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 679904 times)

Offline utilitarian

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 816
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #645 on: April 18, 2011, 01:05:47 AM »
My dear Poynty Point. 

Right now I don't even have the time to read this.  But from a quick scan - I see you're still on about criteria for proof.  Here's the thing.  I'll do whatever it is that is required PROVIDED ONLY THAT THIS IS FIRST ENDORSED BY AT LEAST 5 EXPERTS AS BEING SUFFICIENT PROOF OF THE CLAIM.  AND THEN THAT CLAIM MUST THEN BE SUFFICIENT TO BE ENDORSED BY THE ENTIRE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY.  Otherwise, with respect - you're wasting my time.  I have NO interest in satisfying your own arbitrary criteria.  They're irrelevant and designed to confuse the facts with extraneous parameters that have NOTHING to do with the measurements.

Rosemary

Here is one thing you may or may not be aware of.  The Randi Foundation has a standing offer of $1 Million to anyone able to demonstrate a paranormal claim.  The definition of paranormal has been expanded to include a perpetual motion device, which is currently considered impossible under traditional science.

Here is a link:  http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/1m-challenge.html

So if you can make a self-runner, you can score an easy $1 Million.  JREF does now require a media presence, so you would need to show a news story about yourself, but once you make your self-runner, it should be no trouble to get at least some local outlet to do a story.

Offline poynt99

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 3582
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #646 on: April 18, 2011, 01:24:09 AM »
My dear Poynty Point. 

I'll do whatever it is that is required PROVIDED ONLY THAT THIS IS FIRST ENDORSED BY AT LEAST 5 EXPERTS AS BEING SUFFICIENT PROOF OF THE CLAIM.  AND THEN THAT CLAIM MUST THEN BE SUFFICIENT TO BE ENDORSED BY THE ENTIRE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY.
Rosemary

You may or may not own and drive a petrol car, but I am going to assume you have some basic knowledge about them. With reference to the above:

Would you require the endorsement of 5 auto mechanics to assure you that a perfectly functional car with it's engine running will indeed stop running when the car uses up all of it's petrol?  ???

Or closer to the point: would you require the endorsement of 5 auto mechanics to assure you that as the engine runs and the fuel gauge indicates a decrease in fuel quantity over time, that the gauge is indeed working properly, and the engine is using up petrol?  ???

.99
« Last Edit: April 18, 2011, 04:37:41 AM by poynt99 »

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #647 on: April 18, 2011, 07:03:36 AM »
You may or may not own and drive a petrol car, but I am going to assume you have some basic knowledge about them. With reference to the above:

Would you require the endorsement of 5 auto mechanics to assure you that a perfectly functional car with it's engine running will indeed stop running when the car uses up all of it's petrol?  ???

Or closer to the point: would you require the endorsement of 5 auto mechanics to assure you that as the engine runs and the fuel gauge indicates a decrease in fuel quantity over time, that the gauge is indeed working properly, and the engine is using up petrol?  ???

.99

No Poynty.  Your grasp of the point is rather tenuous - as ever.  I'm commenting on the fact that there is no consumption of petrol.  On the contrary.  Every time I run that car the tank fills up again.   Not only that but the petrol gauge confirms this.  I've already spoken to the guys who made that gauge and they've assured me that there's a warranty on it's accuracy.   And I've also told and shown some really interested people about this on this thread and all over the place.  But I've also, unwittingly, shown a mere handful of really nasty - ill qualified - small minded mechanics.  This latter group - about a dozen or so disciples of yours in the art of disinformation and misinformation - earn their living from the sale of all that petrol.  If there is no need for ample and excessive consumption of this then there will be no livelihood available to them.  So they have rallied in earnest.  They are now dedicated to destroying this claim.  They're on record.  They state that I must be mad to be reading this excess on the gauge.  And when they say this they say it REALLY, loudly.  They scream the facts across two public threads and an equally public blogspot - all run concurrently.  This really noisy minority group of partially qualified and excessively partial group of mechanics make up for their minority representation - that minority quotient - through an anxious and mindless repetition of those shouts and screams to advise the world and its wife that my reading of the gauge is the result of delusions - incompetence - and general idiocy. 

Since the petrol gauge shows 'full' and since this has now been seen by a sizeable percentage of internet browsers - related as it is to those who read here and to those who followed earlier evidence of this - then I have no actual quarrel with this little group - representing - as they do - a mere handful of ill qualified mechanics.  In truth,  I would first need to be as mad as they claim to even spend time speaking to them. 

There is no question that the guage reads 'FULL'.  And there is no question that the car has been beetling about the place with a seemingly endless appetite for movement - and this has been duly seen and approved by a whole slew of mechanics - who are ALL ON RECORD.  That petrol gauge has been checked and re-checked.  The 'logic' that it applies to that reading - to the calculation of that 'sum' has been checked and rechecked.  There is no explanation for this.  Either it is a miracle - or it is erroneous - or there is some principle that has been overlooked that allows for this reading.

So.  I am modestly proposing that the best way to get this explained is to bypass those ill-qualified mechanics who are dedicated to wrecking this technology for their own nefarious purposes - and go to those real experts who are capable of evaluating this as is required.  And so open handed am I in this exercise that I have recommended that those same people - that minority handfull of ill qualfied - nasty self-serving men - the term 'men' here used in its loosest sense - find their own 'experts'.  The only criterion then - is that they are acknowledged experts and that they evaluate the evidence and not speculate on what they predict may be that evidence.  Then.  I will show them that evidence and hopefully all parties will then be satisfied.

Otherwise - I assure you - I am not about to get into my car and drive around in circles for another 5 months or more - to satisfy you or anyone else that I am that I am indeed that lunatic that I'll comply to any aribtrary requirement or request that you or yours stipulate.

Kindest regards
Rosemary

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #648 on: April 18, 2011, 07:33:20 AM »
Here is one thing you may or may not be aware of.  The Randi Foundation has a standing offer of $1 Million to anyone able to demonstrate a paranormal claim.  The definition of paranormal has been expanded to include a perpetual motion device, which is currently considered impossible under traditional science.

Here is a link:  http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/1m-challenge.html

So if you can make a self-runner, you can score an easy $1 Million.  JREF does now require a media presence, so you would need to show a news story about yourself, but once you make your self-runner, it should be no trouble to get at least some local outlet to do a story.

Utiliarian - I am not about to try and impress anyone about anything at all.  And as delectable as a million dollars may be - nor do I believe there is any sincere intention of proving anything at all.  If it's perpetual motion that he wants to see - then properly it should have been paid out by now.  There is at LEAST one working device on show that has been working perpetually for some many years now.  I just, for the life of me, can't remember the man's name.  If I do I'll append it here.

What I am anxiously trying to do - in fact what the entire team is trying to do - is to HIGHLIGHT QUESTIONS that this can get to the academic table.  That's the only barrier that needs to fall.  Once it's there then we can all rest easy.  Because they certainly have the skills and the expertise to develop this argument and this technology to where it needs to go.  What we represent is a fringe minority of dedicated researchers - who do NOT have the required academic recognition to progress this technology at all.

The sad truth is that until this gets academic recognition then it is dead in the waters.  That's the only respectable arena that will satisfy our public and will justify the research funding required to get this all fully developed.  Sad but true.  And that's why my efforts are entirely in this direction.

Kindest regards,
Rosemary




Offline utilitarian

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 816
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #649 on: April 18, 2011, 08:14:21 AM »
Utiliarian - I am not about to try and impress anyone about anything at all.  And as delectable as a million dollars may be - nor do I believe there is any sincere intention of proving anything at all.  If it's perpetual motion that he wants to see - then properly it should have been paid out by now.  There is at LEAST one working device on show that has been working perpetually for some many years now.  I just, for the life of me, can't remember the man's name.  If I do I'll append it here.

What I am anxiously trying to do - in fact what the entire team is trying to do - is to HIGHLIGHT QUESTIONS that this can get to the academic table.  That's the only barrier that needs to fall.  Once it's there then we can all rest easy.  Because they certainly have the skills and the expertise to develop this argument and this technology to where it needs to go.  What we represent is a fringe minority of dedicated researchers - who do NOT have the required academic recognition to progress this technology at all.

The sad truth is that until this gets academic recognition then it is dead in the waters.  That's the only respectable arena that will satisfy our public and will justify the research funding required to get this all fully developed.  Sad but true.  And that's why my efforts are entirely in this direction.

Kindest regards,
Rosemary

The prize is awarded only to those who apply for it and where a mutual agreement is reached as to the testing procedure, so as to remove the possibility of fraud.

Currently, there are exactly zero functioning overunity devices in the world.   Yours would be the first.

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #650 on: April 18, 2011, 08:17:26 AM »
Guys - I need to explain something here.   And you really ned to understand it.  Proper measurement of electric energy is based on vi dt.  This requires the calculation - the product - of volts and amps in real time.  The minute one takes the average of the amperage over a certain period of time multiplied by the average of the voltage over a certain period of time - then one is actually only pointing to an average.  It may very well be a fair reflection of the fact - very much as you can average the global temperature - but it tells you NOTHING about the temperature at any precise point.  IF we measured electrical energy as an average - then it could be entirely misrepresented. 

Here's an example.  You can take the sum of the voltage across the shunt over - say - 1 minute - and then multiply it by the sum of the battery voltage over that same minute - and it will give a result that is only 'close' to but not 'representative of' the actual energy delivered or dissipated.  It will certainly HIDE the benefits in phase relationships between those voltages - and it may either enhance or fudge the actual facts.  Poynty is relying on this.  He is hoping that your own lack of knowledge of detailed measurements is such that he can carry his argument.  But pick up your phones.  Talk to your academics.  They're very approachable.  They'll explain how it is that any measurment based on an average - is absolutely NOT acceptable.  What is more - our own evidence shows that there are those relationships between the voltages that are ENTIRELY hidden by an average.  I've not even touched on that side of the evidence yet.  But Poynty et al - thay know of this.  And this NEED TO AVERAGE is therefore also MUCH NEEDED.  Else they'll have no argument.

We're here dealing with a really sophisticated effort to diffuse the efficacy of these forums.  And it's actually where the real energy pollution is. 

Regards,
Rosemary

Offline WilbyInebriated

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3141
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #651 on: April 18, 2011, 08:18:31 AM »
the JREF is a biased farce... and so is randi's "challenge".

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #652 on: April 18, 2011, 08:41:03 AM »
the JREF is a biased farce... and so is randi's "challenge".

Hi Wilby.  Always nice to see you here.  There's a machine in a museum someplace - I've seen a picture of it.  It's housed in a glass case.  Do you know of it? 

Anyway - perhaps it's as well to mention Bessler's machine?  I believe that worked.  But I absolutely do NOT claim perpetual motion.  I wish I could.  I only claim absolute conservation of charge.  And that's a completely different argument.

Here's one link that I found.

http://pesn.com/2006/06/27/9500287_Bessler_gravity_documentation/

Kindest regards,
Rosie

Offline WilbyInebriated

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3141
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #653 on: April 18, 2011, 08:57:44 AM »
Hi Wilby.  Always nice to see you here.  There's a machine in a museum someplace - I've seen a picture of it.  It's housed in a glass case.  Do you know of it? 

Anyway - perhaps it's as well to mention Bessler's machine?  I believe that worked.  But I absolutely do NOT claim perpetual motion.  I wish I could.  I only claim absolute conservation of charge.  And that's a completely different argument.

Here's one link that I found.

http://pesn.com/2006/06/27/9500287_Bessler_gravity_documentation/

Kindest regards,
Rosie
hi rose. good to see you too! i believe you are thinking of the clarendon dry pile (oxford bell) ;)
http://atlasobscura.com/place/oxford-electric-bell

you see the thing with randi is that he is only prepared to "debunk" "unpopular" claims... there are plenty of extraordinary claims out there that randi shows no interest in debunking... like the big bang theory, like the general theory of relativity, etc. yet he seems to show no concern (at least not the same level of concern he applies to "paranormal" claims. as an aside, i find this deliciously amusing. after all, what could be more paranormal than "first there was nothing, then it exploded") that billions of dollars are being hoodwinked from tax payers to fund the 11+ billion LHC and that billions are being hoodwinked from students via tuition only to have teachers teach them "first there was nothing, then it exploded"... HA what a farce!

and i have to comment on humboogers "Rosemary's Baby ~ a Short Story by Way of Analogy" from yOUR.com with a little analogy of my own.

humbooger's pickle ~ a short story by way of analogy
humbooger "Take the division 64/16. Now, canceling a 6 on top and a six on the bottom, we get that 64/16 = 4/1 = 4."

rosemary "Wait a second ! You can't just cancel the six !"

humbooger "Oh, so you're telling us 64/16 is not equal to 4, are you ?"

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #654 on: April 18, 2011, 09:01:20 AM »
hi rose. good to see you too! i believe you are thinking of the clarendon dry pile (oxford bell) ;)
http://atlasobscura.com/place/oxford-electric-bell

you see the thing with randi is that he is only prepared to "debunk" "unpopular" claims... there are plenty of extraordinary claims out there that randi shows no interest in debunking... like the big bang theory, like the general theory of relativity, etc. yet he seems to show no concern (at least not the same level of concern he applies to "paranormal" claims. as an aside, i find this deliciously amusing. after all, what could be more paranormal than "first there was nothing, then it exploded") that billions of dollars are being hoodwinked from tax payers to fund the 11+ billion LHC and that billions are being hoodwinked from students via tuition only to have teachers teach them "first there was nothing, then it exploded"... HA what a farce!

and i have to comment on humboogers "Rosemary's Baby ~ a Short Story by Way of Analogy" from yOUR.com with a little analogy of my own.

humbooger's pickle ~ a short story by way of analogy
humbooger "Take the division 64/16. Now, canceling a 6 on top and a six on the bottom, we get that 64/16 = 4/1 = 4."

rosemary "Wait a second ! You can't just cancel the six !"

humbooger "Oh, so you're telling us 64/16 is not equal to 4, are you ?"

What a pleasure.  My first laugh in a long time. 
Thanks for this.

 ;D

BTW I've just seen that link.  It's not the one I'm thinking of - BUT HOW GOOD IS THAT?  Nice reminder there Wilby - EVEN PERPETUAL MOTION's in the bag. 


Offline happyfunball

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 405
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #655 on: April 18, 2011, 09:52:34 AM »
\There is at LEAST one working device on show that has been working perpetually for some many years now.  I just, for the life of me, can't remember the man's name.  If I do I'll \

Reidar Finsrud

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=us7YB7eiOeQ

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #656 on: April 18, 2011, 10:17:36 AM »
Reidar Finsrud

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=us7YB7eiOeQ

Thanks Happy.  That's the one I remembered.  But how nice to know that there's two.  So.  Someone should get hold of Randi and claim that prize for either of those two estates - OR BOTH.  And I'm reasonably satisfied that - provided this is handled by some legal experts - then I doubt that Randi would be able to refute those prizes.  Golly.  If Utilitarian or someone here actually rallies for the prize money on behalf of those estates - then I imagine they'd be able to claim a reasonable fee for all that effort from that prize money. 

And we actually need these examples in the front page of EVERY TEXT BOOK ON THE PLANET.  That way when we're subjected to all that disclaiming drivel against perpetual motion then we'll be better reminded of the quality of that drivel. 

Please note that I have more than a sneaking suspicion that our Mookie has a vested interest in the Koeberg Nuclear Expansion program.  Wonder if that's perhaps, why he's been trying to besmirch my good name. 

Golly.  Whatever next?
Rosemary

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #657 on: April 18, 2011, 02:44:51 PM »
And MileHigh.  The master of the mot juste.  The wizard of the perfectly balanced sentence.  The artiste of greatest clarity.  What a waste of talent.  Read my little exposition again.  If I have erred or wandered too near the truth - just bear in mind - I was using analogy.  I wonder why it is that you assumed anything else?

And if you and Pickle and others want to quote me - as you so often do - then please include the entire passage.  Else the sense of what I'm trying to communicate is lost.  And I'd then be inclined to think that you were simply quoting me out of context or - God forbid - propagandising.  And thank God - your little forum gets all the attention that it deserves - which is negligible.   

Kindest regards,
Rosemary

And BTW.  What MileHigh can you and Pickle do about all that evidence of perpetual motion?  Do you just deny this too?  I'd be interested to see if your language skills are also equal to dismissing this evidence as well.

 ;D

 

Offline poynt99

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 3582
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #658 on: April 18, 2011, 02:47:22 PM »
Are you going to do the continuous operation test?

If not, why not?

.99

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011
« Reply #659 on: April 18, 2011, 02:57:19 PM »
Are you going to do the continuous operation test?

If not, why not?

.99

Poynty Point.  Do you EVER read what I write?  OF COURSE I'LL DO THIS.  But first get me 5 or so EXPERTS to advise me in writing that this will constitute ABSOLUTE PROOF - and I'll gladly run all the required tests and their controls.  Then - when those tests are concluded I will require those same experts to acknowledge those results in writing.  GOOD HEAVENS.  Historically we haven't got a single expert to even acknowledge perpetual motion - notwithstanding the evidence.  Not a good thing Poynty.  You must admit.  I sort of imagine myself beetling around until the day I die and then hearing you all say - 'NOT GOOD ENOUGH.  Until it's run for 1000 years - it's just hearsay'.  You see for yourself what our poor Mr Reider Finsrud managed. 

As ever,
Rosie

 ::)