Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims

[TinselKoala]

That's right, and that's why I've suggested before that the entire circuit, including the mosfets and the load element, should be immersed in oil and the temperature of the entire system should be monitored. Knowing the quantity of the oil and its specific heat (0.84 for mineral oil USP) , and having a container with a known measured thermal leak rate, will allow the honest researcher to compare the input _energy_ from the battery or DC power supply to the _total energy_ dissipated by the entire circuit over a reasonable time period. A simple negative bias supply to produce 100 percent oscillations, or an adjustable 555 clock, can be included in the oil-immersed circuit, thus removing the power dissipation within the FG that occurs in the present test setup.

This procedure will avoid any assumptions about where any extra energy could be coming from in the system, and would reveal it if it did occur. What if Ainslie's excess thermal energy is created in the load element but dissipated in the mosfet(s)?  (We already know it isn't dissipated in the load element, from the previous demonstrations.)

[Magluvin]

That's right, and that's why I've suggested before that the entire circuit, including the mosfets and the load element, should be immersed in oil and the temperature of the entire system should be monitored. Knowing the quantity of the oil and its specific heat (0.84 for mineral oil USP) , and having a container with a known measured thermal leak rate, will allow the honest researcher to compare the input _energy_ from the battery or DC power supply to the _total energy_ dissipated by the entire circuit over a reasonable time period. A simple negative bias supply to produce 100 percent oscillations, or an adjustable 555 clock, can be included in the oil-immersed circuit, thus removing the power dissipation within the FG that occurs in the present test setup.

This procedure will avoid any assumptions about where any extra energy could be coming from in the system, and would reveal it if it did occur. What if Ainslie's excess thermal energy is created in the load element but dissipated in the mosfet(s)?  (We already know it isn't dissipated in the load element, from the previous demonstrations.)

Hey T

How about 2 separate immersion tanks. 1 for the load and 1 for the other circuitry. This way being that the load is most likely the hottest, its heat wont affect the other components adversely, as it shouldnt in a well designed product.

Mags

[Magluvin]

being that the load is most likely the hottest,

Well, it should be. In 2 containers the difference would be found.

Mags

[MarkE]

TinselKoala, the situation does raise a number of considerations.  Your proposal would establish a much better overall balance measurement and is far more favorable to Ms. Ainslie.  If her thesis that the heater resistor operates as a power generator were correct then her past set-ups were poorly disposed to demonstrate as such.  August 11, the measured power drain was ~15W.  The heating element temperature rose by an amount equivalent to ~3W.  If the heating element was net less than 1/5th the effective resistance of the current paths it connected to, then there could have been an anomalous behavior that Ms. Ainslie and her collaborators did not see because it would have appeared as more power dissipated in the other elements:  The function generator and the MOSFETs that they did not measure.

This raises challenges for Ms. Ainslie, because it presents more or less three divergent test paths all with their own pitfalls.

Option 1) Attempt to measure all the circuit power.
A. Replace the function generator with a voltage source but do not use a 50 Ohm resistor.  One of the lead acid batteries could be used to provide low impedance power for this purpose.
B. Replace the function generator with a voltage source.  Use a 50 Ohm resistor located in the oil bath to serve as the source ballast resistance previously provided by the function generator.

Option 2) Attempt to reduce the external resistances to a minimum.
Replace the function generator with a voltage source but do not use a 50 Ohm resistor.  One of the lead acid batteries could be used to provide low impedance power for this purpose.

A. Leave Q2 operating in its linear region as it does now.
B. Suppress linear operation of Q2.
i. Replace sustained oscillations with only leading edge / trailing edge ringing.
ii. Configure a the heater resistor into a tank circuit so that Q2 can operate Class C or D with minimal losses.

All Option 2) require reconfiguring the power source, as does Option 1) A.  The closest option to doing exactly what they have in the past is Option 1) B.  I think that it may be beyond them to implement any of these options.  They are things that Greg (GMEAST) should think about as he works his way towards conducting new experiments of his own.

[MarkE]

Hey T

How about 2 separate immersion tanks. 1 for the load and 1 for the other circuitry. This way being that the load is most likely the hottest, its heat wont affect the other components adversely, as it shouldnt in a well designed product.

Mags

The way that the circuit has been configured, during Q2 (Q1 "OFF") operation that is hypothesized to provide the "benefit", very little of the circuit power comes out as heat from the heating element.  Almost all of it is lost inside the function generator and in the MOSFETs.  If Q1 is biased on deep into the constant resistance region of the MOSFET, then during those times, most of the circuit power evolves as heat from the heating element.