Rosemary Ainslie Circuit Demonstration, June 1 2013

[gmeast]

Also, notice the strength of MY claim. I am not making some wishy washy challenge here: I am stating bluntly that Ainslie cannot reproduce the scopeshot shown above with functioning mosfets in the circuit as claimed.

....................................

And her favorite sycophant Gmeast is silent on this issue. Why doesn't HE use his wonderful talents, so respected by Ainslie, to put this simple circuit together with functioning components and demonstrate that HE can reproduce that scopeshot? I know why: because HE CANNOT. The mosfet is blown!

....................................

My circuit is different than hers. The proof I show in my video slide show stands on its own.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q473lX-Zw1w


And BTW I no longer have anything to do with Rosie so please don't associate me with her work.  Thank you. Oh and I only run on 28VDC, and my MOSFET is NOT blown.


Regards,


Greg

[TinselKoala]

My circuit is different than hers. The proof I show in my video slide show stands on its own.

This thread is about Ainslie's circuit, her "postponed" demonstration and just what she intends to demonstrate there. Your name was brought up because you are, or were, one of only two people I can think of with any electronic competency that hasn't come right out and said that she is FOS, and she respects you as an experimenter.... for that reason you are a very logical choice to "second" her in this challenge. And I think you probably have the equipment -- if not the balls.
I notice that you do not accept the challenge to reproduce Ainslie's "simple enough" scopeshot, though, instead preferring to talk about your own work. Are you going to be claiming any OU prizes soon? Publishing a paper in IEEE journals, or even on Rossi's JNP vanity blog, where you claim large OU ratios like COP>17, COP INFINITY or the like? No?
Then fine, you deserve to be ignored.

And BTW I no longer have anything to do with Rosie so please don't associate me with her work.  Thank you. Oh and I only run on 28VDC, and my MOSFET is NOT blown.


Regards,


Greg

So you are no longer associated with Rosie. What happened? The last time I looked it was like, get a room you two, come on. Did ums have a widdle falling out? Did ums discover, perhaps, that the scopeshot couldn't be so easily reproduced after all? Hmm? Oh, do tell us the story Gmeast.

But as you wish, I won't mention you any more. As long as you stop mentioning me, that is, and as long as you don't try to defraud anyone with your devices and experimentation.

[gmeast]

This thread is about Ainslie's circuit, her "postponed" demonstration and just what she intends to demonstrate there. Your name was brought up because you are, or were, one of only two people I can think of with any electronic competency that hasn't come right out and said that she is FOS, and she respects you as an experimenter.... for that reason you are a very logical choice to "second" her in this challenge. And I think you probably have the equipment -- if not the balls.
I notice that you do not accept the challenge to reproduce Ainslie's "simple enough" scopeshot, though, instead preferring to talk about your own work. Are you going to be claiming any OU prizes soon? Publishing a paper in IEEE journals, or even on Rossi's JNP vanity blog, where you claim large OU ratios like COP>17, COP INFINITY or the like? No?
Then fine, you deserve to be ignored.

So you are no longer associated with Rosie. What happened? The last time I looked it was like, get a room you two, come on. Did ums have a widdle falling out? Did ums discover, perhaps, that the scopeshot couldn't be so easily reproduced after all? Hmm? Oh, do tell us the story Gmeast.

But as you wish, I won't mention you any more. As long as you stop mentioning me, that is, and as long as you don't try to defraud anyone with your devices and experimentation.

I have never attempted to defraud anyone with anything. As much as it may run against the grain with some, my experiments simply show actual and truthful results. Rosie's circuit is far too "out there" for me to grasp a solid understanding of it. At the same time, I really believe her circuit works. I do NOT have the equipment to test her circuit even if I did totally understand it. My equipment list consists of a piece-of-shit Vellman PC scope and two Sperry DVMs. That's all I have... and that's why I chose to use batteries that I have carefully and painstakingly characterized as a means to measure energy.


Before I ever became aware of Rosie's MOSFET Heater project and her publications, I was interested in exploring an Inductive Resistor used as a heater because I sensed some unique possibilities for it.


And as far as your query:


"Did ums have a widdle falling out? Did ums discover, perhaps, that the scopeshot couldn't be so easily reproduced after all? Hmm? Oh, do tell us the story Gmeast."

It is as sarcastic and childish as ever and not deserving of a response.  But regarding your more sensible question regarding the pursuit of some 'prize' or seek to boost my ego by publishing something ... no I'm not, I won't. And in response to your query about making ridiculous over unity claims ... I think you'll find that I have NOT claimed much more than a 25% gain ... spectacular NO, significant YES.

My near term goal is to run on Bat Caps and Ultra Caps (if I can afford to buy them) in an effort to get a better Discharge/Charge ratio for the battery part of this ... a separate project unto itself. This is all aimed at exploring the possibility of some sort of practical application. But that's very far down the road.


I have two other locations where I am posting my progress on this topic and see no need to post anything here. I'll mostly be relying on my YouTube Channel to report anything significant. The only reason I posted here, this time, was to inform you that it is senseless to include me as a cohort of Rosie's in any further posting by you because it no longer applies, and I'm sure you desire to be accurate in what you say. 


Regards,


Greg

[TinselKoala]

And another non-answer re the "simple enough" scope shot.

Here is the deal. Ainslie's papers rely heavily on this scopeshot and the conclusions drawn from it. It is IMPORTANT because it is the cornerstone of her entire "thesis" and experimental program. She is claiming that she can attain high heat in the load with NO current "measured" because the Q1 mosfet shows no current and the Q2 mosfets are "disconnected". This is a result of seeing this scopeshot, shortly after high heat had indeed been attained, but the mosfet blew out and stopped conducting. The load was still hot! So Ainslie convinced herself that the load was heating up with no current thru the Q1 and the Q2 mosfets "disconnected" to use her term.
If she is incorrect, and the scope shot is the result of a blown mosfet and the load heat is only residual, this means her papers are so severely flawed and her experiment is so contaminated with error and malfunction that they must be retracted and withdrawn and some kind of errata notice issued.... along with more than one apology.
Several knowledgeable people, other than myself, have also said that this scopeshot is impossible to obtain under the conditions Ainslie claims. It is a fundamental and important issue at the crux of Ainslie's claims. IT IS IMPORTANT. If the scopeshot is bogus in any way, such as being made with an inoperative transistor, her papers and her "thesis" are out the window and into the garbage pile, it is just that simple.

So will somebody either reproduce this "simple enough" scopeshot under Ainslie's direction, or have her show it herself ... OR IF YOU CANNOT, then say so. Ainslie must then begin the process of retraction.

How long does it take to reproduce this "simple enough" scopeshot, anyhow?

[hoptoad]

How long does it take to reproduce this "simple enough" scopeshot, anyhow?

I've got some paper, now if I can just find my pencil set, it shouldn't take too long.   ..... KneeDeep