Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie

[PaulLowrance]

Hi Paul,

I have read a few of your references to op-amp circuits but I am not really sure exactly what you mean with respect to the low pass filter and all that.  The old cliche is a picture is worth a thousand words.  If you put up a simple sketch with a description then I am sure that .99 would have some comments and perhaps others including myself.

MileHigh

There are a lot of ways of doing it. Here I just did a quick google image search & grabbed a few images,

First stage, ultra high input impedance,
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/Electronic/opampvar.html#c3

Second stage, low pass filter,
http://freecircuitdiagram.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/1st_order_active_lpf.gif

And of course you can add a 3rd stage filter. Or you can get wild & crazy with more advance filters. No big deal here. Just enough filtering to get a good shot at this on the scope to determine the DC voltage across the battery shunt to calculate the DC current. Personally, I seriously doubt that we need any filters, as the scope could probably do it without the filters. Scopes with probes are typically 10Mohms, with 10 or so pF. If the gang thinks that's taking away the "free energy" effect, then use the ultra high impedance op-amp. I have one that has 2e+15 ohms with not that much capacitance.

Paul

[PaulLowrance]

Also, if the gang thinks the inductance from the battery shunts resistor interferes with the effect, then why not take about 4 cheap carbon 1ohm resistors, at least 1/4 watt, and parallel them. Obviously you don't want the resistor getting hot, otherwise the resistance changes too much. Heck, take a dozen. Whatever.

Paul

[Rosemary Ainslie]

MileHigh - I had an idea you'd be contributing again.  More's the pity as I can see it's going to keep me busy.

Your background information to our Pauly is a little misleading.  Poynt does indeed know his stuff.  Unfortunately he keeps his data under wraps.  We're all waiting to get an unedited version of this.   Had this ever come to hand we would be in the happy position of being able to establish his point.  As it is we only ever know his conclusions - based on rough approximations of the tested circuit.  The fact that data is continually being removed, hidden or modified - tends to errode his credibility or his dependability as an experimentalist.  I'd settle for his analytical contribution as an alternative - if this were also UNBIASED.  Thus far we see partiality leaking out everywhere with more persistence that our own overunity claims.

The filtering capacity setup will probably obviate the benefit of the 'returning energy' that you, Poynt et al - denied was extant.  Where, by the way, is your retraction?  I must hand it to Wilby.  He's the only one who still calls you guys to question on those early sharp and strident  claims that the voltage returned to the battery was 'neglible' or 'non-existent'.  Both terms or variations thereof were voiced with an assurance that, in retrospect, must surely echo in your ears with a certain amount of embarrassment?  And you of all people MileHigh?  I thought you were more or less ready to admit the occasional error? 

The spice simulation does indeed highlight some questions.  But these relate to the waveform over the shunt at the source.  The questions were in hand - long before Poynty pointed at them.  And Fuzzy will return with answers here - hopefully in the near future.

There indeed has not been the 'slightest whiff of over unity shown'.  It comes in great dollops.  And our universe is definitely unfolding as it should - dark energy - dark matter AND ALL.

I might point out that I've now been made a moderator?   Certainly looks that way.  Take heed MH.  If it gives me more power I intend to abuse it.  LOL.

[poynt99]

btw, MileHigh...

I appreciate the vote of confidence. Thanks.

.99

[fuzzytomcat]

Hi all,

I just wanted to thank all the participants in this thread and inform everyone that I have obtained the TDS 3054C from the Tektronix Corporation again until the end of the month. I will possibly be cleaning up some of the problem areas indicated by some members here at Over Unity and Energetic Forum changing the 0.25 ohm 'shunt' to a non inductive "film" resistor from "Caddock" a  #MP821-0.25-1%  or  #MP930-0.25-1%  http://www.caddock.com/ for comparison tests.

If there are any other items please indicate them ASAP so that it can be addressed and possibly placed in the now busy DSO testing schedule to get this all done in a timely manner.

Fuzzy