Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie

[HeairBear]

replicate
Verb
[-cating, -cated] to make or be an exact copy of; reproduce [Latin replicatus bent back]
replication n

[WilbyInebriated]

Only if you can achieve random chaotic resonance.



(Oh, and did you see the part where I asked someone to send me a mosfet, and Wilby said it would do so, and then reneged? "send me your address and i will send you the part, you worthless bum" and it even got that wrong. I'm not a bum, I'm a jerk. (Thanks, Steve...))

lots of useless chatter and the endless litany of excuses continue...

any plans on doing it right?
edit: get the correct $4 fet, or the shoe fits...

[WilbyInebriated]

COME ON PEOPLE, all you have to do to PROVE ME WRONG is to build the circuit in the quantum article and look at the duty cycle it generates.

you mean build the circuit that you haven't built yet? or did you still manage to not find that fet in a major metro area...   

[TinselKoala]

@Tinselkoala
Do you know what a motorcycle is? It is a means of transportation that utilizes two wheels and a motor. However there are people who have the ability to transcend what we call transportation into a form of art. They fly 100's of feet through the air performing backflips, they jump off the bike with their feet straight up holding on to only the handlebars --- this is not transportation it is a form of individual expression.
I watched your video's and while you may be competent at standard electronics I am afraid this is not going to cut it, not in any way. As well from your scope shots it is obvious that you have done nothing out of the ordinary, so why would you expect extraordinary results. I wonder why Rosemary requires a mosfet rated at 1000v@6.2A when her source is only 24v? or why she requires a mosfet with an on resistance of only 2 ohm and rise/fall times in the 35/36 ns range when the 555 timer is relatively slow at 100ns max?. It would seem the circuit properties are designed for high speed switching of high potentials and yet everyone is still preoccupied with trying to push slow pulsed low potential currents through the resistance and hoping to come out ahead,LOL. Rosemary also states that in operation the internal diode is conducting, if the drain to source breakdown voltage is 1000v then we can assume her transient spikes are in excess of this. I wonder has any of your circuit voltages exceeded 1000v? If your video's are any indication then I can assume you are nowhere near the operating parameters dictated by Rosemary. All of this relates to the beginning of this post, if you want to practice common electronics then you should expect common results, if however you take your circuits and your understanding to the next level then you become the artist not bound by common practice nor common results.
Regards
AC

So far, we have an admission from Rosemary that the circuit in the Quantum article is in ERROR and was NOT used to gather the data in the article (or in the report of the same experiment in the EIT paper.)
And we now have the admission that she has NO patents, just has filed patent applications.
And we have her putting her foot in mouth over and over about the duty cycle issue--which is easily checked and has been confirmed here as well.

So why do you believe ANYTHING she has told you? There is NO evidence of any of her claims. Not a scope trace, not a copy of those "independent lab" tests, nothing--just the Quantum article and the EIT paper, both reporting the SAME experiment but with DIFFERENT circuits...

OK, pick on me all you want. But Rosemary Ainslie is feeding you a line of BS for sure.

And all you have to do to PROVE ME WRONG is to build that Quantum article's circuit and test it yourself. The problem has nothing to do with the MOSFET used.


Oh, and did you see where Wilby promised to send me the mosfet, and then reneged?


(And Rosemary has done nothing out of the ordinary either. So why should anyone expect out-of-the-ordinary results--especially when nobody else has gotten them...)

[TinselKoala]

Oh, Allcanadian...did you notice that I have reproduced the load heating profile that Ainslie reports?

Even though Wilby refuses to send me the mosfet he promised?

Yes, that's right--at a true duty cycle of 3.7 percent ON from the FG, I get the same heating, the same rate of heating, the same final equilibrium temperature after the same amount of time,  in the load as Ainslie reports. And at the same average power levels that she quotes. Within experimental error, of course.

So this is another bit of evidence that the Quantum circuit is WRONG--as it does not have the flyback diode and generates the WRONG duty cycle to boot. Yet by NOT using it I am able to make the right heat.

What do you say to that? If I get the same heating as Rosemary, and I have the same average power input am I not also creating overunity? And tell me (because Wilby cannot) how the MOSFET choice could change these findings???