another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.

[poynt99]

Yes TK.

That gradual ON and OFF is what I mentioned earlier on about your wave forms getting close, but without that characteristic. You didn't understand what I meant then, but you do now.

With the use of your delayed time base, the evidence is there, you got it.

[TinselKoala]

I understand more and more every day, but less and less of it makes any sense at all.

[picowatt]

Rosemary,

I see at the beginning of this thread that some tests were performed using three drained batteries and a single MOSFET in only the Q2 position.

I have a few questions regarding those tests.

1.  Do you know what the bulb number was that was used to discharge the batteries?

2.  When you say the batteries were discharged until the bulbs went out, was this completely out as in cup your hands around them or observe in the dark "out" or until they were just too dim to observe in a normally lit room?

3.  Was the somewhere around 10.06 volts figure given the voltage of the batteries with the bulbs still connected or was this the open circuit voltage taken after disconnecting the bulbs?

4.  If the answer to 3 above is the open circuit voltage, was the voltage measured fairly soon after the bulbs were disconnected?

Thanks,
PW

[fuzzytomcat]

Hi guys,

As we all know now there is two (2) device schematics shown in the two (2) papers that Rosemary sent out to some accredited journal or magazine for a peer review from both engineers and academics with a possible publication of the "CLAIM" of COP>INFINITY on her invented device(s).

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Experimental Evidence of a Breach of Unity on Switched Circuit Apparatus  ( ROSSI-JOP-1-PDF.pdf )
ROSSI-JOP-1-PDF_Q2_x4_Q1_.PNG

Proposed variation to Faraday’s Lines of Force to include a magnetic dipole in its structure  ( ROSSI-JOP-2- PDF.pdf )
ROSSI-JOP-2-PDF_Q1_Q2_x4_.PNG
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


There is one "SCOPE SHOT" a ..... "LeCroy" 50s - 500k - 4 Channel - Dated 2011/03/02 - Time 07:54:13  shown in both papers .... SCOPE_SHOT_ROSSI-JOP-1-PDF_FIG3__ROSSI-JOP-2-PDF_FIG2_.JPG

Experimental Evidence of a Breach of Unity on Switched Circuit Apparatus  ( ROSSI-JOP-1-PDF.pdf ) Figure #3
Proposed variation to Faraday’s Lines of Force to include a magnetic dipole in its structure  ( ROSSI-JOP-2- PDF.pdf ) Figure #2

Given there are two different device schematics one for each paper is this "SCOPE SHOT" wave form even possible for both papers or only one paper ? 

Cheers,
FTC

[picowatt]

FTC,

Both schematics should perform similarly.  There would be differences in current handling capability for different portions of the FG waveform and possibly some AC differences (osc freq, etc).  But essentially they would perform the same.

The MOSFET(s) whose gate is connected to the FG output (common source) will turn on when the FG output swings positive moreso than the MOSFET threshold voltage.  The MOSFET(s) whose gate is connected to the CSR (common gate) will bias on into a "linear" region of operation when the FG output swings negative.

The scope shot you posted is the same as from Test 1/FIG 3 in the first paper and was discussed somewhat last night.  The indicated gate drive during the positive portion of the FG output is more than sufficient to turn on Q1 (schematic of first paper) while the CSR trace indicates that Q1 is not turning on.  One must assume that Q1 was either defective or disconnected during the test performed for this scope capture.

Long story short, both schematics should perform similarly.  Also, we have been assured that the second paper schematic was merely a typo and that the first paper schematic is the correct one.

PW