Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie

[ramset]

Tk
The cat is suspect[posts things to fit its agenda ,saving face]
Owlsley is the Urim and Thummin of F E [no BS just the facts]

Chet

[TinselKoala]

TK, I would assume by this statement from Rosemary Ainslie it would make me believe that any ground or grounded connection used possibly was a "Earth" ground similar to whats in the UK, Europe, Australia, Asia and Africa on all their 240 volt circuits.

http://www.energeticforum.com/61046-post801.html

Quote:

Regarding the need for grounding, and at the risk of prolonging an argument regarding this - I have to see clear evidence of the earth attached to the neck of the probe attached to the meter and across the shunt. This is sadly lacking. And from memory - that waveform looks like a single probe connection. I'm sending the link to experts at Fluke for final comment. I need to put this 'evidence' to bed. We also never saw full benefit of the scope functions. But certainly early suggestions of the Hartley effect.

Well, she isn't very observant, I guess. I showed a closeup of where the "B" probe connects: sense lead to the circuit side of the shunt, the "neck" of the probe, i.e. signal ground of scope, to the battery side of the shunt, which is connected to the negative pole of the battery, which, in the GL video, is connected to the EARTH by hooking to that copper cold water pipe that penetrates my basement wall. Sure, that pipe is probably also connected to the bonded line ground. So what? If it wasn't, the circuit wouldn't work at all, probably.  As I show in the video, it matters not whether I connect it or not, EXCEPT when the neg batt is disconnected and the scopes are not isolated. The Ainslie circuit isn't a one-wire circuit, after all. (I think that's why they call it a groundLOOP.)
The Fluke, as you might be able to tell from the above photos, does not even HAVE a third prong and its ps is isolated. Doubly so, usually.

Note carefully the description of "ground" or "zero volt reference" on the EIT paper's diagram and in the text. One might assume from the diagram that the "FG" and the circuit are tied to one zero volt reference, and the oscilloscope is tied to another, or the same one at a different point...and where's the "neck of the probe" attached? It isn't shown in the diagram...
I mean I know where it's supposed to go, but what assurance, from this diagram, do we have that her system was properly connected, :earthed: and isolated?

(Also, as an aside, note that she says the "Load resistor was wound to deliberately yield (sic) a high level of inductance." 8.6 microHenries!!!  Wow. The 6 inch leads of my inductance meter, all by themselves, have about 2 microHenries.)

And I will point out again that with the Fluke I was illustrating deliberate False Triggering. And she is calling that the "hint of the Hartley effect."

What is this all about anyway? Is there something wrong with any of my measurements? I have shown that there is only a miniscule effect of the ground/bonded/waterpipe, whatever, when the circuit is properly energized.

And isn't anyone going to comment on the large power injection from the FG (likewise the 555 when it is used)?
Remember, my circuit is wired exactly like the Quantum diagram AND the EIT.pdf paper--I can switch between the two on the fly (diode in or out; 555 inverted cycle or truly known FG cycle).

[TinselKoala]

Tk
The cat is suspect[posts things to fit its agenda ,saving face]
Owlsley is the Urim and Thummin of F E [no BS just the facts]

Chet

Yep, and like another of its ilk, tomscat is stuck on a single point that does not even really apply. But I am sure that we will be hearing about it again and again, until some other little nit sticks up and needs picking.

Chet, since Rosemary has now said several times that she still has the circuit, I think it is time for her to show it in operation. So far, you realise, we have less real stuff from her than from anybody, except that one poster that said he has something, wouldn't say what, and generated 11 pages of comments on that before he disappeared -- you remember?

Well, we only have a little more than that to go on from Rosemary. Just words and a couple of papers, not even a patent.

We need more. Other wise we are in danger of having MY results be the only real data set out there on this topic.

And we wouldn't want that, would we.

[HeairBear]

Congratulations TK! Sometimes being "too" right can be wrong, eh?

[TinselKoala]

Congratulations TK! Sometimes being "too" right can be wrong, eh?

Well. I'll agree there, but again, what does that have to do with the present case?

I'm still not sure Ainslie's oscillations were the groundloop or the false triggering or something else. Without seeing a scope trace, or her seeing one of mine, and her saying :that's it!:  we are just guessing. Educated guessing, but still.

I mean, aperiodic resonance, come on. What's that?

So I made yet another video showing how to do a systematic search for resonance using the Interstate F34 Sweep Function generator.
It's uploading now.

But before that one finishes, here are a couple of others. First, a supplement: the Ainslie Free Energy Audio Amplifier. Then, more on Flukoscopy and LoundGroops. Er, groundloops.

Am i asleep enough to fall drunk yet?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0ovUxSwn1g
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JU1YGaEBKwM