Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011

[poynt99]

From Rose:

Guys - please note.  There is absolutely NO WAY that one can do any power analysis on any circuit that has a waveform that is more complex than a direct current.  Certainly it cannot be applied to the waveforms we're generating here.  I do hope you realise this.  And in as much as no-one has challenged all this nonsense I'm concerned that perhaps the most of you do not know this.  If you doubt it - then look it up.

Where do we "look it up"?

WTF?  Poynt is doing the exact same set of measurements at the exact same points in the exact same circuit you have been doing ever since day 1.  And showing the exact same results.  His use of averaging (being done AFTER the real-time point by point multiplying) is exactly the same as your own use of averaging: MEAN AFTER MULTIPLY. 

That full set of measurement done the same exact way you have always done it serves only to show that the sim agrees rather precisely with your bench testing when done in exactly the same way.

Then, after doing the work to replicate your circuit, your tests and your results almost to the millivolt, showing the validity of the simulation rather convincingly, Poynt goes on to move the scope probes and the shunt to the proper locations to allow for a true direct unpolluted measure of the battery voltage and the battery current.

He continues to use the same real-time point-by-point sample multiplying technique just as you always have done and then takes the mean of the resulting power trace, just as you have always done.  The results clearly show a large net drain from the battery and a very low efficiency of power delivery to the heating element through the circuitry. 

HE CAREFULLY POINTS OUT AND AS TESLASET HAS CLEARLY VERIFIED (AND I VERIFY AS WELL) THAT THE PSPICE W PROBE USES THE CONVENTION OF STATING A DRAIN FROM THE BATTERY AS A NEGATIVE POWER. 

Why don't you just quickly put your shunt right at the battery negative terminal itself and take a good look?  It's not hard to do.  It will show you immediately that the net current is draining the battery and not charging it.  No need for lengthy battery runs at all.  No need for further confusion.

Rosemary, your arguments are so thoroughly "straw-man" based and so poorly stated at that, that you really should take a break from your incoherent ranting and just try to absorb what has been clearly shown:

The simulation behaves exactly like your circuit.  When measured wrongly, exactly as you measure, the results agree with your results.  When measured properly, the very low COP and gross inefficiency of powering a heating element using MOSFET parasitic oscillations is revealed clearly.  End of story.

No amount of rude insults, calling people dogs and vermin and stupid, will change these well-demonstrated facts..

Humbugger

That was a great post Hum!  Sorry it was missed.

.99

[i_ron]

Then Guys - and in conclusion - in the space of a few short minutes - with an increased frequency - it then took the temperature to boiling point - snip

Next major problem for North American experimenters is the IRFPG50, there is no stock at Mouser, Digikey, Newark. Mouser has 400 on order... be here in August. The 2SK1365 is an equivalent, same deal, no stock. One can backorder, expected delivery 30 to 71 weeks!

This might slow me down a bit. Can we drop down to say 600 volt FETs?

Ron

[eisnad karm]

@poynt99
Yes its a pity cheeseburger like my real ID here and many others got put in the sin bin.
@Rosie...i was delighted to see that you have devised a way to measure the heat output. Still no way to check the battery properly..however if the volts of the battery do increase and are maintained its a start in the right direction. One thing I am confused about...do you measure the battery voltage at the terminal of the battery? I am dumbing the questions down so the greater audience can break it down into simple terms that we can all understand.
Also what was the time it took to heat the water and the volume?
You made claims this was the first device using ZPE to heat water...technically you could be right if we assume what you have is working. But how far are we off for a practical application. The reason I ask is people like Rossi although have not demonstrated everything beyond reasonable doubt is getting main stream academics involved and to date he has something that goes close to ZPE as far as effect. he does use some hydrogen and nickle and a catalyst in small quantities but gets one hell of an effect. if his device or the black light power one pans out in the near future in reality it makes your project redundant other than a curiosity.
Kind Regards as always

[Groundloop]

Rosemary,

I have updated my drawing, is this correct?

GL.

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Rosemary,

I have updated my drawing, is this correct?

GL.

Not quite Groundloop. But I've thought of something.  I could sketch what's needed - scan it and then send it to you.  Then you could make sense of it better.

Many thanks for your efforts nonetheless.

Kindest as ever,
Rosie

added I should be able to do this during the morning.  I still have your email address.  I'll get back to you here.

Sorry - another problem  It seems everyone is still on holiday.  Labour day in SA - I'll need to get this to you tomorrow.