another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Yes, exactly. So a non-saturable core material is preferred, as each "slosh" as the energy goes between inductance and capacitance is an opportunity for energy to enter the system from outside and reinforce the resonance. Careful selection of your resonant frequency is also important here.... if you push the "swing" at too fast or too slow a rate you won't get optimal coupling of your input power to your resonant storage, so if you're looking to pick up energy from outside the system you need to have some idea of how to match its frequency. (My little contribution to the general theoretical BS around Tesla and MEGs and so on.)
Air (vacuum) works pretty good for a core material at the energies we are using. I hope you've had a chance to look at my TinselKoil videos on YT. I am using a similar switched-mosfet circuit as Rosemary does (except that I use a full bridge -- 4 mosfets -- instead of essentially 2), but because I know a bit about what I'm doing, I've gotten much better results.

Golly TK.  This is not actually addressed to me but I wonder if I could impose on you to explain what you mean by 'slosh'?  And what exactly do you mean by non-saturable core mateial?  And how does this toing and froing of energy between capacitance and inductance allow for energy to enter into the system from outside>  Outside where?  The vacuum of space, the vacuum around that non-saturable (whatever that means) core material.  Around the atoms in that material?  From our atmosphere?  What?  And what exactly is that energy?  From outside?  What does it do?  Are you proposing that all we need to do is set up any kind of really pacey resonance - and we'll be able to tap into INFINITE ENERGY SOURCES?  Somehow?  Rather magically I might add.  As Schubert has mentioned.  This is REALLY exciting.

@Rosemary, you seem to have trouble accepting that circuits like these can have current peaks in the multi-kiloAmpere range. Let me assure you this is not only very possible but common. POWER, as you have finally figured out, is the rate of energy dissipation. As a rate, it incorporates a time dimension. If the time duration of a high-current spike is small, there will be little POWER in it, hence little heating of conductors, and so on.

I'm more comfortable here.  It seems that I'm actually being addressed.  Thank you for that.  I was rather concerned that you were ignoring me.  But with reference to your statements.  I have absolutely NO DIFFICULTY in picturing waveforms that have their peaks in the multi-kilo - ampere range - as you put it.  What the hell. Make it even higher.  The multi - giga ampere range.  I'm really, really imaginative.  What I have difficulty believing is that one can ever actually measure at that pace.  No doubt doable.  But NOT within the ambit of those rather excellent scopes we use.  Also I'm rather concerned that you propose that the slower the pace - or as you rather ponderously refer to it - the 'time dimension' - then the less power in it. What do you mean by 'slower'?  That the spike is for a shorter duration?  Or that it occurs less frequently?  We have measured spikes on other tests that are there for very, very small 'moments' - of very short duration - and they COOK our resistor.  Indeed we've referenced one such in our 4th and final test of our paper.  You see my problem TK.  It's with the terms that you all bandy around - without any kind of qualification.  And then you presume that any of us reading here are able to understand it.  We'd first need to read you mind.  God forbid. 

@.99-- yes, I can see that now-- the mosfet behaviour will be sensitive to the relationship between the battery voltage and the FG's output voltage level, and the mosfets will interact through the circuit's capacitances. It would be interesting to apply the FG's signal through an appropriately chosen series capacitor, to assure only AC coupling.

It is the very first time that I've read that the MOSFET interacts with the circuit capacitance.  I thought the MOSFET was simply a solid state switching device that was triggered at the gate by an applied signal.  Who would have thought?  The explanations in the standard model are clearly very misleading.

It's clear from the blather above that Rosemary really still doesn't understand her circuit, nor the basics of power measurement, and most especially artifacts induced by measurement probes and other wiring. Still--- isn't it relatively easy to build this circuit, or sim it, and show how it actually behaves?

You really need to explain where my blather is INCORRECT.  I've mentioned this before.  It can only improve the general tone of this thread if we all tried to refer to the arguments and NOT to allegations about anything at all.  Otherwise one is left with the distinct impression that you've made a valid point.  Again.  God forbid.

And indulge me here.  I need to go back to this point again.

Air (vacuum) works pretty good for a core material at the energies we are using. I hope you've had a chance to look at my TinselKoil videos on YT. I am using a similar switched-mosfet circuit as Rosemary does (except that I use a full bridge -- 4 mosfets -- instead of essentially 2), but because I know a bit about what I'm doing, I've gotten much better results.

May I ask you to not use this thread to advertise yourself?  Or your work?  I only say this because I'm a little concerned that you're trying to steer this discussion away from the point.  We absolutely are not, to the best of my knowledge, discussing anything other than our claim related to our circuit.  Golly.  If I didn't know better I'd be inclined to think that you are anxious to take this argument onto some kind of irrelevant discussion on how to access strange energies - that have absolutely nothing to do with the standard model or our claim.  That way you will, MOST CERTAINLY, be able to corrupt this thread.  Which again - I am sure is NOT your intention.

Kindest regards
Rosie

[poynt99]

Still--- isn't it relatively easy to build this circuit, or sim it, and show how it actually behaves?

I've simulated this circuit to the nth degree, and I understand fairly well how it functions. I've also produced very similar results to Rosemary's own with my simulation, and she agrees that I have (I think this is the only thing we DO agree on).

FYI, Rosemary's circuit is not a switching circuit that builds up amplitude via resonance. It is a linear single-MOSFET amplifier that with the right amount of bias, bursts into oscillation (ever see a MOSFET audio amp oscillate?).

Regards,
.99

[SchubertReijiMaigo]

FYI, Rosemary's circuit is not a switching circuit that builds up amplitude via resonance. It is a linear single-MOSFET amplifier that with the right amount of bias, bursts into oscillation (ever see a MOSFET audio amp oscillate?).Regards,.99

1: If her circuit have no amplification of the oscillation it will be difficult to have OU...

@ Rosemary:

Hector Perez speak that the energy come from 1) Ambient thermal, 2) Gravity distortion(Anti-gravity) 3) Time distortion...
Work done and energy is two different things: if you can recycle energy you can done with the same Joule, work over over and over...

1) Energy is never destroyed or created but always recycled...
2) Work is not conserved, but energy always...
3) Work and energy are different...
4) Perpetual energy is not possible (energy conserved) but perpetual WORK is possible...
5) This is also my view of things, I'am also skeptic about to create energy out of nothing...

It's only a theory but an attractive theory that can allow OU while fully comply Conservation of Energy...

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Schubert - I agree with every single one of these postulates at some level.  Here's our arguments
.  Thermal is this magnetic dipole OUT of a field condition.  It is then chaotic.
.  Gravity is the interaction of a toroidal three dimensional field of dipoles with the orderly binding fields in coalesced matter
.  The particle in the field is invisible as it exceeds light speed.
.  Therefore it does not manifest in our time frame - except when the field loses it structure to become chaotic
.  Which is when it also manifests its thermal properties and is measured as heat.
.  Out of the field - in a chaotic condition -  it also manifests as visible flame - sparks - fire  which is when the dipole is slow
.  When those dipoles are in their 'hot' state they are not binding atoms
.  When they bind atoms they then decay back into an orderly field formation - to bind those atoms.
.  Effectively the 'flame disappears
.  In transferring their energy from chaotic to orderly - or from orderly to chaotic they are able to influence matter
.  Which means that - given the right conditions they can move from orderly back to chaotic back to orderly - into perpetuity

Which I think covers every point you've made here.  It is interesting Schubert.  I am well aware of the fact that we've discovered nothing new.  The only benefit that there is in our own proposals is that if you propose that magnetic dipole in a magnetic field - then it resolves all those outstanding questions in science.  And there are many.  We've been looking at the electric field for too too long, without actually determining its properties.

I'm attaching a link to my personal quarrel with the standard model in it's methods of resolving those outstanding questions.  You may want to dip in there.

http://newlightondarkenergy.blogspot.com/2010/11/more-on-inconvenient-truths.html

KIndest regards,
Rosemary

Hector Perez speak that the energy come from 1) Ambient thermal, 2) Gravity distortion(Anti-gravity) 3) Time distortion...
Work done and energy is two different things: if you can recycle energy you can done with the same Joule, work over over and over...

1) Energy is never destroyed or created but always recycled...
2) Work is not conserved, but energy always...
3) Work and energy are different...
4) Perpetual energy is not possible (energy conserved) but perpetual WORK is possible...
5) This is also my view of things, I'am also skeptic about to create energy out of nothing...

It's only a theory but an attractive theory that can allow OU while fully comply Conservation of Energy...

edited. I added a point.  Sorry. You may want to refresh the page.  I can't remember where.

[poynt99]

1: If her circuit have no amplification of the oscillation it will be difficult to have OU...

The circuit bursts into oscillation due to the bias and a healthy serving of stray inductance in the Gate and Source leads. The oscillation becomes amplified where she is taking her so-called "battery" measurement, because the probe is actually on the load, and NOT the battery terminal. There is a substantial length of wire connecting the two, and hence a significant amount of inherent inductance. The voltage at the load can be on the order of 200Vpp or so.

This is ONE of the fundamental flaws in the measurements that her team has taken, and misinterpreted as "the battery voltage". Clearly it is not, and I've pointed this out several times. Read my analysis Schubert, and you will see exactly what I am referring to.

.99