Rosemary Ainslie Circuit Demonstration June 29, 2013 Video Segments

[TinselKoala]

@.99:

It seems clear to me that she has not watched the video recording of the demonstration. The full 4-hour version is pretty intolerable, for sure... I've watched the whole thing several times.

But there is no excuse for her not to watch the excerpts that include the conversation with you, and the later conversation with S.Weir.

It is just crazy for her to claim that she replicated the Figure 3 scopeshot, but it showed the wrong voltage because of some misplaced FG wire or probe reference.

"Here, I've replicated Green. What's that, it looks like fire-engine RED to you? Well, that's just because I put a bit of the wrong color in the mix earlier. Take my word for it, this is Green. And by the way, your blood is Green too, see, it looks just like my Green replication."

She really should watch the video clips, don't you think? How is she going to be able to tell just where and how I may have altered them, otherwise? 

[TinselKoala]

So I think we have dealt adequately with the current path issue (the magical "floating" Q2 Source) and the matter of Figure 3, which Ainslie now admits is bogus. The issue of current flow at a gate drive of +4 volts, with oscillations in the "gate low" time, is being examined by .99 with his more accurate accurate instrumentation. But my results already show quite well that there is significant current both in the oscillations and in the Q1's DC condition even at a gate signal of only +4 volts. Is it enough to account for the small heat observed at the load under these conditions? We shall see.

Next is the claim that there is some "benefit" involved in using the Ainslie-Martin circuit. This apparently could arise in a couple of ways.

First, the batteries could somehow exceed their rated capacity while heating a load. This of course is ill-specified, as battery "capacity" varies according to the load schedule, a fact known for decades. Hence it is a difficult claim to test properly by any but the crudest methods (dim bulb tests, etc.) I would like to hear some ideas about how properly to test battery capacity in the context of powering an Ainslie-Martin oscillating heater circuit.

Next, more traditional measures of "efficiency" at heating a load could be obtained. This is easier to do, if one can get a number for the power supplied by the battery _and the FG_ when the circuit is operating. Again, there is the problem of specification, because the exact settings of the FG, the battery voltage and etc. that are claimed to produce the best "effect" are still not known or precisely stated. After all this time. However, at least it is relatively easy to measure load cell temperatures and time intervals, and it is possible to supply a load with a known DC current so that the electrical power input can be precisely known, at least in the DC case.

When I was examining the claims around the Quantum article's COP>17 claims, I was able to get a measurement of the power drawn by that circuit, and I was able to set up a DC equivalent power draw, and I plotted time-temperature profiles of both systems using the same load cell in the same environmental conditions. And I measured the temperature of a known quantity of heat-transfer liquid in a sealed and insulated container, not the "temperature over the load resistor" hanging in air. I was able to obtain good temperature profile data using this technique, and it's easy to see from the data which system is more "efficient" at heating the load.

If I can get a good measurement of the battery power (plus FG power) drawn by the present circuit, I will be able to set up a similar performance comparison that should show whether or not the circuit is actually more efficient than straight DC. Ainslie's own temperature data, taken as it is in her naive manner, is not reliable for any quantitative determination.

Crunching the time-temperature data down into an easily-interpretable display results in a picture like this (data from the Quantum circuit experiments done in 2009):

[TinselKoala]

How about this.

I have a capacitor bank that can power Tar Baby for some seconds, during which it produces the mean negative power product just like it does when powered by batteries, but only until the caps run down and the oscillations stop.

I can set up a load with small heat capacity and an accurate temperature monitor. Then I can "pulse" the load by running the Ainslie circuit, starting with the cap bank charged to a known voltage, and I can record the increment in load temperature produced.

Then I can repeat the pulse heating test but using just the cap bank and the load (starting from the same cap voltage and load starting temperature of course), with no intervening circuitry except for a relay or manual switch.

Thoughts?

[poynt99]

TK,

Your capacitor is likely to expire 10x faster with a direct connection compared to when it is running the RA circuit. So wouldn't it likely get much hotter but for a much shorter time period? I would think to achieve an accurate comparison you would have to integrate the temperature over time.

[TinselKoala]

TK,

Your capacitor is likely to expire 10x faster with a direct connection compared to when it is running the RA circuit. So wouldn't it likely get much hotter but for a much shorter time period? I would think to achieve an accurate comparison you would have to integrate the temperature over time.

Yes, that's right. The well-insulated container with some heat-transfer fluid in it will act as an integrator, though, and knowing the time it takes for the capacitor to run down, while running the RA circuit, will actually give me a fairly accurate average current draw for that system. If the natural integration time of the load capsule isn't sufficient or doesn't work, I can try adding plain resistance, also within the load cell, to equate the average current draw of the direct capacitor system.

The biggest hurdle to overcome is the claimant's continuing claim that the circuit doesn't work with capacitors, that batteries are somehow special. This is just handwaving conjecture on her part, though, because she has never tested the circuit powered only by capacitors, and as I have shown, the circuit makes the identical waveforms with caps that it makes with batteries, until it runs down. So there is no justification or evidence for the claim that caps aren't suitable as power supplies.

(I have actually seen arguments of the latter form taken as far as the material and color of the insulation on the wires. "Your replication doesn't make the Free Energy like my original does because I used Teflon insulated wire that is white, and you are using ordinary black PVC insulated wire.")