another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.

[TinselKoala]

You're quite welcome.  I suspected that was the case.

You've shown us that spurious oscillations are easily
obtained.  Are you attempting to illustrate that such
oscillations may be beneficial?

Or, are you simply demonstrating that they may detract
from circuit performance?

Neither, actually. I am attempting a "faithful reproduction of the intended Ainslie circuit", complete with the oscillations SHE has attempted to show on her not-so-informative DSO traces. I hope to get some kind of acknowledgement from somewhere that, when the circuit is supplied with the "correct" mosfets at the end of this week, if my supplier is correct, and I can find out some coherent information as to the inductance and resistances necessary, that it does the same things that Ainslie's own circuit does. After all.... 5 IRFPG50 mosfets will be installed; three 12 volt 5 A-H batteries will be used, a load matched in inductance and resistance to her claimed load will be used.... the circuit will be laid out with as much "sloppiness" as I can stomach, and hopefully will make the same kinds of oscillations Rosemary's is claimed to make.
Note that my circuit already DOES make the same kinds of oscillations, even using Internal Load 1. My old HP180 scope can't display them well enough for photography. But.... yes indeed I do have, a short drive away, an advanced 4-channel Tektronix DSO with, IIRC, 1 GHz bandwidth.

Is it a faithful reproduction of the intended Ainslie circuit?

Some would say no, since 1) I am using IRF830A mosfets from my parts stock; my supplier only had a single IRFPG50 in stock, so I only have a single one of those on hand. They are relatively expensive so I don't want to waste them during circuit config and basic baseline studies. (I already smoked a row of 5 2n7000s on this nonsense, but they are only a buck each.) And 2) I do not yet have the correct inductances... and my LC meter is blown (new one arriving at the weekend, hopefully) so I'm pretty much shooting in the dark on the inductance. But you can see the effect in the photos....

And of course I could duplicate her circuit and layout EXACTLY even down to the pegboard and RAT's nest wiring, and she would still claim that it wasn't a good replication... because you see, I am TK, the mighty would-be debunker with lousy experimental and math skills and garage-sale apparatus. Oh... and I live in Texas, and everybody knows what that means. BIG OIL RULES !!

(ETA: Since you seem to be interested and able to interpret what you see, perhaps you would like to review my earlier work with Rosemary's original circuit and COP>17 claim, from 2009 and earlier. Check out my YT channel and look for the early videos with "Electric OU" in the title and "Ainslie" in the keywords. Did I do a faithful enough reproduction then, or not? I'd be happy to hear YOUR criticism and comments, because that could only improve my present efforts to HONESTLY TEST ROSEMARY'S CIRCUIT and CLAIMS in a rational and hopefully unequivocal manner.... since she so evidently refuses to do so in public.)

[TinselKoala]

What, I gave you my calculations, which agreed with yours.  I am not sure what more I can answer.

Sorry... I guess you missed seeing this post, a few pages back in the thread.... because as typical, Rosemary came in with post after post of irrelevant innuendo and more absurdities to distract from the real issues.

Let me state my position clearly.

1. Rosemary Ainslie over the years has claimed that at least 4 (slightly) different circuits using ordinary MOSFETS switched in a manner detailed in the MOSFET's data sheet.... all produce overunity performance, from COP>17 (her early claim) to COP = INFINITY in her latest claim, along with battery recharging and consuming NO power from the batteries.

2. The data and evidence that she has provided are inadequate to support such a grand claim.

3. The data and evidence that she has provided... the RAW DATA (most of it) ... CAN INDEED be duplicated, on demand, both in standard circuit model simulations as .99 and others have shown, and in real circuitry, as FuzzyTomcat and others have shown, including myself. These reports have been published, posted, referenced out the wazoo.

4. Rosemary has shown repeatedly that she does not understand basic arithmetic, algebra, nor does she have a grasp of the basic concepts of the calculus. She consistently and constantly confuses units of energy and power, showing that she does not understand the difference ("`1 Watt = 1 Joule, the terms are INTERCHANGEABLE" she says).

5. The conclusion that Ainslie's circuits perform in any manner other than the perfectly ordinary, is a result of her incorrect interpretation of the raw data, including but not limited to arithmetic errors, algebra errors, and improper data collection. When the data AS SHE PRESENTS IT is analyzed correctly, no indication of any "overunity" or battery charging performance due to her circuit can be found. This part of the story has been "replicated" over and over, by everyone with the knowledge and skill and apparatus to TEST FOR THEMSELVES.

6. No credible replication of her overunity claim exists, anywhere.

7. The present discussion illustrates each of my points above, in spades.


@eatenbyagrue: You no doubt have gotten caught up a little bit by now. I ask you therefore, Counselor: have you been able to find anything in what I've said, posted or linked to that is incorrect, untrue, or not supported by external independent evidence?

Have you been able to find anything that Rosemary has said, posted or linked to that is incorrect, untrue, or not supported by external independent evidence?

(edited for typos and grammar)

And let me also ask... do you find anything potentially "actionable" in anything I've said? I've called her ignorant and willfully so, and referenced her "calculations" as proof. I've called her a liar, and there is ample evidence of that from FTC, Powercat, and others including myself in this thread.

And she has threatened me with "killing" and "putting to rest", along with trying to silence my VALID criticisms and CONSTRUCTIVE suggestions and tests .......  go figure.

[TinselKoala]

Rosemary Ainslie says:

It really does  not matter if I'm wrong.

Oh... yes... it does indeed matter. Because it shows that YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT when you attempt to discuss matters concerning Watts, Joules, and simple algebra.

Bubba you're getting tedious in the extreme.  Correctly it is one Joule per second - but since 1 watt = 1 Joule and since 1 Joule = 1 watt per second - then AS I'VE EXPLAINED EARLIER - the terms are INTERCHANGEABLE.  Which is ALSO explained in WIKI.  Much more important is that you answer your earlier concern that a battery can deliver a negative current flow - which seems to be something you really CAN endorse.  Somehow?

I'm not going to answer any more of your posts Bubba.  They're getting too tedious.  And they've got absolutely NOTHING to do with the topic.

QED. But there are also more recent examples of Rosemary's arithmetic "skills", as our three readers can see for themselves.

[SeaMonkey]

...
Oh... and I live in Texas...
...

That is very encouraging!  Some in the Republic
seem to think they live in TX...

I'll take a look.

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Golly TK.  I could hardly expect you to give me your actual address.  That would, indeed, be reckless.  Just a service address will do.  Your attorney would be a safe bet.  Surely?  And I promise you faithfully that I won't attack you on anything other than purely legal grounds.  You can even keep your name hidden - provided only that you'll answer to tinselkoala in Court. 

Kindest regards TK
Rosie Pose

LOL.  And I assure you that I have no 'hired thugs'.  If I did I'd use them to help defend me here on this thread against this 'elite troll army' that I face, all alone.  But it's intriguing to see how frightened you are at the prospect of becoming accountable.  It must be nice to hide behind an identity - where you can say what you want - allege what you please - and absolutely get away with it.

I get the distinct impression you're avoiding this post of mine TinselKoala.  Is there a reason for this?

R