Language: 
To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
  the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.

GDPR and DSGVO law

Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding

User Menu

Google Search

Custom Search

Author Topic: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011  (Read 669344 times)

Offline fuzzytomcat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 676
    • Open Source Research and Development
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1365 on: May 23, 2011, 09:08:03 AM »
ahhh, how fickle the winds of "open source" contributors are...

a blast from the past...

quote taken from "the strange case of the rosemary ainslie circuit by steve windisch". full text can be found here: http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/2009/12/24/the-strange-case-of-the-rosemary-ainslie-circuit-by-steve-windisch/
Quote
"The gifted and skilled Open Source Researcher, Internet name “Fuzzytomcat” (Glen Lettenmaier), one of the first to Replicate the Ainslie Circuit successfully in 2009, has built several configurations of the special inductors/resistors for test… And his fine work in building, tuning, measuring, documenting, and analyzing test results… Extremely well recorded and presented using the Tektronix Digital Phosper Oscilloscope stored data, still photos, and “You Tube” videos… Conclusivly prove using accepted industry-standard methods that this circuit has definite anamalous qualities in energy efficiency, and that the Rosemary Ainslie Circuit and effect deserves very close scrutiny from our scientific mainstream community."


(emphasis added by me)

the interesting thing is... not so long ago, these "players" were lauding this circuit and placing heaps of praise upon rosemary (and themselves of course ;) ) and talking about success and "several replications"... but now, what are they doing? yes, a strange case indeed.

perhaps steve (jibbguy), glen (fuzzytomcat) or aaron murakami could clarify for us which case they have stated (since they now have made several different OPPOSING AND CONFLICTING STATEMENTS) is the correct one, and perhaps give the rest of the readers here an explanation or reason for the flip-flop...

It's on record all over the place if one was to look ..... also check the published dates about five (5) months apart

http://www.energeticforum.com/93746-post74.html    ( 05-02-2010, 09:23 AM )

Quote -
________________________________________________________________________________

Hey Harvey,

I'm sorry it took so long to do a detailed overview of the "LIVE" broadcast I did in the "Open Source Research and Development" channel on the January 9, 2010 5 Hour non stop video recording.

This video as you are aware is one of the best ever recorded representation of the preferred mode of operation but only in a non stop 5 Hour video. I'm sure that many members and guests don't realize the difficulty in capturing this effect for the purpose of recording the data properly and if given the time looking at the recorded video everyone can see the problems that we face in getting accurate data.

The constant 24 volt battery bank voltage fluctuations going up and down the Mosfet "drain" spike oscillating from 500 to 900 volts, battery voltage down the Mosfet spikes, battery voltage up the Mosfet voltage to normal operating range, back and forth over and over.

I have tried to get as close to this mode of operation in Test #13 which was used in the IEEE submittal Open Source Evaluation of Power Transients Generated to Improve Performance Coefficient of Resistive Heating Systems the team including yourself did, and in Test #22 but never being able to record the data scientifically correct because of the circuits complex oscillating waveforms. I don't think everyone, members and guests understands that the Test #13 was done with a Tektronix TDS 3054C which has a maximum resolution of 10K of data spread over a 10 x 10 grid or divisions so each one has 1k of data samples separately for each of the 4 channels. The data collected in Test #22 was with a Tektronix DPO 3054 which has a maximum resolution of 5M of data, but I used the 100K which is spread over the same 10 x 10 grid or divisions so each one has 10k of data samples separately for each of the 4 channels ..... ten ( 10 ) times the data of the TDS 3054C used in Test #13.

The problem being we need to find a method of capturing the data continuously in real time, there's nothing wrong with Tektronix TDS 3054C or the DPO 3054 these are the finest instruments I've ever used and are extremely accurate, but if you push the acquire button at the wrong time you can appear to get conflicting or skewed data, not the case .... were you before the spike, during the spike or after the spike when the data was collected. I had a allotted dedicated set time to record the data, It was the time frame I used with the 6 minutes or as fast as the data could be physically collected with the finest equipment I had at my disposal.

I am in total agreement with you that something "good" is happening in the Mosfet Heating Circuit and can be plainly seen in the recorded videos, we just need to somehow get a streaming real time data recording. Maybe by somehow obtaining a Real-Time Spectrum Analyzers from Tektronix or some other method to verify the data findings as you suggested, the equipment I previously used as good as it is, just isn't enough to totally capture what is occurring during the preferred mode of operation.

Best Regards,
Glen
________________________________________________________________________________



My testing was on a MODIFIED replication ... http://www.energeticforum.com/84279-post1.html "NOT" the original circuit operating at a higher frequency with a made custom inductor.


Fuzzy

Offline WilbyInebriated

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3141
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1366 on: May 23, 2011, 09:31:36 AM »
I am in total agreement with you that something "good" is happening in the Mosfet Heating Circuit and can be plainly seen in the recorded videos, we just need to somehow get a streaming real time data recording. Maybe by somehow obtaining a Real-Time Spectrum Analyzers from Tektronix or some other method to verify the data findings as you suggested, the equipment I previously used as good as it is, just isn't enough to totally capture what is occurring during the preferred mode of operation.

Best Regards,
Glen
________________________________________________________________________________



My testing was on a MODIFIED replication ... http://www.energeticforum.com/84279-post1.html "NOT" the original circuit operating at a higher frequency with a made custom inductor.


Fuzzy
care to explain what you meant by "good"?

oh!! my!!  modified!! you used a custom wound resistor? whoop de doo... did you change the fundamental design of the circuit? no. you didn't...  ::)

more from the "strange case":
Quote
“COP” efficiencies greater than “4″ have already been recorded in the recent 2009 replications; and can be possibly much higher as the voltage pulse levels seen in the waveforms often go beyond the limits for measurement of the present equipment.
(again, emphasis added by myself)

stranger yet, i noticed nothing in that article about "modified" circuits, just "replications"... so who is not being truthful here? you or steve?

edit: and even stranger yet, you have now claimed there is no "technology" and that rosemary has 'nothing'. i can find those posts and rub your face in them if you wish. ;)

Offline fuzzytomcat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 676
    • Open Source Research and Development
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1367 on: May 23, 2011, 09:48:38 AM »
care to explain what you meant by "good"?

oh!! my!!  modified!! you used a custom wound resistor? whoop de doo... did you change the fundamental design of the circuit? no. you didn't...  ::)

more from the "strange case":(again, emphasis added by myself)

stranger yet, i noticed nothing in that article about "modified" circuits, just "replications"... so who is not being truthful here? you or steve?

edit: and even stranger yet, you have now claimed there is no "technology" and that rosemary has 'nothing'. i can find those posts and rub your face in them if you wish. ;)

GOOD .... watch the complete five (5) Hour non stop video recording as posted ....
http://www.livestream.com/opensourceresearchanddevelopment/video?clipId=pla_6d255c76-9e9a-42ae-a565-fbc698e0b6df

Rosemary's COP efficiency claims are hers, not mine never were ..... so ask her about the

COP> 17 ???

COP> INFINITY  ???

The op-ed article was written by Steve Windish ..... ask him not me.

Offline WilbyInebriated

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3141
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1368 on: May 23, 2011, 09:56:00 AM »
GOOD .... watch the complete five (5) Hour non stop video recording as posted ....
http://www.livestream.com/opensourceresearchanddevelopment/video?clipId=pla_6d255c76-9e9a-42ae-a565-fbc698e0b6df

Rosemary's COP efficiency claims are hers, not mine never were ..... so ask her about the

COP> 17 ???

COP> INFINITY  ???

The op-ed article was written by Steve Windish ..... ask him not me.
LOL you're funny glen. i've watched before... when it was first posted, and i am quite aware of what you, aaron, peter, steve, ash, et all were saying back then... something quite different than you are saying now... ::)

more from the "strange case"
Quote
The gifted and skilled Open Source Researcher, Internet name “Fuzzytomcat” (Glen Lettenmaier), one of the first to Replicate the Ainslie Circuit successfully in 2009, has built several configurations of the special inductors/resistors for test…
(again, emphasis added by me)

Quote
And that there are many possibilities for practical uses and parallel applications yet unexamined. “COP” efficiencies greater than “4″ have already been recorded in the recent 2009 replications;
(again, emphasis added by me)
this 2009 "replication" is referring to glen... ::)

funny how you have no problems with steve making cop>1 claims for your REPLICATION... ::)

Offline fuzzytomcat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 676
    • Open Source Research and Development
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1369 on: May 23, 2011, 10:11:45 AM »
LOL you're funny glen. i've watched before... when it was first posted, and i am quite aware of what you, aaron, peter, steve, ash, et all were saying back then... something quite different than you are saying now... ::)

more from the "strange case"(again, emphasis added by me)
(again, emphasis added by me)
this 2009 "replication" is referring to glen... ::)

funny how you have no problems with steve making cop>1 claims for your REPLICATION... ::)

Please supply any FORUM posting link or number from ....

Aaron
Peter
Steve
Ash
Harvey
Myself
or anyone "World Wide"

..... of a verified replication on the Rosemary Ainslie finding or claimed efficiency of a COP> 17 device with all experimentation done in any scientific method reproducing the same or exact finding or claimed results by Rosemary that could be reproduced by anyone over and over again.


 ::)

Offline WilbyInebriated

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3141
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1370 on: May 23, 2011, 10:20:23 AM »
Please supply any FORUM posting link or number from ....

Aaron
Peter
Steve
Ash
Harvey
Myself
or anyone "World Wide"

..... of a verified replication on the Rosemary Ainslie finding or claimed efficiency of a COP> 17 device with all experimentation done in any scientific method reproducing the same or exact finding or claimed results by Rosemary that could be reproduced by anyone over and over again.


 ::)
denied. logical fallacy: red herring. but i''l be your huckleberry... ;) please post the quote of where i said any of the people you listed claimed efficiency of COP> 17...

don't attempt to misrepresent what i have said glen... ::)

i have posted quotes of where it has been claimed that your 2009 replication of the ainslie circuit is cop>4. i have asked you to reconcile these statements by one of the "Members of the 2009 Open Source Rosemary Ainslie Circuit Project Team" (a team you were part of), namely steve windisch, with your recent statements that there is "no technology" and rosemary has 'nothing'. why do you keep dancing around this simple request with logical fallacies?


edit: more from the "strange case":
Quote
The Effect, and the Significance

When asked to reflect on this endeavor and experience of replicating and verifying the Rosemary Ainslie Circuit, Open Source Researcher and key project member Glen Lettenmaier, who has worked countless hours over the last several months building, testing, and recording his positive results with the Circuit (often through a barrage of unfounded criticism from the skeptics and naysayers), summed it up this way:

“What brings most to mind on this project are two things, the first being a movie called ‘The Medicine Man’ where an individual’s best efforts were totally lost due to varying circumstances and had to be re-found, and the second was the skepticism and refusal from so many, all seemingly knowledgeable but going by their education and not willing to do any experiments on their own…
(again, emphasis added by myself)

Offline fuzzytomcat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 676
    • Open Source Research and Development
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1371 on: May 23, 2011, 10:48:08 AM »
denied. logical fallacy: red herring. but i''l be your huckleberry... ;) please post the quote of where i said any of the people you listed claimed efficiency of COP> 17...

don't attempt to misrepresent what i have said glen... ::)

i have posted quotes of where it has been claimed that your 2009 replication of the ainslie circuit is cop>4.

Yes, and I posted this above all your postings on page 91 here in this thread .....

http://www.energeticforum.com/93746-post74.html   ( 05-02-2010, 09:23 AM )

I said ..... on 05-02-2010 the following ....... read it very closely again .....

Quote -
_________________________________________________________________

Hey Harvey,

I'm sorry it took so long to do a detailed overview of the "LIVE" broadcast I did in the "Open Source Research and Development" channel on the January 9, 2010 5 Hour non stop video recording.

This video as you are aware is one of the best ever recorded representation of the preferred mode of operation but only in a non stop 5 Hour video. I'm sure that many members and guests don't realize the difficulty in capturing this effect for the purpose of recording the data properly and if given the time looking at the recorded video everyone can see the problems that we face in getting accurate data.

The constant 24 volt battery bank voltage fluctuations going up and down the Mosfet "drain" spike oscillating from 500 to 900 volts, battery voltage down the Mosfet spikes, battery voltage up the Mosfet voltage to normal operating range, back and forth over and over.

I have tried to get as close to this mode of operation in Test #13 which was used in the IEEE submittal Open Source Evaluation of Power Transients Generated to Improve Performance Coefficient of Resistive Heating Systems the team including yourself did, and in Test #22 but never being able to record the data scientifically correct because of the circuits complex oscillating waveforms. I don't think everyone, members and guests understands that the Test #13 was done with a Tektronix TDS 3054C which has a maximum resolution of 10K of data spread over a 10 x 10 grid or divisions so each one has 1k of data samples separately for each of the 4 channels. The data collected in Test #22 was with a Tektronix DPO 3054 which has a maximum resolution of 5M of data, but I used the 100K which is spread over the same 10 x 10 grid or divisions so each one has 10k of data samples separately for each of the 4 channels ..... ten ( 10 ) times the data of the TDS 3054C used in Test #13.

The problem being we need to find a method of capturing the data continuously in real time, there's nothing wrong with Tektronix TDS 3054C or the DPO 3054 these are the finest instruments I've ever used and are extremely accurate, but if you push the acquire button at the wrong time you can appear to get conflicting or skewed data, not the case .... were you before the spike, during the spike or after the spike when the data was collected. I had a allotted dedicated set time to record the data, It was the time frame I used with the 6 minutes or as fast as the data could be physically collected with the finest equipment I had at my disposal.

I am in total agreement with you that something "good" is happening in the Mosfet Heating Circuit and can be plainly seen in the recorded videos, we just need to somehow get a streaming real time data recording. Maybe by somehow obtaining a Real-Time Spectrum Analyzers from Tektronix or some other method to verify the data findings as you suggested, the equipment I previously used as good as it is, just isn't enough to totally capture what is occurring during the preferred mode of operation.

Best Regards,
Glen
_________________________________________________________________


After five (5) more months of testing and evaluation including nine (9) more verified documented tests on "MY" experimental device ..... the above is my opinion and there is "NO" efficiency of any COP is mentioned or claimed other than the word "GOOD".

Full circle again .... there was no COP> 17 found.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_%28scientific_method%29   ( Replication Scientific Method )
Quote
Reproducibility is one of the main principles of the scientific method, and refers to the ability of a test or experiment to be accurately reproduced, or replicated, by someone else working independently.

The results of an experiment performed by a particular researcher or group of researchers are generally evaluated by other independent researchers who repeat the same experiment themselves, based on the original experimental description (see independent review). Then they see if their experiment gives similar results to those reported by the original group.

 ::)

Offline WilbyInebriated

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3141
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1372 on: May 23, 2011, 11:14:04 AM »
full circle again...
Quote
And that there are many possibilities for practical uses and parallel applications yet unexamined. “COP” efficiencies greater than “4″ have already been recorded in the recent 2009 replications;

::)

are you saying this 2009 replication was not you?

Offline WilbyInebriated

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3141
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1373 on: May 23, 2011, 11:20:38 AM »
My testing was on a MODIFIED replication ... http://www.energeticforum.com/84279-post1.html "NOT" the original circuit operating at a higher frequency with a made custom inductor.


Fuzzy

according to glen his was a MODIFIED replication... and yet he continues to post this wiki quote:

Quote
Reproducibility is one of the main principles of the scientific method, and refers to the ability of a test or experiment to be accurately reproduced, or replicated, by someone else working independently.

The results of an experiment performed by a particular researcher or group of researchers are generally evaluated by other independent researchers who repeat the same experiment themselves, based on the original experimental description (see independent review). Then they see if their experiment gives similar results to those reported by the original group.

this 'begs the obvious question'... is his a "replication" or not? it would appear from the definition that glen keeps posting, that his is not a replication. it's all very confusing given his (and others from "the team") conflicting reports, claims and statements.

Offline fuzzytomcat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 676
    • Open Source Research and Development
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1374 on: May 23, 2011, 11:51:51 AM »
full circle again...
::)
Quote
And that there are many possibilities for practical uses and parallel applications yet unexamined. “COP” efficiencies greater than “4″ have already been recorded in the recent 2009 replications;
are you saying this 2009 replication was not you?

The "MODIFIED" replication was because from all experimentalist working on the project  it was found the published electronic circuit in the Quantum 2002 article did not work, and using the new "MODIFIED" circuit in TEST #13 it had the problems months later that was found as quoted in my posting at Energetic Forum .... again


http://www.energeticforum.com/93746-post74.html   ( 05-02-2010, 09:23 AM )

Quote

I have tried to get as close to this mode of operation in Test #13 which was used in the IEEE submittal Open Source Evaluation of Power Transients Generated to Improve Performance Coefficient of Resistive Heating Systems the team including yourself did, and in Test #22 but never being able to record the data scientifically correct because of the circuits complex oscillating waveforms. I don't think everyone, members and guests understands that the Test #13 was done with a Tektronix TDS 3054C which has a maximum resolution of 10K of data spread over a 10 x 10 grid or divisions so each one has 1k of data samples separately for each of the 4 channels. The data collected in Test #22 was with a Tektronix DPO 3054 which has a maximum resolution of 5M of data, but I used the 100K which is spread over the same 10 x 10 grid or divisions so each one has 10k of data samples separately for each of the 4 channels ..... ten ( 10 ) times the data of the TDS 3054C used in Test #13.


For the RECORD -


I failed with "NO" scientific method replication of Rosemary Ainslie's COP> 17 device verifying her finding and claim  ... I found "NO"  COP> 17 in my scientific method of testing and evaluation which if it was found would be quite obvious.

So why all the harassment and talking in circles .... never mind I already know why.

 ::)

Offline WilbyInebriated

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3141
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1375 on: May 23, 2011, 12:03:35 PM »
full circle again... ::)

why is there a claim of cop>4 from the team you were a part of? a claim that YOUR replication was cop>4...


i am not harassing you. i am trying to get to the bottom of the contradictions posited by yourself and other members of your "team"... ::)

Offline fuzzytomcat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 676
    • Open Source Research and Development
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1376 on: May 23, 2011, 12:30:53 PM »
full circle again... ::)

why is there a claim of cop>4 from the team you were a part of? a claim that YOUR replication was cop>4...


i am not harassing you. i am trying to get to the bottom of the contradictions posited by yourself and other members of your "team"... ::)

There was oscilloscope measurement errors happening during the circuit waveform spikes any data dump timing used still had skewed results because of the inconsistent oscillations ... a better method of recording the results happening was needed in my opinion to verify any results especially by someone else.

As of today no one has reproduced "MY" actual working results that I know of, unless you or some one else in the Open Source Community is withholding a working Rosemary Ainslie COP> 17 device replication.

I was not the author or involve in the context of the op-ed article other than a short statement and some images of the inductors used, what others say or said ask them not me .... what was .... changed to what is .... in my eight months of recorded results, simple.

Fuzzy

Offline WilbyInebriated

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3141
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1377 on: May 23, 2011, 12:46:45 PM »
There was oscilloscope measurement errors happening during the circuit waveform spikes any data dump timing used still had skewed results because of the inconsistent oscillations ... a better method of recording the results happening was needed in my opinion to verify any results especially by someone else.

As of today no one has reproduced "MY" actual working results that I know of, unless you or some one else in the Open Source Community is withholding a working Rosemary Ainslie COP> 17 device replication.

I was not the author or involve in the context of the op-ed article other than a short statement and some images of the inductors used, what others say or said ask them not me .... what was .... changed to what is .... in my eight months of recorded results, simple.

Fuzzy
ok so let me make sure i understand you correctly glen. the cop>4 claim was due to measurement errors on your part?


it's funny to me that:
you obsess about rosemary claiming a cop>17, but steve's claim of a cop>4 from your replication does not bother you at all... ::)

you obsess about rosemary removing or amending her claims, yet claims of cop>4 from your replication remain online, not amended, for all to read... ::)

you claim "I am in total agreement with you that something "good" is happening in the Mosfet Heating Circuit and can be plainly seen in the recorded videos." and then when asked to elucidate on your meaning of "good" you say good means good... ::) let me try again counselor, since you want to play word games... does good mean cop<1? or cop>1?

things are becoming clearer.


Offline fuzzytomcat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 676
    • Open Source Research and Development
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1378 on: May 23, 2011, 01:29:47 PM »
ok so let me make sure i understand you correctly glen. the cop>4 claim was due to measurement errors on your part?


it's funny to me that:
you obsess about rosemary claiming a cop>17, but steve's claim of a cop>4 from your replication does not bother you at all... ::)

you obsess about rosemary removing or amending her claims, yet claims of cop>4 from your replication remain online, not amended, for all to read... ::)

you claim "I am in total agreement with you that something "good" is happening in the Mosfet Heating Circuit and can be plainly seen in the recorded videos." and then when asked to elucidate on your meaning of "good" you say good means good... ::) let me try again counselor, since you want to play word games... does good mean cop<1? or cop>1?

things are becoming clearer.

There was measurement errors because of what the circuit was doing, if you would just take a few minutes and look at the "LIVE" recording on January 9, 2010
http://www.livestream.com/opensourceresearchanddevelopment/video?clipId=pla_6d255c76-9e9a-42ae-a565-fbc698e0b6df

In the first hour you can plainly see what happens it's totally explained in this FORUM link -
http://www.energeticforum.com/93710-post70.html

And if you want to see the last 3 hours and 14 minutes or end of the test ( 15 + start to finish continuous hours ) see -
http://livestre.am/f8x

This is when the circuit waveform basically dies from "LOSS OF VOLTAGE"

And if you really want to get into the nity-gritty in the op-ed article there's also many other issues stated by others that are big problems ... I have no control over any of them that's their problem not mine for fixing any errors.

Good night I'm done it's 4:30 am here ....

Fuzzy

Offline WilbyInebriated

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3141
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #1379 on: May 23, 2011, 01:36:54 PM »
There was measurement errors because of what the circuit was doing, if you would just take a few minutes and look at the "LIVE" recording on January 9, 2010
alright then. according to you, there were measurement errors... thus the actual COP could not be attained ( i'm still left wondering how your team came to the cop>4 conclusion then... ::) ) because, according to you, the spikes were 'messing with you' and any data dump timing used still had skewed results because of the inconsistent oscillations. again, i'm left wondering how your team came to the cop>4 conclusion that was posted...