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: 14
  • *Total: 16

Author Topic: Rosemary Ainslie COP>17 Circuit / A First Application on a Hot Water Cylinder  (Read 266554 times)

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: The Commedy Channel
« Reply #480 on: August 23, 2010, 10:00:03 PM »
Always great entertainment posted here! Heheheheh! ;D
Indeed.  Thanks cat.  I just looked through them all.  Nice laugh

Kindest regards,
Rosie

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: The Commedy Channel
« Reply #480 on: August 23, 2010, 10:00:03 PM »

Offline WilbyInebriated

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3143
.
« Last Edit: August 23, 2010, 11:15:05 PM by WilbyInebriated »

Offline gmeast

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 481
I've now been able to give this post of yours more attention Greg. The thing is this.  There is clear evidence of 'over unity' in as much as the circuit shows that more energy is being dissipated at a load than is being delivered by the supply source - in this case using a battery.

But there are downsides.  The most energy we could get on the resistor in any reliable way was between 25 to 30 watts.  And even at this level we stress the MOSFET with voltage spikes that it can barely tolerate.  We're trying different variations of the transistor - by using and IGBT but have had difficulty sourcing this.  We've now been informed that it's delivered and hopefully it'll be to hand before Wednesday.
.....................................................................
Kindest regards,
Rosemary

Hi Rosemary,

Thanks for the comprehensive response/update.  This experiment is about as practical as they come from the standpoint of being within the reach of almost every open-source researcher navigating these forums.

Whether it is 1Watt or 1MegaWatt, COP>1 is just that!  I had been in the process of relocating because of the economy in my native state so I have not been set up to experiment.  That may have changed for me. 

Other than the sophisticated analytical equipment required to 'PROVE' the merits to the arrogant academics, only an 'adequate scope' should be required to tune the switch to the 'sweet spot'.  This equipment is already owned by most researchers.  As a consequence, we should be able to have literally hundreds of 20Watt to 30Watt replications running reliably, world-wide and in short order.  All we would need in order to accomplish this is for EVERYONE to be operating EXACTLY the SAME circuit using EXACTLY the SAME components ... and WITHOUT any little personal modifications or 'inspired' changes to ANY of the circuit.  Such little changes just tend to muddy things up and do the overall effort a gross injustice.

If we can say "...oh lookie here, today I charge this battery with my little 2 Watt solar panel with 10 Watt-Hrs of power and tonight I'll keep my hut a little warmer with 200 Watt-Hrs of heat from my little electric floor heater ... "

Now if enough people did this, what do you think it would say to the detractors.

No, I don't live in a hut ... but you get my point.  Do we need a standardized 'kit' of your gizmo that definitely works?  That would seem to be workable.

Well, there it is.  Just a thought (or two),

Greg

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Sponsored links:




Offline gmeast

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 481
Hi Greg /ALL

Some one like Omnibus with the needed scope, (a person who does not have 13 post behind him) could do well, we offer to send him a board as an independent and tune other boards for others, just a reminder that those who discuss the technology only and want to take us upon this offer will get results sooner, we are here to help tuning and Glen has the best experience so far. Mean time i am still trying to source a 200hmz scope to tune boards for others to test, its a very cheap circuit.

Ash

Hi Ash,

not sure what's meant by "(a person who does not have 13 post behind him)" but anyhow, is there a board layout of Rosemary's circuit available?  Has the precise design of the resistive heater/inductor been pinned down (diameter, wire size, turns, etc)?  Also, there are several 'grades' of 555 timers available as well as the other parts.  I know the circuit is simple, but I have seen (and so have you) what's supposed to be identical replications of other devices wherein one works and the other does not.  Then someone finds (for example) that if they use a Fairchild part instead of a Texas Instruments part, it suddenly works.

I'm just trying to identify an inarguable methodology to further Rosemary's cause (in fact everyone's cause).


Offline Hope

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 701
How did Tesla tune his circuits,  I know he made a focusing device that could detect movement very well.  Can this device maybe be made adjustable so we can detect the coils oscillations without detuning them? Dr T didn't have a scope that is for certain.   Can anyone think of a way to place ANY material (gas,water,mercury,light) in proximity to the circuit and sense some change when at resonance?  Also an electric cavity is one cause by two separate but potentially different pulses meeting the materials changed to ions within the plasma/arc/spark the vacuum create at the moment closes at least light speed and of course the partials these lines of force create heat and I believe other radiant energy.  Many cavities exist in nature and also seem to each react to there exposure to radiant energy differently.  I will be looking forward to my 10 lb toroidal build (it is a whopper),  your circuit and the gangs jewel thief are sure efficient and when we R&D new products we may find by building on these circuits fundamentals we shall see further down the road toward higher percentages of  < COP until we either stumble upon causing > COP or just line upon line trial and error solves radiant collection and conversion.  But whatever is the solution the ultimate formula is likely to be X amount of mind power=solution so the more we all collaborate the quicker we can get on to using radiant energy.   This may just be the largest group mind ever together working on solution,  who is the 100th monkey? If it is one of us lucky ones here we will be able to give man another piece of harmony with this world and their lives.  This would make a difference, so we are moving toward something monumental and WE all are part of this a can smile when we see peoples lives better for it.   Also a link for a software scope a nice member sent me http://www.sillanumsoft.org/download.htm   (I understand it is not normally as sensitive as a real 500MHz Quad Scope )...     but coupled with a detector circuit it may be a great tool.   

Another question about high frequency,  doesn't the earth make do with 11.8 Hz (was 7.8 in 1992)  can't we use these baselines as known working models instead of new R&D projects of different frequencies?

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Sponsored links:




Offline Hope

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 701
I got a disconnect   so I must continue with a new reply.   I believe the larger the physical size of the cavity created and the quicker the collapse the more radiant energy will get disturbed and will exhibit imbalance in the form of many types of radiant energy seeking harmony again with its surrounding.   So when we collapse a coil, spark,.... whatever  we are starting the generator and driving all the matter into a void.  Since different radiant energy travels through different materials at different rates can we not impede (by making our LOAD easier to go through than the normal replenishment line used by nature and make the "must balance LAW"  work in our favor?  I certainly hope this is understandable to you good people,   I am not so good at communication as is needed.  Therefore if we use smaller sparks then we will have to use higher frequency: than if we make bigger sparks in vacuums (faster decay).  I am for the low frequency thinking.   And figuring out how to make other radiant energy partials  decay (collapse)
« Last Edit: August 24, 2010, 05:23:34 AM by Hope »

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
I got a disconnect   so I must continue with a new reply.   I believe the larger the physical size of the cavity created and the quicker the collapse the more radiant energy will get disturbed and will exhibit imbalance in the form of many types of radiant energy seeking harmony again with its surrounding.   So when we collapse a coil, spark,.... whatever  we are starting the generator and driving all the matter into a void.  Since different radiant energy travels through different materials at different rates can we not impede (by making our LOAD easier to go through than the normal replenishment line used by nature and make the "must balance LAW"  work in our favor?  I certainly hope this is understandable to you good people,   I am not so good at communication as is needed.  Therefore if we use smaller sparks then we will have to use higher frequency: than if we make bigger sparks in vacuums (faster decay).  I am for the low frequency thinking.   And figuring out how to make other radiant energy partials  decay (collapse)

Dear Hope,  ;D

I can't say that I understood all that you've written, but may I say that how much I enjoy your post and how much I applaud your sentiments.  You have a unique turn of phrase. 

I think you're pointing to the advantage in those collapsing fields.  I'm sure you're right about this being of benefit even at a lower frequency.  And it also seems that you're right about Tesla.  I think it was either Omnibus or Sm0ky who pointed out that he had been experimenting with this. But, like you, I have no idea what instruments were available for measurement. 

Delighted to have you with us Hope.
Kindest regards,
Rosemary

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Sponsored links:




Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Hi Ash,

not sure what's meant by "(a person who does not have 13 post behind him)" but anyhow, is there a board layout of Rosemary's circuit available?  Has the precise design of the resistive heater/inductor been pinned down (diameter, wire size, turns, etc)?  Also, there are several 'grades' of 555 timers available as well as the other parts.  I know the circuit is simple, but I have seen (and so have you) what's supposed to be identical replications of other devices wherein one works and the other does not.  Then someone finds (for example) that if they use a Fairchild part instead of a Texas Instruments part, it suddenly works.

I'm just trying to identify an inarguable methodology to further Rosemary's cause (in fact everyone's cause).

Hello again Greg,

I wonder if I can impose on you to address Ash with your questions in his own thread that I created.  I'm afraid it's not very readable - but I'm sure he'd be happy to answer you on this.

Meanwhile let me see if I can address this question.  I know that a board was indeed put together - very kindly - by a member of the EF.com team.  But I'm not sure that they're still available.  Your idea of getting multiple 'builds' and 'replicas' is good one.  Unfortunately this simply doesn't seem to satisfy either the curiosity or the individuality of our experimentalists.  The eternal quest is to 'add' - and frankly, I'm not sure that isn't a good thing.  Each variation results in something new to be considered or eliminated.  The circuit that is tested here is simple and relies on a standard 555 switch - driving a MOSFET.

I'm still not sure if you realise this.  We're trying to take this circuit to a full on 'application' and this is being done on a university campus with hands on contributions from some weighty experts.  They would not be doing this if they did not respect the results that were evident in our 'proof of concept' which, effectively, means that they're prepared - at least - to consider it's viability and indeed it's effectiveness.  This thread will be dedicated to full record of those test results.  My personal hope is that this will generate some more data that other institutions will be hard pressed to ignore.  It has been a question that long needed to get to their table.  And I am entirely satisfied that this is now there.

The danger with 'replications' is that it is technically and - in truth - impossible to duplicate every aspect of a test in any replication.  Even with a standardised board.  My experience here is that the 'replicator' finds a 'variation' however slight - and then claims the experiment for himself.  This would not matter - but that it then 'endagers' the status of the 'ownership' of the entire technology.  I think we're all committed to keeping this Open Source.  The minute one starts associating developments with 'copyright' and 'rights to data' and challenging the facts that are actually put in the public domain - then one is also flirting with prospects of 'IP OWNERSHIP'.  And that is absolutely NOT in the public interest.  And I'm satisfied that all of us need to resist that.

The other truth is that it is a really desirable technology.  Even if it is still very much in its infancy.  And there are those who already are putting their claims to it and those that will do so.  It would be as well, therefore, to remember that it was Open Source who first explored these principles and a tribute to the multi talented contributors here and on all Free Energy forums - that this technology was both explored and exposed.  Rightfully, therefore, no-one should EVER assume the rights to claim this technology.

I do hope that helps.
Kindest regards,
Rosemary


Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
OPEN LETTER TO ASHTWETH

May I remind you that EF.Com have a dedicated thread to the development of a MOSFET HEATING CIRCUIT.  Please use it.  This thread has NOTHING to do with replications. 

I have also started a thread for you where you are free to 'bash' me or the technology or anything you want.  I will not EDIT that thread. 

I require that you do NOT POST on this thread.  Your opinion of me has been paraded both on and off forum and there are many contributors here who have requested that I do not allow your posts.

Rosemary

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline gmeast

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 481
Hello again Greg,

I wonder if I can impose on you to address Ash with your questions in his own thread that I created.  I'm afraid it's not very readable - but I'm sure he'd be happy to answer you on this.

Meanwhile let me see if I can address this question.  I know that a board was indeed put together - very kindly - by a member of the EF.com team.  But I'm not sure that they're still available.  Your idea of getting multiple 'builds' and 'replicas' is good one.  Unfortunately this simply doesn't seem to satisfy either the curiosity or the individuality of our experimentalists.  The eternal quest is to 'add' - and frankly, I'm not sure that isn't a good thing.  Each variation results in something new to be considered or eliminated.  The circuit that is tested here is simple and relies on a standard 555 switch - driving a MOSFET.

I'm still not sure if you realise this.  We're trying to take this circuit to a full on 'application' and this is being done on a university campus with hands on contributions from some weighty experts.  They would not be doing this if they did not respect the results that were evident in our 'proof of concept' which, effectively, means that they're prepared - at least - to consider it's viability and indeed it's effectiveness.  This thread will be dedicated to full record of those test results.  My personal hope is that this will generate some more data that other institutions will be hard pressed to ignore.  It has been a question that long needed to get to their table.  And I am entirely satisfied that this is now there.

The danger with 'replications' is that it is technically and - in truth - impossible to duplicate every aspect of a test in any replication.  Even with a standardised board.  My experience here is that the 'replicator' finds a 'variation' however slight - and then claims the experiment for himself.  This would not matter - but that it then 'endagers' the status of the 'ownership' of the entire technology.  I think we're all committed to keeping this Open Source.  The minute one starts associating developments with 'copyright' and 'rights to data' and challenging the facts that are actually put in the public domain - then one is also flirting with prospects of 'IP OWNERSHIP'.  And that is absolutely NOT in the public interest.  And I'm satisfied that all of us need to resist that.

The other truth is that it is a really desirable technology.  Even if it is still very much in its infancy.  And there are those who already are putting their claims to it and those that will do so.  It would be as well, therefore, to remember that it was Open Source who first explored these principles and a tribute to the multi talented contributors here and on all Free Energy forums - that this technology was both explored and exposed.  Rightfully, therefore, no-one should EVER assume the rights to claim this technology.

I do hope that helps.
Kindest regards,
Rosemary

Well OH SHIT!

Fucking politics.  This makes it very god damned hard to be interested in anything,.  Piss on this crap ... ALL OF IT!!!

SO LONG ... GOOD LUCK EVERYONE.  THIS ALL SUCKS THE BIG ONE.

I'M DONE WITH THIS SHIT!!

THIS DOES NOT DESERVE MY ATTENTION NOR MY VALUABLE TIME !!!!!!!!!!!!!

Offline Pirate88179

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8366
Ash:

Open source does not include bashing, which evidently you seem pretty good at doing.  Please read the Overunitydotcom terms of service before posting again.  If you Google your name, all that appears is material where you are bashing one person or another.  Try it sometime.  Perhaps you will learn from it....perhaps not.

Thank you,

Bill

PS  I believe you have been warned 3 times now about posting here again.  You were instructed to post at the other topic made especially for you.  So, please do not act surprised when your post is removed from here.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline Pirate88179

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8366
Ash:

First, please learn to spell and type correctly so folks can understand you.  Second, did you Google your name?  Did you see what comes up?  Is that not bashing?

I have been correct 3 times not wrong as you are trying to pretend.  You telling me to wake up is like like a drunk telling a sober person to quit drinking.  Please do try to get over yourself.  Probably not possible but do give it an effort for the benefit of the rest of the serious researchers here.

Thank you,

Bill

PS  Here is the topic area where you will be allowed to post.  It was created just for you and your crazy rants and insults and bashing:

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=9645.0

Please try to remember to use it.  Write yourself a note so you don't forget.

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
cheers all.  I'm out of this until I get some kind advice, ruling or whatever happens when Steve gets back.  What is clear to me is that this thread is intended to be hijacked one way or another and I cannot do anything to prevent this.

kindest regards,
Rosemary
« Last Edit: August 24, 2010, 01:26:22 PM by Rosemary Ainslie »

Offline Pirate88179

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8366
Bill Greg was given the information and can testify to no bashing.
Glen has validated you were wrong about his PM.

This information that was censored was related to the circuit.
You sure have a way of making a fool out of your self.
I said i was done with you mate, and its for a very good reason.

Ashtweth

Did you read Glen's pm to me?  I don't think so.  It was, after all, a pm.  I do not lie and I do not like your suggestion that this is what I am doing.  I read his pm.  This prompted me to demand that he pm me no more.

So, with you having not read his pm, how is he vindicated?  I said he was bashing Rose and he was.  Plain and simple.

Glen has hung himself with this one, as have you.

Good night sir.  (and I use the term loosely)

Bill

Offline Pirate88179

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8366
Sorry Bill

6 people plus the energetic forum Admin can testify to what your saying is WRONG
Greg can testify that only open source info was censored.
You my friend, can stay the king of OU.com.Your not to be trusted. Enjoy Mate

Go ahead and report results of what ever in this thread, but when people request information to the related circuit, and they get answered  it has a place to be known, also I dont See Bill's name on the paper, i see 5 people's name Including Glen's and mine who have enough experience and trustworthiness in this genre to KNOW,. Until some one has the same thing, ask your self what have you contributed.? No bashing on Glen and open source info is to be known, thats why we stepped in. Simple as that.

Carry on.
Ash

So, 6 people, the admin of EF and you can all testify to what was in the pm Glen sent to me that no one but me has read?  This is a really cool trick you have going there.  Forget free energy, you guys are mind readers and sooth sayers now I guess.

I have a copy of that pm.  I have not posted it as of yet, but keep it up and I will and you, Glen, and all your other "witnesses" will not be too happy about that.  Better check with Glen so he can tell you what he really pm'd to me first.

I said it was bashing, and I stand by that.  Why don't you get another 50 witnesses who also have not read my pm to help you? 

So now this is the 3rd time you have told me your name is on a paper.  I have read your Google files and I don't care how many "papers" your name is on.  From what I see, you have contributed nothing but disinformation and bashing to the FE community.  Maybe you should sue Google for publishing the truth about you?  Let me know how that works out for you.

Bill

 

OneLink