another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.

[TinselKoala]

Figure Captions:

Fig. 1:  Charging the batteries with an automatic regulated charger
Fig. 2:  The load Ext2, in a Fleaker, submerged in about 120 ml of oil (the load's volume is about 30 ml)
Fig. 3:  Another view of load in Fleaker
Fig. 4:  The load cell inserted into an insulated 1-liter beaker for the testing
Fig. 5:  Showing the hookup to the board's Ext Load terminals
Fig. 6:  Time-temperature data
Fig. 7:  The waveform used ("sorry about the light" tm) -- top trace FG, bottom trace mosfet drains, scope set as previously described, 1 kHz

[evolvingape]

 There are 5 options:


1) Run a DC control with a load matched to the RAT load.


2) Run the RAT circuit with a load matched to the control.


3) Run the RAT circuit with everything unplugged from the mains. Maybe with a 555.


4) Run the RAT circuit with a DC function generator run off the battery's.


5) Run the RAT circuit with a large capacitor simulating a battery.


Option 1 the control, will definitely run down.


Option 2 may run forever and possibly be COP = infinity, if the function generator is powered from the mains. The energy supplier's will provide OU all day, for a price.

Options 3, 4, 5, are additional useful data sets.


If the circuit itself performs underunity then options 3 and 4 will definitely run down, and have an efficiency ratio to the control.



If the circuit itself performs overunity with options 2 and 5 then the possible explanation is energy supplied by the grid. Possible efficiency ratio of infinity here.



If the circuit itself performs overunity on options 2, 3, 4 ,5, then it has achieved overunity and COP = infinity because they are all still running.



If the RAT circuits 2, 5 outperform the control by a considerable factor, say 100, but the isolated DC only closed system circuits 3, 4 run down, then the apparent overunity energy, is coming in through the wall socket.



RM

P.S. Multi purpose mineral oil 

[TinselKoala]

Now... DO THE MATH on my data.


But please, do it Rosemary's way. And tell me when my prize will be delivered... I badly need a hut on a Mexican beach.....

[TinselKoala]

Now... Rosemary discounts her calculation as presented here, as having nothing to do with her overunity claim... even though the claim is completely contained in the calculation.

She claims that the "true" evidence for her claim is in the paper. What it consists of is the interpretation of oscilloscope traces, perhaps including a math integration performed by the oscilloscope.

As I have shown in this and other contexts (look at my YT channel) this must be done properly and with great care to be accurate. These standards aren't met by Rosemary and her team, who can barely manage to set a trigger properly. If she understood what's necessary to perform and interpret a time integration of an instantaneous power waveform... I would be very surprised, based on the errors and misconceptions she continues to spout in this thread.

Nevertheless, now that I have duplicated and exceeded the performance of her circuit on a heating task, using the pitiful IRF830a mosfets instead of the holy magic IRFPG50..... what will happen when I reproduce her scope integration and show "negative power" "coming" from my batteries? When I show the same evidence as Rosemary, will I too be achieving overunity?

[TinselKoala]

Could I be a "tad out"? Let's see.... OH... yes. Where Rosemary multiplies her values times the number of minutes only, I have "mistakenly" multiplied by the number of minutes times the number of seconds... since the Watt and the Joule are defined by somthings happening "PER SECOND", not "PER MINUTE". So if I duplicate Rosemary and only multiply by the 63 minutes, I get only about 565 kiloJoules instead of the whopping 33.8 megaJoules. That's better... I didn't think it was getting that warm in here. And it's only around 2/3 my battery's capacity. SO if I can perform ONE more test, raising the oil to 80 degrees or so over an hour or hour and a half.... I'm home free, with proven OU. RIGHT? Or WRONG, Rosemary?

565 KiloJoules PER 63 minutes is only 149 Watts, a lot more reasonable figure. All the more reasonable as it only requires a current of a bit over 4 amps to provide it, and that's within the Mosfet's actual capability.

And it's still wrong, of course.