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: 897324
  • *Total Topics: 15812
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 1
  • *Guests: 11
  • *Total: 12

Author Topic: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011  (Read 631440 times)

Offline Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #120 on: March 18, 2011, 09:11:16 AM »
@omnibus
I actually know someone who did replicate and earlier circuit with spice and built it. The circuit perfromed exactly as the spice simulation suggested...but not as claimed. This does not apply to the current experiment..but that spice is sure good.
Mark

Can you post the PSpice files of that simulation? I'll be waiting for @poyn99's simulation of the new schematic too. All these claims have to come to an end so that we can move to something more productive, if all turn out negative.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline markdansie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1471
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #121 on: March 18, 2011, 09:26:04 AM »
@Omnibus
Unfortunately I do not own the data but will see if I can get permission to send it privately.
@Rosemary
I know of a maths guru who is familiar with your work. He with a friend built one of your experiments sometime ago and know what you are trying to achieve. I can put you in direct contact with them if you like.
My email is markdansie@bigpond.com
Kind Regards

Offline poynt99

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 3585
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #122 on: March 18, 2011, 01:21:13 PM »
and is this the type of probe being used?

No. It was simply to make a comment on the limited vertical res of oscilloscopes, and how some folks attempt to work around that limitation. In this case, for small currents.

.99

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #122 on: March 18, 2011, 01:21:13 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline neptune

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1127
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #123 on: March 18, 2011, 04:59:45 PM »
Hi Rosemary , your eyesight sounds no better than mine . I have only one eye that works , and last week while mending a puncture in my bike , I managed to Glue it shut! All sorted now . There was a a couple of things you said in your last reply that I did not understand . You said "there is a whole lot of iron on that resistor ." I take it you mean the load resistor , but I thought it was nickle chromium wire on a glass or ceramic core . Are you now saying it has an iron core? Also , not sure what you meant by "try to keep a threaded rod of sorts " Please tell me if and when you have time . Looking forward to the video on Monday , or whenever .
           Just a small point from the demo report on your blog .At the lowest driver frequency , you talk about the gate being Negative for 2.7 minutes . If we assume a low duty cycle of , say ,10% on , that means the actual switching frequency is one cycle every2.97 minutes .I know that you said that the effect is not frequency dependent but , boy , is that slow!

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #124 on: March 18, 2011, 06:56:29 PM »
Hi Rosemary , your eyesight sounds no better than mine . I have only one eye that works , and last week while mending a puncture in my bike , I managed to Glue it shut! All sorted now . There was a a couple of things you said in your last reply that I did not understand . You said "there is a whole lot of iron on that resistor ." I take it you mean the load resistor , but I thought it was nickle chromium wire on a glass or ceramic core . Are you now saying it has an iron core? Also , not sure what you meant by "try to keep a threaded rod of sorts " Please tell me if and when you have time . Looking forward to the video on Monday , or whenever .
           Just a small point from the demo report on your blog .At the lowest driver frequency , you talk about the gate being Negative for 2.7 minutes . If we assume a low duty cycle of , say ,10% on , that means the actual switching frequency is one cycle every2.97 minutes .I know that you said that the effect is not frequency dependent but , boy , is that slow!

Hi Neptune.  We have a standard immersion heater type element.  I'll try and get a photo of this from my early shots.  The wire is threaded inside the rod. 

Regarding the frequency.  We have some variation when we go into 'heavy duty mode' with the frequency.  But that zero discharge number from the batteries - that is as steady as a rock at just about any and every frequency.  We took it to its slowest possible to test this.  And yes - it oscillates without any evident variation for 3 minutes.  I agree.  It's wierd. 

Kindest
Rosemary

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #124 on: March 18, 2011, 06:56:29 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline happyfunball

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 405
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #125 on: March 18, 2011, 08:05:37 PM »
I don't get why this hasn't simply been continuously looped as proof positive of it's validity if there is so much supposedly going back to the batteries

Offline neptune

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1127
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #126 on: March 18, 2011, 09:16:51 PM »
Hi Rosemary , and thanks for the reply and the picture . Would you believe I had actually seen that picture before and forgotten about it ! I think they call it "having a senior moment. " @happyfunball . By feeding power back to the battery , is it not therefore looped already ?

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #126 on: March 18, 2011, 09:16:51 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline happyfunball

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 405
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #127 on: March 18, 2011, 10:05:32 PM »
@happyfunball . By feeding power back to the battery , is it not therefore looped already ?

Then why does it not run continuously?

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #128 on: March 19, 2011, 06:03:54 AM »
Every single one of these inventions to date have produced absolutely nothing publicly. Zero, nada. They're always coming to market 'very soon' and never heard of again. Every single one of them.... None of them powering anything in the real world as far as I know. Now we have a 'cold fusion' power plant supposedly being built. Don't hold your breath. Gets tiring after a while. The only benefit I have seen in this quest is some interesting research revolving around resonance (Joule Ringer) which seem to have real world applications, although I've yet to see it being used practically by anyone. What happened to Bedini's 'ferris wheel?' Looked impressive, what is it powering? Anything, anywhere?

Happy

happyfunball.  Another gross misnomer.  LOL Your posts read like the prophets of doom. I've just trailed through a page of them.  Your denial of OU is somewhat brutal.  They're about as inspirational as as a tall glass of tepid tap water.   And you're wrong of course.   Measurements are given all over the place.  It's just when the stack up to contradict what you clearly require - then they're ignored - or considered fallacious.

Just to fill you in here I'll say this again.  When BP (SA)  evaluated these results - some decade ago - they insisted that it would ONLY be proved on batteries.  I was involved in a series of the most boring tests that I have ever been involved with.  All the more arduous as I am - absolutely not - an experimentalist.  I won't here go into the protocols.  But it required close testing of controls against the experiment and run concurrently.    The timing of those batteries was determined like this.  When either one of those supply banks depeleted their PD from 24 v's to 20 volts or when each battery depeleted from 12 to 10  - then the tests were terminated.  That constituted the 'test period'.  What was evidenced is that the controls were entirely 'flat' when the test had barely lost a fraction of a volt.  On the strength of these results PB (SA) allowed us to use their names as accreditors of that early test.  Those early tests are on record as showing a COP>17.  In effect we proved that the test batteries outlasted its watt hour rating against the control.

Now.  When it came to giving a published report on those definitive tests - the PUBLISHER refused to allow ANY REFERENCE TO THE CONTROL.  The publication was a technical journal.  The editor was advised by an electrical engineering academic.  They determined - regardless of my protests - that any reference to battery duration was entirely IRRELEVANT to the argument.  Therefore was I not allowed to reference batteries.  I ASSURE YOU - that as often as you guys state that the battery needs to be tested to it's full duration - just as often will that evidence be ignored.   Batteries vary - one from another.  Some batteries retain their charge and then collapse in moments - to nothing.  Others distribute their charge more gradually.  Others require small currents to match their ratings.  Others don't.  The electrolytes vary - one from another.  So.  If I was to test one then - for conclusive results - I'd need to test them all.

Then.  We have hooked up as many as 7 of those very large batteries in one single test -  apparently discharging nothing.  Now.  The artefact matters.  When this experiment finally gets to our academies, then equivalent and nonequivalent capacities will need to be tested.  In these tests we only used that same bank.  And we could measure absolutely zero loss over a 5 month period.  Exactly how long would it be required to run those tests?  Would it take 2 years to prove it?  10? 6 months?  What?  What exactly would satisfy you?  And how then does one run a control?  Must we SHOW that under normal operating conditions a battery will discharge?  I would have thought that that much could be relied on.  And even then.  I am ready to put money on it that while the most of you engineers require it - our learneds will, to a man, insist that the battery duration is irrelevant.    I wonder if I can state this more plainly.  They're right.  The minute you start evaluating the battery performance - then you are trying to resolve a result in line with specific commodity with a market supply that has varieties that are probably counted in their thousands if not their hundreds of thousands.  That's an awful lot of testing. 

What is intersting is this.  We have an energy returned to the supply that is far greater than the energy delivered from that supply.  Now.  Here's the thing.  If, as is widely assumed by mainstream - that energy is lost to a battery when it discharges current flow - then - by the same token one would expect the energy to be increased in line with a recharge cycle.  In point of fact the batteries voltages varied under test conditions.  The stronger the current discharge the quicker the decline.  But OF INTEREST - is that immediately thereafter it systematically climbs - within minutes - to it's previous high.  Not higher.  Perhaps there are those subsequent tests that may take it higher.  In previous tests we have certainly found a climb to a higher 'start condition'.  But in these tests we did not.  It never exceeded its 'kick off' voltage level. 

I would modestly propose  therefore, that there is a fixed amount of energy that is available from that potential difference - and that no new material - electrons or whatever classical assumption requires - has been introduced to the system.  That's interesting.  That implies that this may be a closed system. It also implies a whole lot of other things.  But for now - just consider that.  That is, if you are not 'happily' out to throw more of that tepid tap water on this research.

Rosemary

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #128 on: March 19, 2011, 06:03:54 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #129 on: March 19, 2011, 06:43:49 AM »
And Happy - Guys, all,

It is a complete waste of time testing those small wattage values as this does not show depletion on that large stack of batteries.  It may make sense to test those higher wattages.  But here there's a problem.  There is clear evidence that the system is trying to output more energy than is determined by the setting at the gate.  It has OFTEN defaulted that the gate setting seems to slip higher and - in moments - we're in a crisis.  I have - in the past - set fire to sundry components.  Therefore to test this to duration would take time.  Whole days and nights of it.  And someone would need to be there to monitor that accidental 'rise' in output which - most assuredly - would be hazardous.  There simply was not the personnel available on this kind of test basis.  It was simply a 'no go' criteria for testing. 

And I keep saying this.  Feel free to do your own tests.  We've made a complete disclosure of the components required.  I may be giving some small demonstrations to experts as I've got the artefact with me.  But, otherwise, I am most certainly giving experiments a rest for now.  I've been at it for a year and a bit - AGAIN.  And, just to remind you, I really have no interest in experiment.  I am interested only in where these results point.  I just wish there were others who would share that interest.  It's where these tests are pointing that is actually of far greater interst.  On the face of it - and in terms of the measurements applied - all of which conform to classical protocols - the evidence is that there is a second energy supply source on our circuits.  Isn't that the actual reach of OU research?  Aren't we all looking for this energy?  So.  Surely this is a good thing? 

Rosemary

Offline alexandre

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #130 on: March 19, 2011, 04:01:37 PM »
Dear Rosemary,

I am an EE student from Brazil and I am following your last experiments. Thank you for your hard work and openess.

In answer to your last post, I would say yes, what I am seeing here is definitely a good thing. And that is people challenging boundaries.

I have also seen here good suggestions to enhance the experiment, to shed more light into what´s happening. With all respect, in my view the experiment is VERY important, it´s what is tangible for me. And I am very interested in the results.

Technically speaking now, if you allow me, I think these suggestions were good and I see no reason not to try them (experiment): much lower AH batteries, many parallel circuits, low pass filtering before DVM as a DC average measurement.

I think an important issue that has been pointed, is that you are mesuring voltage across the current sensing resistor, and considering it pure R, when in reality that element is RL.

With all respect, these suggestions can do no harm to our understanding of what´s happening, quite the contrary in my opinion.

Thank you again and god bless,
Alexandre

(Removed the suggestion about bypass capacitors, because it could make the circuit more stable, which is not desirable? And, could it be that the HF going through the lead-acid batteries is required for COP>1? In any case, I´m not satisfied and that is the reason for my posting, I hope it is constructive.)
« Last Edit: March 19, 2011, 05:51:39 PM by alexandre »

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #130 on: March 19, 2011, 04:01:37 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline alexandre

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #131 on: March 19, 2011, 04:27:47 PM »
Dear Rosemary,
I would like to add this:
I really want this effect to be real extra energy, and I do hope that you succeed in all of this!
God bless  :)
Alexandre

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #132 on: March 19, 2011, 06:13:47 PM »
This is good overview reading for starters:

http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/292991-overview

It will put everything in perspective.

cheers
chrisC

Hello ChrisC.  If I am delusional I share that delusion with more than 86 others related to the witness or involvement of previous tests and to more than 30 who have been witness to or involved in these latest tests.  I also share that delusion with those at the demonstration.  And the most remarkable of all is that our video camera and our oscilloscopes are equally delusional.  Clearly this is delusion on a remarkable scale.  Unless, of course, all of us - including the camera and those DSO's - are somehow infected with a kind of contagious delusion.  I believe that is widely assumed to be the explanation for that magical Indian Rope Trick.  But our particular delusion trumps that.  They've never managed to film that trick in operation.  We have.

There is, of course, another kind of delusion.  That's when a certain kind of pathology kicks in and refuses to evaluate the evidence to hand.  That's usually associated with a kind of bigotry and closed mindedness that has absolutely nothing whatsovever to do with scientific research and considerably less with the truth.   It's a Medieval throwback that still, unfortunately, has some genetic links through to those descendants even in our own times.  It's where evolution has not so much moved forward but, in fact - devolved.  Unfortunately, one can cure most delusions.  But this particular state is entirely incurable because those poor afflicted are not aware of their afflication.  More's the pity.  What they need is some reasonable access to fair mindedness, an effective intelligence quotient and at least some rudimentary grasp of logic.  But it's denied them - on just about every level.  So.  It's probably always out of reach. 

Rosemary

edited spelling
« Last Edit: March 19, 2011, 06:37:35 PM by Rosemary Ainslie »

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #133 on: March 19, 2011, 06:24:49 PM »
Thanks for your suggestions alexandre.  Your English is remarkably good. 

We have already been obliged to return the Tektronix DSO and we're to return the LeCroy in the near future.  I cannot therefore do any more tests.  All we will be able to do from here onwards is to put up the occasional demonstration for experts - as required.    But there's nothing to stop anyone else from doing this or any variation as required. 

Kind regards,
Rosemary

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #134 on: March 19, 2011, 06:40:19 PM »
I tip my hat off to you for your tenacity in your 'research' but from what I've read so far, most 'inventors' want to believe what they think they have found that no one else have found so far. I wished it was true but the reality is often misguided knowledge coupled with inaccurate measurements. That said, I do wish you well and maybe you really have discovered something worth pursuing.

I've gone to some considerable lengths to assure you all that THERE IS NOTHING NEW in what we're showing.  What we're doing is showing you an aspect of something really well known and yet its signficance has been entirely overlooked.  How often do I need to say this.  It's all really well known stuff.

Rosemary

 

OneLink