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

Custom Search

Author Topic: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.  (Read 933227 times)

Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1200 on: March 19, 2012, 06:25:46 AM »
It's getting hard to decode your sarcasm. Do you mean that you think that "PER" does NOT mean "divided by" when used in this way?

Or are you really calling the readers here absolute idiots? I note that nobody, not even Mags, is defending your calculations. Eatenbyagrue, whether you realize it yet or not, is repeating the exact same course of correction that I have posted, at least three times now.

To the best of my knowledge 'per' NEVER means divide by.  Not even in scientific terms.  Just look up the dictionary definition.  But nor am I saying that you shouldn't use the term in another context.  It's just that Wiki doesn't, is all.  But there you go.  Not everyone allows themselves the license to redefine words in common usage.  And far be it from me to propose that you follow suit.

Rosie

TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1201 on: March 19, 2012, 06:29:05 AM »
Golly.  I almost thought there - for a brief moment - that you wanted to keep this on topic.  Silly of me.  I should have known better.  You're only anxious to take this off topic.

Cheers TK.  How goes the funding for your little cottage by the sea?  Have you managed to get enough together since the market collapsed?  I see you've lost that easy access to all those oscilloscopes you had.  But my guess is that they were all of them in need of repair.  Do you see now how wasted were your efforts on that 'math trace' number.  You CLEAN forgot the need to first replicate the waveform.  But your videos then were as entertaining as they are now.  Can't wait to see you replicate our own circuit.

Ever Rosie

Since you are referring to my other oscilloscopes, you must be now talking about the first circuit of yours. Once again you lie, because I did indeed reproduce your magic waveform, your load heating time-temperature profiles, and much else with respect (sic) to that circuit. The evidence is there for all to see on my YT channel. I even used the same type of scopes that you claimed to have used, in addition to much more sophisticated scopes. And once again... I showed that you do not understand power computations. Remember the trouble you had with the term, "integration"? It was almost as funny as your present difficulty with "PER".

Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1202 on: March 19, 2012, 06:30:15 AM »
FYI, I do still have access to better oscilloscopes than you will ever be allowed to touch. What is your evidence for your accusation that my equipment is not working properly?

LOL  The evidence on your own oscilloscope where at least one channel was out of use.  And by your own admission.  I got the distinct impression that you were doing a little repair job there TK.  Which makes you what?  A repair electrician?  Let us know.  And more to the point.  Let us know your real name.  We're all rather interested.  When I find this out and your address - then I'll call on you to account for your traducements.  Are you afraid of being held accountable?  Is that the problem? 

Rosie pose

MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1203 on: March 19, 2012, 06:31:32 AM »
Like I already stated Rosemary, "LOL" is your code word for when you are very uncomfortable with the discussion at hand.

Your counter arguments to the capacitor test were no good, and you were off in Rosie Posie Never Never land and not making any sense at all.

So you can "LOL" all you want but the capacitor test will bust you in ten seconds flat.  The capacitor test will show that the capacitor that is emulating the battery is outputting power to run your circuit in exactly the same manner as the battery it is temporarily replacing also has to output power to run your circuit.

Look, you still can't even understand the fact that the current loop that powers your nonsensical accidental circuit goes straight through the function generator.  You saw it in the simulation that someone ran about a week ago.  Nor can you understand that the function generator when outputting -5 volts is actually teaming up with the main battery bank and helping to power your circuit.

So you can be a blank slate and not understand how the current flows straight through the function generator, or how the function generator acts as another voltage source in series with your battery bank, or how a capacitor emulating one of your batteries can give you definitive proof that your circuit is conventional and not COP infinity.

Even though you are a blank slate and simply cannot understand these concepts, it doesn't mean that all three aren't true, it just means that you can't understand.

The truth is that all three things are true, and it's both unfortunate that you can't understand, and tough luck for you that you can't understand.

The capacitor test can bring this whole sorry saga to an end.  There are literally dozens of other tests that can do the same thing.  The advantage behind the capacitor test is that most of your peers on the free energy forums can understand the significance of the test and will instantly agree that your circuit is not COP infinity when they see the voltage on the capacitor decrease.

So I have a feeling that you are going to have to resort to using a lot more "LOL's" as time goes on because reality is going to catch up with you, you simply can't escape it.

MileHigh

Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1204 on: March 19, 2012, 06:32:48 AM »
Since you are referring to my other oscilloscopes, you must be now talking about the first circuit of yours. Once again you lie, because I did indeed reproduce your magic waveform, your load heating time-temperature profiles, and much else with respect (sic) to that circuit. The evidence is there for all to see on my YT channel. I even used the same type of scopes that you claimed to have used, in addition to much more sophisticated scopes. And once again... I showed that you do not understand power computations. Remember the trouble you had with the term, "integration"? It was almost as funny as your present difficulty with "PER".

No TK.  You never even got close.  And more to the point - you still haven't replicated.  It's your true genius.  You manage to convince yourself that you have.  But this is it now TK.  I'm not answering any more of your posts.  So help me.  I need to get this back an topic and it seems that Harti is as anxious as you are that you destroy this thread.

Cheers TK.  And may your efforts at replicating bear some approximation to the experiment being replicated. 

Kindest regards,
Rosie

TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1205 on: March 19, 2012, 06:33:39 AM »
To the best of my knowledge 'per' NEVER means divide by.  Not even in scientific terms.  Just look up the dictionary definition.  But nor am I saying that you shouldn't use the term in another context.  It's just that Wiki doesn't, is all.  But there you go.  Not everyone allows themselves the license to redefine words in common usage.  And far be it from me to propose that you follow suit.

Rosie

So, say I travelled sixty miles PER hour, for one hour. How FAR did I go? Show your work.

Or, let's say I went 300 miles and used ten gallons of gasoline. How many miles PER gallon did I get? Show your work.

There are a dozen eggs PER carton. If I want 144 eggs, how many cartons do I need. Show your work.

Or just look at the definition pages .99 posted. In words they say "One Watt equals One Joule PER Second" and .99 has highlighted the part where it says " W = J / S ". 

Or do you dispute that the slash symbol or the horizontal bar symbol denotes division?

Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1206 on: March 19, 2012, 06:34:40 AM »
LOL MileHigh

You still haven't explained your emergence here.  In real time.  Let us know what transpired.  Then I may be persuaded to answer your post.

Rosie

TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1207 on: March 19, 2012, 06:35:30 AM »
LOL  The evidence on your own oscilloscope where at least one channel was out of use.  And by your own admission.  I got the distinct impression that you were doing a little repair job there TK.  Which makes you what?  A repair electrician?  Let us know.  And more to the point.  Let us know your real name.  We're all rather interested.  When I find this out and your address - then I'll call on you to account for your traducements.  Are you afraid of being held accountable?  Is that the problem? 

Rosie pose

Bring it on. You dare to threaten me?
I can prove everything I say, anywhere anytime, in court if you like, and you cannot. Let me warn you though... the jurisdiction will be in Texas.

Yes, for a demonstration of how to use an oscilloscope to track energy flows through integration of an instantaneous power waveform, I used a scope with one channel out. This did not at all affect the demonstration, as I clearly explained in the video. That scope can display two live traces and two math traces simultaneously, or any four selected from memory, math, or live. The lack of one working live channel was irrelevant to the demonstration I performed. Again, by implication, you lie, as that was NOT the primary oscilloscope that I used to debunk your circuit. Recall the FLUKE 123 and 199 ScopeMeters that I used? The SAME MODEL scopes that you claimed to have used for your original work.

Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1208 on: March 19, 2012, 06:37:49 AM »
Just a reminder here.  I'm waiting for an answer.  You've stated that I can 'bring this on' were your words.  Well?  I'm bringing this on.  Let me
know who I'm dealing with.  Give some accountability.  You seem to be more than 'game'.  So am I.

Rosie Pose.
Bring it on. You dare to threaten me?
I can prove everything I say, anywhere anytime, in court if you like, and you cannot. Let me warn you though... the jurisdiction will be in Texas.

>>I can't TK.  Sadly.  Not until you give me your name and address.  If you email me I promise faithfully not to disclose it here.  It'll only be
public knowledge when it's appended to my claim.  Hows that for fair?


Rosie Pose
« Last Edit: March 19, 2012, 12:44:00 PM by Rosemary Ainslie »

fuzzytomcat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 676
    • Open Source Research and Development
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1209 on: March 19, 2012, 06:43:05 AM »
Rosemary,

PROOF YOUR PAPER IS JUNK .....

http://www.overunity.com/11675/another-small-breakthrough-on-our-nerd-technology/msg315894/#msg315894

TO DENY THESE FACTS YOU ARE .....

bonkers, brainsick, cracked, crackers, crazed, crazy, crazy as a loon, cuckoo, daft, dellusional, demented, deranged, distraught, disturbed, dotty, fruity, insane, kooky, loco, loony, lunatic, mad, maniac, mad as a hatter, maniacal, mentally ill, mindless, moonstruck, non compos mentis, not all there, not of sound mind, nuts, nutsy, nutty, nutty as a fruitcake, neurotic, off one's rocker, out of one's mind, out to lunch, paranoid, psycho, psychopathic, psychotic, sick, sick in the head, schizophrenic, stark raving mad, touched, unbalanced, unhinged, unsound, unstable, wacky and a zipper head

GET OVER IT .... YOUR A JOKE  !!!


Fuzzy
 8)
*meow*



TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1210 on: March 19, 2012, 06:47:18 AM »
Miles PER gallon. I used ten gallons and I went 300 miles. What is my Miles PER gallon, and how is it computed?

Or if you like, liters PER 100 kilometers. My car gets 3 liters PER 100 km, and I've gone 300 km. How much gas did I use, and how is it computed?

MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1211 on: March 19, 2012, 06:52:41 AM »
The LOL deflection isn't working Rosemary and I am not telling you about how I am here.

I itemized three things that you clearly don't understand and the third one is the one that can bust you.

Just like the LED test is the "Light Emitting Diodes of Doom" test for your circuit the capacitor test also represents your claim's downfall.  Assuming that Poynt goes through with building and testing your circuit, then finally we will be able to put this to bed.

You are simply clinging for dear life to your DSO data and you still persist and insist that it's valid data when you describe the state of affairs of your claim.  The fact that you ignore the counterarguments means that you are simply propagandizing when you talk about your claim. You simply refuse to listen.

You have the blinders on and you are humming "LOL's" as loud as you possibly can to drown out all other sources of information.

MileHigh

TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1212 on: March 19, 2012, 06:58:08 AM »
Just a reminder here.  I'm waiting for an answer.  You've stated that I can 'bring this on' were your words.  Well?  I'm bringing this on.  Let me know who I'm dealing with.  Give some accountability.  You seem to be more than 'game'.  So am I. 

Rosie Pose.
>>I can't TK.  Sadly.  Not until you give me your name and address.  If you email me I promise faithfully not to disclose it here.  It'll only be public knowledge when it's appended to my claim.  Hows that for fair?

Rosie Pose

Go ahead and use your super sleuthing powers. You said that when you find out who I am you will do something to me. That's a threat, and I'm not going to walk into it; you're going to have to work for it.

Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1213 on: March 19, 2012, 06:59:10 AM »
The LOL deflection isn't working Rosemary and I am not telling you about how I am here.
Then we have nothing further to discuss.  I'm more anxious to expose the 'background dialogue' than I am to enter into a discussion with you on any pretext at all.

Therefore we'll first need a certain 'quid pro quo' MileHigh which is always required as a basis of engagement.  Failing which I'll assume that you petitioned Harti to come to the defense of TK as his credibility was systematically being destroyed by Magsy.  And that Harti obliged this because he depends on TK to DEBUNK our claim - without ever giving it a chance to be tested.  If he, TK has no residual credibility then how can he debunk?  Your intervention was much needed.

Harti confused you with a competent defender of the faith.  You are, in fact, only a 'defender'. 

Kindest regards,
Rosie

Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1214 on: March 19, 2012, 07:05:21 AM »
Go ahead and use your super sleuthing powers. You said that when you find out who I am you will do something to me. That's a threat, and I'm
not going to walk into it; you're going to have to work for it.

No TK - that's neither my style nor my competence.  But assuming that you stand by your allegations then I would have thought you'd also be
prepared to stand by your libel - in it's manifold appearances.  But clearly you require this internet personality to hide behind any need for
accountability.  In which case you can say what you want and in any manner that you require and forever be unaccountable.  Which - in my book
- is an abuse of one's internet identity.  Unfortunately it rather diminishes anything at all that you claim.  Your statements are thereby
discounted - in their entirety.  You are simply abusing this anonymity to promote an agenda.  It is not something that you care that much about
that you'll defend it in Court.  Therefore which of the two of us occupies the moral highground?  I make no secret of my name.

Rosemary Ainslie
« Last Edit: March 19, 2012, 12:45:59 PM by Rosemary Ainslie »