Overunity.com Archives is Temporarily on Read Mode Only!



Free Energy will change the World - Free Energy will stop Climate Change - Free Energy will give us hope
and we will not surrender until free energy will be enabled all over the world, to power planes, cars, ships and trains.
Free energy will help the poor to become independent of needing expensive fuels.
So all in all Free energy will bring far more peace to the world than any other invention has already brought to the world.
Those beautiful words were written by Stefan Hartmann/Owner/Admin at overunity.com
Unfortunately now, Stefan Hartmann is very ill and He needs our help
Stefan wanted that I have all these massive data to get it back online
even being as ill as Stefan is, he transferred all databases and folders
that without his help, this Forum Archives would have never been published here
so, please, as the Webmaster and Creator of these Archives, I am asking that you help him
by making a donation on the Paypal Button above.
You can visit us or register at my main site at:
Overunity Machines Forum



Finally! Independent Testing Of Rossi's E-Cat Cold Fusion Device. Success?

Started by rukiddingme, May 21, 2013, 12:06:50 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

markdansie

Quote from: verpies on May 23, 2013, 05:25:33 AM
What calculation errors?
The transfer of thermal energy from an object to the environment constitutes a flow of energy.
The thermal energy transfer relationship is the same.
Your soldering iron would produce thermal energy internally and lose this energy to the environment through EM radiation, convection and conduction (EM loss would dominate only at very high temperatures).
Because the rate of this loss is proportional to the rate of production, then the temperature equilibrizes at a level when these rates become equal.
This way the temperature becomes proportional to the rate thermal energy production/dissipation.

The function of this proportionality is influenced by surface blackness, emitter's shape (including porosity),  thermal contact area between emitter and support struts, air temperature, air pressure, air humidity and air velocity.
Agreed to all that so if I crank up the input power it should progressively increase the temperature once it passes a threshold of where no more energy can be radiated.....hence will get red hot.
I don't know.
Maybe the internal energy production ceases to increase above some temperature.
This is very significant !
If these clampon ammeter probes indeed are insensitive to DC or HF, then this opens up new possibilities of clandestine power delivery to the E-Cat.

TinselKoala

Quote from: markdansie on May 23, 2013, 04:00:10 AM
Hi TK,
I see Rosemary is now being promoted by Sterling.
She sent me a lot of papers and read some but have not had time, or the expertise to offer any opinions.  There is one red flag for me with my basic knowledge....why does it only work with a battery and not a cap? ???

(snip)

Well.... since you asked....
But it _does_ work with a capacitor power supply, as I showed very clearly with my Tar Baby replication. It produces exactly the same waveforms including the magic oscillations with a capacitor power supply, for as long as the capacitor has enough charge in it. I ran the full Tar Baby, which is a full replication of the 5-mosfet system, using a 330,000 microFarad capacitor bank, and showed that the "negative power" product was produced, that the oscillations were produced, and that the capacitors ran down nevertheless. Also, with the design help from Poynt99, I built a "pocket OU demonstrator", the Altoid,  that uses a single mini-mosfet, runs a LED or resistive load, makes the Ainslie oscillations and the negative power product when hooked to any oscilloscope, and runs _completely without batteries_ using only its onboard 2 Farad capacitor, for long enough to be very impressive.

I've offered many times to have Tar Baby tested side-by-side with Ainslie's device to show that they are identical in schematic and performance. The very idea of this challenge terrifies Ainslie, of course, because Tar Baby is not OU, its batteries do discharge, etc.

She is currently making the rounds, sending harassing letters to scientists and professors, and has gotten some play on PESN, including a couple of current photographs.

Her promised "test" that she claims will happen on June 1st looks to be a planned repeat of the demo of two years ago, which she has now removed from her four YouTube accounts in an attempt to cover it up.... but it is still visible on my YT channel as a record of the lies and misrepresentations it contains.

But take a close look at the pictures on PESN. They are very revealing, especially to those who have been following the Ainslie saga.

For example:
The Function Generator is set to produce a triangle ramp, not a square pulse, and the offset knob is pulled out, turning this offset function ON, and is cranked all the way to the maximum positive offset. This FG setting, with the Red output of the FG connected to the single mosfet gate, will likely keep that transistor ON for long duty cycles and as shown will produce a lot of heat in the RV water heater element she uses as a load... suspended in air with the thermocouple attached to it. Only three of the six batteries are in use.... and the mosfet has been provided with a much larger heatsink than it had in the demo from two years ago. Ainslie has claimed many times that this mosfet stays cool. So why the big heatsink? Why the operation with only three batteries in series when the claim is made that all six can be used? I know why.

I've challenged her to repeat the second part of the 2011 demo, the "high heat" mode, but with all six batteries instead of the 4 she showed then or the three she's using now, and actually boil some water doing it, as she has claimed. With the same small heatsink on the Q1 mosfet that was in use then.  Anyone want to bet on the outcome?

(Note that 3 x 12V x 50 A-H == 1800 Watt-hours. It will take a long time to run those batteries down, even continuously heating that element to over 200 degrees. But with the full 72 volts _claimed_ input, the Q1 mosfet will fail before a liter of water can be boiled.)

fritz

Quote from: markdansie on May 23, 2013, 07:26:06 AM
According to Mr Green not 1 single unit has been sold...you think it would be a no brainier if it worked to anyone's satisfaction.
So two years on...no robot factories, no E-cat sales and no testing that I would consider convincing.
Just my opinion
Mark

Maybe I have a different background.
Together with a friend we developed some nifty tool:
http://amemusica.wordpress.com/author/ajakes/
It´s no e-cat but has some "wow" effect, lots of people asked  us where they can buy it - and maybe this product has some potential.
You have no idea what happens if something starts to be "interesting". Strange investors, companies, fraud, licenses, patents, tooling costs,
redesigns, games, crazy folks, promises.... since 5 years now. - no product.
Due to the advent of 3D printing we are now able to ramp up some proto-series - independent.

In my actual project (sil3 industrial control for power protection, generator excitation and turbine controllers ) we have already 2 years delay - and we all know
that we have to rewrite the entire project from scratch after the next milestone /managment presentation.

It´s difficult to do such stuff without (at least internal) promises and deadlines. That´s when "professional communication" comes into play.

With this background - I see the progress on the e-cat pretty mindboggling for a new, disruptive product operating on physics to be defined.

And even if the presentation / communication is somewhat scam-a-like - there are pretty less alternatives how to do it.

rgds.


profitis

@mark and @fritz...im thinking that no i.r. meter would be needed,and no wattmeter would be needed either. at 'tenfold' conventional power one would only have to stand in front of 1)the controll and 2)the hotcat and simply feel the heat-blast,big dif guys.   

fritz