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

[powercat]

Hi Rosie
Now your running two threads,what a busy bee you are
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2rpBAZEVHmI
Good luck with the rocket surgery 
cat

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Hi Rosie
Now your running two threads,what a busy bee you are
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2rpBAZEVHmI
Good luck with the rocket surgery 
cat

Hello cat.  Where have you been for goodness sake?  Much in need of some distractions. You see the blood bath I had to clean.   LOL.  Yes I've been busy.

Take good care of yourself there cat.  And thanks for the link - as ever.

Kindest as ever,
Rosie
btw - I'm not running that thread.  It's given - gratis to Glen and Ash.  At least they can't accuse me of censorship.  And they can enjoy their freedoms of expression there.   

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Hi all,

I am saddened that there is venom here !  I view this topic and the work already done as very significant.  I compare it to CF, Cold Fusion, CANR or whatever name you give it ... not the same mechanism I admit, but the same 'flavor' of initial observation(s).

....an anomalous amount of heat (energy over time = power) evolving from a physical set up of components ... the observed and measured cumulative power output unquestionably exceeding the input power. 

The important term here is "POWER".  In TOO many experiments, people get all excited over a spike in energy, or temperature.  For a brief moment, something displays OU chacteristics ... for example, a pulse ... which is where most errors or misinterpretation occurs ... beautiful ignorance and arrogance blind experimenters much too often.

In the case of this COP>17 Circuit, there is none of this "misinterpretation" the same as there is NONE with CF.

It seems Aaron from Energetic has been the only one to post a replication ... it appeared inconclusive because of some technical roadblocks, but still something was demonstrated.

If there have been other replications I have not seen, sorry, and please steer me toward them.   This is too important to just argue and criticize over.

Greg

I've now been able to give this post of yours more attention Greg. The thing is this.  There is clear evidence of 'over unity' in as much as the circuit shows that more energy is being dissipated at a load than is being delivered by the supply source - in this case using a battery.

But there are downsides.  The most energy we could get on the resistor in any reliable way was between 25 to 30 watts.  And even at this level we stress the MOSFET with voltage spikes that it can barely tolerate.  We're trying different variations of the transistor - by using and IGBT but have had difficulty sourcing this.  We've now been informed that it's delivered and hopefully it'll be to hand before Wednesday.

But we've got a long way to go to get this onto a usable scale.  If the IGBT works with a diode across it to replace the body diode of the FET then we may be able to get something more in the region of 100 watts.  It's still not much but it's in the right direction.  Still plenty of testing to do.

Kindest regards,
Rosemary

[powercat]

Ok Rosie
Music and comedy,the videos keep rolling,stay tuned
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TfTy2gPZT_k&feature=PlayList&p=903757D3FEA6B5E6&index=0&playnext=1
enjoy
cat

[bolt]

Always great entertainment posted here! Heheheheh!