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.
Amazon Warehouse Deals ! Now even more Deep Discounts ! Check out these great prices on slightly used or just opened once only items.I always buy my gadgets via these great Warehouse deals ! Highly recommended ! Many thanks for supporting OverUnity.com this way.

User Menu

Tesla Paper

Free Energy Book

Get paid

Donations

Please Donate for the Forum.
Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.(Admin)

A-Ads

Powerbox

Smartbox

3D Solar

3D Solar Panels

DC2DC converter

Micro JouleThief

FireMatch

FireMatch

CCKnife

CCKnife

CCTool

CCTool

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Products

WaterMotor kit

Statistics


  • *Total Posts: 524213
  • *Total Topics: 15608
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 4
  • *Guests: 6
  • *Total: 10

Author Topic: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.  (Read 720746 times)

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2070 on: April 10, 2012, 03:56:53 AM »
Yes, PicoWatt...do read the paper, and tell us if you find a coherent answer to your very simple question.

Rosemary's special function generator, the  IsoTech GFG 324 (paper2, page2) ... is unique, being the only one in the whole world, and it has NO current flowing out of it, only current flowing INTO it.

Of course, the INSTEK GFG 8216A, a perfectly ordinary FG with a 50 ohm impedance,  that we see in the demo video,  only _relates_ to her experiment, only the paper actually describes the experiment.

By the way, the local supplier has the INSTEK GFG 8216A in stock, it appears. And they are cheap, only about 220 US Petrodollars. Beware... you can never tell what a crazed koala will do.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2071 on: April 10, 2012, 03:59:05 AM »
Which in turn is followed by this post.


RE the comment in her MISQUOTE of me about "phase shifts"... this has been explained MANY TIMES as an artefact of the oscilloscope and it has also been shown how to prevent it WHEN AN EXTERNAL TRIGGER IS AVAILABLE. Anyone who actually understands these matters knows that I am correct, ONCE AGAIN, about some distortion that RA tries to pin on me.

Rosemary, you have got to stop that crap. If you don't understand what you see, ASK YOUR ACADEMICS to explain it to you; don't just pull something out of left field and call it an "explanation" or a "quotation".

Going back nearly TWO WEEKS....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w60ycUsuPIY

Function generator polarity and current flow:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hz4o37g8XmI

Dolt.
At least he signs himself 'DOLT'.  So candid?  Golly?

My dear TinselKoala

The lack of phase shifts evident in your rather skewed displays is ALARMING.  It indicates that your scope is NOT correctly showing the 'required' shifts that would inevitably result.  Unless of course we are now dealing with a new miracle related to the TAR BABY' (Typical Argument wRongly Based About Bug all you 'Idiots').

With the VERY kindest regards TK because you're badly in need of some goodwill.
Rosie Pose 
 :)

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2072 on: April 10, 2012, 04:04:40 AM »
You have shown no phase shifts whatsoever in any of your scopeshots, and I think you wouldn't recognise one if you woke up next to it. Your LeCroy in the video demo isn't "phase shifting", it simply isn't triggering properly.

Crone.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2072 on: April 10, 2012, 04:04:40 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2073 on: April 10, 2012, 04:08:39 AM »
And then this...
I find it particularly insulting that she thinks dirty hands are something to be ashamed of. I wonder how she treats her car mechanics, her elevator repairmen, the technicians that maintain her plumbing, her aircraft, her garden...... All this from the Red Queen, sitting secure in her manicured home in a gated community, having everybody else do her dirty work for her.
Ah... how I long for the French Revolution. Ainslie reminds me a lot of Marie Antoinette.

in answer to this...
Then this comes - hot on the tail of that question - but this time from MileHigh

I am now roundly 'advised' that he and Picowatt and TK are the 'big boys'?  Golly.  Does he mean that they're 'big' in the sense that a gramm is roughly equal to the excessive size and weight mass of Jabba the Hut?  Or simply that it's  as big as 1 pickle per 72 inches?  Or one foot per every 72  pickles - jammed into one really big mouth? Or that it's that big that it reaches 1760 yards vertically - give or take a few inches because it's measured a short distance above ground?  Are they big because they can manage pages of utterly undefined acronyms in their efforts to exaggerate what little knowledge they have?  Or are they 'big' in direct proportion to the calumny and spite that they parade in page after page after page of spurious posts and spurious facts and spurious observations and spurious tests - NONE of which are scientific - and ALL of which are intended to discredit our hard work?  Or are they 'big' in the sense that they can discredit what they like when the like because they're well funded?  They 'belong' in whole and in part - in spirit and in truth - to our monopolistic interests?  Or are the simply 'big' in spirit - where they see endless value in the constant barrage of actionable slander - against an excessively elderly woman - who has no defense other than intellect.  Or.  Are they big as the lions in that Roman arena are big when they circle their prey and weigh up their chances for some breakfast? 

Define BIG - MILEHIGH
where every effort is made to advise you all that I'm rich.  I can honestly say that apart from my car I own absolutely NOTHING in this entire world.  And I drive a little YARIS for God's sake.  How more modest can one be? I am NOT rich.  If only.  But I see why he needs to imply this.

Kindest regards,
Rosemary

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2074 on: April 10, 2012, 04:25:52 AM »
And then this...
Oh, this burns me up. Rosemary, you are a liar of the worst kind. How many husbands have you buried, anyway?
How utterly charming?  I was widowed at the age of 26.  At the time my son was 6 weeks old.  I have never remarried.  I worked all my adult life.  And I retired at 50.  Thank you for the sensitivity related to this question.  It shows a knowledge that could only have been shared by your equally charming co-conspirators together with a video that I foolishly offered on the continued and urgent requests of Harvey and Glen .  I was wondering exactly how BIG is a pickle.  I now know.

You are a lying, evil, mean-spirited old woman, and you aren't very nice at all, and every time you sign your posts with "Kindest Regards", yet your posts are dripping with lies and insults and distortions.... you reveal your underlying hypocrisy and withered spirit.
I thank God, on a daily basis - that there is NOTHING about this mission of mine that is 'small'.  And if my spirit is 'withered' as you put it - then it is, nonetheless, equal to the sad attack that some 5 trolls needs must put up to try and fend off the truth of our experimental evidence.  If that is a measure of my 'spirit' as you put it - then I'm not sure that it entirely reflects my chronological age.  But it certainly reflects the limited abilities related to your sad efforts to 'misinform' our public.

Rosie Poser
« Last Edit: April 11, 2012, 06:26:53 PM by hartiberlin »

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2074 on: April 10, 2012, 04:25:52 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2075 on: April 10, 2012, 04:36:08 AM »
And then this.  Our TinselKoala seems to see merit in consecutive posting in order to DOMINATE this thread. 
And one more before I walk the "other bitch" Maggie.

The inline ammeter that I use here is a 3-dollar special. I am not about to expose my Fluke 83 or my Simpson 464 to this nonsense circuit until I have full understanding of it.
THEN TK you need to INFORM your viewers that they must IGNORE the value of that ammeter.  For obvious reasons.  For some reason you omitted this.  WHY?
Everyone but RA has noticed that I make a distinction between "precision" and "accuracy",...
WHERE?  There's NO reference to the obvious inaccuracy of that meter's amperage.
and I generally do not say "the current through the unit is 320 mA" but rather I say "the inline ammeter reads 320 mA".... a very different statement altogether, and those in the know understand the difference.
What a load of nonsense.  You RELIED on the misconstruction of your 'inline ammeter' to promote this program of DISINFORMATION
For the same settings and arrangements and knobs and voltages, the inline ammeter gives consistent readings. This means that it is "precise". It could be telling me the wrong answer, though--- in other words it could be PRECISE without being ACCURATE. Precision is easy. Accuracy is another thing altogether, and it requires making the same measurement BY DIFFERENT METHODS, in other words, "calibration" to standards. I do not pretend, nor ever have pretended, that the DMM is ACCURATE, only that it is relatively precise.
I take it that this is an open admission that the PRECISE measure of the amperage is also entirely INACCURATE.  We needed that qualification.  Else everyone watching your video will assume that it's a replication of the NERD circuit.  God forbid.
The Ainslie NERD team measurements are precise. That's what DSOs are for. The Ainslie NERD team measurements are not accurate, though, and hooking up two oscilloscopes in strict parallel is NOT "calibration" to standards of accuracy. That's what a brain is for.... and that's what was left out of the Ainslie "experiments".
Nor was it intended to show " 'calibration' to standards of accuracy".  Are you even aware of this?  Or are you simply hoping that our members and readers don't know the difference?

and again and as ever,
Rosie Pose
[/quote]

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2076 on: April 10, 2012, 04:41:40 AM »
And then there's THIS.

Damn. Not another "official" schematic controversy.

I sure wish Rosemary would just come right out and say, "Schematic X is the right one, Schematic Y was a typo and I'm now correcting it in every copy of the papers posted along with a note of retraction, and Schematic Z, which TK uses, is.... er..... um....... just like mine except for the 555 timer instead of the FG therefore TK is Torquemada."

But we all know that she will just fill another page or two with self-bloviating, and refuse to acknowledge the real issues.

Here, NERDs... I give you this for nothing, because that's exactly what it's worth.
I'm not sure that I can copy over that new variant of our schematic.  I'll give it a go when I've concluded these post commentaries.  But we use a 4 channel scope meter.  I'm not sure that you've entirely convinced anyone at all - that our probe is misplaced as you're trying SO HARD to IMPLY.

Rosie Poser

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2076 on: April 10, 2012, 04:41:40 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2077 on: April 10, 2012, 05:19:55 AM »
Then there's MileHigh's request that the thread needs less rhetoric.  He calls for compromise here...
I think we need a breather and we need to tone down the rhetoric.  Any progress will require compromise on both sides.
And then continues with the description of my input as my 'willful' and 'deliberate' attempts at IGNORING the evidence. Presumably he sees this as a halt on that 'rhetoric'.  And presumably he prefers TK's?  And he decided that the 'proof' is that current 'flows' from the signal generator.  However, IF the applied signal at the signal generator results in a 'flow of current' from that generator - then the signal is NOT a signal.  It is an applied current flow.  It is the INDUCTION resulting from that  applied voltage is certainly able to induce a current flow from the circuit components.  But.  The current flow resulting from that voltage and from the applied signal REMAINS with the function generator and returns to the SOURCE of that function generator.  Unless - as ever - we are not talking physics but talking some kind of 'misconception' that ALL you poor electronic troll geniuses seem to share.  Or - God forbid - need to promote.
And here's more cause to believe MileHigh's call for reason and ration to prevail...
Take the example of the issue of if current can actually flow through the function generator or not.  It's obvious that Rosemary has been ignoring this fact for a long time and she is just pushing on anyways and turning a deaf ear.
INDEED. I'm turning a deaf ear.  It's all that your arguments deserve.  But I'm NOT about to also CLOSE MY MOUTH.
Rosemary, this has to stop.  The way to go forward is to learn and understand.
IF I was to learn and understand anything at all that TK and you and picowatt 'the heavy weight' were to promote  then I'd need to RELEARN physics AWAY from the standard model.  I'm not about to oblige you.
Put it this way:  If you willfully ignore that current can go through the function generator, then how does the current flow?  You talk about your mastery of writing and language, but when it comes to talking about current flow you can't string six words together that make sense.  That is a fact and the way to try to resolve this is to put a sincere effort into trying to learn.  There is no reason that you can't come to understand how the current flows through the function generator and there is no reason that you can't learn how to articulate that properly.
Of COURSE not.  MileHigh.  And there's no reason at all that I shouldn't simply follow your utterly reasonable requirement that I simply STOP promoting our little circuit.  It would suit you SO much better.  I see that now.
added

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2078 on: April 10, 2012, 05:20:39 AM »
So I propose that whenever we come to one of these impasses that you engage and try to learn and then we move on.  We never hear the words "can you please help me understand this" from you and it's about time you start.
I rely on the teaching of our masters here MileHigh.  Not the teachings of a handful of investors in oil or nuclear technologies.  I suspect their interests are somewhat challenged.
You are dealing with experts and it's about time you acknowledge this.
The first requirement for an EXPERT would be IMPARTIALITY.  You ALL fall on your knees at the get go.
We all have our limitations, for example I am not an expert in MOSFETs and you can tell by my lack of familiarity with the proper technical terms.  It's been 21 years since I worked on a bench and when I did I worked in digital logic design.  I know that I am slipping, it has been so long.  I can still read a MOSFET spec sheet though and understand it.  I simply don't have any real-word design experience with MOSFETs.  But in other areas I am an expert.  There are clearly some MOSFET experts here, that's for sure.
I'm not sure that MOSFET expertise is relevant.  More to the point would be an understanding of their FUNCTION.  And this is CLEARLY lacking.
So no more of this willfully ignoring basic electronics and circuit concepts.  It's completely unacceptable.  Current can flow through the function generator.  All that you have to do is ask questions and try to learn.  You have to read the Agilent white paper and try to understand it.  Ask questions if you don't understand it.
ALL that I actually need to understand is the significance of a negative wattage.  And RIGHT NOW - NO-ONE can explain this.  And RIGHT NOW no-one here has tried.  So don't give me this 'pay attention and ask' nonsense.  It is you and your 'friends' that need to pay attention. 
On the other side it's time to stop the gratuitous bashing which tends to come in waves.  Sometimes it's emotionally draining to read.  Most of us are guilty and it can get too nasty.  You have to think MLK.
I will give as good as I get.  With the added advantage that I don't need to resort to invective.  Because that would be actionable.
So that's it.  In my opinion, if this going to go anywhere, then no more willful ignoring and no more gratuitous bashing would be a good start.
I agree. SO?  Stop your own gratuitous bashing and willful ignorance.
 
 ever,
 Rosie

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2078 on: April 10, 2012, 05:20:39 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2079 on: April 10, 2012, 05:24:43 AM »
You have shown no phase shifts whatsoever in any of your scopeshots, and I think you wouldn't recognise one if you woke up next to it. Your LeCroy in the video demo isn't "phase shifting", it simply isn't triggering properly.

Crone.
Because we did NOT take the voltage across the load element resistor.  OBVIOUSLY.  And for that precise reason.  I would have thought you'd know this?  Aren't you a self-declared EXPERT?

yours ever,
Rosie Pose

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2080 on: April 10, 2012, 05:59:18 AM »
Rosemary:

Let's suppose that you have a standard function generator like we have been discussing all along.  You connect your scope up to it and you adjust the function generator to output a square wave where the high output is 10 volts and low output is negative 7 volts.

You then disconnect the scope and connect a 240 ohm resistor between the "positive" center conductor terminal and the "negative" outer conductor terminal of the function generator.

Can you tell us what the voltages and currents are when the function generator is outputting the square wave?  The frequency of the square wave doesn't matter, let's say it's 100 Hz.

If you want to impress us and demonstrate that you understand how the function generator works, then please answer the question and show your work.   You just accused us of not really knowing what we are talking about when it comes to the function generator.

Thanks,

MileHigh

P.S.:  Please, I don't want a single person to help Rosemary answer this question.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2080 on: April 10, 2012, 05:59:18 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2081 on: April 10, 2012, 06:06:31 AM »
My dear MileHigh

Rosemary:

Let's suppose that you have a standard signal generator like we have been discussing all along.  You connect your scope up to it and you adjust the signal generator to output a square wave where the high output is 10 volts and low output is negative 7 volts.

You then disconnect the scope and connect a 240 ohm resistor between the "positive" center conductor terminal and the "negative" outer conductor terminal of the function generator.

Can you tell us what the voltages and currents are when the function generator is outputting the square wave?  The frequency of the square wave doesn't matter, let's say it's 100 Hz.

If you want to impress us and demonstrate that you understand how the function generator works, then please answer the question and show your work.   You just accused us of not really knowing what we are talking about when it comes to the function generator.

Thanks,

MileHigh

P.S.:  Please, I don't want a single person to help Rosemary answer this question.

When have I tried to advise you that I understand the workings of a function generator?  And why should I answer your questions when you don't answer mine? Here it is again.

Then this comes - hot on the tail of that question - but this time from MileHigh

I am now roundly 'advised' that he and Picowatt and TK are the 'big boys'?  Golly.  Does he mean that they're 'big' in the sense that a gramm is roughly equal to the excessive size and weight mass of Jabba the Hut?  Or simply that it's  as big as 1 pickle per 72 inches?  Or one foot per every 72  pickles - jammed into one really big mouth? Or that it's that big that it reaches 1760 yards vertically - give or take a few inches because it's measured a short distance above ground?  Are they big because they can manage pages of utterly undefined acronyms in their efforts to exaggerate what little knowledge they have?  Or are they 'big' in direct proportion to the calumny and spite that they parade in page after page after page of spurious posts and spurious facts and spurious observations and spurious tests - NONE of which are scientific - and ALL of which are intended to discredit our hard work?  Or are they 'big' in the sense that they can discredit what they like when the like because they're well funded?  They 'belong' in whole and in part - in spirit and in truth - to our monopolistic interests?  Or are the simply 'big' in spirit - where they see endless value in the constant barrage of actionable slander - against an excessively elderly woman - who has no defense other than intellect.  Or.  Are they big as the lions in that Roman arena are big when they circle their prey and weigh up their chances for some breakfast? 

Define BIG - MILEHIGH

Kindest regards,
Rosemary

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2082 on: April 10, 2012, 06:19:23 AM »
Big knowledge, big education, or big experience, or some combination thereof.

There you have your answer so please answer my question.

MileHigh

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2083 on: April 10, 2012, 06:23:19 AM »
Big knowledge, big education, or big experience, or some combination thereof.

There you have your answer so please answer my question.

MileHigh
Then show me the evidence of all that 'BIG'.  Else I'll not play along with you and pretend that you ARE that big.  And I'll not show you the kind of respect that you're looking for by ANSWERING YOU.  In fact.  When I have answers to ALL MY OWN QUESTIONS - I"ll start to answer yours.

Rosie Pose 'eo'
Amended


And lest it fall from focus - or off this page - then here it is again

Then this comes - hot on the tail of that question - but this time from MileHigh

I am now roundly 'advised' that he and Picowatt and TK are the 'big boys'?  Golly.  Does he mean that they're 'big' in the sense that a gramm is roughly equal to the excessive size and weight mass of Jabba the Hut?  Or simply that it's  as big as 1 pickle per 72 inches?  Or one foot per every 72  pickles - jammed into one really big mouth? Or that it's that big that it reaches 1760 yards vertically - give or take a few inches because it's measured a short distance above ground?  Are they big because they can manage pages of utterly undefined acronyms in their efforts to exaggerate what little knowledge they have?  Or are they 'big' in direct proportion to the calumny and spite that they parade in page after page after page of spurious posts and spurious facts and spurious observations and spurious tests - NONE of which are scientific - and ALL of which are intended to discredit our hard work?  Or are they 'big' in the sense that they can discredit what they like when the like because they're well funded?  They 'belong' in whole and in part - in spirit and in truth - to our monopolistic interests?  Or are the simply 'big' in spirit - where they see endless value in the constant barrage of actionable slander - against an excessively elderly woman - who has no defense other than intellect.  Or.  Are they big as the lions in that Roman arena are big when they circle their prey and weigh up their chances for some breakfast? 

Define BIG - MILEHIGH

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2084 on: April 10, 2012, 06:34:56 AM »
Rosemary:

I'm not going to play a game of chess with you about this.  I will assume that the readers are assuming just like me, that in fact you are unable to answer the question.

If you can't answer the question then we can conclude that you don't understand how the function generator works.  Since you don't understand how the function generator works then you are not able to pass any judgements on whether or not current is flowing through the function generator when your circuit is running in negative offset oscillation mode.

So I can suggest to you that you either answer the question and show your work or you admit to us that you can't answer the question and ask for our help.

The goal would be to get you to understand how current can flow straight through the function generator just like it does in your circuit.

MileHigh

 

OneLink