Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie

[TinselKoala]

Well, if she has indeed matriculated, and is qualified for university on that basis, I owe her an apology. What was the name of the school? I'd like to give them a call and ask about their curriculum.

In the United States, where I was educated, high-school graduates who intend to pursue scientific careers--you know, the ones where people do theories to replace quantum electrodynamics, design circuits, do experiments and write papers--they generally have had at least maths through trigonometry and precalculus...But that's here. Sorry for assuming the same standards everywhere.

Tell us, Rosemary, is the status of your matriculation the same as the status of your patent? Can you perhaps be so kind as to show us a photo?

Because we know you and I don't always agree on what things are called.

What you call a "patent" is really only an application, and what you call a scientific paper is, well, not publishable as such. And what you call ON I call OFF, and what you call ...Oh, never mind. We do not speak the same language and we never will.

You graduated high school (albeit without what I would consider a basic education.) So I apologize for implying that it was you to whom I referred as a "high school dropout."

And you really should apologize to me, for you have insulted me far more seriously. In addition, I have done, so far, thousands of dollars of work for you, for nothing. In fact, had you gone the correct route of hiring a qualified engineering firm to research and test your idea at YOUR expense like it should be done, it is very likely that I would still be testing your device--just as I am now--only then I would be getting paid royally for it.

If you really want people to replicate your work, they need to see :

1) the exact circuit diagram that was used to generate the data in your experiment, including the correct 555 timer AS ACTUALLY USED BY YOU, and they need some evidence of that. Evidence, not more words.

2) they need to see an example of these random periodic resonant oscillations that you are describing. A scope shot. I happen to know that the Fluke 199's serial interface allows the transfer of screen shots to your computer for storage, display...and printing. And I believe they had cameras back then, even in your neck of the woods. Your experiment is insufficiently documented.

3) they need to see the reports from all the labs and universities and academics and all, that you showed your device to and who, according to you, approved your work and your numbers.

Readers, ask yourselves why Rosemary is being given any credence at all?
I think it is because of the patent. We have a lot of respect for ideas that get patented, like HJ's linear SMOT that may be the basis for a permanent magnet motor. And there are many other patents that we pay attention to, because the patenting process provides at least a small degree of vetting, and for other good reasons.
I think many people are paying attention, who wouldn't otherwise, because of the patent.

But--there is no patent. This high school graduate has only filed an application.

When I first got into this I was under the impression that there was a patent. And from reading the NakedScientists thread, I can tell that other people were too. I mean, I understand there is no intent to deceive, but when someone says "I have a patent" and links to a document, calling it a "Patent", I and at least some others expect that to be true.

[ATT]

(er, the raw jpg is too large for the attachment. I'll upload it to the file section. If someone would enhance contrast and shrink it enough to post in-line, I would be grateful. )

[TinselKoala]

Beautiful. Thanks, ATT.

Well, that's clear enough, isn't it? Anybody with a high school education should be able to figure that out.


So that's what raw data looks like. With a little crunching. You know, it gives a lot of credence to the fact that the experiment was actually performed as described. No--wait. That's MY experiment. We haven't seen any of Ainslie's raw data yet.

[TinselKoala]

OK, note some things. In the 4 percent ON duty cycle, the load did not heat as much as Ainslie's did "in a little over an hour." By a big margin.

On the other hand, with the 96 percent ON duty cycle the load heated so much I had to terminate the experiment because my draft shield was made of plastic, after about 4 minutes or so.

So it is pretty clear that so far, I have been unable to make the magic.

My load parameters in this pilot experiment are sufficiently different from Ainslie's to make it difficult to draw conclusions, other than it is not surprising that the load got hot with the long duty cycle, since it was essentially shorted across a 25 volt battery.

But why didn't it heat more with the 4 percent duty cycle? This load should have heated more than Rosemary's did, but it didn't.

So, either way, I did not see anything that I would write home about. And my batteries did not seem to recharge, although there was one reading that was higher than the previous one. Nothing to get excited about.

I haven't done the energy calculations; I prefer to let the instruments do those, there are fewer chances of error that way..at least for me.

More to follow.

[henieck]

Does anyone here have the ability to pull a still off TK"S vid and highlight the meter connections in RED?
Chet

Press “pause”, then press “Print Screen” key on your keyboard (the screen shot is now in memory). Open “Paint” (or any other graphic application). Press Ctrl+V or use “paste” form the menu, then make whatever you like with this, and save it.