COP 17 Heater | Rosemary Ainslie

[Aaron]

Hi everyone,

This thread is dedicated to the heater method by Rosemary Ainslie. I hope to see some replication attempts.

I'm pasting a message from Peter that he posted in another thread below - it comes from this thread:
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...ld-model.html:

This is the schematic that is proven to work - USE THIS:

WATCH THIS VIDEO FIRST
YouTube - Quantum Magazine 555 Circuit Test on Rosemary Ainslie's COP 17 Heater Circuit



Tune the circuit to resonance for highest gain - it will go into high speed
self oscillation when increasing gate resistance but you need to play with
the duty cycle and frequency.

Here is a pic of what it should look like:



TAKE NOTE: The 1N4007 diode across the load inductive resistor is OPTIONAL. It shows how to get more charge back to the front battery, etc... However, the biggest gains are WITHOUT that diode. The above
schematic does NOT show the diode.

If you use the diode, you get more battery charging on the front battery
and less heat. Without, you get greatest heat and less charging on the
front battery.

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

This thread is full of skeptical nonsense. I always welcome questions and comments but when invalid points that are completely fabricated, false, made up, fraud, etc... WILL NOT BE TOLERATED IN THIS THREAD. They will be deleted and anyone contributing to this nonsense may be removed from the forum.

Just so you know, here are a few skeptical claims made by supposed experts:

1. TK's (Tinsel Koala) claim the Quantum article timer is wrong (FACT - it works)
2. TK's claim the Quantum article circuit won't oscillate (FACT - it does)
3. TK's claim the oscillation is a red herring (FACT - it isn't)
4. Poynt99 and Poynt's claim there is NO AC in this circuit at all (FACT - there is in the load inductive resistor)
5. All claims the diode can't help charge input battery (FACT - it does)
6. All claims the spikes will damage the mosfet and that the ringing should be stopped (FACT - this mosfet IRFPG50 is designed EXACTLY for this kind of application)
7. All claims that the spike would be too small to be significant (FACT - on a decent circuit the voltage is 4 times the input voltage, it charges batteries or caps - it is VERY significant)
8. All claims that when the mosfet is off, the battery cannot conduct and therefore won't receive a charge (FACT - the diode in the mosfet allows just this exact current conduction as it is designed to do this!)
9. All claims that the spike will disappear with improved circuit connections, etc... (FACT - it only makes the spike bigger)
10. All claims that the inductive resistor will change resistance as it heats up will throw off all the numbers (FACT - these resistors are made to be VERY ACCURATE at these operating temperatures. That is the whole point. They can be within 5% across a WIDE range of temperatures but the most discrepancy will be when they are extremely cold (way below ambient - or way too hot - this demonstrates the skeptics knowledge of this kind of resistor is completely lacking)
11. Skeptics claim that a battery capacitance analyzer is an accurate way to determine battery capacitance for load testing and this supposedly makes the actual draw down tests unnecessary. (FACT - they are good only for sorting through batteries to see which ones need replacing or not. They are in NO WAY AT ALL - an accurate way to see what a battery will deliver.)
12. When skeptics analyzed my waveform of the shunt - it was determined all the ringing was above the 0 line in the positive including the bottom half of the ringing. (FACT - The middle of the positive and amplitude of the ringing after the negative spike is in fact the zero line - and by not knowing this, they admit they don't understand how to read a waveform.)
13. The skeptics claimed that the ringing cancels out any charging effect the negative spike will give. (FACT - The negative spike reduces what the battery delivers in net - the ringing down itself cancels itself out as far as battery charging ability but provides extra heat to the coil.)
14. TK claimed the Quantum article schematic (posted above) will not cause the mosfet to oscillate or do anything useful for the circuit. (FACT - with the EXACT circuit from the article, I can get the mosfet to oscillate - and I have shown pics and videos)

All of these "skeptical" points have been conclusively proven wrong.

Anyway, enjoy and make sure to look at my notes above and take that schematic and build it.
A builder's group will be posted soon...


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Below is a post from Peter - he brought this technology to my awareness. His circuit
below is something to be tested thoroughly after Rosemary's circuit is replicated.

Aaron,

Thanks for re-invigorating this older thread. I was about to start a new thread about Rosemary's work. I have also posted her major contributions to a new page on my site at: Free Energy | Rosemary Ainslie On this page, I have collected her papers and put them all in simple, downloadable PDF files, for ease of handling.

This material clearly shows how to build an electric heating device that produces 17 times more heat than the "equivalent" amount of electricity. It accomplishes this by using a resistive heating element that also has inductive properties, and by "recycling" the energy of the inductive collapse.

Rosemary's original test circuit is shown in the article she tried to have published in a "refereed" scientific journal, but the submission was always rejected. In the last 5 months, I have had extensive email correspondence, and numerous telephone conversations with Rosemary, who lives in South Africa. After studying her work, I was absolutely thrilled with her discovery of the super-efficient heating effect. In mid-February of this year, I proposed to her an "idealized" schematic of her DC resonance circuit to produce the effects she had discovered. That circuit diagram is here:

Based on the circuits and work done in the Electric Motor Secrets thread, this circuit should be easy enough to understand.

For those that do not understand it, I will describe its function in a later post.

There are broad implications connected with the proper understanding of the functions of this circuit. We all owe Rosemary Ainslie a deep debt of gratitude, both for her discoveries, and for her willingness to publish her results for the betterment of Science and the human condition.

Peter

[Aaron]

Get all the docs

I'd recommend going here:
Free Energy | Rosemary Ainslie

Download ALL the docs and read through them first.

[nilrehob]

Great thread

It would be good to find a way to change the measuring of temperature to something involving potential or current since that would be easier to measure and most of us has a meter for it.
I have no clue how though...

/Hob

[Aaron]

measuring efficiency

Hi Hob,

In this particular circuit, the heat amount appears to be absolutely disconnected from the current or voltage so measuring the heat and converting that to an equivalent amount of "electricity" is probably the only honest way to do it.

The "rules" seem to be the same in most "overunity" systems.

In Bedini circuits, the output can't be truly measured but work in the battery on the output can be, etc...

This is just an idea, don't know how it play out but perhaps the heat can heat x volume of water from x degrees to y degrees hot. It is known how much energy in joules must be expended to raise a certain volume of water from one temp to a certain temp. Then a thermometer can just be sitting in the water.

[Peter Lindemann]

Electric Heater with COP>20

Aaron,

Thanks for re-invigorating this older thread. I was about to start a new thread about Rosemary's work. I have also posted her major contributions to a new page on my site at: Free Energy | Rosemary Ainslie On this page, I have collected her papers and put them all in simple, downloadable PDF files, for ease of handling.

This material clearly shows how to build an electric heating device that produces 17 times more heat than the "equivalent" amount of electricity. It accomplishes this by using a resistive heating element that also has inductive properties, and by "recycling" the energy of the inductive collapse.

Rosemary's original test circuit is shown in the article she tried to have published in a "refereed" scientific journal, but the submission was always rejected. In the last 5 months, I have had extensive email correspondence, and numerous telephone conversations with Rosemary, who lives in South Africa. After studying her work, I was absolutely thrilled with her discovery of the super-efficient heating effect. In mid-February of this year, I proposed to her an "idealized" schematic of her DC resonance circuit to produce the effects she had discovered. That circuit diagram is here:

Based on the circuits and work done in the Electric Motor Secrets thread, this circuit should be easy enough to understand.

For those that do not understand it, I will describe its function in a later post.

There are broad implications connected with the proper understanding of the functions of this circuit. We all owe Rosemary Ainslie a deep debt of gratitude, both for her discoveries, and for her willingness to publish her results for the betterment of Science and the human condition.

Peter

Hi guys,

OK, Here is an explanation of the schematic diagram above, for the creation of an Electric Heater with a COP>20.

PS = the Power Supply. This is the Primary Supply of energy to the circuit. Any NEW ENERGY required to run the circuit must come from here. It can be a battery, or any source of DC current.
RL = the heating element (load) that has the electrical characteristics of both resistance and inductance. Electrically, the component is operated as an INDUCTOR to be charged and discharged in sequence.
C = a Capacitor of sufficient capacitance to act as a secondary power supply to power the circuit and to act as a reservoir to receive the energy returned by the inductive collapse of RL.
D1 = a Diode to make sure that energy can only move in one direction, in this case, FROM the power supply TO the capacitor. This component prevents any of the energy returning from the inductive collapse from traveling all the way back to the primary power supply. So, in operation, this Diode will allow the Capacitor C to rise to a voltage that is higher than PS, but it will never allow C to drop to a voltage below PS.
SHUNT1 = a low value, calibrated resistor used to measure the currents leaving the Power Supply PS. Current pulses measured here, times the voltage of PS, represent ALL of the energy the circuit is "dissipating".
Q1 = a Power MOSFET, or any appropriate switching device to allow currents to magnetize the inductive load RL. This includes all of the timing circuitry for the circuit's proper function.
D2 = a Diode to complement Q1, to allow currents from C to energize the load RL.
D3 + D4 = Diodes to direct the energy of the inductive collapse of RL back to Capacitor C so this energy may be re-used.
SHUNT2 = a low value, calibrated resistor used to measure the currents supplied from C (through Q1 and D2) to the load RL. Current pulses measured here, times the voltage of the Capacitor C, represent ALL of the energy supplied to the load RL.

The circuit is designed to operate in the following manner. Q1 is timed to produce current pulses which magnetize RL and then shut off, based on the inductive "current rise-time" of the component. The exact timing of this depends on the inductance of RL and the voltage of the Power Supply. RL then discharges as an inductor through Diodes D3 and D4 back to Capacitor C. This represents "one cycle" of the circuit. As soon as this cycle is completed, the process repeats.

RL is meant to be a Resistor Element made of NiChrome Wire, wrapped in a spiral shape around a ceramic frame, as pictured above. Every time there is both voltage and current present at RL, heat is produced. This includes both when currents are being supplied by Capacitor C and when currents are being returned to Capacitor C. Since the inductance of RL does not change during this charge and discharge cycle, the total amount of energy capable of being recovered from the inductive collapse should be on the order of 95% of the amount of energy supplied, during each cycle.

In this situation, currents can be supplied to RL and returned to C rapidly, with very little "real energy" lost to the circuit. Any energy that is actually dissipated, such as voltage drops on the switching devices (Q1, D2, D3, and D4), will be made up for by energy provided by the Primary Power Supply PS.

This "schematic" is provided without specific values, and is meant to provide a theoretical basis for understanding how an Electric Heater with a COP>20 could work.

Peter

[Jetijs]

Thank you Peter!
This is great

[Michael John Nunnerley]

This Is The Best There Is!

Hi Hob,

In this particular circuit, the heat amount appears to be absolutely disconnected from the current or voltage so measuring the heat and converting that to an equivalent amount of "electricity" is probably the only honest way to do it.

The "rules" seem to be the same in most "overunity" systems.

In Bedini circuits, the output can't be truly measured but work in the battery on the output can be, etc...

This is just an idea, don't know how it play out but perhaps the heat can heat x volume of water from x degrees to y degrees hot. It is known how much energy in joules must be expended to raise a certain volume of water from one temp to a certain temp. Then a thermometer can just be sitting in the water.

I agree with what you have said, as I am as of yet the holder of the most efficient heat exchanger in the world at low temperatures, and I AM NOT BOASTING, but if anybody can exchange heat of 60 degrees centigrade from one liquid to another at a transfer rate of 97% instantly, let them speek now. All tests are done with accurate flow rate and temperature measurement, there is nothing better, it is very accurate. Joules, degrees centigrade, volume etc. are all fixed measurements which can be formulised to give an exact result and if the result is as positive as stated then it is right without question. I must point out that all must be done under strict laboratory conditions such as external direct heating such as radient or conductive heating are removed. From this the only answer is that energy has came in from an unknown source, and what we need to know is what is this source. I think that Rosemary Ainslie struck upon one of these unexplained energy sources. As can be seen from many claims, not all are true, but a large amount I think are, energy is coming from somewhere, the question is what energy? where from? man made or of another form? lets face it we DO NOT KNOW, but it is there. I do not believe in over unity, the energy COMES FROM SOMEWHERE! The basic law as we call it is that you CAN NOT GET OUT MORE THAN YOU PUT IN, in crude terms, but there is no law that says we can not put in 90% and gain another 90% from another source of which we DO NOT KNOW WHERE THAT SOURCE IS COMING FROM, it is a bit like saying which came first the chicken or the egg, WE REALLY DO NOT KNOW, but some say they know the answer, sorry but I do not know untill somebody can demonstate accuratly that the egg came first. Well I am going on a bit as it is a bit of a bug of mine in fighting the world of science, this is normal between scientists as many will agree. Cop 1 to Cop 17 is one hell of a leap, lets build it, it is very simple if we know the exact experimental set up, and not expensive as 1 to 17 will give a great margin of error on the data collected, I am all for it @Peter I am sure you are going to make a big reply to this, I have left myself open to it, or may be you are going to agree to me, but I am sure not on all points

I am going to take this opportunity to propose as to leave ALL threads free of doubts with different peoples views on all subjects and all threads, a new thread, just to air, all topics what ever, and keep active constructural threads free. This is something that I have been thinking of for some time, lets call it THE AIRING THREAD, for a better name, I will start it now.

Sorry Aaron, I think your number came up in the lottery for me to air an opportunitive bug of mine and I hope you agree with the AIRING THREAD, could be fun, without obstructing the real work

Mike

[Michael John Nunnerley]

written before peters post, posted after

The post above I wrote before I read peters post and was posted before I read it. @Peter realy cop 20! I can not wait to build this, if it is true, and with what I know of heat transfer, we could make a fantastic heat engine, and I am not being sarcastic

Mike

[Peter Lindemann]

COP>20 is a GOAL

The post above I wrote before I read peters post and was posted before I read it. @Peter realy cop 20! I can not wait to build this, if it is true, and with what I know of heat transfer, we could make a fantastic heat engine, and I am not being sarcastic

Mike

Mike,

It sounds like your heat exchangers are fantastic. The idea of a COP>20 is based on being able to "recycle" 95% of the electricity in the circuit. This is feasible when the inductance is constant, which it is in this case, and operating voltages are above 60 volts. Rosemary Ainslie's original circuit produced COP>17 in actual tests. If you haven't already read the documents linked at my site, please do.

In the Electric Motor Secrets thread, I showed how to produce mechanical energy while recycling the electricity. In the thread with Imhotep, we showed how to light fluorescent lights while recycling the electricity. Now, here, I am showing Rosemary Ainslie's method to produce heat while recycling the electricity.

This completes the "GENERAL CASE" of how to use electricity efficiently, first described by Nikola Tesla, and referred to by Gabriel Kron as "shuttle circuits". The real method to produce Heat, Light, and Motive Power, at efficiencies above the supposed limits described by the Laws of Thermodynamics, is now fully in the Public Domain.

God Bless you all!

Peter

[Michael John Nunnerley]

This is very interesting

Hi Peter

I am going to try this out as I have other things which I did in the past which would naturally benifit from this. If you want to read my patent on this the number is EP0385700. It is used all over the world, it is probably in your house Well we all have to earn a living

If this does come up to spec: we could make a heat engine which would only need a start up input and after would run on its output with considerable excess energy.



Mike

[Peter Lindemann]

I Do Not Agree

Hi Peter

Thanks for not going for the jugular , I suppose this means that you are more or less with what I said . I am going to try this out as I have other things which I did in the past which would naturally benifit from this. If you want to read my patent on this the number is EP0385700. It is used all over the world, it is probably in your house Well we all have to earn a living

If this does come up to spec: we could make a heat engine which would only need a start up input and after would run on its output with considerable excess energy.

What do you think of the new thread idea? as of yet not started it, waiting for a response. It is to keep construction, tests, problems etc in the threads without all the rubish that clutters like this post I am being serious

Mike

Mike,

I do not agree with your previous post and do not wish to comment on it here. Please feel free to remove all parts of Post #7 that are "off topic" and start a different thread. This thread is about Rosemary Ainslie's astonishing contributions to Science, and related developments.

Peter

[DrStiffler]

What I will use initially.

Take a look at the following link and comments are welcome. I am now using this method to test the excess heat. At the end of the day I will add some comment and RL specs. I think this will be a little better arrangement than open air testing.

http://67.76.235.52/Ainslie/ExHeatExp.htm

Thanks

[SkyWatcher]

Hi folks, I have a question that maybe someone could answer about the nichrome wire. I have tried pulsing a 10 watt wire wound w/ the small copper coil inside and get around 30 millivolts in a cap and have tried the nichrome element from inside a hair dryer and get even less than that. So is there a certain kind of nichrome wire to use with more inductance or maybe a resistor that can be bought at the shack or somewhere, or would using an inductor and resistor in series do the same job. oh and yes im using diodes for the flyback. thanks
peace love light

[SkyWatcher]

Hi folks, ran some tests that I thought some might find useful. I used the circuit shown in the pdf where the title is " Counter electromotive force enables overunity results in electric systems" from Peter L. website. except instead of a mosfet I used an npn tans. with a diode across emitter/collector.
I also used an inductor from a high end car audio cross over network with a 200 milliohm resistance in series with a 1 ohm 10 watt wire wound resistor with copper coil inside. well i assume its copper i opened one up and it looks like copper to me and has no attraction to a neo magnet. and it was pulsed with a 555 timer @ 650 Hz. and a 32% duty cycle. I ran a few tests and found that the voltage when running the tests without the flyback diode connected to the positive of battery/resistor leg dropped the battery voltage much quicker, but when the flyback diode is connected it holds a higher voltage and recovers its unloaded voltage better also, so its definitely getting positive feedback.
Then i ran a crude finger test holding the bottom of the resistor with my thumb and timed how fast it takes to heat the resistor till it becomes to hot for my thumb to touch. after 3 tests without the fly back diode output attached to positive leg it took about 46 seconds before i had to remove my thumb and of course with identical cooling periods in between.
Then i ran 3 tests with the flyback diode connected and it took 25 seconds to reach the same temperature where my thumb cant stand to touch the resistor any longer and with identical cooling periods in between, that is about 54% less time needed to reach the same temperature. So it appears that this setup is not only feeding energy back to the battery but also is increasing the heat output in the resistor and over time and using a calorimeter would confirm Rosemary Ainslie's results.
peace love light

[SkyWatcher]

Im sorry 46% less time needed.