there are no such.
Well then Omnibus?  Are you going to test this application or have you decided that it doesn't work?  Not phased either way.  Perhaps, at it's least you could just advise replicators on how to do the data analysis as required.  I think Ashtweth assumes you wanted a board and that he's going to post this.  If you don't need it then let him know.

Rosemary

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Sponsored links:




Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
@sm0ky2,

The half of the wave collapsing freely as a source of free energy may sound plausible but there's no experimental evidence to prove that's the case.
This is an interesting argument.  It means that the heat that is measured to be dissipated does not relate to wattage.  And it means that the notwithstanding the irrefutable measurements on our tests you deny the evidence?  Where's that experimental challenge Omnibus?  It seems that you are still relying on opinion.  I get glimmers of hope that you're reasonable - and then discover that there's actually nothing to hope for. We have another scientist who depends on opinion rather than evidence.  Not exactly science - in my humble opinion.   LOL

Rosemary

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Guys - the logic behind the measurements is simple.  One assumes that a battery does not deliver negative current flow.  One needs to measure the rate of amperage delivered by the battery.  A non-inductive - preferably calibrated shunt - is put in series with the battery terminal - either one - probably best on the negative rail.  Then put the probes across it and and tune the system until it flops into a resonating frequency.  Then fine tune it until the digital display on the scope measures a negative net value.  Then start taking data dumps.  The more the better.  Effectively once the resonance is showing as much below as above, then you're into the right range to get those benefits of a recharging cycle while the resistor is cooking.

The thing is that you need a storage oscilloscope that can manage a fairly high frequency - but it's not in the megahertz range. 

Regards,
Rosemaruy

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Certainly my friend
http://www.panaceauniversity.org/Rosemary%20Ainslie%20COP17%20Heater%20Technology.pdf

Much of Rose's work are there, plus Harvey's, Aaron's and Glens data. Glen really knows how to tune this so collaboration of his notes is essential to get started. Afterward drop me an email ashtweth@gmail.com  ill arrange for shipment. Finally some head way great to see. Will be out of the office doing a weather engineering experiment be back first thing in the morning

Omnibus/Bill  thank you for taking a look

Ash

@ASH
Modified the word 'rants' to 'work' as it's more appropriate.  If you need to see a sample of 'ranting' then I can refer you to your emails.
EDITED.


Thanks a lot for the material. Unfortunately, it's a mess and is nowhere near what one would expect from an academic account (probably because it's more of a diary of the experiments and a compilation of opinions from forums). Worse even, my expectations that there are problems in the very basis of measurement were exceeded. Case in point:

Quote
If you'll recall, I pushed to get probes that are specifically made for current but Rosemary stopped that cold by stating we had imposed on the good graces of our suppliers much too much already. I am convinced that the wire inductance is a large factor in why our battery voltage shows transitions from 24 volts down to 7 volts in the data dumps. I just don't think the batteries themselves are loading that far, it has to be a voltage drop across the wire impedance.

Now, that's the opposite of what should've been done to begin with. Further, the voltage probes are passive, I presume because I couldn't find reference. Right there, the lack of appropriate probes, makes everything presented with regard to experiments fall into question. However, even if the probes were perfect there are so many other sources of error that one shouldn't even begin counting them -- all kinds of parasitic capacitances, parasitic inductances etc. etc. And, most importantly, the data processing. Data processing is an issue in itself which should be studied very seriously.

So, for now, I'd suggest that we postpone the mailing of the device for study until more clarity is achieved regarding the above issues. I have studied much simpler systems, finally even a simple RC filter, and have found that the measurement intricacies are overwhelming. For that reason I am postponing the publishing of five experimental papers that came out from the studies this Summer. The only text which I consider conclusive so far is the theoretical study whereby I found an energy disbalance inherent in the electric phenomena which hasn't been known until now. Even that disbalance, simple as it may seem to be tackled experimentally, turned out to be quite an experimental challenge (I don't have the text right now but you may take a look in the Steorn thread). So, we're facing a firmly established discrepancy, an energy disbalance, seemingly simple to study through measurements, and yet when actually undertaking the measurements all kinds of problems of the type I mentioned above start to show their ugly head. I told you, fellow academics will not touch with a ten foot pole power balance experiments even in the simplest of cases because of the problems such as the ones I mentioned above. Such experiments, like I said, have to be done and probably we should think of doing something pretty simple first. How about doing measurements on the RC circuit I mentioned. I will try to get an active voltage probe and with the Hall effect current probe and the scope I have I'll do some more study this Fall (not in September, though, because I have to travel to Europe). You may want to upgrade your probes and do some measurements with your fine scope. Then we can compare notes and see what we can do about sorting out the measurement and the data processing problems. Does it sound acceptable?

Offline Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
This is an interesting argument.  It means that the heat that is measured to be dissipated does not relate to wattage.  And it means that the notwithstanding the irrefutable measurements on our tests you deny the evidence?  Where's that experimental challenge Omnibus?  It seems that you are still relying on opinion.  I get glimmers of hope that you're reasonable - and then discover that there's actually nothing to hope for. We have another scientist who depends on opinion rather than evidence.  Not exactly science - in my humble opinion.   LOL

Rosemary

The experimental evidence you're referring to is not irrefutable.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Guys - the logic behind the measurements is simple.  One assumes that a battery does not deliver negative current flow.  One needs to measure the rate of amperage delivered by the battery.  A non-inductive - preferably calibrated shunt - is put in series with the battery terminal - either one - probably best on the negative rail.  Then put the probes across it and and tune the system until it flops into a resonating frequency.  Then fine tune it until the digital display on the scope measures a negative net value.  Then start taking data dumps.  The more the better.  Effectively once the resonance is showing as much below as above, then you're into the right range to get those benefits of a recharging cycle while the resistor is cooking.

The thing is that you need a storage oscilloscope that can manage a fairly high frequency - but it's not in the megahertz range. 

Regards,
Rosemaruy

This would be a self-sustaining device right there. Why don't you substitute the battery with a capacitor and observe how it's being charged? You don't need sophisticated scopes and equipment to demonstrate that.

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
The experimental evidence you're referring to is not irrefutable.

LOL Omnibus.  Then refute it. 

regards,
Rosemary

Offline Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
LOL Omnibus.  Then refute it. 

regards,
Rosemary

I did. Read my previous post. The currents and voltages measured are compromised by parasitic capacitances and inductances. You didn't even bother to use a current probe. The voltage probes are passive with low input impedance. Data processing is an issue in itself, apart from the problems with the measurement.

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
This would be a self-sustaining device right there. Why don't you substitute the battery with a capacitor and observe how it's being charged? You don't need sophisticated scopes and equipment to demonstrate that.
Why?  We're trying to prove that the battery is not discharging.  Why should I use a capacitor?  The whole of this test is simply to prove that as much energy is delivered as is returned.  It's easiest proof is at the wattage delivered.  And measurements here are indeed irrefutable.

 

OneLink