Quote from: picowatt on May 24, 2012, 08:32:54 AM
TK,

Just imagine how much more difficult it would be to prove that a circuit exceeds a battery's amp hour rating.  Proving/disproving a COP=Infinity is a piece of cake compared to proving exceeding a battey's amp hour rating.

Can a 60 amp hour rated lead acid battery be discharged at a rate that exceeds 60 amp hours?  I should think quite readily.  With the appropriate load profile, 300-600 amp hours would not seem at all unreasonable. 

Without calorimetry and equivalent heat rate and loading, it would seem very difficult to prove. 

As well, I don't believe the rules for the overunity prizes mention exceeding a battey's amp hour rating.

PW

The rules for the prize offered on this forum technically exclude the NERD device from the start. I think Stefan made an especial dispensation to allow Ainslie to be considered at all, at the beginning of all this nonsense.

As far as testing whether or not the circuit exceeds battery capacity, it is hard to find a flaw in the Dim Bulb Test, isn't it?

Take six batteries and discharge them fully (to some voltage/current end point or however) using a resistive load. Then charge up all these batteries using a standard automotive automatic charger that senses (by monitoring internal resistance or whatever magic they use) when the battery is charged and shuts off. Select two of these charged batteries randomly and set them aside. Take the other four batteries and use them to run the Ainslie circuit, heating a load to substantial temperature (let the load boil some water; I'll show you how to keep the water topped off if the NERDs can't come up with a way to do that) for a reasonable time, like 48 hours. A HIGH HEAT trial, in other words, actually boiling water in a liter container, with scope traces like we have seen which indicate several amperes flowing during part of the duty cycle. That is doable by the NERD circuit, isn't it? Well, at least  I know that TAR BABY can do it and is ready to do it at any time. Then, after the 48 hours of boiling water, the Dim Bulb test is performed, using standard off the shelf automotive brake light bulbs, or car headlight bulbs for a heavier draw. No instrumental monitoring is really needed but to clinch the case, current and voltage of the Dim Bulb test batteries could be monitored as well as the light output.
The bulbs that go dim first lose. Repeat the test several times (this is FREE ENERGY so it's worth the work, isn't it?) randomizing the batteries each time, three wins out of five should settle the matter. If the NERD device wins the dim bulb test, or even ties, then there might be justification to take the time and trouble to put the entire device in the calorimeter that I know about for comprehensive real-time tests of total power dissipation as compared to power supplied by the batteries.
(But I know that zipons are allergic to calorimeters, they get claustrophobic in there or something and probably won't perform their tricks, therefore using a calorimeter on NERD is invalid, therefore aliens.)

What is objectionable about this test? Arguments as to time and expense are irrelevant. How long, how much cost, would a person be willing to put in, if they were assured to win a Nobel Prize at the end of the process?

I'd do it in a heartbeat. Take time off work, use a float valve to keep water in there, a webcam with timelapse software, some fuses to protect stuff against the "brittle" "runaway" events that Ainslie has several times noted (but not explained), some popcorn and some DVD movies.... and in a week we have good repeatable data that will win us all kinds of awards and really attract attention.

Or not.

COP=17, COP=Infinity, and now,  ... COP<1.

Possibly the new forum will be UnderUnity.com

(DBT continued)

So.. .does the DBT really test this apparently new, modified and much weaker claim that the batteries simply "exceed their amp-hour capacity"? It was designed to test the original claim that the batteries DO NOT DISCHARGE, which has been made strongly many times.. Has that claim been withdrawn?

What if the NERD batteries do dim out first, before the unused ones do. Could it still be true that the NERD circuit is causing the batteries to "outperform"? Sure.

What is the measure of performance, though? Is it heat produced in a load? Total power dissipated in the entire circuit, including the RF radiation? How can this be tested?

Have the NERDs actually ever tested this? I don't think so. Certainly ALL of the calculations that Ainslie presents in support of this particular claim have been shown to be completely wrong.

Do we even know what the actual manufacturer's amp-hour rating IS, for these batteries?

Quote from: TinselKoala on May 24, 2012, 09:01:35 AM
The rules for the prize offered on this forum technically exclude the NERD device from the start. I think Stefan made an especial dispensation to allow Ainslie to be considered at all, at the beginning of all this nonsense.

As far as testing whether or not the circuit exceeds battery capacity, it is hard to find a flaw in the Dim Bulb Test, isn't it?

Take six batteries and discharge them fully (to some voltage/current end point or however) using a resistive load. Then charge up all these batteries using a standard automotive automatic charger that senses (by monitoring internal resistance or whatever magic they use) when the battery is charged and shuts off. Select two of these charged batteries randomly and set them aside. Take the other four batteries and use them to run the Ainslie circuit, heating a load to substantial temperature (let the load boil some water; I'll show you how to keep the water topped off if the NERDs can't come up with a way to do that) for a reasonable time, like 48 hours. A HIGH HEAT trial, in other words, actually boiling water in a liter container, with scope traces like we have seen which indicate several amperes flowing during part of the duty cycle. That is doable by the NERD circuit, isn't it? Well, at least  I know that TAR BABY can do it and is ready to do it at any time. Then, after the 48 hours of boiling water, the Dim Bulb test is performed, using standard off the shelf automotive brake light bulbs, or car headlight bulbs for a heavier draw. No instrumental monitoring is really needed but to clinch the case, current and voltage of the Dim Bulb test batteries could be monitored as well as the light output.
The bulbs that go dim first lose. Repeat the test several times (this is FREE ENERGY so it's worth the work, isn't it?) randomizing the batteries each time, three wins out of five should settle the matter. If the NERD device wins the dim bulb test, or even ties, then there might be justification to take the time and trouble to put the entire device in the calorimeter that I know about for comprehensive real-time tests of total power dissipation as compared to power supplied by the batteries.
(But I know that zipons are allergic to calorimeters, they get claustrophobic in there or something and probably won't perform their tricks, therefore using a calorimeter on NERD is invalid, therefore aliens.)

What is objectionable about this test? Arguments as to time and expense are irrelevant. How long, how much cost, would a person be willing to put in, if they were assured to win a Nobel Prize at the end of the process?

I'd do it in a heartbeat. Take time off work, use a float valve to keep water in there, a webcam with timelapse software, some fuses to protect stuff against the "brittle" "runaway" events that Ainslie has several times noted (but not explained), some popcorn and some DVD movies.... and in a week we have good repeatable data that will win us all kinds of awards and really attract attention.

Or not.

TK,

That test would be quite reasonable if the claim is COP=Infinity (or any claim that the batteries don't discharge).

If the claim has now changed to "exceeding amp hour capacity", this test is no longer applicable.  What would one use for an equivalent load profile on the batteries during the now admitted discharge phase?

Possibly using calorimetry and placing the whole device in a calorimeter to determine total heat output and then applying a load to generate a similar heat profile and then doing the dim bulb might be acceptable.

In any case, I see proving this new claim fraught with issues.

PW

Or, to use the word as Ainslie so often uses it.... simply "fraught". She seldom if ever specifies with what.

Nevertheless, you and I and Stefan and some others can figure out how to do it, by comparison against the same average DC power being drawn from a similar battery.
For example: Charge and select 8 batteries as before (two more). Determine the average power drawn for the NERD circuit using a simple filtered inline voltmeter and ammeter at the battery. Use a set of load resistors to create the same average DC power draw from the batteries that did not run the Ainslie circuit. Start both circuits at the same time and monitor the battery voltage and current. Use an inline Zener diode to shut off each circuit when the batt voltage falls below the Zener voltage. (A simple transistor "switch" or even a relay can be controlled by the Zener detecting when the voltage falls below the chosen point...say 11.5 Volts for a 12 volt battery, or 46.0 volts for a stack of 4 in series.)

The DC battery pack will last as long as its amp-hour capacity allows. The NERD circuit will either last longer... or it won't.