Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims

[MarkE]

Of course. Adding a battery like that was first proposed years ago. Poynt99, Stefan our host, and others provided various schematics, and I demonstrated using a power supply and using a battery just as you have diagrammed, even measuring the current contribution of the battery. One such demonstration can be seen in the playlist I linked above, but I first demonstrated it in 2012 sometime.

But that is an _extra_ battery. This is not Ainslie's claim. She says she will be using the same batteries that power the load resistor.

All the batteries and the function generator or a battery acting as its surrogate do power the load resistor.  The function generator just drops most of its power contribution across its internal 50 Ohm impedance.  A lead acid battery limited by the wiring resistance will move the stress to the Q2 MOSFETs and the heater resistor. 

If she rearranges her six batteries as five plus one, then it still works just as you have shown with other combinations.  I think that it can be a fast trip down the rabbit hole to try and second guess Ms. Ainslie when there are already many discrepancies between what she has said, what she has diagrammed, and what she has demonstrated.  We do know from your excellent demonstrations that if they want to drive the oscillation cycles continuously that they can.  We also know that you have the facilities to pretty much replicate any idea that they might come up with and more.  Wouldn't it be interesting for example if TK labs were to replicate whatever it is Ms. Ainslie and her collaborators do next and on top of that switch the oscillations on and off on demand without touching the gate drive or interrupting the heater resistor current?  If you don't already know how to do that, I do.

If they do use a low resistance battery for gate drive then in order to start and maintain the oscillations they will need enough stray inductance in series with the source.  Something between 10uH and 100uH will be needed.  In that case the voltages will be something to watch out for.  They could get 800V or more on the MOSFET drains during start-up.

If they don't have enough inductance in the source leg, then with low ESR like a battery they won't get oscillations.  They will just have the battery stack across the series combination of:  the heater resistor, the Q2 MOSFETs fully enhanced, the current sense resistors, the wiring and the series battery ESR.  With 72V of battery the heater resistor will get plenty hot.

[MarkE]

So, if we sent Sterling an extension cord and he plugged it into itself, could he run his house from it?

Bill

It could do no less than any of the free energy generators he has been told would run his house in the past.

[Pirate88179]

It could do no less than any of the free energy generators he has been told would run his house in the past.

Touche.

Bill 

[picowatt]

This would do:

MarkE,

Your schematic does not bias Q2 into a linear region of operation.

The open circuit voltage of the FG and the 50R internal to the FG, in concert with the Vth of Q2, sets the bias current for Q2 and allows Q2 to function as a common gate configured amplifier.

As you say in later posts (and as proven by .99's sims and TK's breadboards), a fair amount of inductance is required as well for Q2 to oscillate as it does.  However, I do not believe turning Q2 fully on, as would happen if a low impedance V source (battery) in excess of Vth were connected directly to Q2's source, will allow Q2 to oscillate.

She has never attempted to hard switch Q2 as she does Q1, but rather biases Q2 into a linear region and relies on the Q2 oscillations to produce her "effect".


On another note, as she has retracted her retraction, does she now endorse FIG3 of paper 1 as being consistent with what one would expect from the schematic provided in that paper?

If so, she would indeed be better off experimenting with socket strips and piezo ignitors... 

PW 

 

[MarkE]

MarkE,

Your schematic does not bias Q2 into a linear region of operation.

The open circuit voltage of the FG and the 50R internal to the FG, in concert with the Vth of Q2, sets the bias current for Q2 and allows Q2 to function as a common gate configured amplifier.

As you say in later posts (and as proven by .99's sims and TK's breadboards), a fair amount of inductance is required as well for Q2 to oscillate as it does.  However, I do not believe turning Q2 fully on, as would happen if a low impedance V source (battery) in excess of Vth were connected directly to Q2's source, will allow Q2 to oscillate.

She has never attempted to hard switch Q2 as she does Q1, but rather bias Q2 into a linear region and relies on the Q2 oscillations to produce her "effect".


On another note, as she has retracted her retraction, does she now endorse FIG3 of paper 1 as being consistent with what one would expect from the schematic provided in that paper?

If so, she would indeed be better off experimenting with socket strips and piezo ignitors... 

PW 

PW that is true in the DC case and if they used short wires without the inductance that I mentioned then the resulting common source configuration does not oscillate.  That holds to 10uH.  At 100uH  the circuit oscillates immediately.  During start-up, peak drain voltages of 800V are present, settling to somewhat more pedestrian peak voltages of 600V at about 600kHz.   At 600kHz, 100uH is about 377 Ohms. 

Ms. Ainslie has never understood the operation of the function generator and its internal resistance as it pertains to gate bias as well a DC current path for Q2 MOSFET current.  They got their oscillations, made bad measurements, drew incorrect conclusions and were happy until under supervision they made half way decent measurements and found out that their over unity measurements were all the illusions that Poynt99, and TinselKoala had been telling them they were.

My understanding is that despite showing June 29 that Figure 3, Figure 6, and Figure 7 of Paper 1 were all the result of probing errors, Ms. Ainslie has withdrawn her retraction because she has some new strange ideas about how current can accumulate or deplete on a node in violation of KCL.  She already endorses those silly self-powered socket strip videos.