COP 17 Heater | Rosemary Ainslie | Part 2

[witsend]

Not exactly motivating to try and rebuild or duplicate this circuit. How many successful replications of this circuit were done?
Anyway I went out for a long run in the snow during lunchtime, my endorphins level is way up and curiosity on its own will be motivation enough to see if I can have the same results if I build it. I have all I need except for the proper resistance wire. I ordered some in the local electronics shop but what I got is really thin wire. I understood thicker wire would improve the process so I’m trying to get my hands on some.

Sjalom,
B

Sjalom indeed b4Free. This is just so nice to hear. I did not mean to discourage investigation. On the contrary. I just assumed that the readers here had had a belly full of this circuit. Golly. If you've followed this closely to know that you need thick wire then I must presume you also know that the wider the 'girth' of the core the better. And runs in the snow? Then you've definitely got the will power to do anything - in my book. I battle with my conscience even to walk my poor dogs. Good stuff b4Free - would love to know how it goes.


BTW Your posts are my sole relief lately. Hopefully you'll become a trend setter.

[witsend]

How many successful replications of this circuit were done? ...

Sjalom,
B

I did not answer your question. We've had dozens of replications - as is proven by the accreditors. Nor have I listed them all. There are many. But on this thread Glen is the only replicator. But he had the advantage of a really good DSO which - I believe is critical. You need to look for that waveform. It is crucial to the 'effect'.

There may very well be a ratio between the girth of the hollowed core of the resistor and the thickness of the wire. Whatever thickness you use here b4Free - it would be as well to keep to those same ratios that Glen has tested. The Quantum paper has got a misprint and there is no way the wire was as presented. Nor do I have that resistor to make the corrections. I'm afraid it'll be a bit of trial and error here. The other rather critical tip is don't skimp on the thickness of the connecting wires either. And use a potentiometer as specified and the better the quality the better the adjustments needed. This is crticial for when you start teasing out that harmonic. The final point is that the mosfet we always used was an IRFG50. There's something about that intrinsic body diode that really kicks in well in allowing the returning current flow. Can't wait to hear more here. Am just so chuffed.

EDIT - also, I learned that it was easiest to run a control and the experiment concurrently. So - if you're able to get your hands on two sets of batteries it's a quick gauge to see it's efficiency compared to the experiment. Then too, we found that the best efficiencies were always on lead acid batteries. But that's not critical - just preferable. I don't know why so, but Aaron and others have ideas about this. I can only say that I concur.

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...html#post85727
(I think that's the right link)

[torpex]

Hi everyone

Hi Guruji,

The NE555N timer I believe was one of the first timers on the market back in the early 1980's .... and I have tried other timers and the wave forms were different and not with the same results.

Best Regards,
Glen

I've been following the post from the beginning, congratulations on the great work.

The question is whether "other timers" you've tested are from the same series 555 or other different numbering?
That is, LM555 would be valid?
Any 555 would be valid or specifically 555N?

Greetings

[witsend]

Hi torpex and welcome to the forum.

Sorry I took so long to get back to you. I've only just caught up here. The only requirement is a standard switch. But I would definitely recommend you follow either Glen's switch schematic or our own.

Guys - it seems that we are getting in new experimenters and that's just really good news. I would be very pleased to hear of progress. I never intended to discourage this at all. But there is one point that I need to stress. The waveform that is needed to generate this 'gain' on this circuit is fairly crucial. It's a relatively fast number and needs a generous bandwidth on the scope to show it. Then - because of the complexity - it also needs some reasonably reliable means of measuring it. This is most reliably done with data dumps directly from the storage facility of a good DSO. Without this - then you will no doubt get familiarity with the means to expose this - but you may not be able to access the data analysis to prove that gain.

If you don't in fact have the required DSO's then I would recommend that you, at least, have a power supply source where you can establish the current required to generate the required temperature rise on the load resistor. And then run controls at that same current from a separate battery. If you run this concurrently, as we did, you will quickly see the difference in the performance of both the control battery and the experiment's battery.

But good luck with your testing here torpex. And please just look over the posts to b4FreeEnergy. They've got some further tips to the circuit requirements.



http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...html#post85727
hopefully now it's the right link.

[b4FreeEnergy]

Hi Torpex,

I know I can power a 100W lamp easily with a BEMF circuit and show zero amps in the CSR leg. I'll explain why this is possible a little later. But for now, the 3KW goal just may be in reach - only research will tell for sure.

Hi Harvey,
How do you do that? Is this done in a variation of the circuit in this thread and decribed too somewhere? So you have a 220V/100W bulb and you don't need 0.45Amps to do that? You even can go up to 3kW and do the same thing? Cool.
Cheers,
B

[witsend]

@witsend

You should not believe for one second that this nonsense has not gone unnoticed and you are correct that many of these others have made themselves out to be much more than they are. Any quite ordinary person can produce any variant of another technology but as Nikola Tesla once stated --" there is no invention in it ". Many seem lost because they have no premise, they have no foundation on which to build, their thoughts are continually mired like quicksand. True invention starts with understanding which leads to a premise and this premise leads to experiments to prove it. These experiments can lead to something new which is a unique extension of the inventor themselves-- a product of their thoughts. You do not steal an idea from someone and change a few things and call it invention, this is theft and little more. Unfortunately this seems to be a sign of the times when people feel they are deserving of things they have not earned. I once read a simple statement which sums much of this up -- "you cannot build what you do not understand", I live by these words.
I hope all this nonsense will end soon so we can hear more of your theory and how it applies to your circuit.
Regards
AC

Thank you very much AC. Much appreciated.


EDIT AC changed his post after I had copied it. I specifically asked if I should withdraw this, his earlier comment, and he advised me that to leave it as is. Thanks again AC

[Allcanadian]

@Harvey

You Know AC, the bad thing here is that Rosemary turned against all of us, including Jibbguy and he didn't do anything to deserve that attack. He graciously provided the public readership she asked for in his publications and as soon as it was done she wanted him out. It turns my stomach just thinking about the stuff she did to us all. And now, right here she blast me with false accusations and misinformation. What's more, she has even posted your email to us privately as if you have been giving her support in all this.

I can be a little too critical at times but I think we all do what we think is right at the time, right or wrong. I do support Rosemary's claim because I have built the circuit but if you had a unique claim or theory I felt had merit I would support that as well. Im do not mean to pick sides here and I do not think all this infighting has accomplished much of anything. I relate this in a completely different way than most, I imagine I am working for a hungry little boy in a grass hut out in africa. Now if I would ask him what he thought of all this hubub what do you think he might say? I don't think he would care about all this nonsense when all he wants is a simple light to read by or a means to have clean drinking water. All our petty little indifferences here mean nothing in comparison but all of us are intent on being right and not being outdone by the other as if it had any relevance in the bigger picture. I think I am done with these forums as all I ever see is this indifference towards each other and it starts to be deterimental to what is really important. Maybe everyone should take a break and consider how this technology could be applied to make our lives better, that is our goal isnt it?
Regards
AC

[witsend]

Some really good news guys - at last.

I have the expressed interest of an investor to take this to application. The first will be a 'boiler' or 'hot water cylinder' or 'geyser' as we call it in SA. I'll keep you all posted on the developments here.

Seems like there's truth in the saying 'every cloud has a silver lining'. Anyway. I'm feeling very optimistic again.

[b4FreeEnergy]

pfweew, the bead weather is over now I hope!

[b4FreeEnergy]

'bad' that is ...

[ashtweth]

Replicaitons?

with all going on, replications and the brilliant R and D that Glen and H has done is getting distracted ,The new doc will be uploaded soon Plus a new video production thanking every one for their hard work for the open source community..Here is our Rep, we have 2 chances now of getting a better scope to back up Glen's data.

http://img696.yfrog.com/img696/5538/67646413.jpg
http://img696.yfrog.com/img696/5538/67646413.jpg

All of Rose's helpful new posts are updated in the document. H's and glens new stuff is there with the THEMES of how the paper can help and what direction is intended, The thanks and sponsorship for the open source engineers is in there too. Special thanks to Glen and H. More to come.

Ash

[witsend]

with all going on, replications and the brilliant R and D that Glen and H has done is getting distracted ,The new doc will be uploaded soon Plus a new video production thanking every one for their hard work for the open source community..Here is our Rep, we have 2 chances now of getting a better scope to back up Glen's data.

http://img696.yfrog.com/img696/5538/67646413.jpg
http://img696.yfrog.com/img696/5538/67646413.jpg

All of Rose's helpful new posts are updated in the document. H's and glens new stuff is there with the THEMES of how the paper can help and what direction is intended, The thanks and sponsorship for the open source engineers is in there too. Special thanks to Glen and H. More to come.

Ash

Ash thanks for this. I notice that Glen's work is given due credit as is Harvey's. I also note SPECIAL THANKS TO GLEN AND HARVEY. I can't help wondering why I was left out?

Let me add to this acknowledgement. Without Glen's replication I would have no proof of thesis. I am enduringly grateful. But any such gratitude would be wasted if Glen claimed this is an anomaly. As it seems that he has denied that it is an anomaly and that it is, in fact, a replication, then my gratitude stands. I trust that in the fullness of time he will advance this to applications together with Harvey and that the two of them develop this along any thesis that Harvey is proposing - or not - whichever case is applicable. I would also put on record that it was by virtue of Glen's dedicated skills at testing that obvious measurement weaknesses were addressed and that it was thanks to Harvey that the tested parameters used were well defined.

I would also put on record that I am grateful for the help that all the collaborators have done. And I'm delighted to hear that you'll be able to get this test onto some more advanced DSO's. Wel done Ash and Andrew. And Andrew - I do not have an updated email address. Please oblige me.

[witsend]

And b4Free - I am hoping against hope that normalcy has been established here. Indeed the bad weather is over. Here's hoping, in any event.

[witsend]

So Guys, here's my proposal.

I will start a new thread on and 'explanation of current flow - as per my magnetic field model. I will post over all those explanations to that new thread. That way there will, at its least, be a continuity in the argument which is sorely lacking here. Unfortunately I cannot use the existing thread for the thesis as it's largely a wide discussion on many competing ideas and is way too 'off course' to be appropriate to this subject. Nor would I like to change that existing thread as there are some valuable contributions from members that should stay on record.

Then this thread will be used for updates on the applications and for any members who care to try and replicate the circuit. All such would be welcome and I am well able to guide members to the required. If you pm me I'll be happy to give you my Skype address and then advance this in direct communication with you all, very much as I did with Aaron and Glen.

And I will certainly keep you updated on the progress of applications except in as far as they may apply to any potential patentable aspect of the resistors themselves. This is the area of this knowledge that is still subject to intellectual property ownership. And it's a really good thing. Because variations to this design is where the 'secret' lies and this needs to be explored and advanced. Nothing helps progress better than some thoughts of reward. My hope is that many such competing designs will be submitted - all representing improvements on the last - which can then only advance this knowledge further. But results, progress - proof of measurement - I intend to make that available to open source - ALWAYS.

Let's make this a healthy competition to see which team is the first to get an application to production. I've been advised that a single application will be far more persuasive to academics than anything else. But I will also continue with my work on the paper. It will be under the guidance and 'mentorship' of an institution in SA and it will - I hope - be published in due course. That paper too will be an open source submission.

So. Exciting things ahead guys. This has got to be a vast improvement on the apalling standards of posting indulged here and it is a real means of igniting the interest that these and ALL OVER UNITY RESULTS deserve.

So. Hopefully again. Onwards and upwards.

[torpex]

Hi all

I tested both the LM and the SE versions - I also have a TLC version which I intended to try before getting wrapped up helping Rosemary write a paper that she eventually aborted for all of us. But now I have time to resume my own research into this stuff.

Thanks for your reply

Recent evaluation of Glen's new data has revealed things that we completely missed before, but I won't go into that here. I want to complete my work on Test 21 and Test 22 before I post my findings in the new MOSFET heater thread - hopefully later this week.

I'm also having some background checks done on Rosemary's patents as well as Mr. Ashby's patents (Thanx to one of the readers here for that) to make certain that we are not encouraging the Open Source community to go down a dead end street where their hardwork will just be absorbed.

I know I can power a 100W lamp easily with a BEMF circuit and show zero amps in the CSR leg. I'll explain why this is possible a little later. But for now, the 3KW goal just may be in reach - only research will tell for sure.

Very interesting, hope this explanation as soon as possible. Any clues?

@Witsend.- I do not have sophisticated equipment, but if the interest to experience from the purely empirical, from electronics perspective.

Greetings