Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie

[Cloxxki]

If all these unbelievable stories are true about WITTS, and they have been the major force for F-E over the years and behind nearly everything... Then we have THEM to blame for it being still suppressed and not in the mainstream; with yet no significant body of solid proofs to stand by. That spells "failure" then decade after decade (no matter what wonderful techs they may have created), and not very deserving of our money.

But the idea around here lately is attack Open Source projects where no one is asking for any money... As it is the REAL DANGER to those who would suppress... Since the only effective weapon left then is to convince us to stop study on our own.

I whole heartedly agree. Anyone that has true OU in hands, is part of the PROBLEM, not the solution. All our job to mankind is not to invent, but to share after we've invented. Inventing is our nature, egoism our worse disease.
Ever seen a Gorilla aplha male demand all the bananas for himself? Give them a big pile of the good stuff, and after he's had a good meal, he'll share his wealth with his "people". Asking nothing in return but respect.
When you ask money for free energy, you deserve neither that, nor respect.
Many of the FE inventors were god fearing man. How do they explain themselves to their maker, or ever the guy at heaven's gate?

[Gauss]

Cloxxki, you are hereby uncoverred too..... I agree about the inventors not sharing but you know what, many never got the chance sharing anything since health quickly deteriorated after some "friendly guys" visited them.

They really haunt you these Witts guys. Since you worry so much about them here is their website: www.witts.ws - I am sure when they have news you will see it there.

If I were in your(or maybe Peter´s clothes that is) clothes I would sell one of all the FE devices he got hold of during the 70s and 80s when he assisted all those great inventors. Some people are bound to get rich very soon if the world is still standing.

Good luck!

I whole heartedly agree. Anyone that has true OU in hands, is part of the PROBLEM, not the solution. All our job to mankind is not to invent, but to share after we've invented. Inventing is our nature, egoism our worse disease.
Ever seen a Gorilla aplha male demand all the bananas for himself? Give them a big pile of the good stuff, and after he's had a good meal, he'll share his wealth with his "people". Asking nothing in return but respect.
When you ask money for free energy, you deserve neither that, nor respect.
Many of the FE inventors were god fearing man. How do they explain themselves to their maker, or ever the guy at heaven's gate?

[TinselKoala]

TK,

We're looking forward to your results with power measurements. When can we expect them?

You, Err-on, can expect them when hell freezes over.

Or you can look back along some of the pages in this thread where I have been posting them.

This past weekend I did about a dozen DC control runs and graphed them. If you're especially clever you might be able to find them when I post them.

Because, you see, unlike YOU, Aaron, all my results are posted and repeatable.

And Aaron, none of my scope shots are faked, as you continue to cry. If you continue to LIE about me and what I'm doing, you continue to defile yourself thereby.

All of my scope shots are repeatable by anybody who knows how to use an oscilloscope, and there is sufficient detail in my posts for anyone to do it.

Your posts and scope shots, however, are either deliberately designed to obfuscate, or are evidence of incredible incompetence.

Or both.

I especially mock you for your continuing failure to see and absorb what I continue to show on my videos.

When are you going to post a coherent scope shot of your magic oscillations?

One that includes the point monitored, the scope settings, and the other pertinent information that is necessary to interpret it.

Otherwise we just have to conclude that, although you may have finally figured out how to set your trigger, you still don't know what all those tiny little numbers mean.

[TinselKoala]

And folks, the Thrapp-Witt discussion is a bit OT here; there are several threads on those fraudsters already; I personally don't think that Witt is Witsend, although both seem a bit witless to me. Nor do I give some rat's sass for conspiracy theories unless they have some foreground effects. In this case, that is the Ainslie file, the foreground effects are far too flimsy and transparent to hold up to any deep background conspiracy. IMHO, of course. And of course we all could be part of the conspiracy.

That being said, I may have a new hypothesis concerning the Ainslie circuit and data, thanks to the flailings of the great scientist and seer Err-on.

The original Ainslie circuit published in full (except, curiously, the crucial diode) in the Quantum article includes a 555 timer, which I and others have shown produces an inverted duty cycle--that is, it makes the mosfet turn ON 96 percent instead of 4 percent. Using the battery and load parameters cited in the experiment, this 96 percent duty cycle produced far too much heating in my load, whereas a true 3 percent duty cycle seemed to mimic Ainslie's heat profile closely.

I have long been puzzled by this "error". The numbers are too close for coincidence, particularly in the freq and duty cycle of the timer.

But---I obtained these results using 12 volts Vcc supplying my 555 timer circuit, as apparently specified in the Quantum article's circuit.

Aaron's "work" using a series resistance -- or a low battery voltage-- in series with the 555 power supply, runs the 555 at a lower voltage than is normally considered adequate. When I tried this on Aaron's circuit I was able to make some strange oscillations happen when the mosfet is off, but these oscillations can't transfer power to the load, as the mosfet isn't turning on at all from them.

BUT:: Using a series resistance in the power supply to the ORIGINAL 555 timer circuit, delivering the flipped duty cycle (which gives a 4 percent High signal at the mosfet DRAIN, remember--up is off here--)  "turning down the volume" of the 555 signal, reduces the mosfet's gain to the point where only a small average current passes, even at 96 percent duty cycle.

(The 100R pot in the gate is nowhere near enough to do have this effect. Even a 200K pot here won't turn the gain down enough at 96 percent ON to limit load heating.)

No, I haven't made any "aperiodic resonance", I still think that is false or lost triggering on scope signal, but at least I have come up with a rational explanation that seems to fit the facts better than "it's a misprinted circuit diagram".

And I just came up with this possibility a couple of hours ago, using the small light bulb so that I could easily visualize what was happening to the current in the load as the 555 power level, the duty cycle, and the gate attenuator were changed. I haven't taken any quantitative heating data in this configuration YET. I sure would like to know just what waveform to use, but for now I will set up with 95 percent ON from the  Quantum 555, at low voltage to the timer, and look for some mode that doesn't heat the load or the transistor TOO much.
So the point of the above is this: the original 555 timer could well have been used in the original experiment, if it was underpowered or attenuated enough to reduce the transistor's gain by a large margin.

Unfortunately it seems that inadequate records were kept of the original experiment.

So maybe Ainslie should repeat her own experiment, with modern equipment and better record-keeping. I'm sure there won't be any objection to that--after all, she still has the original apparatus, and she's getting her Fluke-0-Scope fixed...and it's an easy experiment to do, after all.

COP>17, remember?

[TinselKoala]

From Rosemary:

-----------------------------------

Guys this is for TK.

I'm not from the outback. I'm from AFRICA that dark and beautiful continent South of Europe and South East of Canada. I have never been to Australia.

And TK we need you to post results. I'm sincerely sorry that I didn't keep better records of the test procedure but was not advised that it was required. And as we all know now, I'm an amateur. I hope you'll find it in yourself to eventually forgive the oversight.

A monk? That's a new twist. Never would have thought it.
and FE to all.

We seem to have lost the good offices of ramset for the time being. Could someone else with 'dual citizenship' please oblige and post this across to OU.com?

I got the idea somehow that you had gone to Australia from Africa. Sorry, I stand corrected. I don't really care where you are.

Keeping good records of experiments is basic scientific practice, taught to eighth graders here where I come from. Bound lab notebooks and so forth, and it is quite customary for reviewers to ask to see original data records especially when the paper is unusual or controversial.

And one might expect records of an experiment which showed COP>17 to be made in exquisite detail and preserved for posterity, or at least for the grandkids.

Which is why I have been posting test results here, all along, daily, for nearly six weeks.

But what we NEED is for you to focus a bit, Rosemary, and answer some of the questions that I have been asking you for nearly 6 weeks now.
Let's just do them one at a time.

1) What is the EXACT circuit including the timer portion that was used to make the experiment described in the Quantum article and the EIT.pdf paper?

Once you've finally answered that one, we can move on to the others.