another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Dear MilesUpThere

I'm rather tired of the spurious tests that you all propose as being 'definitive' - when they're nothing of the sort.  If I put an AC capacitor in series arranged as follows - bat x 12 volts - to battery x 12 volts - to cap - to battery by 12 volts - to battery by 12 volts.  THEN.  IF and when I disconnect those batteries from the circuit I ASSURE YOU that the voltage on that cap will MOST CERTAINLY equalise to the voltages of the batteries on either side of it.  And that equalisation will apply whether or not the cap is first charged before it's put in series. 

Therefore the test that you propose is MEANINGLESS.  Why should the voltage over the cap be considered to be more or less significant than the voltage across the batteries?  Am I missing something?  Let me know. 

Regards
Rosemary

[Rosemary Ainslie]

And MileHigh - while I'm at it.  I'm glad to see you've dropped that argument related to the delivery of energy from the battery through the MOSFET source at Q2 to the Gate at Q1.  I get it you now see that it would need to breach the positive signal at the gate at Q1 or simply bypass it's own source to jump from Q2's gate to the Source leg of Q1.  NOT POSSIBLE.  Perhaps now you'll see the relevance of my explanations.  LOL  I just tried to dress it up and make it all a tad more interesting.   

And WHY would you think that I'd answer your posts on my hate blog?  Were you hoping? 

Kindest regards
Rosie

[hartiberlin]

Hello Harti,
....
Which new tests?  If you're referring to the use of a 555 switch in place of the function generator - then we've done that test.

Then, why don´t you post the full circuit diagramm and publish the test results ?

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Hello Harti,

Nice to see that you're reading here.  These tests were done during the 'life' - if that's the term - of our previous thread.  That thread was locked - some time back.  One of the many, I might add.  I distinctly recall downloading the test result - AND posting them.  I CERTAINLY remember reporting on it because I we tested it on a battery operated solder iron.  And it worked fine.  In any event.   Not sure why you need a schematic.  It's precisely our standard Q-array schematic but with only 1 transistor at Q1 and Q2 - with the switch driven by your standard 555 timer.  Nothing NEW.   The math trace on the LeCroy computed a negative voltage sum - therefore we're back to that INFINITE COP number. 

Then, why don´t you post the full circuit diagramm and publish the test results ?

We have a real problem when it comes to reporting on the test results.  You see they result in a 'negative' wattage.  And this has absolutely NO relevance to any standard paradigms.  Which is why we're moving to 'publish'.  This anomaly is better determined by our academics.  Wouldn't you say?  I'm not sure that I'm qualified to evaluate the results when they refute the most basic predictions of our Thermodynamic Laws.  I can only point to those results and PROPOSE an explanation.  But that's just to get the ball rolling - so to speak.

What is MUCH more significant is that it seems that some South African inventors have used this circuit variant where two batteries are probably used in parallel with the motorised load.  If this is what they're doing then I think THAT may be an interesting circuit to work on.  I'll see what I can do.  But it will take me until the back end of this weekend.  As you all know - my skills at drawing these circuits are not the most devoloped.

Kindest regards,
Rosemary.

And Harti - btw.  Can I impose on you to at least 'address' me when you post here?  Otherwise everyone will assume the same license to show absolutely NO respect for my hard efforts here. 

Again
Rosemary

[hartiberlin]

Hi Rosemary,
as with the 555 timer it is a new circuit  you
need to post a full circuit diagramms and the test protocol
with the numbers you have taken during the tests.

How was the 555 timer powered ?
A seperate battery
or the same battery ?

It makes no sense to mix up your old circuit with the
function generator where you might had the grid  ground current loop
problem and this new 555 timer circuit.

So it needs a new documentation with precise measurement protocols.

Also you need to disconnect all grounded scopes from the circuit during the longer tests
as this could also have the ground current loop problem.

Also you need to probe the batteries before and after with a battery capacity meter to see their
charge status.

Please quit posting your old measurement results when the function generator was used
as this was enough debunked already.

Regards, Stefan.