COP 17 Heater | Rosemary Ainslie

[poynt99]

What did you use as your voltage source if not a "VDC" component?

Not sure what your "VSRC" stands for.

.99

[poynt99]

I understand this to mean that sample data was taken every 1.2µs and stored for an overall period that included multiple waveforms which were then analyzed in Excel. I see this on page four, not page five

The same seems to be the case in the White Paper except the 1.2 seems to be rounded to 1µS. In both cases, this seems to be the setup for the minimum sample slice.

That doesn't make sense. It's unfortunate that some of these important passages were left open for interpretation.

We'll not know the reality unless/until we see the actual data.

.99

[poynt99]

What did you use as your voltage source if not a "VDC" component?

Not sure what your "VSRC" stands for.

.99

Have just found the 99SE handbook and the reference to "VSRC". They do not seem to indicate what the "RC" part is in reference to, but according to what's written in the handbook, this "VSRC" is the equivalent to the "VDC" component in PSpice. In the 99SE handbook it is specified as: "DC Voltage Source".

Also, see page 219 in the handbook. Clearly these are referred to as "Constant" current and voltage sources.

So, there is no impedance modeling in those components, including the VSRC you are using. They are "ideal" sources.

.99

[Michael John Nunnerley]

I am back more or less

Hi all, after the hols: and a problem with my health, I am more or less back to putting some input into this thread and the thread that I started.

I have been looking and reading the thread but I have not been up to putting any input, sorry about that.

Having time to think about what is happening with this and slightly altered circuits and you might say, stepping back from the forest so as I can see the trees, I find that the results that have been posted are not of a big supprise.

It is very difficult to do an exact replication unless you have the exact components that were used in the original test, it is a pitty that rosemary did not hold on to the original test components, all be it to be of future benifit the exact components must be available!

I have seen others, and myself, with experiments that can not be explained in the normal field of science, and to replicate them is very difficult if another person is not using the same components as was used in the original.

We are working on fring science, where no man has been before, to coin a frase. We have to be very open minded, not closed in to what we have been shown is the be all and end all.

I am now working on a, you might say, highbrid, of Rosemarys circuit so as to see what can be done as far as a usable item to benifit mankind. I have allways been like this, I am not much into key hole surgery, I go for the, knife, the useable factor in its grandest form.

I hope in the next few days to post, what is on paper at the moment, and I will be open to any thoughts or critics as to the design.

Sorry Rosemary if I am leaping ahead, but as I explained before, I am not into small experiments, as Peter I think will speak for me on that, if it is going to be done, I will do it on a usable scale.

All keep up the good work you are doing, resonance and frequency is the key, it is key to life itself, but to find it is very difficult.

Mike

[witsend]

YouTube - Extended Michelson-Morley Interferometer experiment. English version

Guys everyone should view this. It has HUGE implications. And Harvey - take note of the horizontal patterns which correspond to a video I saw of yours pointing out similar effects in magnetic fields. So - so interesting - especially to all FE enthusiasts. Aether evidence definitely on the rise.

[Michael John Nunnerley]

YouTube - Extended Michelson-Morley Interferometer experiment. English version

Guys everyone should view this. It has HUGE implications. And Harvey - take note of the horizontal patterns which correspond to a video I saw of yours pointing out similar effects in magnetic fields. So - so interesting - especially to all FE enthusiasts. Aether evidence definitely on the rise.

Brilliant stuff, just as I was saying, the implications are huge.

Mike

[witsend]

Hi Mike. So nice to see you're back. We definitely need you here and would love to see your experiments. Personally I'm sorry that it's on another thread - but at least it's on this forum.

Sorry to hear about the health problems. I trust all is now well. And yes. The implications of this video are really startling. I hope Martin Grusenick publishes.

[witsend]

Harvey - if you read this and if you get around to it - and in the unlikely event that you have anything better to do - may I impose on you - yet again to do that trick with the translation?

the following link is in french. I tried it on the google translate thing and it kept giving me a french version. I don't think it's me. It's probably a faulty computer Whatever. It has defeated me.

Genese

[dllabarre]

Harvey - if you read this and if you get around to it - and in the unlikely event that you have anything better to do - may I impose on you - yet again to do that trick with the translation?

the following link is in french. I tried it on the google translate thing and it kept giving me a french version. I don't think it's me. It's probably a faulty computer Whatever. It has defeated me.

Genese

Try this:

translated

[witsend]

DonL - You're a sweetheart. Many thanks indeed. I'm just a dinasaur on this system. Now I'm going to study it. I also saw a new link? I'll look at that too.

Many thanks indeed.

[Harvey]

That doesn't make sense. It's unfortunate that some of these important passages were left open for interpretation.

We'll not know the reality unless/until we see the actual data.

.99

It makes sense to me. But then I come from an era before Exabyte storage was within grasp. So when dealing with Kilobyte or even Megabyte storage you only take a sample reading often enough to 'snapshot' the points along the way that allow you to connect the dots. The original signal was ~15µs with ~400µs of off time in between. It would have seemed reasonable to use a 1µs sample interval. This means you take a sample snapshot every microsecond or specifically, every 1.2 microseconds. That should give 15 samples per on time. Even with 200KHz, it should have given a minimum of 5 samples per cycle - plenty.

I think perhaps your confusing the data collection interval with the scope time base.

[Harvey]

Have just found the 99SE handbook and the reference to "VSRC". They do not seem to indicate what the "RC" part is in reference to, but according to what's written in the handbook, this "VSRC" is the equivalent to the "VDC" component in PSpice. In the 99SE handbook it is specified as: "DC Voltage Source".

Also, see page 219 in the handbook. Clearly these are referred to as "Constant" current and voltage sources.

So, there is no impedance modeling in those components, including the VSRC you are using. They are "ideal" sources.

.99

SRC is the mnemonic for Source. You are mistaken regarding the impedance, please look at the 'z' symbol. This is the symbol for impedance. It is a necessary function to ensure constant voltage where the source current is varying. The chart I posted is a direct Transient Analysis of the VSRC impedance during a 560µs run. In this case I had shortened the off time considerably so there are many cycles from the 555, and the ring 'tone' is ~360kHz. Where do you think the 80K Ohms is coming from if it is not modeled in the VSRC?

[Harvey]

Harvey - if you read this and if you get around to it - and in the unlikely event that you have anything better to do - may I impose on you - yet again to do that trick with the translation?

the following link is in french. I tried it on the google translate thing and it kept giving me a french version. I don't think it's me. It's probably a faulty computer Whatever. It has defeated me.

Genese

Genese Website - English Translation

Cheers

EDIT: LOL That's what I get for reading top down and replying as I go - I knew there was a reason I read magazines from back to front
Thanx Don.

[witsend]

Thanks Harvey. In fact with due respct to DonL - your translation has the edge here.

[Harvey]

@.99

Large Pic

Hopefully that helps clear up some of your confusion regarding source impedance of constant voltage sources