Rosemary Ainslie COP>17 Circuit / A First Application on a Hot Water Cylinder

[fuzzytomcat]

********************************************************************************************

What a joke.  If I am a troll - you imbecile - then what does that make you? 

Are you surprised that Tektronix refused to lend you any more equipment?  I saw it coming sure as sun up.  What you need is a long session with a straight jacket.

Glad you brought that up  .....   TEKTRONIX - "PDF" ( Request_for_return_due_to_misleading_intent.pdf  ) 

http://hunpug.blu.livefilestore.com/y1pDiDK1ktVu-qC9r8Ka-C7HoXyp6kDwias1MRFFA_ZkmbXleEEDOERy3-J67OzLqyewMhHmZaRnd1QqUks0kEA4Mafrnd5Tdqe/Request_for_return_due_to_misleading_intent.pdf?download&psid=1


********************************************************************************************

[fuzzytomcat]

Howdy reading members and guests,

Here are some very telling postings from Rosemary that are"IN HER OWN WORDS" ......

*************************************************************************************************

http://www.energeticforum.com/59541-post322.html      07-07-2009   Post #322

witsend 
Senior Member
        
Guys, I think the need to at least display our waveform is taken on board. I have no idea how to do this and will have to impose on my co-author's time which is already massively constrained. So don't hold your breath but I will try and get this.

I will also, subject to my son's return - try and get some video information our on our own circuit. It is the same as the box that was sent to ABB for their replication purposes. Some years after their tests, they contacted me and asked what they were to do with that box. I was in correspondence with someone - can't remember who - and asked them to ship it to him. But it is feasible to replicate the circuitry. I'm just not sure who will do this. I certainly can't. But I could, at least, ask around. It's just that the guys who worked on the circuit are now drowning in other work and one of them has left for Durban - so is not easily reached.

But, as I see it, all that is needed is some accurate assessment of the energy returned to the battery. Is it that difficult to get hold of the correct measuring instruments? Perhaps Aaron you could advise me here. I can't see any other way of working out the energy in that 'spike' without the meter that can tell the difference between the two current cycles.

I think the need to at least display our waveform is taken on board

I will also, subject to my son's return - try and get some video information our on our own circuit. It is the same as the box that was sent to ABB for their replication purposes. Some years after their tests, they contacted me and asked what they were to do with that box.

************************************************************************************************


http://www.energeticforum.com/60279-post511.html     07-13-2009   Post #511

witsend 
Senior Member

Joit - is your waveform proving TinselKoala's point? Is that 555 switch wrongly presented? To me it looks like it is. In which case, I must apologise to all concerned. Clearly the Quantum article was wrong.

So, to all concerned - to everyone who built the circuit as presented in that article, and if, indeed, it is wrong, my abject apologies. I had a shrewd idea it may have been wrong because, thinking back, a university professor kindly edited the quantum paper prior to presenting it to the IET. And his first recommendation was that we omitted a detailed circuit of the 555 switch as being irrelevant to the claim. Which is why I was reluctant to endorse the Quantum article as being a correct presentation.I just wish, in retrospect, that he had pointed out the error if he had seen such. In any event, it seems that I have been entirely at fault. My own objection to it was due to the lack of the feedback diode - which was the entire subject of the exercise. I knew it was in the apparatus. It certainly was not in diagram.

I would point out though, that my reluctance to admit this prior to ascertaining the fact was due to the person who presented that diagram and assisted me in that first article. He is a good friend and he, like all of us, was 'giving' his time. I was not keen therefore to expose the problem unless I also knew it was a problem. So, if you're reading this, don't even worry. In any event, the blame was not his. I should, at least, have had the circuit vetted - considering my own inability to read such.

So. Many apologies, even to TinselKoala and anyone in the entire world who duplicated that circuit. It is wrongly presented. I am sincerely sorry that I have wasted so much of your time. And Joit - you've put the question to bed. I would be very glad to refund you for your time and trouble - if required - and if I can get the money to you with our exchange control. Just send me an account on the PM system. You've done a very good thing here.

What I do assure you all is this. The switch may have been wrongly drawn. Our own duty cycle application is NOT. I have the experimental apparatus available and it has been checked by EE's even at universities. We have also, over the years, built many different 555 switches and by different people. And there are replicated experiments by others using nothing but a functions generator. And all this prior to publication. More to the point is that the battery duration is consistent with measurements based on the duty cycle. But, in point of fact, after publication I never experimented again for a period of 7 years and I certainly never even looked at the article again. The only reason I could scan a copy for the blog when I eventually did this, was because my children kept a copy of the original publication. I was just so dejected at the entire lack of interest it seemed to generate. I had no idea that the test would really ever be duplicated.

Therefore, please take this admission as a sincere apology to all those who have tried to build the switch according to the quantum article. I see that the Quantum article was the primary reference point as the IET paper was only posted to the blog after July. It seems that Ramset and TinselKoala started their thread on OU.COM in mid June. Unfortunate. But there you are. Sorry guys - It's all I can say.

Clearly the Quantum article was wrong.

I had a shrewd idea it may have been wrong because, thinking back, a university professor kindly edited the quantum paper prior to presenting it to the IET.

I have the experimental apparatus available

and it has been checked by EE's even at universities.

scan a copy  ( link ) http://www.free-energy.ws/pdf/quantum_october_2002.pdf

my children kept a copy of the original publication.

*************************************************************************************************

I would say some incredibly interesting *highlighted* "IN YOUR OWN WORDS" from Rosemary .....


Regards,
Glen

.

[happyfunball]

It's her circuit, Fuzzy. Cut the crap already.

[fuzzytomcat]

It's her circuit, Fuzzy. Cut the crap already.

Sorry .... The question at hand is how can a INVENTOR without the knowledge of electronic circuitry or electronic component operation or the capability of construction of a electronic circuit INVENT a electronic circuit for a PATENT or PATENT APPLICATION?? and how can someone claim INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS as Rosemary Ainslie does on that electronic circuit ??

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=9645.msg254309#msg254309
http://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=23243.msg255644#msg255644
http://www.energeticforum.com/59001-post169.html
http://www.energeticforum.com/59005-post170.html
http://www.energeticforum.com/59033-post182.html
http://www.energeticforum.com/59369-post262.html
http://www.energeticforum.com/61040-post798.html
http://www.energeticforum.com/61453-post920.html


That's the question at hand .......

Regards,
Glen

.

[fuzzytomcat]

Howdy reading members and guests,

Here is a copy of a e-mail from Energetic Forum from May 06, 2010 this will be inserted into my "time line" for my testing and evaluation of the experimental device http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=9442.msg262932#msg262932

***********************************************************************************


----- Original Message -----
From: <info@esmhome.org>
To: <ainslie@xxxxxxx.za>; <hwgramm@xxxxx.com>; <fuzzytomcat@xxxxxxx.net>
Cc: <ashtweth@xxxxx.com>; <tot1@xxx.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2010 11:11 AM
Subject: Forum


Greetings,

Unfortunately, there are still numerous posts occurring on the forum 
that contain unnecessary disagreements between certain members.

It is obvious that there are conflicts that are not going to be 
resolved any time in the near future.

The forum is a place to share and learn.  Questioning is fine if it is 
done with respect, but we have seen that this is not what is happening 
here.

It is possible to share your work without speaking of each other?s.

We ask from now forward that you do not reference or question the work 
of each other (Rosemary, Harvey, FuzzyTomCat) in any posts on 
Energetic Forum or via Energetic Forums Private Messaging.

To be quite clear, you are welcome to share your work, your ideas, 
your results.  Just do NOT reference each others work, ideas, results.

Each one of you is valued on the Forum, however, the Peace and good 
nature of the Forum have been interrupted and this cannot continue.

There are four admins to the forum, Aaron is one of them, however he 
has wisely recused himself on this matter.  The three others admins 
have made this decision.

To repeat, it is our place to make sure the good nature of the Forum 
is maintained.  We believe that is possible by simply posting about 
your own work and in no way referencing (directly or indirectly) 
anyone else with which you have a conflict.

If you do (reference anyone that you have a conflict with), you will 
be banned.

Admin


************************************************************************************

Rosemary Ainslie's Work -
Quantum - October 2002
http://www.free-energy.ws/pdf/quantum_october_2002.pdf
http://public.blu.livefilestore.com/y1pK6ZokTOiduva2cT0_G64RytAK78-jc1ncm-Caeeh6-jJtTBtlPQXbFEOnzYYNAIz4Toe0Bi-6U52zMPiRgLe2Q/Quantum%20Circuit%20Diagram.bmp?psid=1
http://public.blu.livefilestore.com/y1p7KK7dz82OLad03kAKZzrW4Cr5oLZ08P79cmRlnezQQcuSqUnahxfF1yWs0wfnCaHUPs4TdDB6M3IwjR7E_64GQ/Quantum%20Circuit%20Parts.bmp?psid=1

Patent Applications
http://public.blu.livefilestore.com/y1pmDTYsvO5wFpJKvF34_-_L0RFEs91CobL5JI2CtmSG23h3_Dgqa_fWZDZnDI8HLEKs873g-29N0Kr0gBKfK7lPw/ZA9900385A.pdf?download&psid=1
http://public.blu.livefilestore.com/y1pY9zromnq3JHJ1o0T0g9QjRs7VPZcqThJ86nKtpoaSvUW6gP6jPLbaOqFGvp4ihuV1n9LyS8Bvnr8-i2QuEQmyQ/EP0932248A1.pdf?download&psid=1
http://public.blu.livefilestore.com/y1p3kQ7ZZSqJBdRdeq3O2tajGhBgpE_oR8D9cwHxinHkZN3YxQ29N20s6mDVwlxF5HcnITG-XkrKAuOfPjp9_gS5g/WO9938247A1.pdf?download&psid=1
http://public.blu.livefilestore.com/y1pZikJBtJ8iE-5lGkZODp8Ye42KnDF3jQkw_QGxc6y6acTDhhhWpNLVY_PVnjLgiZ4prto3e2F1zSgiFIaXYzpOg/WO03007657A2.pdf?download&psid=1

EIT - Paper
http://public.blu.livefilestore.com/y1p8T0piJ2-wv-sflr-t4UY-2855DJelDiICeYF6L1ypzMg2A4_JVpE4jldrrNqBRdzbWkD6Wb3svbHO91HC8azsg/EIT_paper.pdf?download&psid=1


Glen and Harvey's Work -
http://www.energeticforum.com/inductive-resistor/5359-mosfet-heating-circuits.html
http://hunpug.blu.livefilestore.com/y1ptY5lQX5cEKs1-SxZEwcwRDtDC0qJqANch3a5_ZMKBinBfkH-3AcoeojJRDdajmHCviQnh8h--tRRMyOvaq6Z-bsqyfM7xNnw/Mosfet_Heater_Circuit_11-26-2009.bmp?psid=1
http://hunpug.blu.livefilestore.com/y1pTtnP1kyqU26UsLdwXn0VE5ZftXiNL3dgXc4useQnNT8ir5Zu0oT8vqiqUHU9ptCh5L_Da3pDwQ0HqeNa4tX2dsxYeZMYQtZV/Mosfet%20Heater%20Circuit%20Components.bmp?psid=1

************************************************************************************


Regards,
Glen

.