Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie

[ramset]

have _at last_ been able to get some true parasitic oscillations out of my "Aaron's Rod" circuit. Now that I've got the right resistor in the positive rail...

So I've made a couple new vids, they are processing and uploading now. I'm able to show that I do get parasitic oscillations of the classic textbook kind, and I still believe that Aaron's scope is missing triggering to produce the bands that he is seeing.

The parasitic oscillations are regular, albeit quite complex. Since the voltage on the battery monitor goes up, this means that the mosfet is not allowing as much power through during these oscillations.

Or, it means that power is being fed back to the battery, and the battery monitor is just showing the sum of the forward and reversed power.

Or the crack into the seventh dimension is leaking again.

Note that the Aaron's circuit is widely different than Ainslie's and is being operated at a much higher frequency. I still have not been able to get my Ainslie build to misbehave. I guess I'll have to (cringe) hook up this breadboarded timer to clock it and see what happens.

But at least I know for sure what happens in the Ainslie circuit with a good solid 3 percent pulse when there's NO OU.

So any OU will have to beat that baseline.

I'll post the links here when they are done uploading.

EDIT: Here you go.

Part C:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcKg0oXtNjA
Part D:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1iRpEM0qTw

[ramset]

Jetijs
Location: Latvia
Hi all.
Today I did some experiments with the heater circuit. What we found out was that it makes a huge difference if you put a air cored copper wire coil in series of the inductive resistor. See for yourself.

This is the scope shot across the resistor with no recovery diode:


And this is the scope shot of the series of coil and resistor also without recovery:

''[I cant get scope shots with the posts ant suggestions""] Chet

Quite a difference huh?
And this is for the same input power.
This is the scope shot with the recovery diode doing its job. In both cases the image is identical:


After that I tried out the circuit from my attraction motor v2.0. I used a bifilar coil so that I could use one winding to establish a magnetic field and another to capture the spike and put it on the front side capacitor. The power winding had a 10 Ohm resistor in series. The switching was done using a signal generator with adjustable frequency and duty cycle. I used an adjustable power supply for powering the circuit, it can adjust the voltage up to 30V and the current up to 20A. I observed up to 3x greater currents circulating through the resistor than that what the power supply gave out. And all this with a duty cycle of 15%, this is what the lowest setting of my signal generator is and on the scope I can see that this is clearly too much and I am wasting much of the power. Anyway, the resistor did heat up quite nicely up to 160 degree, but I did not have the time to compare if there is a difference in the heating up times depending on weather or not the recovery is used. I monitored the currents in two different spots in the circuit and the weird thing was that if I touched the MOSFET or some other places of the circuit, the input current did not change, but the circulating current did increase up to 40%. So far I blame that on the cheap meters I am using. I will test it more tomorrow. But so far seems pretty great
__________________
It's better to wear off by working than to rust by doing nothing.

[qiman]

You are as usual way behind, as well as being wrong. In the video where I made your waveforms, I am using a 0.066 ohm non-inductive shunt measured at 3 microHenries.

You know exactly what my reference to you using a 10 ohm inductive resistor means. In the first video you showed using a 10 ohm resistor. If you changed it - you are deceitful in your ways - as you would have people believe that I am claiming your new shunt is the original 10 ohm one you used.

Do your followers actually buy this?

There was no need to post what resistor was on the 555's battery as it is irrelevant. You can make any variation of a 555 that will give you 50-99% with frequency control.

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

.99 - TK has clearly linked any triggering flaw to NON OSCILLATION in the mosfet, which of course is a bogus analysis since he didn't even know to verify the shunt to see if the mosfet was indeed in oscillation or not.

[qiman]

I have _at last_ been able to get some true parasitic oscillations out of my "Aaron's Rod" circuit. Now that I've got the right resistor in the positive rail...

So I've made a couple new vids, they are processing and uploading now. I'm able to show that I do get parasitic oscillations of the classic textbook kind, and I still believe that Aaron's scope is missing triggering to produce the bands that he is seeing.

The parasitic oscillations are regular, albeit quite complex. Since the voltage on the battery monitor goes up, this means that the mosfet is not allowing as much power through during these oscillations.

Or, it means that power is being fed back to the battery, and the battery monitor is just showing the sum of the forward and reversed power.

Or the crack into the seventh dimension is leaking again.

Note that the Aaron's circuit is widely different than Ainslie's and is being operated at a much higher frequency. I still have not been able to get my Ainslie build to misbehave. I guess I'll have to (cringe) hook up this breadboarded timer to clock it and see what happens.

But at least I know for sure what happens in the Ainslie circuit with a good solid 3 percent pulse when there's NO OU.

So any OU will have to beat that baseline.

I'll post the links here when they are done uploading.

I'll take this as a public apology from you  that I was truthful in what I claimed and that your dog and pony show was a mis-diagnosis. When I see that noise on the scope, I can adjust the settings and see the high frequency spikes. They are there and there is a lot more to it than one would expect. I also had enough sense to see what the shunt showed for secondary validation and it showed high frequency pulsations from the battery and of course back to the battery, which is what you should have done in the beginning.

I'll post at Energetic Forum that you finally had the courage to admit my claims are accurate -  to admit that my 555 does indeed cause the mosfet to oscillate. However, your belief in what my scope showed is still not lost trigger - you missed that one big time.

I already have a different 555 timer that gives me as low as 1% duty cycle and my shunt has been changed to a 0.05 ohm calibrated resistor. I will replace my inductive resistor with one that matches the size of Rosemary's as soon as I can.

Everyone needs to realize that in my original video, my goal was to just see if I can get the mosfet to self-oscillate since TK couldn't. I succeeded on the first try.

The 555 timer I used with 50%+ duty cycle is NOT what I want to use for my real test, I didn't have the transistors on hand to give me the flexibility I needed so used the bare basic with what I had on hand. I don't believe in procrastinating until I have all the right parts. Even the 10 ohm shunt, it was the lowest I had and wasn't going to put 40 of them in parallel. I'm glad I did do that because I saw potential gaining and gaining and gaining and gaining in the battery up to 1/4 volt in 2 X 12v 7ah batteries, which was able to power a restive load...it wasn't a phantom charge...it kept the resistor a few degrees above ambient the entire time while continuing to gain charge on the front battery. It took almost 24 hours before it ever came down to the initial resting voltage before I started the test to begin with.

[TinselKoala]

You know exactly what my reference to you using a 10 ohm inductive resistor means. In the first video you showed using a 10 ohm resistor. If you changed it - you are deceitful in your ways - as you would have people believe that I am claiming your new shunt is the original 10 ohm one you used.

Do your followers actually buy this?



There was no need to post what resistor was on the 555's battery as it is irrelevant. You can make any variation of a 555 that will give you 50-99% with frequency control.

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

.99 - TK has clearly linked any triggering flaw to NON OSCILLATION in the mosfet, which of course is a bogus analysis since he didn't even know to verify the shunt to see if the mosfet was indeed in oscillation or not.

That entire statement is a lie, Aaron.

First, I used a 10 ohm "shunt" because that's what you used. Unlike you, I actually measure inductances and you will be surprised to know that that cement 10 ohm resistor has almost exactly the same inductance as your carbonfilm or metalfilm 10 ohmer.
And you can also see that your timer is "grounded" to the wrong side of your "shunt"... but OK.

You are the one who used that resistor on your timer power.

Your statement to .99 is also a lie. I have linked your triggering flaw to your induced oscillations in the mosfet, which are primarily caused by your improper signal driving the mosfet. I have indeed looked everywhere in that circuit, and your implication that I "don't know" to look somewhere is just ridiculous.

You are the one who is misusing your scope to "SHOW"  what you are trying to prove. I am using mine rationally to see what is really there. I challenge you ONCE AGAIN: do a side-by-side comparison with  your circuit using a decent oscilloscope properly operated, and you operating your scope like you do. Or compare my circuit with yours on your oscilloscope or mine or a third one.

You are seeing false triggering; I am reproducing your signal exactly --after all, I am using the SAME COMPONENTS AND THE SAME LAYOUT that you are using.

And I am in NO WAY apologizing to you, or "admitting" anything of the sort that you are implying. I still maintain that you are wrong; that the mosfet is oscillating because of "bad" driving signal and/or poor construction technique and/or damaged components; that you do not know how to use an oscilloscope properly, and/or there is something wrong with your scope, and/or it is just not "up to snuff" with a complex signal; and that you are not focussing on the real issue at hand: the many discrepancies in what Ainslie is telling you.

Now, by following your excellent suggestions, that is, by regressing to 10th grade electronics, and perhaps by using a roasted mosfet and a purpose-built chaotic 555 circuit, I have been able to show classic parasitic oscillations on top of the mosfet trace. Hooking up the probes incorrectly like you did helped too, thanks.

Now that I can maybe induce the same oscillations as you (After all, you ADMIT that mine are the same as yours, in the above posts) it will be much easier to show that there is no free energy coming from the Ainslie system, even when the mosfet is oscillating.