COP 17 Heater | Rosemary Ainslie

[poynt99]

Wish I had more time at the moment, but real quick - everyone needs to remember that the amp is a time relative value. Subdivide the time, you subdivide the amperage.

G2G,

BBL

Indeed that goes without saying, but is there a point?

.99

[Harvey]

Wish I had more time at the moment, but real quick - everyone needs to remember that the amp is a time relative value. Subdivide the time, you subdivide the amperage.

G2G,

BBL

[witsend]

My guess is that the above number is the scopemeter giving its measurement of the RMS value of the scope trace, i.e. the shunt voltage. Poynt

This is a full screen shot. The AC RMS value is shown above the DC. Nothing is hidden I can assure you.

Sorry I missed this point in your earlier post. EDIT It is not in AC coupling mode. It shows both DC and AC coupled.

[poynt99]

Aaron states twice in his post that it is DC voltage across the shunt.

It looks to me that the scopemeter is in AC coupling mode as indicated by the little sine wave under the "rms", i.e. the "V~".

.99

[witsend]

Poynt - if you don't mind I'll answer this. I happen to know that Aaron is busy.

...If so, why do you call that "DC"?
Not DC - just DC Coupled.

What is the red circled number representing? What is the rms value displayed above it? My guess is that the above number is the scopemeter giving its measurement of the RMS value of the scope trace, i.e. the shunt voltage.
The red circled number is the average of the voltage across the load with reference to zero.

If you are using the rms voltage across the shunt and its resistance to determine current, this will be an RMS current through the battery and the shunt (assuming they are the same).
You answered this yourself '(assuming they are the same). They are not. RMS is the value that TK uses. DC is actually what's required here.

Now this is fine if you want to determine heating in either the battery of the shunt, but it is not the correct way to determine how much power is leaving the battery, and how much is going back in. For that you need to either take instantaneous measurements (and do some post-processing), or have the scope (if it is capable) take an average current measurement.
Poynt. Patience. I think Aaron still has to get computer cable links, software and such like. We all know what's needed to compute these measurements.

If the average current measures positive, then the RA circuit is running UU. If the average current is negative, then the RA circuit is running OU. If the average current is zero, then the RA circuit is running at unity.
Not right. If the average current multiplied by battery voltage is less than the energy dissipated at the resistor then the circuit is running at OU.

I talked about instantaneous power pulses to and from the battery the other day, but in reality, since the battery/source voltage does not change appreciably over a few minutes time, one could indeed accomplish the same thing by only measuring the average current in the shunt. If the claim is that more power goes back into the battery than comes out, this is all you need to do. P = V x I, and so if V does not change, P is directly proportional to I.
Indeed. This is the short test that we referred to, as opposed to the loooong test using battery draw down rates. But I'm sure that both will be shown in due course.

Most voltage meters set on "DC" volts average the measurement do they not? The accuracy of the measurement is not an issue, we're only looking for a "+" or "-" reading on the meter.

If you're looking for a minus reading then you'll never find it. We are NOT talking perpetual motion.

The flaw is in assuming that more energy goes back to the battery. I wish. It is always some fraction less than the initial output. But the sum of both cycles is less than the energy dissipated at the load.

[mikehingle]

In response to the question of : What does it mean by "opening the gate"
to these highly useful plasmatic magnetic fields that are natures gift
and "not man-made" ???,

I'll give another analogy for better understanding :
You can let the cows out to pasture through the clever gate you built,
but you didn't create the cows. (I had to refrain from a joke here)

Cheers !
Mike Hingle

[Aaron]

"academics"

It now rests with the academic community to validate the conclusions made in any test report that emerges from the planned tests that I understand Peter and Aaron will be conducting on your behalf.

This is to satisfy myself with my own work to see what results I get by actual experimentation, first. And then if it pans out as expected, the next acknowledgment I am interested in is from corroborated results from other experimenters such as the brilliant builders on this forum and not pen jockeys that are morbidly afraid to put their name on anything.

[witsend]

MileHigh

Aaron is showing only one thing here. He is showing us all that the value of the energy returning to the battery can be calculated by using the correct instrumentation. I don't think anyone can force him to operate at your preferred speed or urgency.

Regarding the Tektronix - it'll be sent to US for Aaron et al to use for measurement.

[poynt99]

A Very Simple Method

Hi everyone,

Here is a picture of a scope shot from a Fluke 123 Scopemeter showing the DC voltage across the shunt.

This is the picture TK does not want you to see because it shows over 1.0 COP immediately - when you compare to AC RMS across load.

The ac rms across load squared divided by load resistance (10 ohm) is the wattage dissipated there.

The dc across shunt divided by shunt resistance is amps X battery voltage is watts leaving battery.

If he shows that, there is more watts being dissipated at load than is leaving battery. It is clearly over 1.0 COP.

Ask TK to show this as well as the wattage at load!

Aaron,

I'm trying hard to understand, but I'm not certain what you are showing there for a scope trace vs. what you are saying. Is the scope trace that of the shunt? If so, why do you call that "DC"?

What is the red circled number representing? What is the rms value displayed above it? My guess is that the above number is the scopemeter giving its measurement of the RMS value of the scope trace, i.e. the shunt voltage.

If you are using the rms voltage across the shunt and its resistance to determine current, this will be an RMS current through the battery and the shunt (assuming they are the same). Now this is fine if you want to determine heating in either the battery of the shunt, but it is not the correct way to determine how much power is leaving the battery, and how much is going back in. For that you need to either take instantaneous measurements (and do some post-processing), or have the scope (if it is capable) take an average current measurement.

If the average current measures positive, then the RA circuit is running UU. If the average current is negative, then the RA circuit is running OU. If the average current is zero, then the RA circuit is running at unity.

I talked about instantaneous power pulses to and from the battery the other day, but in reality, since the battery/source voltage does not change appreciably over a few minutes time, one could indeed accomplish the same thing by only measuring the average current in the shunt. If the claim is that more power goes back into the battery than comes out, this is all you need to do. P = V x I, and so if V does not change, P is directly proportional to I.

So once again, if we assume that the shunt current is the same current leaving (and entering) the battery, then the shunt voltage is a direct indicator of this current. Have some means (excuse the pun) to take the average of the voltage across the shunt and you will have the average power in the battery. It will either be positive (power leaving the battery) or negative (power entering the battery).

Most voltage meters set on "DC" volts average the measurement do they not? The accuracy of the measurement is not an issue, we're only looking for a "+" or "-" reading on the meter.

A voltage meter set on "DC Volts" should read 0V while measuring any 50% duty cycle, zero offset AC wave form.

This just doesn't get any simpler If my idea is flawed, please let me know, but I think it is sound.

.99

[witsend]

... A device running forever without a battery (rather than "multiple hours" with), THAT defies the question of the Amp hour rating of the battery that got it all kick-started...

J

To the best of my knowledge it would not be possible to run this as a perpetual motion machine. It'd be nice to be proved wrong. But I don't see it. Just really great efficiency.

[MileHigh]

Rosemary,

My impression is that Aaron is basing his statement on the Fluke 123 Scopemeter measurements, the 10-ohm load, and the value of the shunt resistor. If that's the case I would like to see the math worked out.

Since I am here, I have a question or two for you. When is the Tektronics DSO going to be available? Who is it being delivered to, you in South Africa, or Aaron and Peter in the USA? If it is going to S.A., who will be running the tests? Can you provide pictures of the circuit that is going to be tested? What is the preliminary plan for making measurements with the DSO?

I will be gone for a few hours, and look forward to seeing the responses.

Thank you,

MileHigh

[witsend]

Aaron:

I have been watching in the backgrond, and I have a legitimate question for you about your shunt waveform using the Fluke 123 Scopemeter in your post #1663.

Please work out the math for all of us for the COP > 1 calculation in the form of a posting.

Thank you,

MileHigh

MileHigh - I think Aaron's still working on the resonating frequency. I think you see for yourself, that this is periodic. I'm sure he'll do this when he's got the frequency right. I think what I'm saying here is that you need a bit of patience.

[witsend]

Am answering Harvey here. It's theoretical - so apologies to our experimentalists. Just ignore this post.

I have been thinking a bit with regards to how you envisage the photons being 'peeled' off from the atomic lattice of the inductive resistor. IIRC, I read that sharp (high delta voltage over delta time) transitions were expected to produce better results.
Have sort of answered this in the model related to nebula. Photons are the first composites of the zipon. Disturb the field - symmetries broken - and the particles become variously manifest. Same in the resistor. But the fields then 'dissipate' as heat - manifest zipons - and photons, composite zipons. The latter move through space. The former decay back to a field but away from their former location in space.

I had imagined that it was more related to the change in field intesity over time. Although the two are related by Ampere's Law, I am curious as to whether a moderate frequency sinusoidal waveform with high amperage would produce different results than a lower amperage, high frequency square waveform.
The two are surely more or less the same? I rather think that the answer is in increasing the effect by changing the inductance. And the inductance can be increased by the shape of the field which means to the shape of the inductor. Presumably this shape would then be unconventional.

To put it simpler, I had imagined that dumping several hundred amps through a coil during a slower sinusoidal ringing would release the effect better than just a few tens of amps being spiked with nanosecond rise and fall times. But on reflecting, I am curious as to whether the sharp corners on the edge of a square wave where the transition abruptly stops (dv/dt = 0 at the top and bottom of the trace) may have a stronger jarring effect on the underlying materials.
Not sure of your point here. But if you are suggesting that the return here is not considerable - then you're basing it on TK's numbers. They're nonsense. But, nonetheless, this is only a small example of the field's potential. I do not know it's upper limit. The underlying material is distressed because of the disturbance of these binding fields. But on an electric application it will not change the value of the atoms. Only their binding in the amalgam. They're 'shaken loose' so to speak.

I guess it depends on whether or not the photon release...
Not so much a release as a particle fusion of zipons. Just one by product. Heat is a second and this is from the manifest zipons.

Theoretically, if it is the dv/dt the fundamental frequency dependency melts away and the matter becomes one of simply choosing a strike rate that exceeds the materials ability to dissipate the energy thus raising its temperature for measurement.
The resonating fequency is key. But the fields are just moved forwards and backwards through space. The actual resonance does not result in discharge from the supply source. Charge is wholly conserved. Just very energetic.

Not sure if I've confused you any further. If it's any comfort I'm struggling here. Difficult to describe - but I feel you understand this thing.
EDIT A guy on another forum described them as curly little fields extraneous to atoms. Which is more or less how I see them.

[mikehingle]

! Partial Transmutations !

! Partial Transmutations !

But on the other hand, magnetic fields can have superconducting-like properties, transmitting easily through a lot more materials than can electricity, light, heat, radio waves, xrays, & even gamma & cosmic rays. And these values have been precisely measured & characterized over the last 100 years. The only things that block or shield magnet fields are materials that magnets stick to & counter-propagating magnetic fields.

Magnetic energy is very unique in our universe, compared to all the other energies. Especially Plasmatic Magnetic Energy, which can be derived from rapidly switching off currents in coils, & hence, "opening the gate" to allow to pass through, nature's provided (not man-made) Karate Chop-Like forcefull, collapsing magnetic fields. Directory:Keshe Foundation - PESWiki

As a Non-Combustion Technology without the level of environmental health concern that is associated with Combustion Technology, numerous new applications of Plasmatic Magnetic Energy are being discovered, which are demonstrating much greater energy efficient work than can be achieved with combustion technologies. The only evirnomental concern is if we open that gate toooo wide, & get sucked into a black hole !!! Or get partially transmuted into a transvestite !!!
We must be carefully considerate of the Bio-ElectroMagnetic consequences when xxx'n around with nature !!!

Cheers !
Mike Hingle
Bio-ElectroMagnetic Integrations
Assuring ElectroMagnetism in Harmony with Biology

[MileHigh]

Aaron:

I have been watching in the backgrond, and I have a legitimate question for you about your shunt waveform using the Fluke 123 Scopemeter in your post #1663.

Please work out the math for all of us for the COP > 1 calculation in the form of a posting.

Thank you,

MileHigh