Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie

[MileHigh]

Rosemary:

I probably said this before, but to put my knowledge and experience in context, all that stuff was stuff I leaned in school between 25 and 30 years ago.  Then I stopped working in a true technical domain as a designer of digital circuits about 18 years ago.  When I started looking into websites like this and EF and YouTube I was really rusty.  I am not a scientist in the truest sense of the word.  None the less, I have soaked up a lot of technical knowledge in one form or another over the years.  When I actually worked on a bench debugging designs I was very good at it.  I think that I am good at reverse-engineering stuff that is shown in various clips, take the interferometer stuff as an example.

I used to play with lasers on a real optical bench, but not for any scientific reasons, but to do far-out laser light shows.  It is amazing to stand inside a cone of a colour modulated Krypton laser beam and switch the smoke machine on.  lol  Although on the scientific side I remember doing the classic double-slit interferometer experiment in a physics class in junior college more than 30 years ago.  You make a few tape measure measurements and if you know your slit separation you can easily calculate the wavelength of the coherent light going through the pair of slits.

The high water mark for funny and slapstick postings was the "Barb Wire" posting.  Now that feeling has subsided, so I will wait with anticipation for new stuff to happen.  It's just some fun.  I never claimed to be a full-time crazy.

.99:

Yes, my words of wisdom are, "Two traces on your scope display give you 10 times as much information as a single trace."

The pet peeve is, "Please clearly state what points your scope probes are measuring across because I don't take it for granted that they are in the 'usual' place(s)."

Fuzzy:

I looked at your pictures and for your standard Ainsley circuit project you should try suspending your new load resistor in mid air vertically.  I know that I am repeating myself here but there are sound reasons for doing that.  If you ask I will tell you why.

Finally, here is a YouTube clip that is a complete break from the subject at hand.  A poem, a fireside chat, a lament for White boys that can't dance like me.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ghtvYTdtJA

MileHigh

[poynt99]

OK Glen.

Here are some close scope shots.

Vload again, this time with closer resonance frequency. Also notice at the end of each cycle how the last half cycle increases in amplitude slightly, then the big negative half cycle, just as your Fluke scope shot.

Vshunt, showing negative spike before positive. Negative is not larger than positive, but with more adjusting and tweaking I am sure I can achieve this also. I suspect though that even if I did, the net average would come out to a positive, just as it does with Vload as shown.

Again, the MOSFET is not conducting here, and is really only being used for its parasitic inter-electrode capacitances as the signal paths.

.99

[poynt99]

Rose asked about the resistor I'll be using:

Length=165mm, Diameter=20mm
No. of turns=64 (2mm spacing)
R=10.1 Ohms, Inductance=29uH (will confirm with a better meter)

.99

http://i1004.photobucket.com/albums/af166/poynt99/Resistor/resistor001.jpg
http://i1004.photobucket.com/albums/af166/poynt99/Resistor/resistor002.jpg

[poynt99]

btw all,

Has Aaron asked for (or been sent) one of GroundLoops's PCB's?

.99

[MileHigh]

.99:

Thank you for your amazing effort in observing a real life phenomenon and then working with your PSpice modelling tools to replicate that phenomenon.  It demonstrates how sophisticated the models are but more importantly how you can go from mathematically modelling something to a numerical analysis of that modelling so that you can visualize the actual operation of the circuit with respect to time.  The voltage at every node and the current through every loop is modeled by a set of differential equations that can be converted into series of time-based functions.

Some people may not realize that all PSpice is doing is what scientists and physicists and engineers have been doing for hundreds of years on paper.  The understanding of how a mechanical or electrical circuit operates was solved and perfectly understood by keen minds hundreds of years before PSpice came around.  PSpice is simply a luxury that does the calculus for you and gives you a pretty display on your computer monitor.  The brains "under the hood" for PSpice is the real "magic", and the "magic" is just good sound science.  The real scientist or engineer *must* understand what is under the hood, that's where the real knowledge is.  PSpice itself is just a "glorified pile of wires, vacuum tubes, and relays."

It is important to also state that you successfully modeled a "spurious" or "undesirable" operating mode of the MOSFET that you normally would not ever expect to see in a normally operating MOSFET switching circuit.  It clearly demonstrates how the modelling is just as good at modelling non-standard observable effects as compared to standard observable effects.

A long time ago you were asked if PSpice would "allow for over unity" but that is a misnomer.  The mathematical modeling is "over unity neutral" - the only thing it does is show us a perfect analogy for the way the universe operates based on understood principles.

PSpice can electrically and thermally model the Ainsley circuit and show exactly how it operates in the real world.  If you have an understanding of what is under the hood (even if it is from a foggy 25-year-old memory) then you know with certainty that COP 17 is not achievable.

The real conclusion, the one that is upsetting to free energy enthusiasts is this:  Any combination of passive components (resistors, capacitors, inductors, diodes, transformers, magnets, etc) and active components (transistors, MOSFETS, TRIACs, etc) cannot produce free energy.  It is simply impossible.

There is always someone posting yet another coil kickback circuit or magnet motor configuration and they start threads that are short or long, but they all fall into the same boat described above.

I know that it is frustrating for some people because they firmly believe that you have to experiment with every new configuration in the hope that they will find over unity.  The intellectual leap that they either can't take or refuse to take is to be able to accept the generalized statement about passive and active components not being able to be put into a configuration that gives you free energy.

With respect to batteries, they are peculiar for sure, and sometimes appear to be "absorbing" energy from "somewhere."  This is all a false hope, batteries are simply a complex bunch of chemical and physical reactions that can release electrical energy or store electrical energy.  It is easy to be misled by observing a battery and circuit over a short period of time.  You can't hook up any kind of circuit consisting of active and passive components to a battery and expect that somehow the battery + circuit system will manifest over unity or COP > 1.

This PSpice simulation by Poynt99 carries a message.  The message is that the scientists and engineers really got it right, they weren't fooling around.  They GOT IT - the conclusions are right.

Rosemary, this little treatise is not an attack on you in any way, it deals with the issue in a generic sense.  This is a "step back" moment for those that want to see.  If people reading this don't see or don't want to see, keep doing your thing, nobody is stopping you.  Watch for the data to come in on the Ainsley replications and draw your own conclusions.

For all those people that will point to other threads here or on the EF as proof of over unity, realize that doing this stuff properly does require that you have a solid knowledge base and a good skill set and can apply yourself.  If you don't posses those attributes and you want to believe then you can easily mislead yourself and others.  The classic story to illustrate that is the horsetrainer that was convinced that his horse could do simple additions and subtractions.  That's not a cliche, it really happened.  It is a fun read if you want to look it up.

Thank you again .99, we are not worthy!!

MileHigh