COP 17 Heater | Rosemary Ainslie

[Joit]

Harvey, did you know, some theoreticians can explain you, and even believe it by herself,
how to hang an Elephant with his Tail knoted on a Daisy headfirst into a Canyon?

I only hope, they all do stand below, when they do the REAL Experiment.

[Aaron]

calibration

When working with such minute voltages, it's imperative to ensure the scope is calibrated before the readings can be trusted.

Obviously the test should be re-run after the scope is self-calibrated as per David's comment in 3. above.

Thanks for the information. I have it in the manual and i know how to read. Someone already walked me through the system calibration methods - someone that has probably forgotten more knowledge about electronics than most people learn in a lifetime.

And while running this scope for hours on end, the spc won't do ANYTHING unless there is some big temperature change and this room only fluctuates a few C in a 24 hour period. With or without spc - there is no difference in the data.

In any case, all data presented is ACCURATE and CLEAN - please stop trying to misdirect people's attention away from the facts.

And you continually ignore ALL THE CORROBORATED DATA and RESULTS that match what is shown. Get over it!

[Harvey]

Hi Harvey - I watched both videos and had the pleasure of rating them 5 star - yet again. I'm not sure I understood the significance of the switch. Are you saying the the oscillations come from the timer?

The only thing I know about these oscillations is that it needs the smallest pressure to get rid of them. But I think Aaron's found a way to make them more stable.

"the switch"?

Some of the activity we are seeing, is a new pulse coming from the timer. It appears that the off-time is being cut short and a new pulse is being presented. This means that one of 3 things is occurring. 1. The chip is being reset by signal injection into the internal reset transistor 2. The trigger input is falling below 1/3rd Vcc 3. Something is rapidly discharging the 0.0033 microfarad cap, circumventing the off-time discharge path.

The internal schematic for the Texas Instruments NE555 shows a diode running from the output stage to the first stage output transistor collector. The emitter of that transistor goes through a 100 ohm resistor to the Discharge transistor base and to the collector of the PNP reset transistor. When the output is 'low', the first stage output transistor is on and there is a path to the collector of the reset transistor. If a sufficient EMF spike occurs on the output pin 3 it could find its way through that path and cause an avalanche in the reset transistor sufficient to trigger that circuit at the end of the avalanche. The hurdle here is the final stage of the output section which is essentially at ground at this point. The spike energy has to be enough to overcome that transistor on resistance. I need to runs some tests to see if this is what is happening.

Regardless of the re-triggering, we also have self triggering of the IRFPG50 which is quite evident to occur during the off period of the timer. Clearly these oscillations are timer independent during this period. Aarons work indicates that if the re-triggering does not occur, that the self oscillation will grow in amplitude until a trigger occurs (or if it was allowed to continue an avalanche in the FET).

We have quite a few variations to the circuit, the components, power sources and the test equipment. So we can certainly expect variations in the behavior. The good news is that even though the wave shape may be slightly different, we are all able to obtain the self oscillation in some form.

Next, I would like to focus on how this oscillation played a part in the original work that claimed the high COP and see if we can tailor our variations toward that same goal.

[poynt99]

I haven't seen anything that corroborates the notion that the net mean current is negative.

I've seen a lot of 0's on meters, and a fluctuating +/- 0.2 or 0.3 on your red meter. So nothing convincing. I've also seen a lot of twisting of my words and mis-interpretation of my posts and the intended message.

Anyway, it doesn't matter what anyone says, clearly you all will continue to disregard it and by any means convince yourselves otherwise. That's one thing that clearly has been proven.

.99

[Aaron]

0.000

If there is current in both directions and they are both exactly equal, then the meter will read 0.000.

Right - so according to you if there is 0.000 on the amp meter, the circuit is running at unity! A complete and total violation of thermodynamics!

[Aaron]

Poynt99 AGREES CIRCUIT IS OVERUNITY

If the scope still reads a net mean value that is negative, and it is corroborated with a DC voltmeter measurement across the shunt as I have suggested, then ok we can agree that the mean value of current in the shunt is negative, albeit very tiny, but negative.

Now what? How are you going to demonstrate that this result can be used in some practical sense?

Any -0.00 on a volt meter is showing negative voltage that is below the .00 decimal place! This matches net negative on scope, the real way to do it...and therefore, you agree the current is NEGATIVE... 100% completely and totally irrelevant how small... NEGATIVE WATTAGE is NEGATIVE WATTAGE and the very existence of it is in complete and total defiance of everything you have claimed from the beginning.

Practical application? Doesn't have to be one. It is proof of concept that thermodynamics is wrong - at least closed system thermodynamics that you are a believer in. Non-equilibrium thermodynamics perfectly describes this ability to show negative wattage. And this is not the first demo of data that shows this! It is just one that I have done.

[Harvey]

Harvey, did you know, some theoreticians can explain you, and even believe it by herself,
how to hang an Elephant with his Tail knoted on a Daisy headfirst into a Canyon?

I only hope, they all do stand below, when they do the REAL Experiment.

I have heard that it is unsafe to walk in the cherry tree grove between four and five o'clock. This is the time when elephants are hiding in the trees waiting to jump down on us. They paint their toenails red to camouflage themselves. Have you ever seen an elephant in a cherry tree? No? See, the camouflage works. But the saddest part of this story relates to the beavers. They cut the birch trees down to make their dams. But after a long day, they must travel through the forest, between four and five o'clock to get home. That's why they have flat tails.

[Aaron]

accurate instrument

Are you presuming that taking measurements down in the fractional mV range does not call for an accurate instrument?

You have made more assumption than anyone else here put together - except for MH, TK and Hoppy.

YOU assume the scope was not calibrated by me.

You walk about fraction mv range needing accurate instrument - that is why you want to suggest putting a volt meter on it?

I actually had to laugh out loud on that one.... oh, too much.

[Aaron]

@poynt

Rosemary,

I have to tell you, every post of mine--you consistently mis-interpret at least part of it, just as you did again just now.

The video not being convincing is from "your guys'" perspective. If I do a video demonstrating the DC voltage meter method of determining net polarity that is.



.99

Do the video, I want to see it.

[Aaron]

@poynt

If Aaron is wise, he would heed the advice from the Tek application engineer and calibrate the scope and re-run the test.

99, stop lying to people about what I have done or haven't done based on your speculation. You will be removed from the forum if you continue to establish such stupid claims that are completely fabricated out of your own mind.

[Aaron]

Insignificant

Not a single sample was ever 0.0000V. The closest to zero in all 5880 samples was at row 4892 of 1.25mV (0.00125).

Out of that many samples, that is about as INSIGNIFICANT as saying not a single sample was ever 0.0027 or 0.0001 or any other voltage reading. Do you realize that you are completely digging yourself into a hole that you can't get out of?

You will stoop to very low levels obviously.

[Aaron]

negative dominance

Voltage across a coil being pulsed at its resonant frequency. Frequency = 400kHz. Period = 2.5us. Pulse width = 0.6us. Supply = 150VDC. L = 50uH. Rinductor = 10 Ohm:

.99

Show more negative than positive like I do! What's wrong? Your simulator is worthless when it comes to anything we're dealing with?

[Aaron]

ignore list

I haven't seen anything that corroborates the notion that the net mean current is negative.

I've seen a lot of 0's on meters, and a fluctuating +/- 0.2 or 0.3 on your red meter. So nothing convincing. I've also seen a lot of twisting of my words and mis-interpretation of my posts and the intended message.

Anyway, it doesn't matter what anyone says, clearly you all will continue to disregard it and by any means convince yourselves otherwise. That's one thing that clearly has been proven.

.99

You are a fool - you saw negative voltages on the volt meter on the shunt. You have no integrity, you lie through your teeth and are totally gutless to honor your word.

You are going on my ignore list today. You deserve NOTHING.

[Aaron]

poynt99

I have just placed poynt99 on my ignore list - if he gets out of hand and keeps insulting people and spreading lies about what i have done or haven't done - flag the posts and we can move to have him banned from the forum.

I have never seen such a coward in all my life. Good riddance to him.

[poynt99]

Although I have my doubts he'll accept, I've invited David the Applications Engineer from Tektronix to join the discussion here.

If he would like to join, I'm sure someone would notify Aaron for me since he's now not viewing my posts.

.99