COP 17 Heater | Rosemary Ainslie

[Aaron]

this thread

Hi Rosemary,

I started this thread with the hopes that you might eventually join us to share you experience and knowledge. I consider this your thread, actually - so call the shots on whatever you want.


@ Gotoluc, I saw part of your video with producing heat in those resistors. Those resistors must have some kind of inductance. I seem to have a habit of burning those up until they're red hot, they crack and all the ceramic covering falls off. Inside it is definitely a coil of resistive wire. Whatever you feel is similar, feel free to share. I'm still one of your biggest fans if not the biggest I'm not sure if you realize what kind of trouble you caused with the reverse diode finding It sure cracked open pandora's box, let the cat out of the bag and opened a can of worms at the same time and still not everything has been revealed about it.

[gotoluc]

Gotoluc - feel free to reference anything you want - with the proviso that its to do with efficient energy delivery - then what could be better? In any event, it's not my thread but Aaron's and I can't talk for him. But I'd bet my shirt on it that he'd be happy. Certainly I am.

Hi Rosemary,

thanks for the reply did you see the video I made? (link posted above)

I would like your feedback on it.

Click this link to see it: YouTube - Effect of Recirculating BEMF to Coil test 3

Thank you for your time.

Luc

[gotoluc]

Thanks Aaron

talk about a simple circuit or what

looks like Rosemary is okay with this mixed in this topic and what ever works the simplest is fine with me.

You know me, keep it simple

Luc

[witsend]

I presume you are very sure of your thesis. Q: are you sure in sufficient extent to be slightly not so sure about it? Think about it - if you are so sure -you can probably, without risking anything, become not sure of it. Others could probably even doubt it - can you do any of that? henieck

This question is not exactly multiple choirce, but multi layered options on one choice. As it's a good question I feel I need to choose my words carefully. so here goes.

When I started out I only had a model that could reconcile the mass/size of the proton to the electron. That never wowed anyone. I was told I had to give the model better predictive values. So I put the circuit together to prove the model by default. If I could exceed unity on an electric circuit - then I would also prove that the current model (again no pun intended but it is nonetheless apt) could at least be wrong. It's not the ideal premise to define what something is by proving what it is not. But it could be a start - a launch pad to propose that, at its least electric energy is not constrained to the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. I was then told that if, indeed, I could exceed unity then I could claim anything I liked and that I would be believed.

Well. Thus far my dialogue was exclusively with academics. And I was too naive to realise that they simply did not believe that I'd prove this claim. So, when it came to demonstrating the circuit and thereby having an opportunity to prove the model, I discovered that those same academics, those experts who had set me the challenge were, in fact, not prepared to evaluate the results on that circuit apparatus. It now, apparently, also required the prior submission of an academic paper - which, only once published in a properly reviewed journal, would then warrant their best attentions. And, needless to say, when it came to soliciting that evaluation - then my paper it was rejected out of hand, without even being submitted to the reviewers. Up to and until the point that the IET rejected that paper - until that moment, I had every confidence in getting the claim properly accredited within the precincts of those hallowed academic institutions.

I have studied the basic laws of physics - as best I could within the constraints of layman's literature and Dyson's book on Conceptual Physics. I used that knowledge to develop the circuit. Every stage of its application and results has the dubious merit of being entirely explicable in terms of classical physics. Only it's results fly in the face of classical prediction. But I have never had any reason to doubt any part of the claim. Nor do I. I have tested the effect too, too often and have yet to find it false. And while academics, to a man, are reluctant to be openly associated with the claim, there have been many experts who have looked at and accredited the experimental apparatus and its over unity results.

Publication is apparently denied on these bases - that the circuit is well known - the description of the test is substandard and that there is no real relevance to the progress of science. I contest all that. It is a simple circuit and requires a simple test that goes to the heart of the problem with remarkable precision.

So, to answer your question. I have had no reason to doubt the experimental results. They are entirely replicable. The only doubt that I now seriously entertain is that our esteemed academics still retain the moral authority to comment on the claim in any capacity at all. They have forfeited that authority and it remains forfeit until they test the circuit. It is easy to replicate and it is extraordinary that they simply will not do this, or I should rather say, that they will not do it openly. And for any readers of this, who may perhaps know academics, it would greatly advance this cause if you could persuade them to put the experiment up in their labs. If you can challenge them to do this, if you have access to their ears - then please, please try. I have failed miserably in my own attempts.

[witsend]

Gotoluc - I've just seen the first video. Am so excited. I just want you to know that this is FANTASTIC work. And so much appreciated that you're showing it. It's just wonderful.

I need to get back and see the second. But I wanted to get this down in case - time differences, you're asleep without reading it.

I see now why Aaron's in 'awe'. The test is simple - to the point and only needs some very visual references. Well done indeed.

I'm must get back to see the second. I'm just so glad that you're on this thread. What excitement.

[witsend]

The link and video provided by Gotoluc

Click this link to see it: YouTube - Effect of Recirculating BEMF to Coil test 3 edit. Sorry I meant to copy the link. Just check the link on Gotoluc's post - above.

FANTASTIC WORK. Please EVERYONE who reads this thread. PLEASE CHECK THIS OUT. Two videos - both showing the effect of 'reticulated'? energy. It is incontestable proof and with all the experimental evidence on view.

Gotoluc I cannot tell you how deeply grateful I am for this. Tears to the eyes. I am blown away. It's my test - but configured differently so that it explains the effect so much better than I have ever done.

AND HENIECK you must definitely look.

Gotoluc - I owe you in a very big way. I shall send the link to all my friends and ask them to look at this experiment. It is the very first test that has ever been made entirely public - to prove the very real benefit in a switching circuit using collapsing magnetic fields. It is a day I will always remember. Thank you very, very much.

:

EDIT - PLEASE ALL READERS ON THIS THREAD - I know there are many - please tell your friends to look at the video. We really need to spread the word. If you can't test, then maybe you'd help by just doing this?

[henieck]

@henieck

"yes, but the establishing of the inductor’s field does not happen for free- like you see it. Search around that some more… "

Are you absolutely certain of this so called "fact" you have just stated or is this just something you have read or been taught in school?. I want you to think very hard and careful on this question before you give me an answer.

- I don't have to think very hard on that one. "It takes energy to establish magnetic field in the coil" statement - is just a piece of my model of reality which I picked up at school, (was brainwashed), it fits nicely with many other parallel phenomenon of energy transformation which I have personally experienced, and is widely accepted among the people i consider to be wise. I thought it was Rosemary who was suppose to prove the new model - but her revelations turned out to be false (the way i checked this), based on flawed thinking and very bad science. So all this is just my opinion you asked about.

I am asking have you purposely performed actual experiments to prove for yourself that NO energy was required to form the inductors magnetic field.

- no, I have not performed direct experiments on this subject, but all my other experiments which involved magnetic induction (like running electric motor in a toy) seem to indirectly confirm that as well. Even Rosemary and the wildest other similar ones probably implicitly think that it needs energy to make electric field exist – but they explain this, by introducing another form of energy – zero point energy, zipons or aether… I just say that my particular circuit doesn’t tap to any of these – it somehow takes energy from the battery “the ordinary way” instead. I deeply hope that others will discover something else, I just pointed out few traps, or at least questionable points, they may fall into along the way.

[henieck]

If we use a charged capacitor as our power source on the front side.

- you would need a huge capacitor in the front side. In practice that means a battery. But you can have it for the recycle purposes. Capacitor as big as your fist will charge within 25s unless you make smaller coil than mine. You need at least several minutes tests to have any temperature readings.

[witsend]

Did you see the video gotoluc's video henieck?

[witsend]

By the way - for all NiKola Tesla fans, Donovan's just pointed out. Today's his birthday. I KNEW it was an auspicious day.

[henieck]

Hi everyone,

I have just made a new video that maybe of interest in this topic.
Video link: YouTube - Effect of Recirculating BEMF to Coil test 3

- Rosemary – what is your excitement level now, after seeing video like that – is it 10 or 15mLn? ( 1Ln as a unit of excitement about free energy device being defined as Peter Lindemann’s excitement about his “gravity wheel”).

Do you want me to make a video for you, where I add some extra magnets, light bulbs, pour some gasoline on your circuit which you don’t fully understand what it does anyway, - and show a huge number of Joules delivered – so you will not sleep tonight?

Your childish attitude about that worries me. What should we spread the word about? – about the fact that the guy had colder resistor and hotter bulb in an unknown circumstances during the experiment in which he mentioned your name? Or the reason is that there was a little coil made of the filament which was thousands degrees hot? You should encourage scientific and holistic approach, precise measurements before you achieve 15mLn level (don’t let this “milli” prefix full you – this is seriously high level. I have 10mLn level while my hands are shaking connecting the last crocodile clip to the free energy device, right before it is going to flood me with the excessive energy).

gotoluc- by placing the light bulb instead of ampmeter you are introducing one more variable instead of reducing some. Heat is energy - indeed - but your bulb does not indicate the energy entering the circuit - it just indicates how much of the total energy supplied you dissipate in the bulb before it ever enters the circuit. Heat is energy, like you said - and the lighter the bulb - the more of the energy you loose as heat before it goes into the coil in the form of electricity. The filament dramatically changes its resistance with the temperature- so it is very hard to use it as indicator anyway.

I think that only by eliminating the unnecessary variables to the degree that you fully understand all the inputs and outputs, and by including all the possible forms of energy dissipated in the circuit - you can make reliable balance calculations of energy delivered/obtained. This experiment shows nothing and the fact that Rosemary has got excited about this shows her lack of precise thinking. Entertaining value –> 10, scientific –> 0.5. That is my rating, I hope others will pull up the average a little bit…

My battery is emptying fast and my coil is relatively cold. Where specifically should I place the light bulb to fix that?

[Groundloop]

Temperature logger for researchers.

Hi All,

First I will apologize for a slight off topic post.

I have been allowed to open source a small project I made.
It is a temperature, relative humidity and input voltage
logger that connects to a PC via RS232 serial communication.
(RS232 to USB converters can also be used.) So if you need
a small temp logger then this unit will probably do fine.

You can use Windows HyperTherminal to communicate with the logger.
The HyperTherminal program can then log the data to a text file
for later import to a Windows Excel spread sheet.

If you just need the temperature then all the parts shown with
a red X can be omitted. The unit will run fine without the other
sensors. It will also run fine with no sensors at all,
but that is not fun.

I have included ALL the design files complete with the micro controller
source files. There is even a user manual in there.
The unit has been built and tested to work OK.

The unit is called TRS and the files can be downloaded from here:
Index of /ufoufoufoufo

Groundloop.

[witsend]

henieck - I'm glad at least that I have an entertainment level at 10. Indeed I'm excited. It's the first time that I have ever seen an alternate circuit to my own that clearly shows the flyback principles and its advantage in supplying extra energy.

To me there is evidence in first video that the input energy is considerably less than the second - yet the first dissipated far more heat and did more work than the second. The first used my system. The second did not.

So. Once a sceptic always a sceptic? Must I give up on you? Have your determined that this representation has no evident value, with or without fine tuning those measurements?

[Mark]

If you took the battery out of the circuit and it made twice the heat he would still shoot it down.


"no, I have not performed direct experiments on this subject", henick

Maybe you should run the test just for the heck of it.

[witsend]

Rosemary – what is your excitement level now, after seeing video like that – is it 10 or 15mLn?
Can't answer this henieck. For some reason I can't get into the link. Is there another? I just go back to gotoluc's videos - which is a total turn on for me. But I think you're pointing at something else?

Do you want me to make a video for you, where I add some extra magnets, light bulbs, pour some gasoline on your circuit which you don’t fully understand what it does anyway, - and show a huge number of Joules delivered – so you will not sleep tonight?
If you like. I'd certainly watch it - if that's the question. Can't guarantee the excitement level.

You should encourage scientific and holistic approach, precise measurements
That's what we're asking from you henieck. We only get numbers from an ammeter that is not up to the analysis. Even with my really limited knowledge I know that. Why don't you?

gotoluc- by placing the light bulb instead of ampmeter you are introducing one more variable instead of reducing some. Heat is energy - indeed - but your bulb does not indicate the energy entering the circuit - it just indicates how much of the total energy supplied you dissipate in the bulb before it ever enters the circuit.
This is not true. The energy that is entering the bulb must be equal to the energy dissipated by the bulb. It's a pure resistive load. It is not a sentient object that can magically limit its intake in order to pass on some of that energy into the system. But you are now playing us as TinselKoala played his public by showing an inverted waveform. He claimed this as proof of an error in the circuit. Then he marched through the thread stridently demanding a concession of an error. I did not see you with your astute scientific mind pointing out an obvious distortion. If you are the expert henieck where was your expert comment then?

Heat is energy, like you said - and the lighter the bulb - the more of the energy you loose as heat before it goes into the coil in the form of electricity. The filament dramatically changes its resistance with the temperature- so it is very hard to use it as indicator anyway.
I get it that gotoluc simply wanted to give a visual representation. He keeps his points simple. And I found the experiment to be particularly elegant.

I think that only by eliminating the unnecessary variables to the degree that you fully understand all the inputs and outputs, and by including all the possible forms of energy dissipated in the circuit - you can make reliable balance calculations of energy delivered/obtained. This experiment shows nothing and the fact that Rosemary has got excited about this shows her lack of precise thinking. Entertaining value –> 10, scientific –> 0.5. That is my rating, I hope others will pull up the average a little bit…
henieck - I thought your's was an open mind. If you really want to grade me grade my naivety. That is - indeed - and self-evidently, considerable.