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.

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 892637 times)

Offline fuzzytomcat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 676
    • Open Source Research and Development
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1440 on: March 23, 2012, 02:02:48 PM »
I can't believe that Rosemary even admitted her submitted academic papers were a fraudulent work that has incorrect device schematics and still hasn't retracted them, even after admitting there wrong !!!


 :P

Offline poynt99

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 3582
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1441 on: March 23, 2012, 02:11:19 PM »
All,

When Rosemary can find two academics and get them on-board with the testing, the winner will unmistakably rear its head, and all debate shall be put to rest.

Offline fuzzytomcat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 676
    • Open Source Research and Development
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1442 on: March 23, 2012, 02:28:36 PM »
The ONLY sad thing about this is when ROSEMARY'S grand children grow up and use a computer .... They "GOOGLE" their grandmas name ..... and see she was a fraud.

The pain of all pains  :'(



Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1443 on: March 23, 2012, 02:30:19 PM »
I have just confirmed with our attorneys.  No papers yet from Glen Lettenmaier.   :o ::) I got the distinct impression he mentioned he'd sent something.  But then again he claimed I'd only sent him a post box number.  Which - to put it politely - is not consistent with the fact.  Here again is that address that you can all see how anxious I am that he is thoroughly enabled when it comes that class action of his.

Physical Address
Suite 2, Frazzitta Business Park
Cnr Lubbe & Langeberg Roads
Durbanville 7550
Postal Address
P.O.Box 3584
Durbanville 7551 

And Glen, feel free to access the email address as detailed in that PM Glen Lettenmaier.  It will be more than enough for these purposes.

Kindest regards,
Rosie Posie

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1444 on: March 23, 2012, 02:39:48 PM »
All,

When Rosemary can find two academics and get them on-board with the testing, the winner will unmistakably rear its head, and all debate shall be put to rest.

Hello Poynty Point.  This is remarkably appropriate.  Well done for the reminder.  Much needed.  I've actually not even picked up a phone yet.  I'm busy fending of these rather toothless old lions - and it seems to take up much of my time.  What they lack in intelligence they rather make up for in number.  Collectively I believe it's described as being 'nibbled to death by a duck'.  Irritating but relatively painless.

Kindest regards,
Rosie Pose

Offline fuzzytomcat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 676
    • Open Source Research and Development
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1445 on: March 23, 2012, 02:55:22 PM »
I have just confirmed with our attorneys.  No papers yet from Glen Lettenmaier.   :o ::) I got the distinct impression he mentioned he'd sent something.  But then again he claimed I'd only sent him a post box number.  Which - to put it politely - is not consistent with the fact.  Here again is that address that you can all see how anxious I am that he is thoroughly enabled when it comes that class action of his.

Physical Address
Suite 2, Frazzitta Business Park
Cnr Lubbe & Langeberg Roads
Durbanville 7550
Postal Address
P.O.Box 3584
Durbanville 7551 

And Glen, feel free to access the email address as detailed in that PM Glen Lettenmaier.  It will be more than enough for these purposes.

Kindest regards,
Rosie Posie


NICE TRY ROSIE ...

I'm waiting a response from Stefan on what action must be taken here ......

As I said over and over I'LL say it again, being you fucking cant read.

It will be done on my time table not yours .....


IT WILL BE AT LEAST A YEAR !!!


IDIOT !!!!

 :P

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1446 on: March 23, 2012, 03:02:50 PM »
Please refer to the attached image ainslie_scopeanal1.jpg below. These notes apply to the indicated features of the scope trace.

1) The dashed line of the upper moveable cursor, at the top of the Trace 1 oscillations, at about 4 small ticks above the baseline, or about +800 mV
2) The bottom level of the Trace 1 (CVR) signal, at about 3 1/2 small ticks below the CH 1 baseline, or about -700 mV-- it would have been very nice to have the bottom moveable cursor positioned here instead of at some useless place on the bottom of the screen.
3) The CH 3 voltage level, at just over 6 minor ticks above its baseline (4), indicating battery voltage of just over +60 volts (50 volts per major division, five minor ticks per major division, so 6 small ticks = 60 volts.)
4) The CH 3 zero volts baseline symbol.
5) The CH 2 baseline zero volts symbol. CH 2 represents the Gate signal. The channel is set to 2 volts per major division.
6) The oscillation mean amplitude on CH 2. Oscillates around a value 5 minor ticks BELOW the baseline, or - 2 volts. The peaks go from about -1 to about -2 1/2 volts or a bit more. Either the mosfets ARE NOT GETTING ENOUGH CHARGE to switch, AND/OR the FG's output voltage is being pulled down by the low impedance of the circuit.

EDIT TO ADD: I at first thought that the negative pulse would mean that only the Q2 mosfets (edit, sorry) in the corrected circuit diagram would switch. But by experimentation I found that, with offset settings of the FG combined with the load caused by the circuit's connections, the mosfets could switch at the "zero" INDICATED level of the FG's output if the amplitude was set high enough. I think this is because of the current path through the FG's impedance. My FG has a 50 ohm impedance, but the data sheet for the INSTEK GFG-8216A ,which I believe is the unit in Rosemary's video, has something I don't understand where the impedance should be listed: www.tequipment.net/pdf/Instek/GFG-8216A_datasheet.pdf.

7) The baseline  but NOT zero volt level for the DRAIN TRACE, scope CH 4. Since this trace is AC coupled and at 100 volts/div we don't know what the voltage level actually is here, but we can tell that the oscillations on the drain go about 6 or seven minor ticks, for a peaktopeak swing of 70 volts, being generous. This trace "should" be sitting on top of the battery voltage; in other words, had DC coupling been used and if there was enough screen room, we'd see the straightline average of this trace sitting at 60 volts above its zero level.
8 ) The display box indicating the channel sensitivities in volts PER major scale division.
9) The scope is attempting to calculate parameters of a very FAST signal from a SLOW display. It may be using its full sample rate to do this, or it may not. The slight negative value here is what Rosemary THINKS is confirmation of her conjecture that the batteries are recharging... a "reversed current flow". Actually it is no such thing at all, as many people have tried to explain to Rosemary.
10) The volts per division setting for CH 4, the GREEN trace, the common DRAIN trace.
11) The symbol indicating that this channel is AC COUPLED.
12) The scope here is complaining about the NOISE on the signal of CH 3, the battery voltage, the purple trace, indicating that it cannot get a reliable reading because of the NOISE.
13) The horizontal timebase setting: 40 milliseconds PER major horizontal scale division. This of course applies to the whole display.
14) The SCALE DIVISIONS. Major and minor ticks across these white lines indicate voltage and time according to the settings PER major division. These are extended to a grid across the whole screen, which unfortunately the presenters chose not to display.
15) The trigger setting: Trigger on CH 2, as is proper, at a rising slope of signal, at a level of 1.52 volts. Here again we see evidence that the FG is being loaded down by the circuit, I think, because the signal never gets to + 1.52 volts on the trace, yet the scope is triggering stably. Or... a possibility I just considered... maybe the display is stopped. The LeCroy in the video, connected in parallel, certainly is NOT triggering stably.
16) The dashed line of the bottom horizontal moveable cursor, in a useless location on the screen
17) The cursor data box, showing the "delta t" between the two vertical cursors, which are correctly positioned across one full waveform. So a frequency of 1 cycle PER 100 milliseconds translates to 10 Hz.. that is, ten cycles PER second.... which is very slow in my opinion, and makes the 1.5 MHz oscillations look like nothing more than a big blur.
18) A "minor" or small "tick" or scale division on the vertical scale.
19) A "major" or big tick or scale division on the vertical scale.
20) The righthand vertical moveable cursor.
21) The lefthand vertical moveable cursor.
22) The scope's trigger point in time.
23) The small blue arrow indicates the scope's trigger voltage and channel. What's triggering it? The blue trace never gets this high. Is the Tek scope smarter than its users? In this case, I think it is... or either it could be simply stopped, displaying a static screen... which might be another little mendacity of the video.

Note that you have NEVER seen an explanation like this of ANY scope traces that Rosemary has provided. And that's because she doesn't bother to understand what's being shown. This scope trace, far from being the "evidence" for overunity, is rather another nail in the coffin of Rosemary's claims.
« Last Edit: March 24, 2012, 01:05:38 AM by TinselKoala »

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1447 on: March 23, 2012, 03:05:29 PM »
Guys,
I rather suspect that Glen Lettenmaier has not actually got that team of attorneys to attend to this class action.  In fact I'd be inclined to suspect that it was all just a rather empty threat.  Otherwise he needs to find himself a new set of attorneys.  Because a year is far in excess of what's required.  His complaint - though rather confusing - is clear.  He has stolen our paper through the simple expediency of stating under oath that the Scribd publication is his exclusive property and work.  And for this he needs must bring a class action to bear against me to assert his sole rights to access and publish that paper.  I'd say it would take all of about an hour and an attorney's clerk to manage the paper work.  Frankly Glen, I get the distinct impression that your own team of attorneys are simply not taking you seriously enough.  If I were in your shoes I'd sack them.  Find a new team.  But DON'T expect me to nominate them for you.  It's not acceptable protocol.  In fact I think it would be construed as 'prejudicial'?  Something like that.  LOL.  Certainly not usual practice for the Defendant to nominate the Plaintif's attorney.  Never heard the like.  ::) :o

Rosie Pose.   

Offline fuzzytomcat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 676
    • Open Source Research and Development
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1448 on: March 23, 2012, 03:15:45 PM »
Guys,
I rather suspect that Glen Lettenmaier has not actually got that team of attorneys to attend to this class action.  In fact I'd be inclined to suspect that it was all just a rather empty threat.  Otherwise he needs to find himself a new set of attorneys.  Because a year is far in excess of what's required.  His complaint - though rather confusing - is clear.  He has stolen our paper through the simple expediency of stating under oath that the Scribd publication is his exclusive property and work.  And for this he needs must bring a class action to bear against me to assert his sole rights to access and publish that paper.  I'd say it would take all of about an hour and an attorney's clerk to manage the paper work.  Frankly Glen, I get the distinct impression that your own team of attorneys are simply not taking you seriously enough.  If I were in your shoes I'd sack them.  Find a new team.  But DON'T expect me to nominate them for you.  It's not acceptable protocol.  In fact I think it would be construed as 'prejudicial'?  Something like that.  LOL.  Certainly not usual practice for the Defendant to nominate the Plaintif's attorney.  Never heard the like.  ::) :o

Rosie Pose.

Rosemary ..... whats required for MY lawsuit should not concern you other than when your receive it.

It will be factual and correct unlike anything you have done in your entire lifetime.

Do your ............ Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah.

I don't care ..... why don't you answer TK on your fraudulent video ???

MAKE YOUR GRAND CHILDREN  "PROUD" !!!!


 :P

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1449 on: March 23, 2012, 03:16:09 PM »
It is also to be noted that whenever Rosemary is refuted by references or even by conversations with the person involved himself, she simply ignores the refutation and continues on.

25.6 million Joules.
"PER" never means a division operation.
Powercat endorses her claims.
FTC confirmed her COP figures.
The green trace is not the common drains and has nothing to do with her circuit or claims.

And many many more of her claims like those above have been UNDENIABLY refuted, with references -- so she just moves on and refuses to discuss the refutations, while still making the same tired old mendacious claims.

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1450 on: March 23, 2012, 03:18:58 PM »
Rosemary ..... whats required for MY lawsuit should not concern you other than when your receive it.

It will be factual and correct unlike anything you have done in your entire lifetime.

Do your ............ Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah.

I don't care ..... why don't you answer TK on your fraudulent video ???

MAKE YOUR GRAND CHILDREN  "PROUD" !!!!


 :P


At this point I'd be happy if she'd just explain what the GREEN TRACE is supposed to represent, if it isn't the common mosfet drains like I and the presenter and the diagrams all say it is, since Rosemary has denied that it is. WHAT IS IT then? If it's not pertinent to your demonstration or claims, Rosemary Ains-lie,  what is it doing prominently displayed and labelled in your comedy-of-errors video?

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1451 on: March 23, 2012, 03:34:50 PM »
Quote
It is also to be noted that whenever Rosemary is refuted by references or even by conversations with the person involved himself, she simply ignores the refutation and continues on.

And many many more of her claims like those above have been UNDENIABLY refuted, with references -- so she just moves on and refuses to discuss the refutations, while still making the same tired old mendacious claims.

Old 'Iron Curtain' Rosie, she is a mystery wrapped in an enigma.

"I cannot forecast to you the action of Rosie Posie. It is a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma; but perhaps there is a key. That key is Rosie's personal interest."

But the LEDs of Doom say 1989 is coming soon!!!

Rosie Posie, tear down this wall of ignorance and stupidity!!!

lol

MileHigh

Offline fuzzytomcat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 676
    • Open Source Research and Development
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1452 on: March 23, 2012, 03:44:22 PM »
This is so sad for ROSEMARY'S grand children.

Like a flat chested girl getting teased by school mates on her physical appearance.

The grand children when any school mate "GOOGLES" the name AINSLIE ..... there it will be ..... FRAUD and other damning information.

This will be devastating to the grand children .... the teasing will be endless.  :'(


DOES ROSEMARY CARE ...... HELL NO !!!       FAMILY OR NO FAMILY !!!   :o


MY "THESIS" TILL THE END !!!   ???


SO SAD  :'(

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1453 on: March 23, 2012, 03:53:05 PM »
Here's another link to some info about the FG that seems to be the one Rosemary is using.
http://www.tequipment.net/InstekGFG8216A.html

Note the use of the symbol "W" where one would normally expect to see the OHM omega symbol:

Quote
Impedance: 50W ±10%
and
Quote
DC Offset:<-5V ~ >+5V (into 50W load)

and a couple more times in the specs for the counter functions.

Since when is impedance measured in Watts? Since never. This should be "ohms", and in the other instances as well.

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #1454 on: March 23, 2012, 04:01:09 PM »
Are the innocent bystander newcomers starting to get a feel for just why the old-timers get so ruffled and fed up to the gills with Rosemary? We can't stop, either, because then she'll think -- and say and claim --  that's an ENDORSEMENT of her claims or that our various refutations have failed.
Meanwhile, what has really failed is for ANYONE ANYWHERE to reproduce or support her claim of overunity performance.

(Here's where FTC and I differ as friends and scientists: I don't think his work showed OU either, but I have not examined it in the detail that I have with Rosemary's claims, and HE is not making claims HERE, and has clearly stated that he doesn't support Rosemary's claims here... so I'm not worried about his work. Also, I know that he's intellectually honest enough to evaluate his own work critically, and has done so in the past with good results.)