Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie

[MileHigh]

Wilby:

Call me a realist if you want.  I believe in the foundation of knowledge that we have built up over the last 400 years.  There is nothing wrong with that.

Capacitors and inductors are energy storing devices only.  The experiments and mathematical modeling confirms this.  Magnets are not a source of energy no matter how you configure them.  It took man a long time to understand energy and gravitation and electricity and a myriad of other things.  We are fortunate to have been born in an enlightened age.  Part of the enlightenment and the rational thought process is to take the knowledge base that you have and then be able to apply it to new situations.  You have to have "faith" in that, and if your assumptions prove to be wrong then you have to go back and look at your model and fix any problems that might be there.

I firmly believe that "we" know what is going on with respect to things like Rosemary's setup, the model works and has been proven.  Aaron would disagree. 

The working and understood model puts the burden of proof on Rosemary and her supporters.  I am certainly willing to look at the data and see if there is something there.  Of course it has to be good data.  So far we have seen no real data with the new test hardware so bring it on.

That's as far as my open-mindedness extends to experiments like this.  I think that is fair.  Please don't bring out the flat earth and the first flying machine arguments.

As far as the choice of MOSFET goes, I vaguely remember the posting, but I may have said before I don't care.  I think there is a very good chance that the two devices provide the required "excitation" to the coil-resistor within a few percentage points such that the "effect" should manifest itself if it is real.  I am using my knowledge base to make an informed "I don't care" decision.  What does the MOSFET really do?  It repeatedly pulls the floor away from under the coil-resistor's feet and gets it to start conducting current.  Then it puts the floor back in place and the coil-resistor goes crashing to the floor.  The coil-resistor is just being "yanked around" by the MOSFET to induce it to spit out a discharge of stored energy.  I don't care, as long as each type of MOSFET is not being driven past it's maximum current rating and if the "on" resistances and switching times are comparable and they are being operated in the saturation region relative to the battery voltage and the load.  If that's true, then the 16 extra magic heat pies should be popping into existence if the "Ainsley effect" is real for either MOSFET.

MileHigh

[TinselKoala]

Well, I see that Err-on has posted a bunch of more non-interpretable scope shots from his borrowed DSO, along with more blatant distortions of what I and others here have said and found. Most of it is just trolling and lies but one thing in particular is really funny. He's complaining about my 500-600 mV drop across my current viewing shunt. Idiot.

I remind him that I am using AS AINSLIE SPECIFIES a 0.25 ohm shunt made of 4  ea. 1 ohm resistors in parallel. While he is not.

And 600 Mv drop across this resistor at full on with an 8.5 ohm load is perfectly normal and expected, as it gives 2.4 amps for the current value.

Aaron on the other hand is using some tiny value shunt that is different from Ainslie's value and so will be seeing a much smaller--and harder to measure accurately--voltage drop. His objection to my 600 mV figure is idiotic to the max.

Also I will point out that he is claiming a dozen different oscillatory modes, none of which have been reproduced by anybody else. And it appears that he is claiming to be able to produce the oscillatory mode with a FG instead of a 555. That I would like to see.

I say again, Aaron is not working with Ainslie's circuit. His circuit produces TOO MUCH HEAT. Which means that it is either MUCH MORE OU than even Ainslie's, or...the whole thing is a big mistake.

It will be interesting to see if that expensive DSO survives the week.

[WilbyInebriated]

you've more than shown yourself to be a believer.

[WilbyInebriated]

As far as the choice of MOSFET goes, I vaguely remember the posting, but I may have said before I don't care.  I think there is a very good chance that the two devices provide the required "excitation" to the coil-resistor within a few percentage points such that the "effect" should manifest itself if it is real.  I am using my knowledge base to make an informed "I don't care" decision.  What does the MOSFET really do?  It repeatedly pulls the floor away from under the coil-resistor's feet and gets it to start conducting current.  Then it puts the floor back in place and the MOSFET goes crashing to the floor.  The coil-resistor is just being "yanked around" by the MOSFET to induce it to spit out a discharge of stored energy.  I don't care, as long as each type of MOSFET is not being driven past it's maximum current rating and if the "on" resistances and switching times are comparable and they are being operated in the saturation region relative to the battery voltage and the load.  If that's true, then the 16 extra magic heat pies should be popping into existence if the "Ainsley effect" is real for either MOSFET.

MileHigh

it really doesn't matter whether you remember that post or not, the telling and important post is the one from your fearless leader where he tries to claim an "overunity performance" context that clearly did NOT exist in the conversation about the fets. i demonstrated this with HIS OWN POSTS. and THAT is the thing, tk posted a baldfaced lie and has refused to back it up. i imagine he will continue to refuse similar to his behavior with refusing to use the proper and correct fet for a "replication" in the first place .

and here the real bitch, none of you have the integrity to call him on it, yet you want his work on a pedestal. when it has been demonstrated again and again by the emperor penguin himself that he has:

little if any attention to detail.
a habit of redefining words to suit himself.
a habit of repeating the same mistakes.
a habit of confabulating excuses when he has been caught red handed.
a habit of stubborn refusal to take accountability for his words.
a habit of being a hypocrite (crying about being banned from energetic while at the same time banning me from his youtube channel), etc.

so again i ask you, where is your integrity? and do you realize that in showing none, it damages your credibility?

[MileHigh]

Wilby:

It's all a bit much for me.  I don't know what the real issue is but I can say this:  Nobody is perfect and TK does a much better job than Aaron and knows a lot more than Aaron.  I make the comparison because of your list.

I just read Aaron's last posting.  It looks like he is going to do the old warhorse testing method.  He is going to make a measurement of the power consumption of the Ainsley circuit.  Then he is going to take a hopefully newish freshly charged battery and run the Ainsley circuit and time how long it takes to get to 11 volts.  Then he is going to recharge the same battery and connect a load resistor that draws the same DC power and time how long it takes to get to 11 volts.  If the Ainsley circuit runs longer then that's proof of COP > 1.  There is a chance that he may even take another battery (same type) and run the DC control resistive test in parallel, which would be unthinkable in my book.

This test would not be acceptable for me.  It is just the same-old same-old.  He may even put a multimeter in series with the Ainsley circuit to measure the current consumption to set up the control test.  That would be totally the wrong way to go about it.

Aaron once mentioned his commercial pulsing charger to charge the batteries and it has an indicator light to tell you when the battery is charged.  That's an "idiot light" and you would be a fool to use that as an indication of full charge for a test like this.  You should not even start the test with the batteries fully charged, that's probably a nonlinear area.  You should start the test with the batteries 80% charged, but that's me.

So is that where we are, your "Leader" is going to use a $6000 DSO to look at battery and coil-resistor spikes and then do his dumb battery rundown test?  He can make much better use of his equipment.  He should set up his favourite spike display and do the real power measurement with the two channels of the DSO and spit out the V-I product waveform and calculate the real power consumption in Excel and then do the thermal profiling.  That's the real deal.

You should report back.  (Actually either Aaron's laptop or his desktop is "OU cookie free" so he is probably here in spirit) 

MileHigh