COP 17 Heater | Rosemary Ainslie

[witsend]

I have an idea.

Why don't all the skeptics get together and write down a list of criterial that would satisfy you. Post the list up, the believers will edit the list and update it. This go back and forth until the list is perfect. Then the testing begins. The list needs to be as simple and specific as possible to get to the main point.

Hi Quantumuppercut. We've got the protocol for the test from experts. It's really enough. When the results of the final test are posted then our 'classicists' can object. But they'll have to quarrel with some hefty expertise. The protocol was not set by anyone 'for' or 'against'. It was simply set according to required measurement analysis.

I love the name you've chosen by the way. Neat.

[MileHigh]

Mark:

Let me just get my comments on the record for the test process and then that information can be used or not used at the discretion of Aaron and Peter. Compared to my originally suggested test protocol, this is a simplified test taking advantage of the new hardware.

I looked through the user manual for the Tektronix TDS3000 Series DSO. The first thing to do is the probe compensation and signal path compensation for both of your acquisition channels.

To measure the power going into the circuit load you set up one channel across the shunt resistor like normal. For the second channel you connect the hot lead of the probe to the battery positive and the ground lead of the probe to the "hot" side of the shunt resistor. This will measure the true voltage from the battery, bypassing the voltage drop caused by the shunt resistor and factoring in the battery voltage "hiccup" when you first demand current from it. This is a step that I have been worried about.

The DSO can record up to 10,000 points at 9 bits of precision, more than enough accuracy for this test. Suppose the DSO records three full waveforms at 1000 sample points per pair of waveforms, for a total of 6000 sample points. The DSO has built-in dual waveform math, so you program it to multiply the two signals together to give you a weighted instantaneous power waveform.

This waveform is then put onto a floppy disk and then loaded into Excel. The .csv file probably has a format of:

<time stamp>,<weighted instantaneous power>
<time stamp>,<weighted instantaneous power>
.
.

You then have Excel calculate the average weighted power value of the weighted instantaneous power column of data between two time stamps (rows) that represent exactly three (for eaxmple) periods of your waveform. In plain English, you do a summation on the power column between a start and end range that you select with your mouse. Then you divide that by the number of sample points in that row range.

You have to make a precise measurement of the period of your waveform to be sure you select the correct number of rows. The big trick for doing that is to display 5 or 10 waveforms on your display and then measure that period, and then divide by 5 or 10. This gives you more accuracy in measuring a waveform's period with any type of scope. You can also look at the actual data dump, and look for a good reference point, like a sharp falling edge, and measure the time preiod like that.

Then you convert the average weighted power value into the true power by multiplying it by (1/(precision measurement of the shunt resistor value).

This gives you the true average power into the load based on three full vaveforms and about 6000 data points at 9 bits of precision. Nothing to sneeze at.

This will factor in any current being returned into the source battery because the instantaneous power calculated by the DSO will be negative because the shunt resistor voltage will go negative. In fact, you can now look at the energy in the spike returned into the battery itself for each cycle by selecting the right row range in the column of data and doing a summation on it.

I think the thermal measurements are much more straightforward. You could do a quick pass-fail for the over unity claim by running the same DC power through the coil-resostor-diode thermal assembly, and do whatever investigations after that you may choose.

So that's my take on it for the record. I loooked at the DSO manual and am trying to offer these suggestions because there are a few tricky parts that everyone should be aware of.

MileHigh

[Hoppy]

Hi Quantumuppercut. We've got the protocol for the test from experts. It's really enough. When the results of the final test are posted then our 'classicists' can object. But they'll have to quarrel with some hefty expertise. The protocol was not set by anyone 'for' or 'against'. It was simply set according to required measurement analysis.

I love the name you've chosen by the way. Neat.

Rosemary,

You are going to have to come clean on who these 'hefty experts' are and their background. Could you please expand on your last sentence, first para?

Hoppy

[witsend]

Rosemary,

You are going to have to come clean on who these 'hefty experts' are and their background. Could you please expand on your last sentence, first para?

Hoppy

Why? Surely if any expert wants to be associated with this test he would advance his own name? Why should I do this? We all know that if any academic expressed any interest in OU claims his reputation would be severly compromised. But there's never been any conflict on the required protocol. Which is why TK's determined omission of the DC average over the shunt is so suspect. It throws doubts on his knowledge or on his agenda. Not sure which.

[Joit]

Prize?

Btw, 'come clean' What is actually the Prize therefor to win, when it shows, this circuit gives a higher COP?
A 2 Million $ Contract for this Circuit?

And speaking from Experts, you should come clean, what Experts you are,
you did proove it more then once that you are not.
So what is the Prize for, only the satisfaction for some, and after they got her Proof they go to her Bumf and Bucket?

Seriously, when someone from you would be really interested at this,
he would had spend the few Bucks for the Parts and did replicate it, to see, if there is a gain or not, and,
even a hayseed can see, when you remove the Flybackdiode or connect the Batteries directly, you have lesser gain or NO Gain.

That Discussion seriously looks so ridiculous, if the measurements are wrong about a few Volts up or down,
and dont ask for Respect towards classical hardcore EE's i have NONE.
I can get upset 2 Times every Day, when i see, how wrong the classical Theorie is, and its nothing else then a Theorie.
Maybe thats why they deny it to get an other View from Current, because they would see, how useless its actually is, and they still need to support that Tissue of Lies.

So what is the Prize here for the Proof.

[MileHigh]

Joit:

I have spent thousands of hours on a bench with a scope and a logic analyizer. I wasn't looking for OU, I was working. I did similar experiments like this on a bench almost 30 years ago.

The "prize" is the fact that over a 10-year period the entire world would undergo a transformation that would make the Internet look like nothing more than a better mousetrap. It would affect every single person on Planet Earth and make famine and possibly even war a thing of the past.

"Break on through to the other side."

MileHigh

[Hoppy]

Why? Surely if any expert wants to be associated with this test he would advance his own name? Why should I do this? We all know that if any academic expressed any interest in OU claims his reputation would be severly compromised. But there's never been any conflict on the required protocol. Which is why TK's determined omission of the DC average over the shunt is so suspect. It throws doubts on his knowledge or on his agenda. Not sure which.

Because you are presumably the person who is going to publish the report with the names in it?

Hoppy

[Joit]

>I have spent thousands of hours on a bench with a scope and a logic analyizer.
>I wasn't looking for OU, I was working. I did similar experiments like this on a bench almost 30 years ago.

That explain a lot of your scepticism.

I dont think, if someone can proove it with this Circuit, that you can have a higher Cop, it will change the World.
Otherside, mostly the Reward for got such a Device is mostly a Bullet into your Head.
I remember a Story, where someone destroyed a Teslaswitch at J. Bedinis Store
as he was a moment absent, just, 'because he was angry, that such Things exist'.
Beside are there still a few Devices outside, what shows OU.
I dont give Examples for that, and when it would go public, it would be supressed.
And this Circuit is maybe a hard Example, to show it.
You dont have Energy, what you can directly take from, you see a lower decrease at the Batteries, wich seems is hard to Proof,
when someone dont wanna see it, all you got is the Heat, where you can say, its more like its usual is.
The Question, why there is allways a Batterie in this Devices is simple, because you cant catch the Spikes really proper,
i would say, you do transform it more then use them.
But having Batteries it does not help to show that you can have/use more Energy, when you use the Spikes too.

War is another Theme, much Scientist are against Wars, but her inventions are exactly used for it,
because, at last, they can tell you, it is for the National Security.
That are other Peoples, what rules right now the World.
And there are quite a lot other Things, what you can find out about the Spikes, or collapsing Field,
but someone need to investigate it from all corners.
And that, is still quite a bit more Work, till all are there.
And well, i damaged one PG50 now from this weak Spikes.

[mikehingle]

Rosemary !

Have you perused the Keshe Generator descriptions yet to realize how it works ???
Keshe energy Plasma Reactors - Scroll down & see his generator diagram.

Can you see how his generator's initiating power source could be very efficient, & similar to yours
& others who are effectively using collapsing magnetic fields to drive the reactions ???

Here's some of Keshe's clues :

"In this system energy production is achieved simply by the normal creation of heat first,
then gravity in the center of the core, with the help of the generation of magnetic fields
through the right method of circulation [of the magnetically active medium: hydrogen or SG Gas]
and cooling system, within the reactor."

"The creation of electric energy in this reactor is achieved through the simple process of hydrogen ionization."
[The hydrogen gasses are ionized by strongly applied external magnetic fields,
which results in the creation & circulation of the contained ionized hydrogen gasses.
Then, these circulating highly ionized gasses themselves create a strong magnetic field,
which can be used for power generation & propulsion.]

Cheers !
Mike Hingle

[Harvey]

Ok, it seems some here still don't get the concept - so perhaps this video will help.

YouTube - Induction Heating

I want all the skeptics here to build a circuit that performs the action demonstrated. They must fully document a complete and exhaustive power chart for their work. If they are unable to comply, then I put it forward that they haven't a clue as to what they are discussing here in this thread.


Rosemary, you ever feel like you're raising a bunch of kids here? Feels that way to me.



And if you like that video:
YouTube - Red-hot ice cube by induction heating

[MileHigh]

I can't resist Harvey:

> They must fully document a complete and exhaustive power chart for their work. If they are unable to comply, then I put it forward that they haven't a clue as to what they are discussing here in this thread.

The clip you linked to has nothing to do with this experiment. Back to the drawing boards.

MileHigh

[Joit]

But, but i need such a Thing!
Maybe i can heat up some Iron and can finally make some Magnets with it.

Just to bad it usual needs a lot of Caps.

[Harvey]

I can't resist Harvey:

> They must fully document a complete and exhaustive power chart for their work. If they are unable to comply, then I put it forward that they haven't a clue as to what they are discussing here in this thread.

The clip you linked to has nothing to do with this experiment. Back to the drawing boards.

MileHigh

Thank you for proving my point.

[witsend]

Harvey - I'm a little embarrassed to ask this - but are those effects mainstream - or not? I sincerely believe that - if they are - then there is nothing new introduced by my model. If they're not mainstream - then why not - if the effect is so easily replicable.

I'm afraid I'm not up with current science and all it's applications

EDIT. Joit, so nice to see you're always there.

[mikehingle]

Joit !
Can you imagine the numerous applications from utilizing magnetized iron,
which has been heated & then allowed to cool in the presence of a strong
steady-state magnetic field ??? The resulting magnets have 4 to 5 times
higher strength & higher temperature tolerances, because a greater number
of magnetic domains in the molecular matrix of the iron were allowed to be
formed & fixed (held in place), than the number of domiains that are normally
set from the conventional method of just momentarily shocking the magnetic
material with high amps. Here's the company with the recent patent on this
process :
A Novel Technique for the Enhancement of Coercivity in High Energy Permanent Magnets--Advanced Materials Corporation
51

Cheers !
Mike Hingle

A Simple Process to Manufacture Grain Aligned Permanent Magnets
52

Advanced Materials Corporation
Advanced Materials Corporation