Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie

[Harvey]

Good Grief,

Can we all just set aside our personal feelings for a moment and focus on the real question? We have two 12Ah batteries in series for a total of 24V, that ran for a period of 7 hours and only dropped 0.23V http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/4314-cop-17-heater-rosemary-ainslie-97.html#post70105 and produced enough thermal energy in the MOSFET and Load resistor so as to call into question how 24Ah of battery capacity could perform such a feat. At the end of that run, the system was left running (Test #3b - unpublished) for another 14 hours, during which time the aperiodic harmonic mode was apparently lost and battery drain quickly escalated draining both batteries down to ~6V each while still producing heat above the expected values.

Then we have another 7 hour run, a duplicate on #3 http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/4314-cop-17-heater-rosemary-ainslie-99.html#post70771, which again, according to the 2µs data dump, started with an average of 24.3646V at the end of the first hour, and ended with an average of 23.989V at the end of the 7th hour for a difference of 0.3756V. And here again, we have a record of heat being dissipated that cannot be explained by that energy drain.

Add to this, that the shunt, the only return path between the circuit and the battery that is the only way for the energy to complete its path, has a voltage measured across it during 3 separate data dumps each hour with 10,000 samples in each dump for a total of 21 different data dumps and 210,000 individual samples which when all averaged together yields a negative average.

Then add to that, in an effort to find a classical reason for this phenomenon, we observe an unexpected shift in the current sensing timing relative to the inductive pulse which calls into question whether or not the current in the load resistor has been shifted as indicated, or if the use of the shunt is questionable altogether.

Then add to that, the especially powerful fact that this type of result was experienced years ago and evaluated by credible persons at that time who offered no explanation for the events they had witnessed and who even went to the painstaking effort of careful battery draw down tests to ensure that the heat performed was not coming entirely from the batteries.

When we sum these events, surely anyone with intelligence will recognize that this begs for an accredited answer as to how this is even possible not to mention why.

Wouldn't it be nice if we could work together to find the answer?

[Harvey]

Thank you for that analysis Poynt,

Hopefully this will help us to arrive at the truth regarding the timing and how it is possible to produce 100,800 Joules of heat with so little power.

Cheers,

[Rosemary Ainslie]

When we sum these events, surely anyone with intelligence will recognize that this begs for an accredited answer as to how this is even possible not to mention why.

Wouldn't it be nice if we could work together to find the answer?

I agree it would be nice.  My question is whether Poynt shows the required impartiality to tackle the question?  He is on record as stating that under no circumstances will he acknowledge that there is any evidence of anomalous heat signatures.  Does that make him a 'team player'?  My own experience of this mindset is that it's characterised by abject denial at all points.  I've only recently learned this and I see very little scope for dialogue. 

But that's only my opinion Harvey.  Unlike Poynt I'm open to persuasion. 

[Rosemary Ainslie]

i told you this a long time ago over at energeticforum... it took a page of you dancing around my increasingly specific questions to finally admit it. then you put me on your ignore list

we would have to get our resident 'brownie point' expert milehigh here to weigh in on what the amounts are, but i think that's 15 brownie points for me and 50 demerits for you.


edit: speaking of milehigh,it's modus operandi not modus operandum. ie: 'being stupid and pompous is milehigh's modus operandi'. operandum... lol dum indeed.

Hi Willby.  Always nice to see you around.  I've copied this in case you're on Poynt's ignore list here as well.  But I think I may soon be joining you there.   

[WilbyInebriated]

Good Grief,

Can we all just set aside our personal feelings for a moment and focus on the real question? We have two 12Ah batteries in series for a total of 24V, that ran for a period of 7 hours and only dropped 0.23V http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/4314-cop-17-heater-rosemary-ainslie-97.html#post70105 and produced enough thermal energy in the MOSFET and Load resistor so as to call into question how 24Ah of battery capacity could perform such a feat. At the end of that run, the system was left running (Test #3b - unpublished) for another 14 hours, during which time the aperiodic harmonic mode was apparently lost and battery drain quickly escalated draining both batteries down to ~6V each while still producing heat above the expected values.

Then we have another 7 hour run, a duplicate on #3 http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/4314-cop-17-heater-rosemary-ainslie-99.html#post70771, which again, according to the 2µs data dump, started with an average of 24.3646V at the end of the first hour, and ended with an average of 23.989V at the end of the 7th hour for a difference of 0.3756V. And here again, we have a record of heat being dissipated that cannot be explained by that energy drain.

Add to this, that the shunt, the only return path between the circuit and the battery that is the only way for the energy to complete its path, has a voltage measured across it during 3 separate data dumps each hour with 10,000 samples in each dump for a total of 21 different data dumps and 210,000 individual samples which when all averaged together yields a negative average.

Then add to that, in an effort to find a classical reason for this phenomenon, we observe an unexpected shift in the current sensing timing relative to the inductive pulse which calls into question whether or not the current in the load resistor has been shifted as indicated, or if the use of the shunt is questionable altogether.

Then add to that, the especially powerful fact that this type of result was experienced years ago and evaluated by credible persons at that time who offered no explanation for the events they had witnessed and who even went to the painstaking effort of careful battery draw down tests to ensure that the heat performed was not coming entirely from the batteries.

When we sum these events, surely anyone with intelligence will recognize that this begs for an accredited answer as to how this is even possible not to mention why.

Wouldn't it be nice if we could work together to find the answer?

well said harvey. anyone with intelligence will recognize that this begs for an accredited answer as to how.

regarding being able to work together, i agree that it would be nice, but that's a utopian dream.
it is similar to bringing a theist (tk, poynt, mk, hoppy and the rest that believe all their answers are contained in a book written by man) and an atheist to the same table to work together to find the answer to 'is there a god?'. there will be no agreed upon consensus. ever.

look back to how this thread started, a totally biased hack of a replication by tk. when i asked when he was going to do it right, they called me a troll and produced a shit storm of obfuscation. when i told poynt his sim was nothing more than an incomplete simulation i got called a troll. of course, no one called hoppy a troll when he said the same thing a hundred pages later... the poynt is, to paraphrase aldous huxley, if the history of this thread is any indication of the future of this thread, and it usually is, the future of this thread is more of the same. don't be disappointed.