The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: a circuit that produces overunity results.  (Read 98936 times)

lyner

  • Guest
a circuit that produces overunity results.
« Reply #325 on: 18/06/2009 11:30:26 »
You are not confronting Science - you are ignoring it by not getting to understand it. That is the arrogant bit; assuming you know best when you haven't understood the alternative.
(As you haven't sufficiently explained you alternative, the reverse can't be said of your critics.)

I think you ought to direct your 'sensitivity' in the direction of the messages you have been getting rather than in taking offense at the fact that people have been disagreeing with you. I /we didn't start off being so blunt about what you have to say. The initial reactions have always been very polite.

Make a decision, either to learn some Science  which can give you the tools to make progress in the subject or take up Fantasy Fiction, which is great fun and a place where no one will knock your ideas, if they're original.

btw, there are a number of definitions of trolling. I would say your contributions are not deliberately mischievous - more self indulgent.
 

Offline witsend

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 418
    • View Profile
    • Magnetic field model that enables overunity of electric systems
a circuit that produces overunity results.
« Reply #326 on: 18/06/2009 12:22:37 »
Sophiecentaur - I went to some considerable trouble to explain myself as clearly as I could.  I wish you would simply address those questions and points instead of reverting to another character bashing exercise.

And quite frankly unless you do address those points there's no point in discussing anything.  It loses the benefits of a discussion to become an exercise in trolling, if that's the right term.  Whatever it is, I do not think it applies to me.  I have raised questions that have plagued me.  These are the same questions from some highly qualified electrical engineers, albeit they would, no doubt, ask the questions more appropriately and with more evident skill.  It is a tribute to their intellectual honesty that they ask it at all.  I think it is fair to say that we, and not only I, want expert comment to explain these results.  They made that explicity evident in their permission to use their names as accreditors.

May I be so bold as to make a suggestion.  Try and keep your comments applicable to questions and answers instead of to wide sweeping dismissive accounts of my character - my lack of knowledge - or to any other points that are entirely irrelevant to the question.

Otherwise may I recommend that you simply do not follow my threads.  Clearly they exasperate you.  And I have it on good authority that I can ask these questions and address these points even though you may find them offensive.  Your right to answer them or not, is unquestionable.  But I certainly question your right to tell me what to do with my interests the more so as the implication is that I live in some sort of 'fantasy land'.

I do not know if there is a readership to this thread.  But if there is - then my eternal hope is that trawlers, as Vern describes them, will either explain where the error is, or will replicate the test.  The bonanza would be if they are, themselves, academics.  That way, with luck, they may replicate the test.  Either way, I win.

I am just so sorry that you find my contribution so offensive.  The more so as it seems I've lost out on the opportunity of either a chance at an objective overview of the results - or alternatively a chance to encourage you to test the device for yourself.

Clearly I'm a bad marketer.

« Last Edit: 18/06/2009 14:10:39 by witsend »
 

Offline rosy

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1018
  • Chemistry
    • View Profile
a circuit that produces overunity results.
« Reply #327 on: 18/06/2009 12:31:51 »
Sorry, witsend. The deal with forums is that, whilst you are allowed to expound your theory... sophiecentaur's allowed to comment on it.

Unfortunately, whilst in general sweeping comments on a poster's character or background are to be frowned upon, I agree with him that here your lack of any grounding in conventional science is entirely relevant, especially since you say you've been engaged with this for some years and yet don't see why the fact that you don't know what a capacitor is might be a reason for others not to take you seriously.
 

Offline witsend

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 418
    • View Profile
    • Magnetic field model that enables overunity of electric systems
a circuit that produces overunity results.
« Reply #328 on: 18/06/2009 12:41:58 »
Sorry, witsend. The deal with forums is that, whilst you are allowed to expound your theory... sophiecentaur's allowed to comment on it.
Rosey

Where have I denied him that right? 

And regarding my knowledge or otherwise of capacitors, nor do I know a thousand different electrical components and devices.  That does not make me unable to understand current flow, elecromagnetic interactions, gravitational forces, the strong and weak nuclear forces - and on and on.  I'm a good gardner. I do not know all the names of the plants - certainly not their botanical names.  I'm also a really good bridge player.  But I have never read books on Bridge. 
 

lyner

  • Guest
a circuit that produces overunity results.
« Reply #329 on: 18/06/2009 13:07:39 »
Quote
And regarding my knowledge or otherwise of capacitors, nor do I know a thousand different electrical components and devices.  That does not make me unable to understand current flow,
It actually does. If you don't know how the circuit that you were working on functions then your comments about it can hardly be valid, can they?  As for knowing what a capacitor is; there are just three basic, passive, components - resistors, inductors and capacitors and inductors are in the small minority.  It is hardly a good start if you don't know of the existence of what constitutes nearly half of the passive components used. What can you know of electromagnetic interactions if you are not aware that capacity is as important as inductance and resistance?

A good gardener can get good results which are repeatable under many circumstances. There is no doubt about what constitutes a good crop of beans. What you are doing with this electronics exercise is the equivalent of claiming that your bean plant produced pineapples - and grew up into the sky and you found a giant there.
You presumably can name all the suits of a pack of cards and know how many cards there are in each suit. And, without some basic knowledge of the game you wouldn't be a successful player. The same goes for Science, I'm afraid.

Quote
Either way, I win.
Does that imply that, either way, you will be proved right?

You ask me for specific answers to specific questions. I have actually given you several detailed replies to direct questions.
I have asked you one specific question about the Hydrogen lines, several times, but you have not even acknowledged it - let alone answered it. That would be the acid test for you ideas. Do you understand the question?
 

Offline witsend

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 418
    • View Profile
    • Magnetic field model that enables overunity of electric systems
a circuit that produces overunity results.
« Reply #330 on: 18/06/2009 13:29:30 »
Sophiecentaur - I do not understand the question.  Do you want me to list the different lines in the Lyman line series?  Do you want an explanation for their absorbtion levels - or how they're identified by their colour which I believe moves from infra red to ultra violet?  Or are you asking which levels are occupied by which electrons in the Hydrogen, Deuterium, Tritium types? 

This is a really strange question.  The answers are readily googled.  If I need to answer this to satisfy you that I know something about science - then you've set me an absurdly simple test and I really cannot see how it proves anything at all.  Did you do this as a third year or post grad student that you're so interested?  I would have thought my understanding of physics would be better challenged on that circuit.

But why must I waste my time trying to convince you that I understand hydrogen lines and their existence?  Surely everyone knows?
« Last Edit: 18/06/2009 14:17:51 by witsend »
 

Offline BenV

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1503
    • View Profile
a circuit that produces overunity results.
« Reply #331 on: 18/06/2009 13:44:54 »
Just to help clear things up...

I think he was asking how your theory would predict and justify those lines, rather than just asking you to give the currently accepted ideas.
 

Offline witsend

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 418
    • View Profile
    • Magnetic field model that enables overunity of electric systems
a circuit that produces overunity results.
« Reply #332 on: 18/06/2009 13:57:13 »
Hi BenV.  I'm always surprised to see that you're actually always there - monitoring.  It's comforting.

Yes indeed.  I believe that these lines are formed by zipons which are magnetic particles that move in fields, velocity of 2c and dipoles so have neutral charges.  I've explained how these energy levels actually separate from the flux of nebulae at the early genesis of hydrogen atoms in those fields.  I then suggest that these fields, these energy levels are the final composition in the fusion of three electrons that form the hydrogen atom.  The proposal is that the number of these zipons has a correspondence to the actual mass of the hydrogen atom.  I've also suggested that their existence, these energy levels enable the hydrogen atom to operate as a truly closed system outside the primary field of the universe.  I've explained it all in my blog but also, possibly more briefly, in the thread on 10 dimensional binary system

 

lyner

  • Guest
a circuit that produces overunity results.
« Reply #333 on: 18/06/2009 13:59:05 »
Ah, I have your attention.
What I am asking is that you, in order to establish the credibility of your theory of everything, should derive, using that theory from first principles, the frequencies of radiation that you would expect a Hydrogen atom to produce.
The reason I choose that particular exercise is that it is pretty much the most elementary problem which quantum mechanics deals with.  It was, as I remember, something we did in the second year and is a standard bit of bookwork in a Physics course.  It 'proves' the pudding of early Quantum Physics by putting in known values and getting out predicted values which correspond to subsequent measurement. It is the sort of test to which a theory must be subjected before it can be taken seriously - and it passed.
So, given the measured values of masses, charges etc, of anything you need to quote (the ones in the book will do) can you use your theory to show what the actual frequencies would be?
To be a proper 'theory' it would be essential that your hypothesis would yield the correct (numerical)results. I don't think that you can have grasped the importance of the boring little details like numbers. All the data is available - you just need to show how your idea links them together. A very reasonable request, I'm sure you 'd agree.
Alternatively, you could always apply some quantitative analysis to this circuit of yours and show why it should work in the way you think you have observed and why your magic explanation is preferable to the possibility of a measurement error. From what you say, however, the electronics could get in the way.
[spelling edit]
« Last Edit: 18/06/2009 14:28:44 by sophiecentaur »
 

Offline witsend

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 418
    • View Profile
    • Magnetic field model that enables overunity of electric systems
a circuit that produces overunity results.
« Reply #334 on: 18/06/2009 14:08:37 »
I will gladly do both.  But the explanation of the current flow can come in this thread and the reconciliation of the frequencies evident in Lyman lines come come in the 10 dimensional binary system.  But Vernon is helping me with that exercise and I'm still not ready to get to the nitty grits of the subject.  I will gladly get there - in due course.  But I'm a plodder.  As I've explained.  And I'm still establishing an overview.  I won't be hurried.  However I will take the trouble of explaing the circuit analysis.  Unfortunately will have to do that tonight as I must get onto the trading floor.
 

lyner

  • Guest
a circuit that produces overunity results.
« Reply #335 on: 18/06/2009 14:27:39 »
I look forward to hearing from you.
 

Offline witsend

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 418
    • View Profile
    • Magnetic field model that enables overunity of electric systems
a circuit that produces overunity results.
« Reply #336 on: 18/06/2009 17:55:07 »
Sophiecentaur, I've just spoken to my co-author.  I am going to write up my take of current flow and he is going to draw the distiction between mine and classical understanding.

Unfortunately his time constraints are pretty extreme.  He needs the better part of a week to get the time to do this.  So, if you don't mind waiting.  Otherwise I can give my own description pro tem but then must ask that you make allowances for any comparisons that may not be precisely classical.  The choice is yours.
 

lyner

  • Guest
a circuit that produces overunity results.
« Reply #337 on: 18/06/2009 22:36:35 »
Start off with a few numbers. That will be interesting.
 

Offline witsend

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 418
    • View Profile
    • Magnetic field model that enables overunity of electric systems
a circuit that produces overunity results.
« Reply #338 on: 19/06/2009 05:59:12 »
Start off with a few numbers. That will be interesting. Sophiecentaur

I have just read through this entire thread which was fortunate as it served to remind me that your objects in relation to this circuit and my field model are hardly constructive.  Have you ever looked back at the things you've said to me and about me?  I would have to be hopelessly naive to think that either the experiment or the model may be of interest to you.

I was prepared to take up your challenge until I saw this cryptic suggestion.  And you accuse me of arrogance?  Where was your 'thank you for the trouble of not only exhausting your own efforts but also of soliciting your co-author's efforts'?   A courteous, 'actually do whatever is most convenient' would have been nice. Even an honest 'thanks, but I'm not that interested'.

You may post whatever nasty thing you like about me.  I have no intention of ever answering them.  And I certainly will not jump through hoops to satisfy some imaginary standard of excellence that you arbitrarily impose on my contributions.  I have no respect for your judgement coloured as it is by your compulsive need to 'put me down'.

« Last Edit: 19/06/2009 06:12:12 by witsend »
 

lyner

  • Guest
a circuit that produces overunity results.
« Reply #339 on: 19/06/2009 08:23:30 »
You say that you have a new theory. If you want it to be accepted, you need to demonstrate it's validity in more ways than just giving assurances.
As you have announced it to the World, I assume that you meant it to be read - no, scrutinized. If you have, as you say, read the whole of this thread, you will see that my early comments were very civil. Your answers have been moe and more evasive and my responses have been more and more exasperated. You have taken offense.
None of this would have happened if you had given straight answers.
The reason for your non existent and vague answers can either be because you want to keep your knowledge secret or because you have nothing concrete to say.
I have called your bluff, in a very polite way, and you have flown off the handle. I can only conclude that you cannot give a proper answer.
I should not have to ask "pretty please" for a Scientific explanation. If you had an answer , you should be desperate to give the world a visible response to a reasonable challenge.
Tell you what- pretend that someone other than I made that challenge. Answer them without an emotional outburst- just some honest Science. Prove to the World that the King has clothes on.
 

Offline witsend

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 418
    • View Profile
    • Magnetic field model that enables overunity of electric systems
a circuit that produces overunity results.
« Reply #340 on: 19/06/2009 10:11:35 »
If there are any readers who are interested in this effect and would like to understand my model - I am attempting to explain it in the thread 'The universe as a 10 dimensional binary system'.  My model actually requires an over unity result on a flyback circuit.  And from what I see in other forums it appears to be a phenomenon that is becoming ever more apparent.

The object of this thread was to afford interested parties an opportunity to evaluate and replicate a circuit that gives unequivocal results of overunity.  It may, however be due to some incorrect measurement or incorrect analysis of those measurements.  But we have been entirely unable to find that error.  If - in replication - this can be demonstrated to be wrong then this would be welcome.  Discussion on this subject appears to generate nothing but exasperation from parties at both sides of this claim.  And discussion is entirely irrelevant as the proof can only be evaluated through measurements on the circuit itself.
 

lyner

  • Guest
a circuit that produces overunity results.
« Reply #341 on: 19/06/2009 10:19:53 »
So I'll take that as a No, then?
But, here's another question. What is your strict definition of 'over unity'?
(In your own words, if possible).
 

Offline witsend

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 418
    • View Profile
    • Magnetic field model that enables overunity of electric systems
a circuit that produces overunity results.
« Reply #342 on: 05/07/2009 11:47:04 »
Everybody who's followed this thread - you'll see reference in it to Overunity Dot Com - as the forum discussing our circuit.  In point of fact I've joined another forum called Energetic forum.  They've been studying our little circuit with some interest and there are some who have already duplicated.  Not precise - but close.  Here's the link.  You may be interested in following it.

Kindest regards,


http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/4314-cop-17-heater-rosemary-ainslie-8.html
 

Offline witsend

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 418
    • View Profile
    • Magnetic field model that enables overunity of electric systems
a circuit that produces overunity results.
« Reply #343 on: 08/10/2009 15:36:17 »
Hi everyone.  I rescued this thread from page 4.

Check out this link.  My circuit experiment has finally been replicated. Eat your heart out SophieCentaur.

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/4314-cop-17-heater-rosemary-ainslie-98.html

Oh the difference between the enquiring mind and the closed mind.

EDIT  We've also been invited to resubmit a paper on this.  What fun.  Vern.  I hope you get to read this. 
« Last Edit: 08/10/2009 15:46:06 by witsend »
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8645
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
a circuit that produces overunity results.
« Reply #344 on: 08/10/2009 18:46:10 »
Do you remember the first reply you got.
It was from me and it said "The final test is to remove the battery and have the system run itself.
Until you have done that you have not shown that you have an "over unity" system."

I'm still waiting.
 

Offline witsend

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 418
    • View Profile
    • Magnetic field model that enables overunity of electric systems
a circuit that produces overunity results.
« Reply #345 on: 08/10/2009 19:19:19 »
Hi Bored chemist.  I also am not sure that we've got OU.  But we definitely have a really high co-efficiency of performance.  And that's also useable.  Also it defies classical prediction so may be of some intest.

But my object here isn't to gloat.  Truth is that without the talents of the experimenter - FuzzyTomCat - I would also be doubting that original claim.  It was a fraught few months.  But I'm sure that even the likes of you would not deny the potential value of this. Add to that the fact that it's open source - unpatentable and relatively easily applied - then I think it may indeed be a really good thing.   
 

Offline witsend

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 418
    • View Profile
    • Magnetic field model that enables overunity of electric systems
a circuit that produces overunity results.
« Reply #346 on: 02/12/2009 10:21:26 »
 

Offline witsend

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 418
    • View Profile
    • Magnetic field model that enables overunity of electric systems
a circuit that produces overunity results.
« Reply #347 on: 09/12/2009 06:10:08 »
I've copied this from a new thread I started - WHEN SCIENCE LOSES ITS AUTHITY  Just so badly need to reference this because I'm more than a little angered - in retrospect - at the reception of this thread.  It's what I think of mainstream scientists and I sincerely believe it needs saying.  So.  Vern, Rosie, Bored Chemist - what kind of an example do you guys give to the reception of new ideas? 

Guys - not sure what the readership will be to this thread.  But I just want to detail a few things.  I had a demo that developed anomalous heat signatures on a resistive load.  Crashed through the unity barrier and exprimentally evident.  Couldn't get a single academic to attend a demonstration of the circuit.  So I took it to industry.  5 public companies accredited the results.  One of the 5 offered our local university a bursary award to take the study further.  Offer was declined and the claim to have exceeded unity - continued to be ignored by our learned and revered.  MTN Sciencentre asked for the demo to show it to an international group of scientists at a conference.  Not one person from the conference attended that 5 day demo.  Tried to get it published in a reviewed magazine.  Could only get it into a technical journal.  Tried again 6 years later and was rejected without review by IET.  Accepted for review at the IEEE but rejected by reviewers on consensus with the added comment that it may not be represented.

I posted on the naked science forum and was hounded by several contributors who went to some trouble to describe my delusions.  I was invited and joined a second forum whose contributors tried to replicate the experiment.  Couple were successful.  We went to the trouble to write a paper and I posted a link on the previous thread in this forum to advise the thread contributors.  Not one person has commented on the submitted paper, the evidence of the full replicated experiment, the significance of the result, nor the possible outcome of the submission.  This, notwithstanding the extraordinary outcry that any such claim could ever be taken seriously or even be half way correct.

So here we have a forum and a thread, apparently designated to 'new theories' where - having posted a new theory I'm hounded out of the house, and when the results or replication are positive - not one comment for or against that open source replication effort.  Extraordinary.  It speaks to the kind of contributor here who is only, apparently, inclined to victimise any contributor who dare, in good faith, present a seminally new idea.  Not good, guys.  Not good at all.  Plenty to say before replication.  Now nothing?  Is it only required that initiating contributors acknowledge that they were wrong?  Are the attackers
appropriate in ignoring the evidence?  And why is no-one that interested.  These tests turn classical physics on its head?  Why this extraordinary lack of interest?  I'm intrigued.  It seems that 'new ideas' thread is a misnomer - designed to subject the unsuspecting to a full on attack from mainstream bigots who reflect academic bigotry with the added flair for discouraging original thought.    ??? ::)
« Last Edit: 09/12/2009 06:12:40 by witsend »
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8645
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
a circuit that produces overunity results.
« Reply #348 on: 09/12/2009 19:38:59 »
OK, I can't be bothered to look through all that. It's not very clearly written
However I note that you make reference to the "true RMS" reading Fluke 87 meter.
It's only specified as true RMS for crest factors up to 6 and I think, from looking at the waveforms in the screenshots, that you are exceding that by a considerable margin.
Please ask the people who did the work to confirm that the equipment was suitable for the measurements; in particular please calculate the crest factors (at least roughly) for the quantities measured with that meter.
 

Offline witsend

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 418
    • View Profile
    • Magnetic field model that enables overunity of electric systems
a circuit that produces overunity results.
« Reply #349 on: 10/12/2009 00:05:40 »
OK, I can't be bothered to look through all that. It's not very clearly written
However I note that you make reference to the "true RMS" reading Fluke 87 meter.
It's only specified as true RMS for crest factors up to 6 and I think, from looking at the waveforms in the screenshots, that you are exceding that by a considerable margin.
Please ask the people who did the work to confirm that the equipment was suitable for the measurements; in particular please calculate the crest factors (at least roughly) for the quantities measured with that meter.


Golly Bored chemist.  I have no idea what you're talking about?  What is not clearly written? If you're referring to the paper KINDLY ADVISE WHERE IT IS NOT CLEAR?  NOWHERE do we calculate crest factors with a multimeter.  We use the data dumps from a Tektronix 3054C Oscilloscope - sample range of 10 000 per screen shot.  What are you reading?  Clearly it's not the paper that you access through that link.  The only thing we used the Fluke for was to measure the battery voltage - to get an independent reading.  What is wrong with you?
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

a circuit that produces overunity results.
« Reply #349 on: 10/12/2009 00:05:40 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums