COP 17 Heater | Rosemary Ainslie

[witsend]

Harvey - I'm a little embarrassed to ask this - but are those effects mainstream - or not? I sincerely believe that - if they are - then there is nothing new introduced by my model. If they're not mainstream - then why not - if the effect is so easily replicable.

I'm afraid I'm not up with current science and all it's applications

EDIT. Joit, so nice to see you're always there.

[Harvey]

I can't resist Harvey:

> They must fully document a complete and exhaustive power chart for their work. If they are unable to comply, then I put it forward that they haven't a clue as to what they are discussing here in this thread.

The clip you linked to has nothing to do with this experiment. Back to the drawing boards.

MileHigh

Thank you for proving my point.

[Joit]

But, but i need such a Thing!
Maybe i can heat up some Iron and can finally make some Magnets with it.

Just to bad it usual needs a lot of Caps.

[MileHigh]

I can't resist Harvey:

> They must fully document a complete and exhaustive power chart for their work. If they are unable to comply, then I put it forward that they haven't a clue as to what they are discussing here in this thread.

The clip you linked to has nothing to do with this experiment. Back to the drawing boards.

MileHigh

[Harvey]

Ok, it seems some here still don't get the concept - so perhaps this video will help.

YouTube - Induction Heating

I want all the skeptics here to build a circuit that performs the action demonstrated. They must fully document a complete and exhaustive power chart for their work. If they are unable to comply, then I put it forward that they haven't a clue as to what they are discussing here in this thread.


Rosemary, you ever feel like you're raising a bunch of kids here? Feels that way to me.



And if you like that video:
YouTube - Red-hot ice cube by induction heating

[mikehingle]

Rosemary !

Have you perused the Keshe Generator descriptions yet to realize how it works ???
Keshe energy Plasma Reactors - Scroll down & see his generator diagram.

Can you see how his generator's initiating power source could be very efficient, & similar to yours
& others who are effectively using collapsing magnetic fields to drive the reactions ???

Here's some of Keshe's clues :

"In this system energy production is achieved simply by the normal creation of heat first,
then gravity in the center of the core, with the help of the generation of magnetic fields
through the right method of circulation [of the magnetically active medium: hydrogen or SG Gas]
and cooling system, within the reactor."

"The creation of electric energy in this reactor is achieved through the simple process of hydrogen ionization."
[The hydrogen gasses are ionized by strongly applied external magnetic fields,
which results in the creation & circulation of the contained ionized hydrogen gasses.
Then, these circulating highly ionized gasses themselves create a strong magnetic field,
which can be used for power generation & propulsion.]

Cheers !
Mike Hingle

[Joit]

>I have spent thousands of hours on a bench with a scope and a logic analyizer.
>I wasn't looking for OU, I was working. I did similar experiments like this on a bench almost 30 years ago.

That explain a lot of your scepticism.

I dont think, if someone can proove it with this Circuit, that you can have a higher Cop, it will change the World.
Otherside, mostly the Reward for got such a Device is mostly a Bullet into your Head.
I remember a Story, where someone destroyed a Teslaswitch at J. Bedinis Store
as he was a moment absent, just, 'because he was angry, that such Things exist'.
Beside are there still a few Devices outside, what shows OU.
I dont give Examples for that, and when it would go public, it would be supressed.
And this Circuit is maybe a hard Example, to show it.
You dont have Energy, what you can directly take from, you see a lower decrease at the Batteries, wich seems is hard to Proof,
when someone dont wanna see it, all you got is the Heat, where you can say, its more like its usual is.
The Question, why there is allways a Batterie in this Devices is simple, because you cant catch the Spikes really proper,
i would say, you do transform it more then use them.
But having Batteries it does not help to show that you can have/use more Energy, when you use the Spikes too.

War is another Theme, much Scientist are against Wars, but her inventions are exactly used for it,
because, at last, they can tell you, it is for the National Security.
That are other Peoples, what rules right now the World.
And there are quite a lot other Things, what you can find out about the Spikes, or collapsing Field,
but someone need to investigate it from all corners.
And that, is still quite a bit more Work, till all are there.
And well, i damaged one PG50 now from this weak Spikes.

[Hoppy]

Why? Surely if any expert wants to be associated with this test he would advance his own name? Why should I do this? We all know that if any academic expressed any interest in OU claims his reputation would be severly compromised. But there's never been any conflict on the required protocol. Which is why TK's determined omission of the DC average over the shunt is so suspect. It throws doubts on his knowledge or on his agenda. Not sure which.

Because you are presumably the person who is going to publish the report with the names in it?

Hoppy

[MileHigh]

Joit:

I have spent thousands of hours on a bench with a scope and a logic analyizer. I wasn't looking for OU, I was working. I did similar experiments like this on a bench almost 30 years ago.

The "prize" is the fact that over a 10-year period the entire world would undergo a transformation that would make the Internet look like nothing more than a better mousetrap. It would affect every single person on Planet Earth and make famine and possibly even war a thing of the past.

"Break on through to the other side."

MileHigh

[Joit]

Prize?

Btw, 'come clean' What is actually the Prize therefor to win, when it shows, this circuit gives a higher COP?
A 2 Million $ Contract for this Circuit?

And speaking from Experts, you should come clean, what Experts you are,
you did proove it more then once that you are not.
So what is the Prize for, only the satisfaction for some, and after they got her Proof they go to her Bumf and Bucket?

Seriously, when someone from you would be really interested at this,
he would had spend the few Bucks for the Parts and did replicate it, to see, if there is a gain or not, and,
even a hayseed can see, when you remove the Flybackdiode or connect the Batteries directly, you have lesser gain or NO Gain.

That Discussion seriously looks so ridiculous, if the measurements are wrong about a few Volts up or down,
and dont ask for Respect towards classical hardcore EE's i have NONE.
I can get upset 2 Times every Day, when i see, how wrong the classical Theorie is, and its nothing else then a Theorie.
Maybe thats why they deny it to get an other View from Current, because they would see, how useless its actually is, and they still need to support that Tissue of Lies.

So what is the Prize here for the Proof.

[witsend]

Rosemary,

You are going to have to come clean on who these 'hefty experts' are and their background. Could you please expand on your last sentence, first para?

Hoppy

Why? Surely if any expert wants to be associated with this test he would advance his own name? Why should I do this? We all know that if any academic expressed any interest in OU claims his reputation would be severly compromised. But there's never been any conflict on the required protocol. Which is why TK's determined omission of the DC average over the shunt is so suspect. It throws doubts on his knowledge or on his agenda. Not sure which.

[Hoppy]

Hi Quantumuppercut. We've got the protocol for the test from experts. It's really enough. When the results of the final test are posted then our 'classicists' can object. But they'll have to quarrel with some hefty expertise. The protocol was not set by anyone 'for' or 'against'. It was simply set according to required measurement analysis.

I love the name you've chosen by the way. Neat.

Rosemary,

You are going to have to come clean on who these 'hefty experts' are and their background. Could you please expand on your last sentence, first para?

Hoppy

[MileHigh]

Mark:

Let me just get my comments on the record for the test process and then that information can be used or not used at the discretion of Aaron and Peter. Compared to my originally suggested test protocol, this is a simplified test taking advantage of the new hardware.

I looked through the user manual for the Tektronix TDS3000 Series DSO. The first thing to do is the probe compensation and signal path compensation for both of your acquisition channels.

To measure the power going into the circuit load you set up one channel across the shunt resistor like normal. For the second channel you connect the hot lead of the probe to the battery positive and the ground lead of the probe to the "hot" side of the shunt resistor. This will measure the true voltage from the battery, bypassing the voltage drop caused by the shunt resistor and factoring in the battery voltage "hiccup" when you first demand current from it. This is a step that I have been worried about.

The DSO can record up to 10,000 points at 9 bits of precision, more than enough accuracy for this test. Suppose the DSO records three full waveforms at 1000 sample points per pair of waveforms, for a total of 6000 sample points. The DSO has built-in dual waveform math, so you program it to multiply the two signals together to give you a weighted instantaneous power waveform.

This waveform is then put onto a floppy disk and then loaded into Excel. The .csv file probably has a format of:

<time stamp>,<weighted instantaneous power>
<time stamp>,<weighted instantaneous power>
.
.

You then have Excel calculate the average weighted power value of the weighted instantaneous power column of data between two time stamps (rows) that represent exactly three (for eaxmple) periods of your waveform. In plain English, you do a summation on the power column between a start and end range that you select with your mouse. Then you divide that by the number of sample points in that row range.

You have to make a precise measurement of the period of your waveform to be sure you select the correct number of rows. The big trick for doing that is to display 5 or 10 waveforms on your display and then measure that period, and then divide by 5 or 10. This gives you more accuracy in measuring a waveform's period with any type of scope. You can also look at the actual data dump, and look for a good reference point, like a sharp falling edge, and measure the time preiod like that.

Then you convert the average weighted power value into the true power by multiplying it by (1/(precision measurement of the shunt resistor value).

This gives you the true average power into the load based on three full vaveforms and about 6000 data points at 9 bits of precision. Nothing to sneeze at.

This will factor in any current being returned into the source battery because the instantaneous power calculated by the DSO will be negative because the shunt resistor voltage will go negative. In fact, you can now look at the energy in the spike returned into the battery itself for each cycle by selecting the right row range in the column of data and doing a summation on it.

I think the thermal measurements are much more straightforward. You could do a quick pass-fail for the over unity claim by running the same DC power through the coil-resostor-diode thermal assembly, and do whatever investigations after that you may choose.

So that's my take on it for the record. I loooked at the DSO manual and am trying to offer these suggestions because there are a few tricky parts that everyone should be aware of.

MileHigh

[witsend]

I have an idea.

Why don't all the skeptics get together and write down a list of criterial that would satisfy you. Post the list up, the believers will edit the list and update it. This go back and forth until the list is perfect. Then the testing begins. The list needs to be as simple and specific as possible to get to the main point.

Hi Quantumuppercut. We've got the protocol for the test from experts. It's really enough. When the results of the final test are posted then our 'classicists' can object. But they'll have to quarrel with some hefty expertise. The protocol was not set by anyone 'for' or 'against'. It was simply set according to required measurement analysis.

I love the name you've chosen by the way. Neat.

[mikehingle]

4th State of Water

@MH,
Thank you for your consideration of those questions I posted.

The underlying purpose was to get the thought processes of the readers here thinking on original reason Rosemary had this circuit built and how it can lead to COP > 17. ..... Can you think of any examples where passing a magnetic field through a material results in Infra Radiation being produced ???

Harvey !

Yeah, but I don't have the $2000 bucks it takes to run down to Home Depot to buy an oven with a magnetic induction cooking stove-top.

Here's another well advanced & utilized system, that man has recently harnessed, that uses nature's power of rapidly collapsing magnetic fields, for producing a newly discovered "4th State of Water". I hope the parallels described here will give a better understanding of the mechanics of the RA circuit.

Cheers !
Mike Hingle

__________________________________________________ ___________________________________________

Highlights of the SG Gas Patent, entitled :
"Method For Making A Gas From An Aqueous Fluid, Product Of The Method, And Apparatus Therefor"

[0019] ..... electric current provided to the reaction zone to pulse at a frequency of 15 to 20 KHz decreases the wattage needed to create [produce] gas by approximately a factor of 10. ..... with a pulsing device associated with the reaction zone, the amount drops to 0.00028 Kilowatt-hour or less to generate one (1) liter of gas. [= 0.28 Watts / Liter !!! That's @ 9 times OU (COP = 9) !!!]

[0014] ..... Overall, the method employs the creation of [inducing] a magnetic field within the aqueous fluid and periodically collapsing the magnetic field under conditions which do not provoke electrolysis of the aqueous fluid. .....

[0020] ..... a reaction occurs in the electrolyte solution between the two end plates upon collapse of the magnetic field, which results in a release [production] of a generated gas.

[0021] In a pilot plant apparatus for determining optimal operational conditions, a clear Plexiglas receptacle can be used for the reaction zone, so that one can visibly monitor the reaction with ultraviolet light and observe the generation of gas. This pilot plant preferably provides adjustment means for the cathode and anode so that they can be moved to optimize the reaction for a given aqueous fluid composition and changes in pulsing duration and frequency.

[0022] ..... It has been found that use of minimal electric currents between two electrodes results from the electrodes being spread a sufficient distance apart of at the least of one inch apart and preferably eight to sixteen inches apart, .....

[0023] The important functionalities in the process are imposition of [inducing] a magnetic field on the aqueous fluid and the ability to periodically collapse the magnetic field to generate the desired gas, under conditions short of those that will induce electrolysis. ..... [by the use of] a wire coil outside of [wrapped around] the reaction zone ..... [doubling the mass of the wire wrapped around the reaction zone doubles the strength of the magnetic field applied to the reaction zone, without any cost of increased power consumption, except for a minute amount electrical wire resistance] Basic electronics: What is inductance? - 2004-05-10 01:00:00 CDT | Plant Engineering

[0026] The generated gas is then preferably exposed to a second magnetic field by providing [within] a 2nd reaction zone comprising of the [utilizing] rare earth magnets. ..... Since SG Gas is paramagnetic and water vapor is diamagnetic, the magnetic chamber strengthens the molecular bond of the gas [& separates] and repels the water vapor back into the solution [of the 1st reaction zone].

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other gases developed by Rhodes and Brown are "dirty cocktails" with mixtures of gases including H2 or O2 gases
that are generated from heat-producing electrolysis processes and can be explosive.
It must be clear in our process of creating SG Gas, electrolysis does not take place.
"Electrolysis" is defined as a "method of separating chemically bonded elements and compounds by passing an electric current through them." Electrolysis does not take place and no splitting of the water molecular bonds occurs, as is demonstrated by the fact that no increase in hydrogen or oxygen gas can be measured in the reaction zone during the production of SG Gas. This is a key differentiator from the processes that have resulted in other gases that were and are produced by electrolysis of water. The gases produced by electrolysis exhibit far different properties from that of SG Gas. Gases produced by electrolysis are explosive, cannot be pressurized and are heat-producing gases on ignition.
Our process for creating the more stable, safer SG Gas is neither heat producing (no electrolysis) nor involves any splitting of hydrogen and oxygen bonds from the water molecule that could create an explosive situation.

The Science behind SG Gas
The Scientific Discovery of the Fourth State of Water and SG Gas