COP 17 Heater | Rosemary Ainslie

[Joit]

@witsend,
i think either her daily server restart and backup the database did failure,
or someone did spam the Url, that it did exceed the Bandwidth from the Server, where the Page is hosted.
In this case, the Hosting Service just dont give more access to the Site.
overunity.de is still up, but, i dont expect any news from *.com, mostly its only a bad Impression, what you can get there.

This video i did see was in German, so i dont think, it will help you more,
when i give the Link.
I did look right now for similar Pages about him, but the most is German,
or he dont describe it there as he did at the Video.
Not sure, what i can give you now more.
All i did was, to put his name into Google, maybe constantin meyl helps too,
and most what comes out is in German.
The Model he describe is this from Tom Bearden, or rebuild from Jnaudin and the Magnacoaster
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...coaster-2.html
YouTube - Dragon's Den - Vorktex MagnaCoaster Power Generation

About the Shunt, usual, at a Circuit, all sums should be Zero, thats why they put a lot of Resistors in.
But a Resistor only suppress mainly current, not Voltage,
therefor where you end up, is in a average Amount of Watts,
total power output, and they smooth it out into Capacitors, that you get low Voltage,
and this is for me more a screwed way to balance a Circuit.
But so far, you did answer it well, sounds like, it is mainly to do the measurements over it,
and even because you said, they did place it anywhere at the Circuit.
The Shunt actually dont has a lot of Resistance, i thought, maybe it has to do
with kind of Resonance, but i can be very wrong with it, even, when it is a small 'Load' in the Circuit.
But i think i still stay at it, its just the 'Fool Proof', for the one,
what dont wanna burn her Fingers, when they do need to touch the Resistor

The Shunt actually drops a few Percents from the Voltage, what do run over,
and you can back calculate, how much Voltage runs inside.
But therefor you would need to have accurate Readings too, what i doubt,
you can have, when you will measure Spikes.
This Formula is still not done yet because Spikes dont exist 'in a well made Circuit'.

Boguslaw, the Circuit can be done with a 12 V only too, but 24 Voltage gives more Heat at the Resistor, but its not really a need.
The main part is more, to drive the Circuit with a low Cycle, get the Spikes back,
and do that with a higher Frequency, in best case when the Transistor starts to oscillate. Simple said.

[witsend]

Many thanks Joit. I see we're keeping you busy there.

edit - BTW Don't worry about the link
edit again - I just watched that link to the Dragon's Den. Seems we're way behind the times here. It's up and running and they're already drafting contracts. The bad news is they're still looking to generate from utility suppliers instead of independant home generators. Thanks for that Joit. Very interesting indeed.

[boguslaw]

I don't understand how transistor can oscillate.Isn't it merely a substitution of spark gap or other make and break device ?

[Joit]

witsend,
we are not really behind. The Magnacoaster do amplify Current actually,
what your Model do, is using the Power of the collapsing Field, and increase the efficience of the used Current,
not sure, how much this is together, but in your Model,
its mainly catch the BEMF back into the Circuit, i guess it doesnt have to do much with the Core.
They even use Magnets at her Devices, what you dont do, and i think, there are more Ways as only one Way.
B. Muller made a impressive Generator with BEMF and others,
peswiki has a lot of it. lol.

How this Guy did describe it lately noone else did it, the Guy from the Magnacoaster only said often,
You need 2 inputs, once, Frequency, and once Voltage. When you increase one from both,
you can have greater Output then Input....
Well, noone could really something figure out from it.
They are still selling slowly some of the Devices, but i think the Price is about 20 000- 40 000$?
And the other Guy still do need to do more Tests with it, before he start producing it. This all can still take quite a While.

[Joit]

Buguslaw,
yes it is kind of a Spark gap. The Transistor is longer leading, as the Current is switching through.
Therfor, you get more Cycles, as the Base does switch the Transistor actually.

[boguslaw]

Joit,

Like Bedini said BEMF is not what he is trying to catch.I was unbeliever there is something beside BEMF, but now I feel it must be here.
While BEMF (so called) is a nice way to reach unity (almost) it has almost nothing to do with any OU results. It is basic action and reaction schema.

In fact OU is extremely simple I think, at least if I , not trained person can imagine it. I've given my thoughts not directly in thread about Tesla.
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...html#post65092

Shortly : ask yourself , how RESONANCE is at all is possible ? When you struck a rod at correct frequency and it sings very long - isn't that an unexpected miracle ?

[Joit]

Boguslaw
Yes, that is more obvious, when you look at it at this Way.
And sorry, about Tesla, there is still to less info about him.

[Harvey]

Hi Harvey. I think Prof Iravani did the decent thing in forwarding it for review. It also seems that only 1 comment came back - with the possible explanation that the energy is somehow fed from the 555. I think the comment is spurious as we've often run the switch with the same power supply source when testing 12 volts. But Aaron's going to test this himself.

I am intrigued with the preclusion to any allowance to resubmit? Find that somewhat 'unscientific'? In any event. It's the same reaction as we had from IET except there they would not even submit it for review.

I know that Szili is able to find benefit from simulator programmes but am not sure which he uses. .99 could probably advise. I hope that you'll at least replicate the test and not rely on the programme's analysis. It may not give the full picture. Incidentally Fuzzy's got some cheap IRFPG50's may be of interest.

Hi Rosemary,

Yes - it does seem odd that a resubmission with revisions will not be evaluated. I imagine they are being flooded with various OU papers and perhaps have a policy that restricts re-evaluation of things they have already addressed? What ever the case, I spoke this morning with a member of a research foundation I am loosely associated with about providing a publication service. The way I see it, all works could be published but would fall into one of five possible categories:

1. Proven - this would be the category that our lab has evaluated the claims and have proven them to be true.

2. Probable - this category could not be proved or disproved in our lab, but does have valid support from mainstream laws and theories.

3. Possible - this category could not be proved or disproved in our lab, but it introduces new concepts outside current mainstream laws and theories. Any conflict with current laws and theories must have a solid foundations explaining the reason for the conflict. i.e. Newtonian physics breaks down at the quantum level.

4. Improbable - this category could not be proved or disproved in our lab, and it introduces new concepts outside current mainstream laws and theories. Conflicts exist with current laws and theories and no solid foundation explaining the reason for the conflict exists.


5. Unworkable - this category has been proved that it cannot and does not work. The proof may be from our lab or from prior well documented works that conclusively show why and how the submission does not work.

The bottom line would be that it does not matter if mainstream science rejects it or not as long as the results speak for themselves. At least it would provide a place for publication to exist and eventually its position would speak for itself.

Yes, Tom's find is golden - I just hope they don't see a run on the parts and raise the price before we all get some (still waiting for my order to arrive from Digi-key - 2 more days)

[Harvey]

Many thanks Joit. I see we're keeping you busy there.

edit - BTW Don't worry about the link
edit again - I just watched that link to the Dragon's Den. Seems we're way behind the times here. It's up and running and they're already drafting contracts. The bad news is they're still looking to generate from utility suppliers instead of independant home generators. Thanks for that Joit. Very interesting indeed.

"IF" is a small word with much responsibility. The demonstrator indicated that there is an increase in voltage, amperage and frequency. He says that he is amplifying the 'power' but I fear it may be a matter of time division and duty cycle, not power. He may be taking 18W of continuous power, dividing that into 1000 pieces per second and then cramming all 1000 pieces into a thousandth of a second. So now, once each second we have 18KW for 1/1000 of a second. It is the same amount of power, but the delivery is different. It is like saying: Stand on this railroad track, I want to hit you with a train - but I am only going to hit you with all that mass at 1mm per hour. Same train, same mass moving at 100 kM/hr - whole different energy content. But if we trade the mass of the train so that the energy is the same at either speed we still find a difference in the interaction because it deals with the load not the energy source. The transfer of energy into the load has to do with the acceleration of the person on impact.

So in electromagnetism we are forced to look at how a load responds to the impact of the energy exchange. 1KV across a 1000 Ohm wire has the same power as 1V across a 0.001 Ohm resistor. The power is the same, but the magnetic field is vastly different because the current is vastly different.

[Harvey]

@Joit,

Yes the oscillation needs to be figured out. Perhaps a scope across the gate resistor during oscillation will show if any current is flowing through the gate.

I would setup 3 probes if I had a quad scope here with isolated references.

A Gate to 555 pin 3
B 555 to B(-)
C Drain to B(-)

Alternatively, if the scope provides a difference function and no isolated references: All probes referenced to B(-) and a resistance exists between the 555 output and the IRFPG50

A Gate \
---------> Difference between these two
B Pin 3 /

C Drain

The object is to see if any current is flowing through pin 3 during the period that the gate is supposed to be off. If a voltage exists across the resistance, then a current is flowing with it since these are zero phase for a resistor.

[ashtweth]

@- Harvey

YEP.- to quote Trevor James constable - ONLY RESULTS COUNT.
He did OROPS years ago with Peter Lindemann,
Drought relief
(REFRESH)

And they did not worry about what academics thought, it is up to use to take it to the people tho
Also thanks Rosie .

Ash

[Harvey]

I'm sorry Rosemary,

I think the intent of my post was somehow lost in my wording, so I will try and summarize it here.

Mainstream is not unbiased. Therefore they close the doors to anything related to Intellegent Design or Perpetual Motion. Fellows have lost their tenure or even their jobs for inferring that either is plausible. It is a matter of funding. In our day and age over unity is closely linked with perpetual motion and is given the same disapproving wags. This has created a serious deficit within society as a whole where unexplored phenomenon and unexpected results are hidden away in obscure notes and journals for fear of reprisal. Out of a hunger for understanding, fringe science and pseudoscience have taken up the cause for truth even under the extreme persecution of mainstream science and governmental process.

There is a need today, for an independent, unbiased institution that would welcome the submissions of papers for publication regardless of its content. Persons with concepts and theories should not be made to feel that their works are unworthy of publication, but instead should be made to feel that their is a safe haven where their views and ideas can be shared. Such a repository would serve as a doorway to the eventual adoption of new technology and its implementation by providing a place for authoritative review and discussion.

The purpose of the lab review would be to provide certification and categorization. Without it, the publication would be no different than a post in an online forum. The goal and purpose of the review would be to provide credence to the claims. As item 1 suggests, the category would be proved regardless of the mainstream laws and theories, strictly by the irrefutable results. This is what the people need, and this was the nature of my discussion earlier this morning.

Observing what has been happening in your case really underscores the points I've made here. If such an institution existed, it would force mainstream to take off the blinders and actually consider some of the realities that have been published privately.

Don't you think it would be a good thing? I'm having trouble understanding why you felt broadsided by the suggestion.

[witsend]

Harvey - I would welcome any means of publication. Regardless of how or where. But Mainstream is the target here and they've accommodated paradox and contradiction in their theories which is blatantly obvious even to rank amateurs such as myself. My primary object would be a need to address this.

My concern is to discover the existence of a lab. While I am inclined to trust you implicitly I have no such confidence with associated laboratories. My experience has taught me that reports and findings get hidden from view. This concern is compounded when I see TK's efforts which are patently designed to contradict rather than explore the effects. What lab is he connected to?

I have gone to some pains to ensure that the technology is not hidden. I see how Don Wilson dresses up his simple resonating circuit. And others. If this highly exploitable technology gets 'hidden' from view courtesy more 'bad conceptual theory' then I have wasted a large chapter of my life. And its not as if I grow younger. I've said it before. I'm in the unhappy position of knowing that my concepts are 'bang on'. And it's tedious to keep on about it but despite these benefits - even resonating circuits are not the answer. It's much simpler than this. I wish someone would see it in my model and make it understandable - is all.

The prospect of more circuitous argument through endless reports with our tedious and arrogant mainstream is depressing. In the extreme. I was rather hoping that when the results become replicated that this will be shoved under the noses of our learned and revered. Not another dusty account in another small publication with or without the sanction of a reputable laboratory report. And all the while more and more opportunists dressing up their inventions when all they're exploiting is simply variations of resonance.

But I trust your input and your objects implicitly. That much is a comfort and that really is a good thing.

[boguslaw]

witsend,

Can you explain according to your model interaction of two magnets put close facing the same pole one to another ? Why there is repulsion here ?
Can you explain according to your model what is happening if small magnet is inside a one pole of huge magnet?

[witsend]

witsend,

Can you explain according to your model interaction of two magnets put close facing the same pole one to another ? Why there is repulsion here ?
Can you explain according to your model what is happening if small magnet is inside a one pole of huge magnet?

Hi boguslaw. My model proposes that the fields of magnetic dipoles circle the boundaries of permanent magnets travelling in a justified direction - north to south. They then complete the circle inside the body of the magnet south to north. They maintain the smooth field effect because they are able to share a path through space and they align their charges - north to south - in structured fields. If they encounter 'like charge' from another magnet then their path is constrained to that space depending on the juxtaposition of the second magnet. I've got a feeling this complies to classical theory - except that classical does not attribute the field to the existence of those magnetic dipolar particles.

One magnet inside another? That's really interesting. I have never seen this but would speculate that it would adjust its position - depending on the space available inside that magnet.

But - like you - I'm no expert. Interestingly I share your ideas that resonance is a kind of miracle of nature.