COP 17 Heater | Rosemary Ainslie

[Michael John Nunnerley]

first video now loaded

Hi all

first video now loaded

YouTube - STEAP-2

Mike

[Michael John Nunnerley]

I have a question

Hi all,

I have a question, how can we measure the wattage going into the resistor when it is across two phases, one reading 69.1v and the other 78.5v when measured independantly, the voltage across the two phases is 133v. we are talkig AC here.

I did take a reading on DC as well:- 7.74 and 11.06 both positive so it has to be AC

Maybe Harvey can answer this one!

Maybe the electrons are hitting each other in the middle of the resistor and creating heat or maybe this is nothing to laugh about!

Mike

[witsend]

Red Alert

Hi Guys. Just to alert everyone to a really clever ploy in hacking that has now become evident.

Glen supposedly sent the following message to Harvey

'Hey Harvey, I got some new wave forms Rosie wanted me to send you and maybe some .XLR spread sheet info ... not posted yet ...Aaron is now also trying to replicate the new finding' - Glen L...

The point being that Fuzzy never sent this. And who knows what was in that file.

Harvey also found himself in a typed dialogue conversation with someone who was - again - not Glen and Glen then became the confused recipient of Harvey's replies.

Strange things afoot. Just double check the sender before you open files on Skye. And it's possible that voice identification is possibly the safest. Golly. So much intrigue about this little circuit.

[witsend]

Aaron - this is for your benefit. Posted over from OU.Com

Re: Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie
« Reply #2190 on: Today at 05:16:05 AM »

* Reply with quoteQuote
* Modify messageModify

Hi allcanadian. Just to let you know how much I appreciate your input here. I get it that you feel the intrinsic components on the circuit are somewhat unstable or possibly better described as variable? You are right. But the intrigue is that the 'window' to show any kind of anomaly at all, is aslo so very small. So. Superficially we have a really standard set up which is also well known and well tried. And yet, given certain frequencies? resonances? then really sophisticated measurements point at waveforms and values that seem to fly in the face of...

I have been in some really lengthy conversations in trying to resolve the coincidence of the source voltage across the shunt and the drain voltage across the load. We can nearly resolve this provided only that the current flow instantaneously adjusts to applied voltage and if the load resistor presents an alternate path for that current flow. At present our thinking is that it may be through the hollow of the resistor itself. That way there is an explanation for the spike as being entirely stored energy from the level of the source battery potential difference and greater. Then too, the current flow back through the battery would always be enabled through a circuit path enabled by the body diode.

At its least, this would explain the need for the wider diameter of the load resistor which seems to be required to allow this anomaly at all. The thinking then being that the narrower the diameter the greater the magnetic resistance? (sorry about the term) would not allow the full benefit of returning current. But the question remains. What then happens to the stored energy on the load resistor? Does this dissipate? And if so, as what?

The alternative to this could be that the returning energy - be it stored or regenerated - actually behaves in some way that conflicts with standard electric current flow - resulting in some delivery of energy that also does not relate to heat dissipation. I can still argue this in terms of zipons - but it would need more comprehensive experimental proof. There may be hints of this in Aaron's early experiments where he discovered a distinct cooling over the resistor. But it can only be considered as a possibility at this stage. It needs more substantial proof.

What continues to intrigue me is that our early choice of the appropriate load resistors was - through some miracle of coincidence and good timing - able to satisfy the precise requirement to show this anomaly. Which also explains why the early replicators of that circuit were not able to show those same anomalous values. I must confess that until my foray into these forums - I assumed that replicators were simply pretending not to see the benefits. I now know that the effect may very well have required that precise property. The actual question remains as to what is the upper limit required to show full benefit. I believe Fuzzy is making an even wider resistor and I look forward to seeing these results.

But it is just so nice to be reminded that we can engage with the more open minded. There are a dearth of such on this thread - albeit many on this forum. For some reason this thread is monopolised by a kind of mainstream scepticism which is appropriate to good science provided it is also open to the questions posed by these evident anomalies.

Yet again - thank you for the objectivity and the input in general. It is much appreciated.

[witsend]

Hi everyone,

Their is many replicators out there that are asking how can I do this with my older oscilloscope that is 10mhz to 150mhz ...... well its not easy but you can definitely get in the ball park for sure.

The resistance on the gate pot needs to be between 7 and 3 ohms using a DMM across the pot terminals .... 5 to 6 ohms for best results

The battery voltage across the 24 volt battery bank can be monitored with another DMM and tuned to the highest voltage using the gate pot for fine adjustments between the 7 and 3 ohm area.

The Channel 1 is used at the Mosfet shunt area between the 0.25 ohm resistor and the Mosfet "source" pin, "SCOPE" - set at 50mv and probe at X10

The Channel 2 is used at the 24 Volt battery bank positive and negative but connected within 18 inches from your "load resistor", "SCOPE" - set at 2v and probe at X10

The "load resistor" will be from 110 degrees F to 150 degrees F
The "Mosfet" will be from 140 degrees F to 160 degrees F
( temperatures measured with a IR non contact thermometer )

If using these setting this is what should be seen .....






A example of a earlier run using the Tektronix TDS 3054C
Channel 1 - Mosfet "source" shunt
Channel 2 - Mosfet "drain" *
Channel 3 - 555 timer / pin #3
Channel 4 - 24 Volt Battery Bank

As you can see the Mosfet Drain @ 520 Volts rises at the same time the 24 Volt battery bank rises to 70 Volts



I hope this helps all the replicators out there so you know this can be done and get some impressive results yourself

Glen

This should put the question about returning energy to bed.

[Harvey]

The Single Conduit Multi Vortex

Nikola Tesla once said that whatever electricity is, it acts like an incompressible fluid. Note the distinction here between fluid and liquid, they are not the same things. James Clerk Maxwell envisaged magnetic vortices swirling around Faraday's 'lines of force' which led to his famous 8 equations of which 4 are in particular use in classical physics involved with electromagnetic radiation today. Viktor Schauberger applied the vortex phenomenon to actual fluid dynamics involving real liquids and demonstrated how the shear zone between two vortices can have nearly zero resistance, and the shear zone between a single vortex and the conduit in which it travels can reduce the restriction of the forward movement of the fluid by reducing or preventing cohesive action.

When voltage and/or frequency increase, the current produced in a conductor tends to move from the inward material area to the outward surface area. This effect is referred to as the Skin Effect and you can discover the principle behind it by clicking on the link embedded in the forgoing term.

Today, I would like to entertain the possibility that a vortex current structure could form in specific resonant circuits that exhibit a dual function with regards to the voltage and/or frequency of the circuit. In this case, we may have a low voltage, low frequency, high current condition flowing in one direction in the conductor center, while we may have a high voltage, high frequency, low current condition flowing on the same conductor surface in the other direction - simultaneously.

Ok...most of you are doing this right now.... wait for it...and now , you ask, "is it even possible?"

Yes We know for a certainty that we can move fluids in two different directions simultaneously in the same conduit. We also know conclusively, that this action results in a transfer of energy from the one vortex to the other in order to conserve its angular momentum. Could Tesla be correct? Could electricity behave in the exact same way? Tesla also stated that electric current behaved as if it contained momentum, especially in inductive circuits. This would be necessary if an exchange were to occur between two coaxial vortices in the same conductor. The most remarkable aspect of this scenario is the possible internal action of a transformer in a single straight wire.

Our measurement equipment is most often attached to the surface of our conductors. Therefore, we may not be getting the whole picture. Instead, we may only be seeing what is happening on the surface and missing what is happening on the inside.

Recent involvement with the Rosemary Ainslie COP > 17 circuit has forced an evaluation of our current understanding of electrical transmission and its relationship with the surrounding magnetic field it produces.

Happy thoughts ,



(This information was first published here.)

[FuzzyTomCat]

Revised Circuit Diagram

Hi everyone,

Here is a revised "Quantum" Rosemary Ainslie COP>17 Heater Circuit .... this should help everyone that is doing a replication ....



CIRCUIT ADJUSTMENTS - ( For the most efficient results but with less heat )

Use a Digital Multi Meter (DMM) or bench top unit able to see 0.00 type ohms if possible, not just tenths but hundreds to get the pre-set "sweet spot" between 5.80 to 5.30 ohms (checking pot back lash) then using a DMM to monitor the highest voltage reading from your 24 volt battery bank while doing GATE pot "fine adjustments" of more or less resistance to reach that highest voltage reading needed for the most efficient results.

Glen

[Harvey]

Hi all,

I have a question, how can we measure the wattage going into the resistor when it is across two phases, one reading 69.1v and the other 78.5v when measured independantly, the voltage across the two phases is 133v. we are talkig AC here.

I did take a reading on DC as well:- 7.74 and 11.06 both positive so it has to be AC

Maybe Harvey can answer this one!

Maybe the electrons are hitting each other in the middle of the resistor and creating heat or maybe this is nothing to laugh about!

Mike

Hi Mike,

If I understand your question, you have two 'hot' lines and a neutral. Measuring from one hot to neutral you get 69.1VAC and from the other to neutral you get 78.5VAC whereas from one hot to the other you get 133VAC. It is extrapolated then that the difference between 147.6VAC and the measured 133VAC is due to a phase differential and not related to a time difference between measurements. We would need to know the frequency of each, the phase shift between them, possibly the wave shape and whether or not the neutral is included in any way with the resistor, like at a center-tap, wiper etc.

If the neutral is out of the picture as far as operation is concerned, and the power is used only between the two hots, then you simply have 133VAC squared divided by (r + z) where r is the resistance in ohms of the resistor and z is any inductive and/or capacitive reactance present in the resistor as a function of the frequency applied. In this case, your supply is said to be a source of power and your resistor is said to dissipate (consume) that power. Watts are always an indication of work being done. Volt-Amps on the other hand is a type of power that is returned back to the source unused. A transformer primary connected across the mains with no load connected on the secondary may seem to have current flowing in the winding, but no power is consumed until a load is placed on the secondary (barring Joule heating losses).

I don't know if I've answered your question yet - let me know if you need specifics based on the missing criteria above.

Cheers,

[Michael John Nunnerley]

Hi Mike,

If I understand your question, you have two 'hot' lines and a neutral. Measuring from one hot to neutral you get 69.1VAC and from the other to neutral you get 78.5VAC whereas from one hot to the other you get 133VAC. It is extrapolated then that the difference between 147.6VAC and the measured 133VAC is due to a phase differential and not related to a time difference between measurements. We would need to know the frequency of each, the phase shift between them, possibly the wave shape and whether or not the neutral is included in any way with the resistor, like at a center-tap, wiper etc.

If the neutral is out of the picture as far as operation is concerned, and the power is used only between the two hots, then you simply have 133VAC squared divided by (r + z) where r is the resistance in ohms of the resistor and z is any inductive and/or capacitive reactance present in the resistor as a function of the frequency applied. In this case, your supply is said to be a source of power and your resistor is said to dissipate (consume) that power. Watts are always an indication of work being done. Volt-Amps on the other hand is a type of power that is returned back to the source unused. A transformer primary connected across the mains with no load connected on the secondary may seem to have current flowing in the winding, but no power is consumed until a load is placed on the secondary (barring Joule heating losses).

I don't know if I've answered your question yet - let me know if you need specifics based on the missing criteria above.

Cheers,

Hi Harvey thanks for your reply

I have posted all the results of the test on my STEAP thread as it is not directly associated with this thread. The inductance value of the resistor I do not know as I do not have an inductance meter, but I supose we could take a stab at it!

Would appreciate if you would take a look. Phase voltage measured with the meter grounded to battery negative.

Mike

[Harvey]

Copying over from the OU forum for our readers here:

Hi Poynt,

We have to start somewhere using a scientific method if we ever expect to obtain credibility in our data gathering. Glens efforts have been above bar in this respect and no institution can fault his due diligence in this matter. That being said, we all realize that the required data is incomplete. It is hoped that this matter will be resolved soon.

The above table is perfectly valid for the use in which is intended. At a specific time each hour (as can be noted by the documented time stamp on the written record) several data dumps were provided - each being of a different time base thereby increasing the accuracy of the samples. This gives us 10,000 individual samples for each screen of data (3 ea) for each hour of the continuous test. For us, the continuous test is extremely important because it helps diagnose the impact that battery charge has on the desired mode of operation. It is noteworthy that this sometimes did not fully develop until 2 hours into the runs. This data alludes to the concept that a fully charged battery is resistant to the desired effect. If this proves to be the case, then it is doubtful that you will ever produce these effects using your power supply unless you can tune its charge/impedance characteristics to accurately mimic that of the partially discharged battery. Therefore, MH's claims regarding the lack of need for extended runs is grossly misplaced here.

There should be absolutely no doubt that the data retrieved from the equipment is up to industry and academic standards. The quantity and quality of the samples far exceeds those often used for mainstream scientific studies. If you don't believe that, just have a look at any prescription pills you may have in your medicine cabinet and compare the records of their sample numbers to ours.

You have made a serious error in your power calculations which I have tried to tactfully bring to everyone's attention. You cannot determine with any accuracy what power dissipation is occurring in your circuit components unless you understand accurately the precise phasing between the voltage and current. This is the reason that you cannot resolve enormous calculations presented by the data and is the reason that I have not computed them in my latter tables. If we were to believe the instantaneous values as dictated by KCL, we would have power of 21KW present across the load at certain instances. We know this is not the case because current lags voltage in inductors. We also know that we cannot accurately determine the resistance of the load because of its triple impedance characteristics during these rapidly changing frequencies present and observable by the secondary and tertiary images presented in the 'Digital Phosphor' technology of this superb testing instrument provided by Tektronix. The inductive reactance and capacitive reactance inherent in the load resistor, drastically alter the actual current present in the device at specific times in the cycles. It cannot be calculated and the current tests do not provide a means to measure it. Without it, you cannot even begin to reach for reasonable values of power dissipation in the FET or Load. Therefore, we must use the thermal profile as the indicator of the power dissipated and we must use the shunt current as the indicator of battery power delivered as the basis for our results.

It is hoped, that in the future we can get a more accurate method of determining the true current in the circuit as a reference of battery delivery. This is especially true when we consider that the conventional expectation with regards to where in time, what polarity and what value the shunt was to produce, has in fact failed to occur. We all find ourselves looking for a reason as to why 8A of current is indicated in a shunt that is isolated from the power side of the circuit by a high impedance switch while at that exact moment the other side of that switch is indicating an inverse polarity entirely prohibitive of any body diode conduction ... or any conduction through the FET for that matter. This occurrence is clearly not conventional and I am looking forward to having it explained to us by any accredited persons reading this post able to do so. I am sorry to say that MH's attempt just did not come even close to explaining it.

The only problem I see with the chart above, is that it represents 21 independent samples over a 7 hour period for a total sample period of less than 1 second. If you were correct in your earlier comments, that Glen's waveforms were periodic, then this would be rock solid data as 40µs of data at any time during the 7 hour run should be exactly the same as any other 40µs data dump. And, even though the law of averages are on our side here, showing the predominant numbers (19 out of 21) to be favorable to our cause, we cannot ignore the 2 out of 21. This begs for a continuous unbroken data dump for which we currently do not have the means to provide. However, we can narrow the sample times so as to determine conclusively the amount of deviation present. I have suggested 2µs samples be taken every 6 minutes during an hour of stable operation.

Glen has outlined his technique for getting his circuit into a favorable stable operation. I use the term 'stable' rather loosely here as it is a mode where deviations seem to be at a minimum. He determines this by setting the shunt probe to readout the 'mean' for that channel and then adjusting the gate pot so as to produce the lowest mean which is usually between 50mV and 80mV. If you can get it in the negative, then all the better. I really doubt that you can achieve this with your power supply driven circuit, but it is certainly worth a try and if you succeed in producing the same negative average results then we will have confirmed MH's claim that the power supply and battery can be used interchangeably. From years of experience with this, I can state conclusively that power supplies always inject noise into a circuit that batteries simply do not. Whether or not that plays any valid role here is yet to be determined.

I for one am looking forward to, and value, your future presentation of tests performed. Please help us here by including the pristine data dumps for evaluation along with the time stamps and any other pertinent variables such as ambient temp, resistor temp, etc.

Best Regards,

[ashtweth]

Interesting reading Rose!! [Hacking] Hmm!! The more they do the more they will reveal themselves. Thanks Glen got your PM and thanks Harvey /ALL. Did some more tests just getting a report ready and updating the doc for all. Will have Glens revised one to add to the report also. Thanks Glen

Ash

[sucahyo]

Today, I would like to entertain the possibility that a vortex current structure could form in specific resonant circuits that exhibit a dual function with regards to the voltage and/or frequency of the circuit. In this case, we may have a low voltage, low frequency, high current condition flowing in one direction in the conductor center, while we may have a high voltage, high frequency, low current condition flowing on the same conductor surface in the other direction - simultaneously.

Already implemented and sold as ethernet over powerline:
Run Ethernet through Your Walls with the Existing Power Lines in Your Home - CAT-5 TO AC POWER LINE ADAPT
Linksys PowerLine AV Ethernet Adapter Kit PLK200 - bridge : Read product information and write a Linksys PowerLine AV Ethernet Adapter Kit PLK200 - bridge review

That is very high frequency low voltage low current over low frequency high voltage high current.

In Indonesia the national power company already implement this for internet connection for their branch office where electricity can reach. The data home meter gathering can also directly send by newer home metering to their server from powerline. If you never have power company people checking your meter, it is high chance that your meter act as reporting modem too.

As for theoritical explanation, I believe that what move in the wire move in spiral. Unlike common explanation that electron move between nucleus orbit, I believe that the thing move in stream, seeking the natural path just like river, where it rotation diameter will become bigger and bigger, thus making them move close to the skin. Eddy current is side effect of them since they are now rotating the center. To force them to move fast, I think Viktor Schauberger way of making the water move faster may also work.

[Harvey]

Hi Sucahyo,

Thank you for sharing that information.

We also have available the inverse, Power over Ethernet where remote devices can be powered by a bias voltage supplied on the Ethernet wires.

One of the things I am proposing here is that the power can be the same for both types of current resulting in a net zero condition. That is part of what I was contemplating and opening up for discussion.

Cheers,

[sucahyo]

We also have available the inverse, Power over Ethernet where remote devices can be powered by a bias voltage supplied on the Ethernet wires.

I don't think that is the case. From what I know Cisco use the term power over ethernet by using normally unused number 7 & 8 leg of the cable to transmit DC power to remote location. Both switch must have power over ethernet specification or one of them may break.

One of the things I am proposing here is that the power can be the same for both types of current resulting in a net zero condition. That is part of what I was contemplating and opening up for discussion.

I see. My mind can't reach that I guess. Maybe sort of two sound entering one chamber. They may weaken or strengthen or may not interrupt each other.

[Harvey]

Hi Sucahyo,

IIRC, 100Mb Ethernet only uses 2 of the pairs of a Category 5 cable, whereas 1Gb Ethernet uses all four pairs of a 5e or or higher category. Thus, if you want PoE over Gb Ethernet, the data must share the same wires with the power. For more information on the 802.3af standard see this, or if you have IEEE access; this



Imagine if you can 1KV at 1A moving on the conductor skin in one direction, spiral vortex and a 20V 50A moving in the center of the conductor, opposite spiral, opposite direction. Imagine that the frequency of each is such so as to provide a perfect magnetic interlace where each spiral crosses the other near right angles - sort of like the weave of a Litz wire. Would the result offer no resistance to the counter flow of current?