Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie

[Pirate88179]

where did that come from man? look around you you'll see the same thing everywhere.  he's wrong, and anyone can see that ken and vortex1 have tons more background and experience than this guy with 3000 posts, which isn't impressive btw. vortex is right on the money and pirate man 3000 is making comments way out of his own league. relax man, he had his opinion and i had mine.

How unscientific of you to make a comparison to my background of which you know nothing at all?  You obviously have not read this entire topic, (it shows) or any other topic that I have posted in so, you are basing this declaration of yours on what exactly?  Obviously a very uneducated guess.

Also, not that it matters, but it is 4,027 posts.  You were only off by about 25%.  I can see that is close enough for you though.

Bill

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Only two possibilities? Nice setup Rose, but how about a third choice possibility, that you do not speak the language of engineering. Your text above is proof enough. With all due respect you do write a good science fiction paper though I'll give you that.

It's been suggested before.  Maybe one day I'll have a stab at it.

I  will not argue with your thesis, it is good as far as a thesis can go. Now the proof is to make lots of heat above that supplied by the power source as you claim. This has not been demonstrated.
If you can keep to your claims and not try to switch gears into your thesis abstractions (which are fine and dandy if you don't make grandiose claims)

No switching of of anything here - except on the circuit itself.  The thesis has been part of the abstract, introduction and conclusion of every paper written on this subject.

Perhaps you should post the whole PM so its not taken out of context.

Feel free to do this yourself.  I really couldn't be that bothered.

I'm not the one writing papers that attempt a new explanation for the physical laws. Your serve.

I'm not sure that asking questions also requires a mind set prone to delusions of grandeur?  We have only asked mainstream academics to evaluate the evidence in terms of thesis. 

Yes the Tektronix (spell it right) equipment is some of the finest. I have a large collection going back to some of the very early tube models, maybe 30 in all.

Indeed.  Abject apologies for the misprint.  We have the use of a wonderful Tektronix 3054C DPO and all the equipment in the Tektronix stable is to measurement what rolls royce is to engines.  Unquestionably the best.

I wish you well in your work.

And I wish that there was more evident sincerity as such wishes are belied by the offensive nature of your communications.

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Guys, just a general observation here.  It continually intrigues me that this particular thread subject seems to solicit so much anatogonism.  I really would love to know why.  Everyone, just about, who subscribes to this forum, is also interested in the challenging prospect of defeating the energy barriers.  God knows - our own mother Nature would probably enjoy some relief from our excesses - if this were ever managed.

But always there has been the implicit or explicit challenge that we're doing nothing more than wasting our time.  Here's the thing.  A handful of open source subscribers have spent huge chapters of their lives in trying to show evidence of just this event - carefully recorded and detailed in a paper that modestly requests mainstream academics to check it out and comment.  No-one is asking for public funding.  No-one is asking Stefan for prize money.  No-one is claiming unequivocal proof.  We are just presenting, within the constraints of some varied talents from all corners of the planet - and to the best of our abilities, an argument that seems to conform to this general requirement.

It seems to merit nothing but a parade of competing interests from heavily weighted egos using wild and ill considered arguments to challenge not only the evidence, but our presumption in presenting that evidence.  What is wrong with you all?  We're doing our best to help things.  Some positive comments would be appreciated - even if it's to acknowledge a first.  We're taking the argument to mainstream as a collaborative open source effort and with nothing more than an earnest desire to get into an earnest dialogue with them in terms of the thesis and the evidence of that thesis that has been equally exhaustively and earnestly collated and presented. 

I would so welcome a sincere dialogue in this thread.  Not this absurd nonsense where the one tries to sound cleverer than the next and all parties simply managing to parade their ignorance of the test, its objects or its proof.  I personally see a want of maturity which would be so much more welcome.  We're not competing with anyone.  We're asking questions.  And we're trying to get those answers from a forum where it really does matter.  Our convictions or anyones are irrelevant compared to mainstream's.  Mainstream still command public respect.  We don't.

My wish for this year is that this thread either dies, or that it can change its flavour to something a little more adult.  And this latter cannot happen until you guys let up - grow up - or show some evidence of intellect rather than testosterone.

[guruji]

Hi gurugi.  I think the problem is probably due to the voltage at the supply.  If the two batteries have  combined voltage at 18 volts then each battery supplying the energy is about 9 volts.  A typical 12 volt battery is considered pretty well dead at 10 volts.  So - at 9 volts - I don't think that there's nearly enough energy being delivered.  You probably need to recharge those batteries.

But I'd be intrigued to learn if there is any evident voltage across the load resistor at this level of voltage from the supply and what that potential is?  If there is, then I'd also be interested to know if the battery drops below 18 volts on an extended run? 

Hi Witsend Yes I will try to inform you the thing is that I don't have a scope .
I only have a multimeter. [/quote]
Can you let us know.  I think Fuzzy saw evidence of a continued energy exchange at a really low battery voltage - and that would be really interesting to us even if the heat over the load resistor is hardly noticeable.
Another thing that's quite important is that you ensure that the switching cycle is working.  We use low 'on' duty cycles but this defaults to about 50% when that resonating frequency takes over. [/quote]
Is there a way to know about the switching cycle is working without a scope?


Do you see evidence of this oscillating frequency? [/quote]
Don't know what do you mean?
Thanks



[/quote]

[Vortex1]

Witsend

You and a few others seem annoyed with my some of my posts so I will pre-emptively ban myself from this thread.

I am in the process of testing your theory using thermal methods and other methods.

If I find no excess energy, I will not publish the results to this forum.

If I find excess energy of any type, indicating that your theory works I will get the information to you somehow. It will be fully documented.

You can have your cake and eat it too!!

Cheers......Bye

Vortex1