COP 17 Heater | Rosemary Ainslie

[Joit]

Thanks for the input MileHigh. It's a good thing to point to as it reminds us that oscillating, resonating, whatever - is not required to show that gain.

Rosemary

EDIT By the way, MileHigh - it is a curious but repeatable fact that the oscillating? resonating? frequencies, while very possibly the result of erroneous readings, also seems to delay the draw down rate of the battery in line with measurements and as described above, in my post to Jibbguy.

Umm, sorry, now i go totally lost.
Rosemary you point at, that Milehigh says to not to go into osscillation?
I guess i did read over this part.

Thought, it would be pretty clear, that all what you have to do is
BRING THAT DAMN THING INTO OSCILLATION.

Otherwise, there would not be a big Gain or even less, because i dont know, how the Parts actually all do act.

I did had it easy at my Coil, i did listen to the Sound, and as it did sounds like,
there are 2 Frequencys overlapping, i turned the Pot higher.
At the Vid, i did go backwards down with one Pot, thats why it shows first very low Voltage, because i had all ready adjusted.
It did start pumping, and after that, the Mosfet was selfoscillating. Imho.

And therefor, the Mosfet just keep the Wheel running, not do turn it.

[witsend]

Joit - I've just read your post. I want oscillation - it gives a HUGE return. But overunity measurement only needs that Spike. I'm telling MileHigh that he can cut it any way he chooses. THERE IS ALWAYS A GAIN.

But press on with that resonance. It's the best return.

MileHigh is saying that we must get a slow periodic waveform else it's a misread. I'm saying - OK - I can live with a slow periodic waveform also. Take your pick. We always get a gain.

[witsend]

Good news. I'm now allowed back the full facility of the internet and its public forums. Stephan may have come to the party. Thanks for the intervention Ramset. Not only that - but so is my neighbour's access allowed.

[Joit]

witsend
Ok. And i am even not sure, if you can see that at all OSC when the Mosfet is oscillating.
Some are probatly that well isolated, that they even catch up the fast Cycle and show it as clean standing Wave.
Seems, we need to look for that in an other Way on that, if its really needed,
and maybe some been allready in oscillation, but didnt know it, and miss, to attach Batteries on it and did the over-a-Time measurements.

Somehow i think there, you can proove it very well, to have no OU, when you use expansive Meters, where all agree, they are accurate, but just dont show all, and measure just, what they should measure, but not, what is still there....

And btw, i dont call this OU for now, anyhow, it doesnt create new higher Energie, but it use the one it has for a very high Efficience.


Edit And slowly, i am at a Point, where i reject, to offer any Help to OU.com anymore, with all the BS, what is shown there.
They should lock the Thread, and put a Egg over it, and look for his own Solid-as-a-Rock device.
And for who is to blame, Its yourself Ramset, to point someone into this Thread,
what actually is from here, Energetic Forum - Forum Display and not a Public Release,
and still picking on the little Things, just to show, how smart he is.
Its not our fault, that the Whole Discussion about it is that long. Count, wich Posts are related to here, and wich do point to an other Forum.

Edit2
Ok i got now his Intention.
Its " No, No, its a Fraud"

[RAMSET]

Aarons request no more scientist

TK's field
Metrology
Wiki it
Metrology is defined by the International Bureau of Weights and Measures (BIPM) as "the science of measurement, embracing both experimental and theoretical determinations at any level of uncertainty in any field of science and technology." [1]. The ontology and international vocabulary of metrology (VIM) is maintained by the International Organisation for Standardisation.

but I will do as you wish
And quite honestly, and with all sincerity hope you boil some water SOON
Chet
PS
Rosemary I'm glad your problem is fixed,I'm off to watch my grandson ,my daughter is having a baby today

[witsend]

Cloxxki - regarding your test procedure. I have done that demonstration, just left out the tea party. It doesn't make a blind bit of difference if the evidence doesn't also get to our academics. It's the measurement of energy that needs to be addressed. And before that happens academics need to see the demonstration. They refuse to attend any such in SA. Perhaps they will oblige elsewhere in the world. Meanwhile the slow grind is needed to establish what test to use and then why and how to evaluate the results.

The time that it is taking to get replication to fruition is par for the course.

Sceptics are the most reliable party to design a test protocol to prove OU. Cloxxki
Not actually. If TK is an example of a sceptic. I cannot accuse him of impartiality which is the least that's required for an objective assessment.

The progress elsewhere is slow. But I'm encouraged that there is any at all. The real progress is in getting acknowledgement that the system can generate energy away from the supply source. Once that's acknoweldged or proven to be wrong - then we've finally established the only required test parameter to the measurement of this circuit. The rest is easy.

[witsend]

.99 has posted a schedule of preferred test parameters at OU.Com - apparently a post from MileHigh on our forum. I've been back through the entire thread can't find it.

I'd study it on the OU.com page but the print defeats my myopia. Can I ask you .99 to post it on this thread? - that we can study it?

Thanks,
R

[RAMSET]

Mile High test protocol

I will offer some more details for a suggested measurement system.

The shunt resistor should be moved to the battery postive terminal, that way you can record the voltage drop across the shunt and derive your source voltage and current with a single recording channel. The recording channel could come from a digital storage scope that can export it's data to a PC or a PC-based oscilloscope. It would preferably be 10-bit or higher resolution and have a sampling rate high enough to get you enough sample points per cycle (500 or more?). It may be necessary to tweak the value of the shunt resistor to provide a sufficient voltage range to match the A/D conversion range of the recording device. The A/D recording device should be checked against your most accurate digital multimeter at the low shunt voltages to see if they are in accord and if not derive any required offset and gain values to compensate for any sampling inaccuracies. These compensation calculations can be done during the Excel preprocessing. It goes without saying that the actual value of the shunt resistor must be measured as accurately as possible.

All of the recorded data could be imported into Excel. A good person with Excel could massage it and turn it into voltage and current plots over time, compute the average power over one cycle, etc.

On the thermal side, you first have to turn the resistor-coil and the diode into a single thermal entity. All that you have to do is affix the diode up against the body of the resistor-coil and embed the diode in thermal paste. This assembly should be suspended in air by the two wires connected to the rest of the circuit. With about three inches of bare wire on each side of the resistor-coil-diode assembly, and by having it suspended about five or more inches above the desktop, and by ensuring that the air circulation during various tests remains the same, you can create a controlled, repeatable thermal environment for making tempreature readings. This setup only conducts heat to the outside world by air convection and radiation, and not through physical contact with other surfaces, which is what you want. Depending on the size of the resistor, this setup will probably reach 99% of the way to thremal equilibrium within 10 or 15 minutes. Let's just assume it is ten minutes for purposes of this discussion. If you are going to use a non-contact LASER/infrared temperature measuring device, it must be mounted on a tripod and always point at the same place. With a thremocouple, this is not an issue.

Suppose that the resistor-coil will only dissipate a maximum of two watts. That can be sliced into 20 parts, and you can run a thermal profile for every 0.1 watt incrememt in power dissipated in the suspended resistor-coil-diode thermal assembly. So you set up your variable DC power supply to put exactly 0.1 watts of power through the thermal assembly, wait ten minutes until the temperature has stabilized, and record the final temperature, then do it for 0.2 watts, wait, 0.3 watts, wait, etc. After about three hours you will have enough data points to plot a delta-temperature (y-axis) vs. power (x-axis) thermal profile curve in Excel. i.e.; a delta-temperature vs. wattage graph. Of course you should try to keep a fixed ambient temperature in the room for these tests.

Finally, you run the actual setup with the 3% duty cycle waveform, wait 10-15 minutes, and record the final temperature and record your shunt resistor waveforms. Then export the waveforms into the Excel spreadsheet that has been setup to do all of the number crunching mentioned above, and calculate the average electrical power consumed by the setup over one cycle. Then take your temperature reading and compare it to your delta-temperature vs. wattage graph and get the thermal power dissipated during the actual operation of the circuit.

Compare the electrical power with the thermal power and the answer will finally be found.

I just outlined what I think is a reasonably accurate approach for determinining if the circuit does what it claims to do or not. If somebody has any other suggestions for doing this I am sure that we would all be interested in hearing them. And of course the real question is the issue of whether somebody who believes in this circuit is actually going to do it and make the measurements and crunch the data.

[witsend]

The following points by MileHigh

The shunt resistor should be moved to the battery postive terminal, that way you can record the voltage drop across the shunt and derive your source voltage and current with a single recording channel.
Are you proposing to measure the resistor at the same time as the shunt? I would prefer that there is a reference to current flow remaining at the negative terminal. Maybe both?

No quarrel with the calibration of the shunt.

Since the dissipation of heat is the critical factor for power dissipated I would recommend platinum based probes? Not sure if they're more expensive but they're not influenced by applied high frequencies. But you can then insert them into the hollow body of the resistor and hold it with plastic putty or somesuch. That way no interference with drafts that really do influence temperature.

Excel analysis really only needed to confirm displayed measurements across the shunt and to prove aliasing if applicable. Once the spreadsheet and the machine numbers marry - you've got a dependable voltage. But you also need more than 1 sample per cycle. I would recommend between 5 to 8 especially if you're using a Fluke. Tektronix or somesuch can take even more samples to establish a fair average.

Control on heating is more readily established using a variac or somesuch. But I may be wrong here.

I would recommend at least 4 different duty cycles tested unless oscillating frequency clearly evident.

Otherwise I think these parameters are excellent. But it must be understood that the measure of energy out must be in line with the difference in voltage over a sample range so that the power in can be compared to the power out. And the diode must be attached to the positive terminal of the battery with no other resistance in its path. We don't need that heat to be added to the heat value. In any event there is the likelihood that it will then be heated to a greater degree as a result of its proximity to the load resistor thereby detracting from rather than adding to the heat.

Thanks MileHigh. That's my 2c worth. Can .99 give us his ideas?

EDIT I would add that perhaps Jibbguy can recommend the preferred instrumentation to do the analysis.

[witsend]

I would also add that the test should be done by both Aaron and TK - both under these same parameters. With the utmost respect to TK I am not inclined to trust his impartiality. Aaron has nothing to hide and am reasonably certain he can organise an academic or someone/many experts to act as witness to the demo. It would be really good if we could interest international labs to check the demos and the results. And then. Who knows? Maybe we could get it to the desk of our learned and revered.

That would be a scoop.

Rosemary

[Aaron]

TK

TK's field
Metrology
Wiki it
Metrology is defined by the International Bureau of Weights and Measures (BIPM) as "the science of measurement, embracing both experimental and theoretical determinations at any level of uncertainty in any field of science and technology." [1]. The ontology and international vocabulary of metrology (VIM) is maintained by the International Organisation for Standardisation.

Congratulations Grandpa!

With TK, sounds like he has a vested interest in keeping the applecart just like it is.

[Aaron]

testing

Aaron has nothing to hide and am reasonably certain he can organise an academic or someone/many experts to act as witness to the demo.

I'm willing to do the tests. The only thing I really want to change on my updated circuit with a 555 that goes as low as 1% duty cycle is to get a bigger inductive resistor (same 10 ohms but 100w rating instead of 50 - bigger wire and larger diameter turns and about 2 inches longer). May be able to get some from a friend soon.

My friend has a degree in physics from Eastern Washington University. When he showed one of his professors his electromagnet that picks up non-ferrous metals like aluminum, brass, silver, etc... His professor went to the board, started scribbling equations, turned around and told my friend to forget about it because it can't work....EVEN THOUGH HE JUST SAW A DEMO! lol

So, I think I might be challenged to find one interested in doing science with any degree of honesty. Not saying there aren't honest ones but it is a minority of them that are open to challenging the very foundation that their entire career is built upon - and putting their name on it. Will ruin their life.

Anyway, I'm just taking a break from sleep and am going back for a few more zzz's. Will be back on in a bit.

[witsend]

By the way - the same parameters on gotoluc's apparatus. But we need a hefty bank of batteries to enable this away from the utility supply.

I'm quite excited about this happening, actually. Something good at last.

[jibbguy]

"Metrology" is instrumentation calibration lab work, which explains how he gets all those wonderful toys

For instance, "Wylie Labs" in Alabama is probably the best-known "Metrology Lab" in the country (...they have been used by inventors in the past to verify F-E devices). Ive known many peeps in this career, since they were Customers, and they usually know their stuff very well; since they must work on many, many different and widely varied devices. Also, sometimes the cal/electronics shops in hospitals are called "BioMed Metrology Labs" and they do similar work, keeping all the medical equipment up to snuff (the latter is a huge industry and probably employs the most electronics techs of all).

He would certainly be qualified then, not that anyone could really stop him anyway, hehehe.

______________________________________________

Rose i just saw your EDIT, and raise you one

As for instrumentation; It is reliant on cost. Personally, and if money wasn't much of an issue, i would chose a fast 4-channel PC-based data acquisition system (often these days they are crosses between chart recorders, scopes, and DAS's like "AstroMed" sells) that can sample at up to at least 3 megasamples per second (all channels added), with a F Response of 1 MHz (500KHz might do in a pinch).. And a bank 4 of Signal Conditioners / Amplifiers as a "front end", which would provide 3 DC channels with Differential /Isolated inputs, the ability to read down to 25mV full scale (and one of them to at least 25V FS), and one "J" or "K" Thermocouple input. A laptop or desktop PC would be used to monitor and store the data (these systems, whether rented or bought, nearly always come with analysis software "for free"). I would setup the channels for reading across the shunt, with probably like "25mV full scale", one for reading batt voltage (25V FS), and another for the voltage across the resistive element itself (probably around "50mV F-S"). The 3 DC channels should sample at "1 Meg" and the Thermocouple could sample at "1 sample per second", since temp is very slow.

Or... to "bare bones" it, i would suggest a batt-powered Digital Storage Oscilloscope ("scopemeter", LCD screen, portable) like the "Fluke 199" that can store raw sample data then send it to a PC (they can also be gotten with "4 channels" these days), and a thermistor probe (such as the options sold for DMM's), for reading the Temp.

[witsend]

Jibbguy - I understand you're retired. But do you still have contacts at these old labs? Could you motivate a more public test. Not press - just dependable evaluation of test results?

Maybe we could work around that - somehow. It would mean a lot more if there were reliable witnesses to replicated tests. Something? Not sure what I'm asking. I guess what I'm saying is - how can we extend the forum to evaluate these results? Any ideas?