Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie

Hoppy · September 02, 2009, 01:50:45 PM

Rosemary wrote: -

"You keep complaining that the voltage reading across the shunt is small. It IS small. It is not drawing energy from the battery. And that you can't duplicate this Hoppy? I cannot explain why. Perhaps it's because you'd rather not."

Of course the voltage is small across the shunt. However, it is drawing energy from the battery and a 50uA analogue meter will show this. A charged cap in place of the battery will also show that the circuit is consuming power.

I would love to be proved wrong but if I cannot duplicate what Aaron is showing, how am I going to be convinced. Why do you take things at face value when you watch a video. Is it simply because your overwhelming desire to believe in free energy - blind faith. I have experimented and built electronic circuits since I was a youth. I have had a technical education and worked in the Telecommunications industry all my life. I am willing to spend time on these forums in the hope that someone will convince me that EE is fundamentally flawed but I'm not going to let a video of an ammeter spuriously flashing negative and positive and a DSO that may well not be calibrated correctly, convince me that my life's technical education has been in vain!!

Come on Rosemary, smell the coffee! You need to acquire a lot more 'conventional' technical knowledge and experience under you belt to have a right to tell us that we are deluded. I admire your guts to attempt this but before you continue with your campaign, just ask yourself, why you are putting so much faith in Aaron's conclusions when even your friend Harvey shows much caution in openly stating that Aaron is running OU with his setup.

Hoppy

Rosemary Ainslie · September 02, 2009, 02:59:49 PM

Hoppy - one either believes the presented evidence or not. Clearly you do not. Since all these tests rely on the instrument's data capture and on video demos - then there's nothing that will be shown that will convince you. You will have to do your own experiments and if you draw a blank then you must also draw your own conclusions.

If you're hoping to corroborate what you've been taught at school and believed all your life - then I must ask you what I asked MH. What are you doing on this forum? And Harvey's value to this exercise is precisely because he's cautious and critical. If there are glaring errors or incorrect conclusions or misrepresentation of data then he'll find it. We all need that level of critique. Perhaps you could take a leaf out of his book and apply some degree of anlysis to the findings instead of the balnket refusal to acknowledge the data.

Hoppy · September 02, 2009, 04:11:46 PM

Quote from: witsend on September 02, 2009, 02:59:49 PM
Hoppy - one either believes the presented evidence or not. Clearly you do not. Since all these tests rely on the instrument's data capture and on video demos - then there's nothing that will be shown that will convince you. You will have to do your own experiments and if you draw a blank then you must also draw your own conclusions.

If you're hoping to corroborate what you've been taught at school and believed all your life - then I must ask you what I asked MH. What are you doing on this forum? And Harvey's value to this exercise is precisely because he's cautious and critical. If there are glaring errors or incorrect conclusions or misrepresentation of data then he'll find it. We all need that level of critique. Perhaps you could take a leaf out of his book and apply some degree of anlysis to the findings instead of the balnket refusal to acknowledge the data.

Rosemary,

I'm confident that Aaron is reaching incorrect conclusions about the data being presented. I have the circuit working on my bench, and although it is obviously not electrically identical to Aaron's (but a lot neater!), I do have a bit more than just a visual picture from video footage.

I think you are in good hands with Harvey and I will be interested to see his conclusions with this circuit. I'm now signing off for good from posting to this thread.

Hoppy

Rosemary Ainslie · September 02, 2009, 04:17:32 PM

Hoppy I would appeal to you not to stop posting here. I'm just so sorry that I proposed it as an alternative. I should, at least, have pointed out that you're a rare objector - precisely becuase you do your own experiments. I apologise if I have offended you and I would ask you to please reconsider. So, so sorry Hoppy. I shouold at least have highlighted that I respect your conclusions - regardless of their co-incidence with my own.

Please? Indulge a really old lady here. I'm truly sorry I prescribed a right. I have no justification for this.

Hoppy · September 02, 2009, 04:48:03 PM

Quote from: witsend on September 02, 2009, 04:17:32 PM
Hoppy I would appeal to you not to stop posting here. I'm just so sorry that I proposed it as an alternative. I should, at least, have pointed out that you're a rare objector - precisely because you do your own experiments. I apologise if I have offended you and I would ask you to please reconsider. So, so sorry Hoppy. I shouold at least have highlighted that I respect your conclusions - regardless of their co-incidence with my own.

Rosemary,

You certainly have not offended me, to the contrary, I respect your tenacity in debating your side which you are doing with all sincerity. I'm ceasing posting because I've said all that I wish to say and we must all remember that a forum is for polite expression of opinions and we should not expect to win the 'other side' over with a constant barrage of opinionated posts, which I've become guilty of. I'm more than happy to continue listening to the opinions of others and I really do hope that Harvey and others can prove to the satisfaction of at least a few of 'the sceptics' that your original circuit or Aaron's variations can perform as originally claimed.

Hoppy