Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Rose,

Based on your last few posts (here and at EF) pertaining to the "negative before positive" stuff, and the capacitors, and Aaron's latest video, I'd say you have both misunderstood what I have been saying about the circuit and internal capacitance and the parts they are playing.

In short, I was not trying to convey that the capacitors used in the 555 circuit are responsible for this effect.

The observed effect of the negative excursion before the positive is due to differentiation of the pulse entering the output section of the 555 chip. I mentioned that this stage is "inverting", and as such needs a "HI to LO" transition to equate to a "LO to HI" transition on pin 3. This HI to LO transition appears at the output as a "below ground" transition due to differentiation of the drive pulse to the output stage.

Once this differentiated pulse exits the 555, it enters the MOSFET Gate pin and is differentiated once more through the MOSFET parasitic capacitance as I outlined in a previous post. The MOSFET is not active in this mode of operation with only hundreds of mV drive on its Gate.

I have not studied Aaron's latest wave forms completely yet, but wanted to mention the misunderstanding before things get too carried away. I'll comment more later once I've had a chance to review the video further.

.99

Thanks Poynt.     I'm holding my breath here

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Paul, BTW - the patent was only applied for.  It was never granted.  This put the technology into the public domain and it appears that no-one owns it.  This probably means that while you can't patent the circuit you could probably develop it - if you wanted to.

[PaulLowrance]

Rosie,
 
  Your reply is appreciated. So would you say that total input power from the batteries is greater than the dissipated heat?  If so, then what else would I need to test for, electromagnetic radiation?

Regards,
Paul
 

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Ok.  Paul - I really think you need to read the last few pages on the energetic forum thread.  Again.  I hope I've posted the link correctly.  You'll see the tests that relate to this and the level at which they are.  MH claims that EM is irrelevant as it's too small.  But I'm not qualified to comment. 

Poynt would actually give you the best advice here.  If he'll oblige?

Glad you'll give this a stab.  We would love more replications on this side of the thread.  Traditionally OU.com sort of tries to disprove and energetic forum tries to prove.  I think both attitudes have value.

[PaulLowrance]

That link only took me to the homepage. I don't take sides, but it's a fact there are truckloads of fake claims over the years that only serve the purpose to distract people. So indeed, people should look for signs of sincerity in the claims before spending time replicating!!!

Here's all I have so far. 1) I can't find any verifiable info on anyone that's claiming success. 2) It appears you shot down the only legit way I see to test your claim-- measuring total heat production. Years working in antenna design & theory I would agree there would be no appreciable EM radiation emission from such wire wound resistive inductors given your circuit.

So if most of it's not IR, and not EM radiation, then how is one to collect this unknown energy? Something's missing here.

Regards,
Paul