COP 17 Heater | Rosemary Ainslie

[Aaron]

noise

Honestly Aaron,

All you are doing right now is playing with noise pickup.

No that MOSFET is not switching or oscillating. Look at the Drain amplitude...it is on the order of 45mV. I would bet that if you disconnected the MOSFET outright from the circuit, those "oscillations" would still remain on the positive source lead you were scoping.

.99

And the heat on the load is just magically appearing without the mosfet switching...noise, yeah right!

[FuzzyTomCat]

At harbor freight, they have these little deals for around $10 bucks if they're on sale....if there is one in your area.

- Harbor Freight Tools - Quality Tools at the Lowest Prices

They work great for seeing differences in temp.

What I really want is a full color thermal cam to see EVERYTHING. Of course they're about $8000 USD for the one I want but that will have to wait.

Hi Aaron,

I went to Harbor Freight and picked up the Non-Contact Infrared Thermometer - Harbor Freight Tools - Quality Tools at the Lowest Prices and I found my Fluke 87 DMM for some good DC voltage readings.

I think I'm going to do the same 2 hour test and use one 12 volt 3 Ah battery instead of the (2) 12 Volt 4.5 Ah battery's I used yesterday in my trial run with all the same parameters in the PDF and scope shots taken but this time with the Non-Contact Infrared Thermometer and DMM readings, then well go from there !! I'm going to start around 9:00 PDT or about 1 hour from now if you, Rosemary or anyone else may have comments (NO comments please poynt99 for now) on this go round, on a closest apples to apples test .....

Glen

[witsend]

Hi Joit. Always a pleasure to chat. I agree. Poynt is taking this to absurd lengths. The truth is that Aaron's still working with very low wattage values. But to dismiss this as being 'not important' or 'not significant' is really inappropriate. I think Aaron needs to explore this as this is more in line with the thesis and certainly of greater import if it can be developed into stronger voltage values.

I see that Hoppy is also dismissing the evidence. MH - I don't even read his posts.

So loyal Joit. It's truly good to know you're always there.

edit - Sky - I missed your post on this. We should have picked up on it. Did you get heat with the oscillations? Did you check?

[Joit]

Hi witsend
Yes i am still around, and play around at the Circuit, i guess, i got now something what i can use for the colder Days. Just looking for a Element, what do match better, and do some other testings on it.

The Circuit works, it does produce heat, and keep the Batteries loaded.
I really dont know, what is still questionable here, and even more what i dont understand, is, why this smarta..... Guys dont rebuild this Circuit ONCE by herself, and then open her Mouth, instead ask silly Questions,
what noone do need for any Progress, and to show clearly only more and more,
that they do have absolute no Clue about this Circuit,
and what is happen around it.

Seems its now only picking at the same Schematic as it was at the Article,
well, when they got no other Life....Omg Omg it is not Right.. Huuh huuh
Go and cry a bit. Babys!
They are no Researcher nor Developer or Open Minded,
the best you can do is to trow such Guys out from any Forum, till they find one, what do match for her.

When they dont even know the difference from a Capacitor and a Batterie..oh my
It's anyway better for them to take some Nails and hit some conductions at a Wall, because Electricity is for sure not her Case.

[SkyWatcher]

Hi folks, I posted this same thing in a thread somewhere here, that I was getting the same self oscillation when disconnecting the 555 timer completely, though it tends to only happen with a certain load like when connecting the flyback into a battery. Though I was using darlington npn setup but it still worked. my 2 1/2 cents.
peace love light
Tyson

[poynt99]

Honestly Aaron,

All you are doing right now is playing with noise pickup.

No that MOSFET is not switching or oscillating. Look at the Drain amplitude...it is on the order of 45mV. I would bet that if you disconnected the MOSFET outright from the circuit, those "oscillations" would still remain on the positive source lead you were scoping.

.99

[witsend]

Poynt - I cannot believe that you seriously dismiss the fact that the timer circuit is out of the loop. Also - bending my mind is you requirement to introduce an ammeter to measure current here. Not only will it probably interfere with the extraordinary resonance that is evident from the loads but it will NEVER give an accurate number. It may, however, be able to show a negative net current flow.

When are you going to give this phenomenon the due interest it deserves? Some scepticism is healthy. Yours is beginning to look like a commitment to disbelief despite the evidence. Hardly dispassionate.

[poynt99]

YouTube - Ainslie circuit self oscillating without 555 timer even connected

One of many answers to the mosfet oscillation ability.

Not only pull the gate wire to the 555, but ground the gate and show what the MOSFET oscillation does. Connect the gate directly to the source, and again show what the oscillation does.

.99

[Aaron]

self oscillation with no 555 timer connected

YouTube - Ainslie circuit self oscillating without 555 timer even connected

One of many answers to the mosfet oscillation ability.

[poynt99]

The frequency reading is 100% irrelevant to the accurate data collection of wattage readings on the shunt.

Think about this carefully. The fact that the scope itself is telling you that the signal amplitude is low should in good conscience cause you to pause and consider that if the frequency calculation is in error, could the amplitudes displayed also be in error? These levels you are getting are right down in the dirt bottom of the vertical capabilities of most scopes. You are dealing with such small voltages that the offset adjust or error in the scope itself could be skewing your results. I may be wrong about this, but it needs to be seriously considered.

In fact I would arrange a simple test using a small calibrated DC voltage measured first with a good DVM, then input to the scope using the same settings. See what the scope reads as the DC voltage. We are talking about a 10mV range. This would at least test the offset in the vertical section which could explain the negative bias in the shunt measurements. Perhaps I will write an email to the folks at Tektronix. In fact I'll email them your scope shots and ask them to explain the frequency measurement errors and get their opinion on the possibility of any amplitude error or offset as well.

You also on many occasions seem to ignore the fact that the 555 timer settings are overridden on any oscillation. If the timer circuit is set at 416kHz, the oscillation can run much, much faster. You need to do the experiments before simply speculating on what you believe is right. Do the experiments and at least you have a rational basis for your beliefs.

The timer output can indeed be over-ridden by strange behaviour as you have proven, and that's the reason I asked you questions about it, which you chose not to answer.

Go back to the Ainslie circuit and finish what you started. You had a clear target, now you seem to be avoiding it. Get your voltage levels back up and get rid of that bogus resistor in the 555 supply. Build it as per the Ainslie diagram and test it as you had originally set out to do. Why are you jumping around to all sorts of offshoots? You have seen a strange behaviour in your current circuit and have automatically assumed it is the result of some unseen or unknown forces or energy. How about questioning the possibilities why this appears the way it does? Scopes have limitations no matter how fancy or expensive they are. You most likely have not considered this fact in this case, evidenced by the fact that all persons here so far, including yourself, have ignored the warning signs the scope itself is telling you.

At the levels you are measuring and the data being recorded, 1mV can make a world of difference in this case in terms of energy appearing to go in or out of the source.

If you're not open to the capacitor source test, then insert an ammeter in place of one or both of the shunts (red to the positive side). Set on "DC milliamps" the meter should average the current and will indicate either + or - current and you will then know without the need for any fancy equipment. If the meter stays on the - side, then indeed a net current is going into the battery.

Was that whole demo simply done wrong? Would you claim the Tektronix TDS3054C is erroneously collecting data? Does Ohms Law fail in giving accurate current measurements based on the voltage drop across the current sensing resistor? Is Excel giving false calculations on the THOUSANDS of real time samples to determine the average per waveform draw?

Excel, the shunt, Ohm's law, are all just computing what you input to them. The scope is the weakest (and most critical) link in the data acquisition chain here, and at these "low signal amplitudes", could be skewing the results due to S/N and/or resolution limitations. There is also the possibility of noise contamination from the nature of the wave forms present and all that is being radiated and picked up by the high impedance scope probes with the scope input amplifier set on high gain.

Again I'll repeat, if all you are interested in with this test is to determine which direction the net current is going, use a DC ammeter that has been checked to read "0.000" with no current through it.

.99

[Aaron]

conventional cynics or skeptics read this:

Below is copied from Bedini's site. It is his description of a motor experiment but the part of the battery electrolyte resonant ringing action applies to the Ainslie circuit and any circuit using transient spikes that go back to a flooded cell lead acid battery.


BEDINI'S FREE ENERGY GENERATOR

FOREWORD

Imagine having a small D.C. electrical motor sitting on your laboratory bench powered by a common 12 volt battery. Imagine starting with a fully charged battery and connecting it to the motor with no other power input. Obviously, the motor is going to run off the battery, but by conventional thinking it will stop when the battery runs down.


Impossible, you say. Not at all. That's precisely what I have done and the motor is running now in my workshop.

It isn't running by the conventional wisdom of electrical physics. It isn't running by the conventional rules of electric motors and generators, but it is running.

It isn't something complex. It is pretty simple, once one gets the hang of the basic idea.

It is running off the principles of electromagnetics that Nikola Tesla discovered shortly before 1900 in his Colorado Springs experiments. It is running off the fact that empty vacuum - pure "emptiness", so to speak - is filled with rivers and oceans of seething energy, just as Nikola Tesla pointed out.

It is running off the fact that vacuum space-time itself is nothing but pure massless charge. That is, vcuum has a very high electrostatic scalar potential - it is greatly stressed. To usefully tap the enormous locked-in energy of that stress, all one has to do is crack it sharply and tap the vacuum oscillations that result. The best way to do that is to hit something resonant that is imbedded in the vacuum, then tap the resonant stress of the ringing of the vacuum itself

In other words, we can ring something at its resonant frequency and, if that something is imbedded in the vacuum, we can tap off the resonance in vacuum stress, without tapping energy directly from the embedded system we rang into oscillation, So what we really need is something that is deeply imbedded in the vacuum, that is, something that can translate "vacuum" movement to "mass" movement.

Well, all charged particles and ions are already imbedded in the vacuum by their charged fluxes, so stressed oscillations - that is, vacuum oscillations - can be converted into normal energy of mass movement by charged particles or ions, if the system of charged particles or ions is made to resonate in phase with our tapping "potential". For our purpose, let's use a system of ions.

First we will need a big accumulator to hold a lot of the charged ions in the system that we wish to shock into oscillation. We need something that has a big capacitance and also contains a lot of ions.

An ordinary battery filled with electrolyte fits the bill nicely. While it is not commonly known, ordinary lead-acid storage batteries have a resonant ionic frequency, usually in the range of from 1-6 MHz. All we have to do is shock-oscillate the ions in the electrolyte at their resonant frequency and time our "trigger"potential and "siphon" current correctly. Then if we keep adding potential to trigger the system we can get all that "potential" to translate into "free electrical energy".

Look at it this way. Conventionally "electrostatic scalar potential" is composed of work or energy per column of charged particle mass. So if we add potential alone, without the mass flow, to a system of oscillating charged particles, we add "physical energy" in the entire charged particle system. In other words, the "potential" we add is converted directly into "ordinary energy" by the imbedded ions in the system. If we are clever we don't have to furnish any pushing energy to move pure potential around. (For proof that this is possible, see Bearden's "Toward a New Electromagnetics; Part IV; Vectors and Mechanisms Clarified", Tesla Book Co,, 1983, Slide 19, page 43, and the accompanying write-up, pages 10,11. Also see Y. Aharonov and V. Bohm, "Significance of Electromagnetic Potentials in the Quantum Theory", "Physical Review", Second Series, Vol. 115, No. 3, Aug 1, 1959, pages 485-491. On page 490 you will find that it's possible to have a field-free region of space, and still have the potential determine the physical properties of the system.)

Now this "free energy resonant coupling" can be done in a simple, cheap system. You don't need big cyclotrons and huge laboratories to do it; you can do it with ordinary D.C. motors, batteries, controllers and trigger circuits.

And that's exactly what I have done. It's real. It works. It is running now on my laboratory bench in prototype form.

[Aaron]

@redo with cap

I just heard that some people that are convinced they are qualified to analyze this circuit is calling for a retest on the negative wattage test to be done on a capacitor because it should never go down?

I have 2 responses:

1. Do you own tests, I'm nobody's surrogate.

2. This shows complete and total ignorance - what in a capacitor is going to resonate with the spikes in order to stress the local active vacuum to draw in free radiant potential? Nothing. The ELECTROLYTES in the battery are needed and suggesting otherwise is not simply evidence, it is proof that there is zero understanding of anything at all regarding these circuits - give it up! Bedini spelled this out for over 25 years - take a hint. The end.

[witsend]

That cool kitty doing remarkable things on the circuit. Gosh Fuzzy. Such excitement. Many thanks for replicating here. I need to go back and read it again.

[Aaron]

ir thermometer

At harbor freight, they have these little deals for around $10 bucks if they're on sale....if there is one in your area.

- Harbor Freight Tools - Quality Tools at the Lowest Prices

They work great for seeing differences in temp.

What I really want is a full color thermal cam to see EVERYTHING. Of course they're about $8000 USD for the one I want but that will have to wait.

[FuzzyTomCat]

Hi Glen,

With your setup, are you able to detect heat on the pot between battery + and 555? And what about the 555 chip and mosfet? Do you have some kind of IR thermometer you can aim at those to see if there is heat?

Hi Aaron,
I don't have a IR thermometer was going by touch only ..... with the "Rosemary Anislie COP>17 Heater Circuit" at certain levels the Mosfet heat sink and 10 ohm resistor you could'nt hang on to way to hot , every thing on this circuit was cold but the scope showed it was working ...... it through me a little there.

I'm going to see if i can get a IR detector wanted one anyway for my work

Glen