4
Dear Reader,
Dear Reader,
This is my last letter to Hartiberlin. Hopefully it's self explanatory.
Kindest regards,
RosemaryDear Harti,
I need to thank you for taking up our cause at all. Even if you did not support it.
I have, nonetheless, some good news. We have now got that standard immersion heater switching without resonance - with a zero output of energy from the battery and some significant heat dissipated from the resistor. In effect, we have the same CoP>17 but this time with no evident discharge of energy from the batteries and without any noise at all. This all measured with our LeCroy.
If you wish it I'll send you the data and the waveforms - but I would prefer it that you do NOT publish anything about this. I will keep you posted on the progress. We still have many more frequencies to test. But our thinking is that as these results are from a reputable campus then there is a possibility that we will be able to motivate our transistor manufacturers to design a more robust MOSFET. From what we're measuring - there is absolutely nothing more required to get this onto an average household application - wherever it is that heat is required.
I think that the evidence is that Glen and Harvey are going to try and diminish this technology and there is clearly NO POINT in making the information available on a forum as public as your own. Certainly not yet. Indeed - I see no point in making the information available on any forum at all. But if I find one that is relatively low key - then it may be required to use that to keep due record of the progress and the results. I dare not make full disclosure of the techniques. This will be stolen under some pretext - and right now the research is the result of the hard work of the students assigned to this.
I have been angered by your vacillations regarding your support of me. This technology is way more important than you have seemed to realise and you actually put it at some considerable risk when you allowed Glen et al to flame that thread. There was a very big readership - certainly that's something that you yourself can confirm - and the interest was MORE in the field of the thesis than the tests themselves. You and everyone still do not realise it - but the effectiveness of that switching circuit is certainly NOT debated outside your forums. That it's still debated on your forums is because of the efficiency of Glen and Harvey - and possibly less so, but also by TK. They have, indeed, managed to hold this study back.
But it's water under the bridge. I'm still inclined to believe that you do, indeed, support this systematic disclosure of over unity results. I am entirely satisfied that you consider our own efforts here to be rather negligible. But I think the unfolding research will eventually put paid to that opinion. And, as I say, since we're on the same side here - I think it would be better that I bury my anger and try and advance what's needed.
Meanwhile, rest assured that there is much being progressed. The only thing between this and the actual household applications, as we see it - is that really robust MOSFET.
I have now published your intention to delete those threads associated with my work - on my blog. This simply to keep due record of the need for us to have back up information stored elsewhere. I will never again allow this technology to be put in the hands of a forum owner who can potentially destroy it all at the touch of a button. That was, indeed, a wake up call. I had to move heaven and earth to get our thread salvaged and put on the next best thing to 'sticky' at EF.Com. And - properly - that's where this technology belongs on your own forum. But be that as it may. I still feel that if I can convince you to look into this technology yourself - you will, one day, perhaps see what it is that we're trying to do. It is so much more than just getting heat out of a resistor.
Regards,
Rosemary
I need to thank you for taking up our cause at all. Even if you did not support it.
I have, nonetheless, some good news. We have now got that standard immersion heater switching without resonance - with a zero output of energy from the battery and some significant heat dissipated from the resistor. In effect, we have the same CoP>17 but this time with no evident discharge of energy from the batteries and without any noise at all. This all measured with our LeCroy.
If you wish it I'll send you the data and the waveforms - but I would prefer it that you do NOT publish anything about this. I will keep you posted on the progress. We still have many more frequencies to test. But our thinking is that as these results are from a reputable campus then there is a possibility that we will be able to motivate our transistor manufacturers to design a more robust MOSFET. From what we're measuring - there is absolutely nothing more required to get this onto an average household application - wherever it is that heat is required.
I think that the evidence is that Glen and Harvey are going to try and diminish this technology and there is clearly NO POINT in making the information available on a forum as public as your own. Certainly not yet. Indeed - I see no point in making the information available on any forum at all. But if I find one that is relatively low key - then it may be required to use that to keep due record of the progress and the results. I dare not make full disclosure of the techniques. This will be stolen under some pretext - and right now the research is the result of the hard work of the students assigned to this.
I have been angered by your vacillations regarding your support of me. This technology is way more important than you have seemed to realise and you actually put it at some considerable risk when you allowed Glen et al to flame that thread. There was a very big readership - certainly that's something that you yourself can confirm - and the interest was MORE in the field of the thesis than the tests themselves. You and everyone still do not realise it - but the effectiveness of that switching circuit is certainly NOT debated outside your forums. That it's still debated on your forums is because of the efficiency of Glen and Harvey - and possibly less so, but also by TK. They have, indeed, managed to hold this study back.
But it's water under the bridge. I'm still inclined to believe that you do, indeed, support this systematic disclosure of over unity results. I am entirely satisfied that you consider our own efforts here to be rather negligible. But I think the unfolding research will eventually put paid to that opinion. And, as I say, since we're on the same side here - I think it would be better that I bury my anger and try and advance what's needed.
Meanwhile, rest assured that there is much being progressed. The only thing between this and the actual household applications, as we see it - is that really robust MOSFET.
I have now published your intention to delete those threads associated with my work - on my blog. This simply to keep due record of the need for us to have back up information stored elsewhere. I will never again allow this technology to be put in the hands of a forum owner who can potentially destroy it all at the touch of a button. That was, indeed, a wake up call. I had to move heaven and earth to get our thread salvaged and put on the next best thing to 'sticky' at EF.Com. And - properly - that's where this technology belongs on your own forum. But be that as it may. I still feel that if I can convince you to look into this technology yourself - you will, one day, perhaps see what it is that we're trying to do. It is so much more than just getting heat out of a resistor.
Regards,
Rosemary
No comments:
Post a Comment