Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie

[poynt99]

OK Glen.

That's good news about the scope

Looking forward to your results.

.99

[Rosemary Ainslie]

A few hot tempers today.  Rosie, I think there is some room for strong debating, after all we are all adults.  Some people were hot under the collar across the Great Divide.

MileHigh

edit - Forget what I wanted to say here?  Getting way too old.

[Rosemary Ainslie]

That link only took me to the homepage. I don't take sides, but it's a fact there are truckloads of fake claims over the years that only serve the purpose to distract people. So indeed, people should look for signs of sincerity in the claims before spending time replicating!!!

Here's all I have so far. 1) I can't find any verifiable info on anyone that's claiming success. 2) It appears you shot down the only legit way I see to test your claim-- measuring total heat production. Years working in antenna design & theory I would agree there would be no appreciable EM radiation emission from such wire wound resistive inductors given your circuit.

So if most of it's not IR, and not EM radiation, then how is one to collect this unknown energy? Something's missing here.

Regards,
Paul

Hi Paul.  If I left this to Hoppy to answer you may be left with the wrong impression.

Here's the thing.  10 years ago the circuit was tested by some hefty authorities on measurement - all of which are listed in the Quantum article as accreditors.  But the paper itself is riddled with error.  The inductance or the gauge or the Ohms value of the resistor is clearly misrepresented.  The Quantum article does not show a 'feedback' diode while the papers, submitted subsequently, do.  There were no photographs taken of the experimental apparatus and nor were there representations of the waveforms across the shunt - nor some reference to a pdf of sorts showing the dump from the Fluke Scopemeter.  Added to this is the fact that there are two references to the measuring equipment used, the one being a Fluke 123 and the other a Fluke 199C.  The former is the correct reference.  I'm not sure if the article refers to a 'patented' technology - but there is liberal reference to the existence of a 'patent' which in fact is also erroneous.  A patent was never registered.

The excuse for all of the above was simply that I didn't know better.  Which is no excuse at all.  Truth is that after we published the Quantum article there was a flurry of media interest which led to an approach by the MTN Sciencentre to demonstrate the apparatus during an international conference being held there for physicists.  No-one attended the demonstration.  This was over a 5 or 7 day period - forget which.  That's when I simply gave up and for the next 8 years or thereby I simply shelved the project as being a non-starter.  My son then put my 'model' onto the internet - in that blogspot - and added the information that he had.  I really assumed that the entire thing would now simply die but that it would be there for the record.  Then - to cut a long story short - my children again bullied me to join a forum (The Naked Scientists) and thereafter I learned that the information had somehow also got onto this forum and energetic forum. 

The 'sincerity' of the claim is only in the list of accreditors.  But to compound the lack of good reporting - was the fact that none of them disclosed their reports to me.  All they were prepared to accredit was the existence of anomalies and that they recommended and, in one instance, actively supported academic investigation into the claim.

Regarding correct test procedures - there is nothing wrong with your proposal to determine the heat that is dissipated around the circuit.  But to determine the amount of energy required to dissipate that heat - or to determine the co-efficiency of performance - also requires a detailed measurement of the energy delivered by the power supply.  For accuracy here it is necessary to access good measuring instruments.  Hence our gratitude to Tektronix for making their own accessible.  But replication has not, thus far, been successful.  I am satisfied that it is some vagary associated with the resistor and hope that - as in the theme of 'The Medicine Man' this will eventually get exposed.  I think that there is a unique property related to frequency and inductance on the resistor itself.  In any event that's what is currently being considered and investigated.

Meanwhile to Aaron's credit - he has found a waveform at very low wattage - where there is an evidence of Over Unity - based on the fact that there is an apparent zero loss to the supply source.  As this is in line with my model I find it intriguing.  This test has been replicated with even more extraordinary evidence that the negative waveform appears to precede the positive - which is somewhat counter intuitive.  This has been variously explained and dismissed.  But my own opinion here is that it merits further investigation.

Which I think will give you a better overview of the situation.  All attempts at replication would be welcome.  It's a difficult circuit to analyse as there are so many variables related to the switching device, the resistors, and the frequencies.  But if you're up for it - we would be glad.  If you're not it would be understandable. 

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Poynt - please check your Skype messages

[PaulLowrance]

Hi Rosie,

Actually measuring the input power is easy. Just measure the *DC* current & voltage. It's a DC source, so one would measure the DC.

Are you able to replicate your own setup and get the same results that the output is greater than the input?

Paul