Rosemary Ainslie Circuit Demonstration, June 1 2013

[MileHigh]

Something that I stumbled upon for Rosie:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/markgibbs/2013/05/20/finally-independent-testing-of-rossis-e-cat-cold-fusion-device-maybe-the-world-will-change-after-all/

Form the poster Josh Simonson:

<<< Also, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Remember the faster than light neutrinos? That was due to a faulty measurement technique, they could have invited another team to take the same measurement on the same system (or an identical one) and gotten the same results – that wouldn't have made it true. Because there were real scientists involved, they tried a different setup and got different results, then dug through the nitty-gritty of the measurements and were able to find the source of error and get results that are consistent with theory. That last part isn't being done here and that's a red flag for fraud. >>>

I am going to assume with some real searching multiple sources would come up confirming this statement.

Back to the action!  lol

[TinselKoala]

One thing I didn't make clear enough in the previous video is this: The difference in the location of the FG Black lead. In the video above I have the FG Black lead connected as per the published schematic, that is, on the transistor side of the CVR. However, if you recall the history of this particular item, you will also recall that in every posted photo of the Ainslie device that we can find, in the one transistor version, the March 2011 demo version, and including the new ones posted on PESN, the FG Black lead is connected to the common circuit ground.

Anyway, I just shot a new video, with the FG Black lead at the common circuit ground point like Ainslie shows in her vids and photos--- and as was undeniably used in the scopeshots in the manuscripts... and with 36 volts supply and longer interbattery wiring, and the objections to my previous set of traces no longer apply. These new traces are just the same as Ainslie shows; if I had done them on an Etch-a-Sketch oscilloscope with pretty pastel colors you would not be able to tell the difference between mine and hers. The video is processing now. And of course I monitor temperature of the Q1 mosfet and show substantial heating in both it and the load and even show some evidence that the Q2s can do a bit of heating on their own if the oscillations are encouraged enough.
Sorry about the delay though, I have a slow uplink so it may be a couple or three hours before the video is viewable.

[TinselKoala]

.99,

Or that the gate and source leads of Q1 were reversed, which would change the schematic to all 5 MOSFET's being connected as per Q2, with no MOSFET connected in the Q1 position...

PW

Any explanation has to consider that the setup _did_ apparently achieve high heat in the element at least, and this can't be done with only Q2  mosfets oscillating, they simply don't pass enough power. To get high heat in the load you need a functioning transistor in the Q1 role.... for at least part of the time. Miswiring scenarios are unlikely IMO because of this fact. It is more consistent with all of the reported information (assuming it isn't all just a lie) to think that a functioning mosfet in the Q1 position did heat the load, trying its best to do what Ainslie required of it, but finally gave up the ghost just before the Fig3 scopeshot was made, with "tiny bubbles" at the now-submerged but still hot heating element. Take the screenshot, but keep fiddling..... then a few days later she does report to the forums that she has blown mosfets and can't get the thing working again. "It's switching but no load heat" (paraphrasing). I have the screenshots of the posts where she makes these announcements!

Of course to get it to work "properly"... that is, oscillations in Q2 and high current capability for Q1.... then you simply use the original schematic as posted in Paper 2, with the 4 parallel mosfets having their Gates connected to the Red FG lead and playing the role of Q1, and the lone mosfet with its Gate connected to ground happily oscillating away as the Q2. This way you will stop blowing mosfets when you want high load heat, and you can even use the full 72 volt nominal battery stack.
But then you will find it even more impossible to reproduce Figure 3, tra la.

[TinselKoala]

New video is viewable now:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbkpQQvuP2I

Thanks for watching!

[TinselKoala]

The Figure 3 scopeshot is SCRN0253, captured on March 2, 2011 (2011/03/02 in LeCroy-speak). We know about this shot because it made it into the manuscript. But take a look at some of the next few shots, that didn't get into the manuscripts. None of the shots taken later that day show any current in the Q1 mosfet.