Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie

[Hoppy]

Hoppy:

Thank you for your comments about the "New Age" battery theory.  That's the claim for Bedini motors.  Interestingly enough if you look around this web site and elsewhere for people that have tried to do serious measurements on their batteries after cycling them back and forth with their Bedini motor setups, they state that there is no over unity found.  I can't give you a link but I am pretty sure that there is a thread about that very subject on this site.  Also, a typical Bedini motor spike back into the charging battery will most likely have millions of times more energy than the sub 500 nanosecond pulse that Aaron pointed out.

We also can't forget that the Ainsley white paper is not about the battery at all, but free energy believers are drawn to batteries and we have seen that happen repeatedly here.

AC:

To regain focus for all of us, especially considering it is easy to mix up terms, you typically talk about the total energy in a pulse, and even though the instantaneous power can be quite high, the total pulse energy can still be quite low.  The higher the load resistance the discharging coil-resistor sees, the shorter the pulse and the higher the power.

The energy in the sub 500 nanosecond pulse going back to the battery can be expected to be a fraction of the initial discharge energy coming from the inductive part of the coil-resistor.  I think that is fair to say that it will be much less than 10% just by eyeballing the DSO display.  So there is no equality going on here.  Most of the energy will be lost in the switched-off MOSFET when the coil tries to "push forwards" after the MOSFET switches off.

The only resonance related effects here will be related to the standard ringing and related effects.  The circuit itself as a functioning system does not resonate.

Again, it is worth repeating that you are wrong here.  The discharging inductive component in the coil-resistor will dump most of it's energy into the highest resistance element in the circuit path, and that would be the switched-off MOSFET.  The return spike to the battery is just a reflection of energy back due to ringing and related effects.  There is no violation of conservation of energy and I would assume that in setups without the fly-back diode the MOSFETs will start to get hot quite quickly.

From Wikipedia:

The Big Lie (German: Große Lüge) is a propaganda technique. The expression was coined by Adolf Hitler in his 1925 autobiography Mein Kampf for a lie so "colossal" that no one would believe that someone "could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously".

George Orwell's novel Nineteen Eighty-Four refers to the Big Lie theory on several occasions. For example:

    * “The key-word here is blackwhite. Like so many Newspeak words, this word has two mutually contradictory meanings. Applied to an opponent, it means the habit of impudently claiming that black is white, in contradiction of the plain facts”. [6]
    * “To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed...”.

MileHigh

MH wrote: -

"Thank you for your comments about the "New Age" battery theory.  That's the claim for Bedini motors.  Interestingly enough if you look around this web site and elsewhere for people that have tried to do serious measurements on their batteries after cycling them back and forth with their Bedini motor setups, they state that there is no over unity found.  I can't give you a link but I am pretty sure that there is a thread about that very subject on this site.  Also, a typical Bedini motor spike back into the charging battery will most likely have millions of times more energy than the sub 500 nanosecond pulse that Aaron pointed out."

I have spent literally hundreds of hours load testing batteries charged by Bedini monopole motors and other devices and yes, the energy used to charge the batteries is that discharged from the inductor and in 'front to back' electical efficiency terms it amounts to around 50% to 60% of input using 'open' constructed inductors. As I've pointed out to AC, John Bedini states that he is not interested in the events after switch closure. Its this pre-switch opening event that I think Aaron is interested in.

Hoppy

[MileHigh]

Hoppy:

With respect, there is no need to apply advanced physics to the design of a 555 timer that can provide a PWM output. The only problem is that the Aaron's latest modification offering does not work properly, its unstable and anyone who bothers to build it may even find it does not work at all!

It's very interesting that you state that.  My feelings are that to get the 555 to operate at normal frequencies in the few KHz range that just a vanilla 555 circuit should be fine with one caveat:  When you try to squeeze a very asymmetrical duty cycle out of the 555 you are probably getting into "difficult" territory because the charge and discharge cycles for the cap are so different.  A few times I mentoned that you want to use timing components that are "typical" and avoid very very high resistance values and very very small capacitance values because yes indeed, you could pick up "noise" and cause false triggering in the comparators inside the timer chip.

So my dual 555 timer suggestion is not that radical in the sense that you are just stringing two "vanilla" 555 circuits together and can always pick component values that are in the "normal" range.  This gives you a circuit that can do the extremes of duty cycle without "pushing the envelope" that would be required with a single 555 circuit.  The dual 555 setup would always be very robust and highly immune to external noise.

It certainly would be interesting if Aaron's "oscillation" was just his 555 timer circuit undergoing false triggering.  It certainly looks like that in his video clip, you clearly see that the 555 frequency and duty cycle changes the moment that he energizes the rest of his circuit.  I wrote up a full posting about my observations of his clip but Aaron being Aaron simply dismissed what I said with a single incoherent sentence that did not even make sense.  (doubling the point for emphasis)

MileHigh

[MileHigh]

Harvey:

There are a couple of things that some may want to explore.
1. Sympathetic energy external to the circuit that may add to the magnetic field energy. Theoretically, magnetic fields are infinite - the field of this inductor no doubt crosses other fields both in the RF and local wiring spectrums. The conditions may allow extraction of energy from those other sources. This goes back to why we need to treat a changing field as non-conservative.

2. Ionized air blanket. The action of the inductor at 143KHz and above, may result in Ionized air becoming attracted to the resistor body. This air will not move by normal convection and can function as a thermal insulator prohibiting normal thermal dissipation and the subsequent over heating of the device compared to the baseline. The Oil Bath tests would alter the results significantly if this is the case.

Your theories are a bit esoteric for me.  I am a "classicist" so I don't believe that changing magnetic fields are non conservative and you can somehow use the alleged non conservative to property extract energy.

Interestingly enough, the magnetic field generated by the coil-resistor in this circuit effectively creates a "magnetic bubble" relative to the Earth's magnetic field.  Yes the field extends out to infinity, but the net vector field when you add it to the Earth's magnetic field results in a "bubble" where the magnetic lines of force form their own "local loop."

The ionized air blanket is too esoteric for me also.  Even if there was ionization, you would still get thermal convection from the heat transfer across the boundary layer between the ionized air and the "regular" air.

MileHigh

[Hoppy]

Hoppy:

It's very interesting that you state that.  My feelings are that to get the 555 to operate at normal frequencies in the few KHz range that just a vanilla 555 circuit should be fine with one caveat:  When you try to squeeze a very asymmetrical duty cycle out of the 555 you are probably getting into "difficult" territory because the charge and discharge cycles for the cap are so different.  A few times I mentoned that you want to use timing components that are "typical" and avoid very very high resistance values and very very small capacitance values because yes indeed, you could pick up "noise" and cause false triggering in the comparators inside the timer chip.

So my dual 555 timer suggestion is not that radical in the sense that you are just stringing two "vanilla" 555 circuits together and can always pick component values that are in the "normal" range.  This gives you a circuit that can do the extremes of duty cycle without "pushing the envelope" that would be required with a single 555 circuit.  The dual 555 setup would always be very robust and highly immune to external noise.

It certainly would be interesting if Aaron's "oscillation" was just his 555 timer circuit undergoing false triggering.  It certainly looks like that in his video clip, you clearly see that the 555 frequency and duty cycle changes the moment that he energizes the rest of his circuit.  I wrote up a full posting about my observations of his clip but Aaron being Aaron simply dismissed what I said with a single incoherent sentence that did not even make sense.  (doubling the point for emphasis)

MileHigh

You make a good point about noise immunity and I think it very likely that this is a problem with the design offered up by Aaron. His latest Ainslie mod is very 'sensitive' to hand capacitance. The original Peter / Aaron design is a lot more stable and I cannot get this into an unstable condition by adjustment or handling of the circuit. As I wrote in a few posts back, if Aaron fitted a simple analogue ammeter in series with his battery, he will very likely see that in the 'oscillatory condition', the current shoots up and the mosfet starts to get hot due to the 555 suddenly mis-operating.

Hoppy

[MileHigh]

Joit:

A Reason why i more laugh about all the Sims, and the Peoples who trust in.  There are a lot of Magnetmotor Sims at Youtube, they do all work, just not, when you rebuild it.  And for the Circuits maker, they simple dont show OU. Go Figure.

Don't confuse a "Magnetmotor Sim" with a PSpice circuit sim.

A magnet motor sim on YouTube is typically somebody playing with a 3D CAD application to make something that "looks cool."

A PSpice sim is a numerical analysis technique that plugs in all of the differential equations that model how the components work in the real world.  The numbers are crunched and you get real-world results.

The typical 3D YouTube magnet motor sims are nonsense, and are just the expressions of the fantasies of people that dream about motors that run themselves.  The PSpice simulations are real, and the more precise you make your model, the better the simulation is.  The PSpice simulations that .99 has posted are all the real thing.  The only thing that he is omitting are the interconnect wire capacitances and inductances and related effects.  This is desireable, you don't necessarily want to see the effects of the wire interconnects, you just want to see how the components in the circuit interact.

Now you are a little bit wiser Joit.

MileHigh