Rosemary Ainslie COP>17 Circuit / A First Application on a Hot Water Cylinder

[conradelektro]

I went through “Rosemary’s threads” in the energetic forum and also there through “5359-mosfet-heating-circuits”.
This provided a hint concerning “frequencies and duty cycles”.

------------------
A person called Harvey wrote:

I see that there are still some experimenting with the RA (Rosemary Ainslie) circuit and the questions regarding energy gains persist. The test of choice used to demonstrate energy gains was Test #13.

What is the frequency? That depends on what part of the circuit we look at. But generally we use the gate pulse frequency:

426.0 kHz
Rise 768.4ns
Fall 513.0ns
High 13.61V
Low -4.800V
-------------------

All tests and documents can be found here:
http://cid-6b7817c40bb20460.office.live.com/browse.aspx/.Public/Mosfet%20Heater

The ominous test 13 is here (copy the whole link, ^ truncates it):
http://cid-6b7817c40bb20460.office.live.com/self.aspx/.Public/Mosfet%20Heater/Test%20^313^_11-26-09.zip

I am too dumb to understand the data; the only thing I see in Test 13 is a temperature increase from about 130 F to 138 F of the load resistor.

Test 13 was obviously conducted with the NE555 circuit shown is this thread.

May be Rosemary can enlighten us on the significance of Test 13.

For me the 426 KHz (and the duty cycle) of Test 13 represent a starting point for further tests.

Although I would not use an NE555 circuit but a signal generator or a microprocessor to generate the 426 KHz pulses (on the gate of the IRFPG50). Starting with 426 KHz one would vary the duty cycle from 1% to 99% and later also the frequency slightly up and down.

I know that this is a childish and optimistic approach, but one should start with very simple circuits as depicted in Rosemary’s patent applications in order to test the alleged effect and not the components of a rather complicated circuit.

In case the effect gives for instance 10 Watt heat surplus, I would not worry about a few Milliwatt introduced by a signal generator (or microprocessor based circuit) via the gate of the IRFPG50.

In case the best temperature increase achievable in the load resistor with the alleged effect is only about 10 F (10 degrees Farenheit), we are in trouble. This is much too little for simple temperature measurements and will convince no one (especially not me).

On the positive side, 426 KHz is easy. It can be handled with the most basic components and equipment. This encourages me to give it a try.


A remark on the tests done by Fuzzy Tom Cat (Glen):

If the effect is real, it most probably can not be "seen" by a scope, because it will be outside conventional electronics. One can only hope to "feel" it via an unexpected temperature rise in the "coil like load resistor". The scope can only serve to document the necessary square wave on the gate of the switch. The "waves" happening over the "load resistor" will be "random noise" in terms of todays electronic equipment. To "see" the effect Rosemary is talking about, one would need equipment which has not been invented yet.

Greetings, Conrad

[nul-points]

hi Rosemary

thanks for starting this thread so we can all try to understand the phenomena you've seen with this circuit - i hope you'll be able to stand aside from the distractions and get on with the business at hand


@Conrad
i appreciate that your intention is to clarify details, leading on to close replication of the circuit and testing of such

if i understand the context of the effect correctly, i believe that there is a subtle element of the necessary pre-conditions for this phenomena to occur - and this subtlety is not captured in the usual inputs to a circuit replication, ie. the circuit schematic & the signal timing diagrams


let me share an example of this: i've worked with both analogue and digital circuits for approx 40 years as a hobby (i have an EE degree, but work in software side of engineering) and on occasions, when using potentiometers to adjust the frequency (or even level, sometimes) of a signal, i've found that a certain (very critical) position of the potentiometer can sometimes cause a spontaneous 'oscillation' to occur

for many years i attributed this behaviour to the resistance of that particular setting of the pot causing the circuit to become unstable

however, in the last few years i'm beginning to wonder if, instead, the effect is some physical interaction between the metal wiper and the carbon track in the pot itself (eg. the junction characteristics of the materials? - or the physical dimensions/wavelength involved at that wiper position? who knows?)

the point of my illustration is this - if i now wish to share this effect for replication by others, then
- firstly, my circuit schematics and 'intended' drive signal diagrams are not going to show anything 'unusual'
- secondly, there is no 'correct' input signal level or frequency to suggest that people replicate

to try and replicate my example by using an embedded processor or a signal generator to 'recreate' the input drive signal would bypass the effect altogether!


it's possible that the whole trigger to the effect which Rosemary has observed, may be traced back eventually to the 'hand-tuned' input signal provided by the combination of the 555 timer and its setting potentimeters

Rosemary has stated the conditions under which she observed the effect - we should start the investigation from there

only if & when we find that the effect turns out to be entirely 'signal-dependent', not 'component-dependent' (or even 'user-action-dependent'?), can we move on to generate that signal by some other means (such as PICs, or sig-gens)

i agree that the process is labour-intensive, vaguely-defined and uncertain - but, in my experience, if we need to look for something like a 'needle in a haystack', then it's usually a good idea to start with with the right haystack! 

ok, that's my 2-cents worth, i'll shut up now!

good luck with the investigations everybody
sandy

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Hello Sandy,

I suspect that what you saw was that aperiodic Hartley oscillation.  Indeed that is a required pre-cursor to this effect.  But it is NOT difficult to get.  It simply requires a fine tuning.  If you read up on the Quantum and the Open Source papers this is clearly referenced.

The thesis is that the energy - wherever it is from - is returned to the source.  Notwithstanding which heat is dissipated at the load.  While I appreciate your summation as valid - it is only valid from within your experience.  When I embarked on this info through the internet number - I was roundly advised that a supply could not regenerate itself.  Therefore would this system never work.  That much is evidently and empircally disproved.  I would strongly recommend that you read the paper published in scribd.  But the balance of your comments are indeed valid.

Kindest regards,
Rosemary
http://www.scribd.com/doc/26240411/PROVING-OVER-UNITY-THE-HARD-WORK-OF-MANY-DEDICATED-OPEN-SOURCE-MEMBERS

[nul-points]

hi Rosemary

thanks for the feedback

perhaps my example was too close to the actual characteristics seen here - i wasn't intending it as being related directly to the effect you've seen

my post was intended to encourage Conrad to start with the initial conditions as you've provided, rather than possibly 'bypassing' a potentially important element of the effect in the name of efficiency


i'm interested to learn that there is a name for such an effect and i'll try & do some background reading

i don't know if it's the same Hartley but i did some 'tinkering' with Hartley oscillators as a lad, over 40 years ago - although that was just a cursory interest in 'less-than-legal' RF applications 


getting back to the present, i've seen something similar with trimmer-tuned oscillator frequency on a switched-charge capacitor to capacitor experiment i've been 'playing' with over the last couple of years - in fact, when i first saw details of your work a year or so back, your mention of the aperiodic aspect of the drive signal immediately struck a chord!


thanks for the link to Scribd - i've tried a couple of times to access the pages but i've been prevented, by either the PCs or networks in use, from seeing anything in the Scribd script windows

my main PC is tied up 24/7 with a datalogging exercise in a rather constricted space at the moment, so it's not easy to use it to browse sites but i do intend to take a look at the files you've uploaded for us all


i have another long-term experiment running at present which, like yours, appears to be sustaining the source-supply

in fact, in just the last couple of days i've physically (but not electrically, of course) isolated & insulated the battery in its own aluminium case within an outer metal enclosure and the first informal indications are that the battery (8.4V NiCad) is experiencing an approx 0.5*C drop compared to a similar battery (disconnected) in a control setup of similar enclosures

this is interesting because i believe that NiCad charging behaviour is endothermic, whilst discharging is exothermic - so this suggests that my battery is tending more towards 'charging' than 'discharging'


i hope i've corrected any impression that my previous post was in any way a criticism or an attempted explanantion of any aspect of your work


all the best
sandy

[conradelektro]

Rosemary wrote:

WE HAVE EXPERIMENTAL PROOF OF A THESIS THAT REQUIRES ENERGY EFFICIENCIES GREATER THAN 1
WE HAVE WIDE AND COMPREHENSIVE ACCREDITATION OF THAT EXPERIMENTAL PROOF
WE HAVE FULL AND COMPREHENSIVE DATA ON A REPLICATION OF THAT EXPERIMENT AVAILABLE TO OPEN SOURCE

What I asked for with my "simple questions" was:

Please present the "EXPERIMENTAL PROOF".

Please present the " WIDE AND COMPREHENSIVE ACCREDITATION OF THAT EXPERIMENTAL PROOF".

Please point us to the "OPEN SOURCE" where the "FULL AND COMPREHENSIVE DATA ON A REPLICATION OF THAT EXPERIMENT" is visible.

For many reasons (may be it is my own stupidity) it does not happen like a simple and straight forward person like me hopes.

Sorry, I thought that this forum was intended to clarify the above questions and to establish a solid basis for further experiments.

Please excuse my questions, it will not happen again.

Conrad