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 Members: 83913
  • *Latest: wdstk7

  • *Total Posts: 524228
  • *Total Topics: 15608
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 3
  • *Guests: 8
  • *Total: 11

Author Topic: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.  (Read 720854 times)

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2085 on: April 10, 2012, 06:38:54 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

In which case MileHigh we should be able to prove that experimentally.  I intend to do so. The thing you are trying to imply is that our results are skewed as a result of this.  I KNOW that they are NOT.

Rosie Pose

ADDED

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline picowatt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2036
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2086 on: April 10, 2012, 08:25:09 AM »
Rosemary,

Please do experimentally verify that current can both pass through and/or be provided by a function generator.  You need not take anyone's word for that.  It would take very little time to do the experiments necessary to prove that a function generator can both source and sink current, and that it can also be placed in series with a power supply or battery and allow current to flow through it.  Feel free to ask if you need advisement regarding how to perform these tests.  There is little point in arguing about such well known and easily verified facts regarding a function generator.       


You can also quite easily verify my explanation to you of the "ofs" readings on the LeCroy.  Just turn the LeCroy on, you needn't apply any signal.  Set up the scope to display one or more traces on the screen.  Select a channel and adjust the offset control for that channel.  You will see that channel's horizontal trace move up and down the face of the screen verticaly.  As you do so, the "ofs" numbers will increase positive and negative as you move the trace above or below the screen's horizontal center line.  If you press on the end of the offset control, it will cause that trace to return to the center of the screen and the "ofs" number will as well return to zero.

PW





Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2087 on: April 10, 2012, 08:55:36 AM »
Rosemary,

Please do experimentally verify that current can both pass through and/or be provided by a function generator.  You need not take anyone's word for that.  It would take very little time to do the experiments necessary to prove that a function generator can both source and sink current, and that it can also be placed in series with a power supply or battery and allow current to flow through it.  Feel free to ask if you need advisement regarding how to perform these tests.  There is little point in arguing about such well known and easily verified facts regarding a function generator. 
I am well aware of the fact that the signal generator can induce a current flow in the circuit.  That was not the issue.  The issue was whether or not it added to or subtracted from the energy at the battery supply.  If it adds any significant amount then that would need to be quantified against our gains.  Since there's no point in speculating on this we intend to test it experimentally.  And I assure you that there are more than enough skilled in the art - to sort out the required test.       

You can also quite easily verify my explanation to you of the "ofs" readings on the LeCroy.  Just turn the LeCroy on, you needn't apply any signal.  Set up the scope to display one or more traces on the screen.  Select a channel and adjust the offset control for that channel.  You will see that channel's horizontal trace move up and down the face of the screen verticaly.  As you do so, the "ofs" numbers will increase positive and negative as you move the trace above or below the screen's horizontal center line.  If you press on the end of the offset control, it will cause that trace to return to the center of the screen and the "ofs" number will as well return to zero.
I was rather hoping for an honest response in my answer to you regarding the ofs on the display.  It seems rather that you've used this as an opportunity to try and advise our readers that I did not know those rather elementary functions on an instrument that I've used continually for some 2 years now.  Do you still doubt that those voltage values represent the peak to peak voltages - on an AC coupled value?  Because that's what you asked.  And that's what I answered. And you most certainly did NOT read their values as AC.  Considering the level of your alleged expertise one would have thought you'd know better. I didn't know the answer.  But I'm not the expert.

And from memory you asked this seven times or thereby with a sense of outrage and censure that I was not 'jumping' sufficiently quickly - to attention.  You said words to the effect 'If you're not going to answer me - then let me know'.  And that was between the 39 posts from your acolytes while they attacked me for an alleged misrepresentation of the voltage value at the gate - as per your advices.  And all of those posts in the space of about 12 hours.  Charming - I'm sure.  Is that how you 'big boys' deal with things?  Pretend to know everything - and compound the pretense by giving unsolicited and inappropriate advice?  Because that way you can also exaggerate my incompetence.  It's very effective PW or whoever you are.

Rosie Pose

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2087 on: April 10, 2012, 08:55:36 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline picowatt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2036
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2088 on: April 10, 2012, 09:05:46 AM »
Rosemary,

I did indeed provide an honest response to your questions regarding the "ofs" numbers on the LeCroy.  As well, I have provided you with the procedure to verify that answer in my last post.  And again, the offset numbers have nothing to do with "AC" or a "peak to peak" value.

PW




Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2089 on: April 10, 2012, 09:16:00 AM »
Rosemary,

I did indeed provide an honest response to your questions regarding the "ofs" numbers on the LeCroy.  As well, I have provided you with the procedure to verify that answer in my last post.  And again, the offst numbers have nothing to do with "AC" or a "peak to peak" value.

PW

I KNOW that the offset has nothing to do with peak to peak.  It has everything to do with that AC coupled value.  And the AC coupled value relates to PEAK TO PEAK.  It is applicable to the gate voltage.  You insisted on reading it as DC.  My advices were that you should be applying AC.  In which case the actual voltage across the gate is LESS THAN the value displayed as DC.  And we never apply any adjustments once the coupling has been chosen.  Therefore there is NO ADJUSTMENT made to the traces anywhere at all that is not determined by the machine.  And it is well able to determine zero.

Isn't the object here to determine the actual voltage across the gate?  Wasn't that the point of your question in the first instance?  Has this NOT been answered to your satisfaction?  Are you still implying that the voltage on the DC Coupled value is correct?  If so - and if you're satisfied that the DC voltage has been misrepresented - then I have run out of answers.  Because that's the best advice that I have been given.  By an IMPARTIAL EXPERT.  It may well be that I have not understood that answer sufficiently.  But overall and what I most certainly have had explained - is that the VALUE IS CORRECT - provided that you take the voltage reading as an AC value and NOT a DC value.  Because that incorporates the offset value.  I'm afraid that's the best I can do.

Again
Rosie Pose

added a 'd' to adjustments

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2089 on: April 10, 2012, 09:16:00 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline picowatt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2036
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2090 on: April 10, 2012, 09:28:32 AM »
I KNOW that the offset has nothing to do with peak to peak.  It has everything to do with that AC coupled value.  And the AC coupled value relates to PEAK TO PEAK.  It is applicable to the gate voltage.  You insisted on reading it as DC.  My advices were that you should be applying AC.  In which case the actual voltage across the gate is LESS THAN the value displayed as DC.  And we never apply any ajustments once the coupling has been chosen.  Therefore there is NO ADJUSTMENT made to the traces anywhere at all that is not determined by the machine.  And it is well able to determine zero.

Isn't the object here to determine the actual voltage across the gate?  Wasn't that the point of your question in the first instance?  Has this NOT been answered to your satisfaction?  Are you still implying that the voltage on the DC Coupled value is correct?  If so - and if you're satisfied that the DC voltage has been misrepresented - then I have run out of answers.  Because that's the best advice that I have been given.  By an IMPARTIAL EXPERT.  It may well be that I have not understood that answer sufficiently.  But overall and what I most certainly have had explained - is that the VALUE IS CORRECT - provided that you take the voltage reading as an AC value and NOT a DC value.  Because that incorporates the offset value.  I'm afraid that's the best I can do.

Again
Rosie Pose


Rosemary,

Referring to FIG 3 of your first paper, during the portion of the cycle wherein the output of the function generator is a positive voltage, what is the voltage indicated on channel 3 by the scope capture?

I see it at 1.25 major divisions above the zero volt reference, which is the little line with the number 3 above it to the left of the screen.  Channel 3 is set to indicate 10volts per division.  1.25 divisions times 10volts represents 12.5volts.  That is telling me that during the portion of the cycle wherein the generator swings positive, it is attaining a positive voltage of 12.5 volts.

What voltage do you read that point in the cycle as being?

PW   




Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2091 on: April 10, 2012, 09:39:33 AM »

Rosemary,

Referring to FIG 3 of your first paper, during the portion of the cycle wherein the output of the function generator is a positive voltage, what is the voltage indicated on channel 3 by the scope capture?

I see it at 1.25 major divisions above the zero volt reference, which is the little line with the number 3 above it to the left of the screen.  Channel 3 is set to indicate 10volts per division.  1.25 divisions times 10volts represents 12.5volts.  That is telling me that during the portion of the cycle wherein the generator swings positive, it is attainging a positive voltage of 12.5 volts.

What voltage do you read that point in the cycle as being?

PW

In the first instance that display was to determine the applied frequency.  Not the voltage.  In the second instance - the DC voltage is NOT applicable.  Therefore - the voltage across the gate should be read as an AC voltage.  That's the advices that I was given.  Left to my own devices then I would say that the zero crossing line is midway between the peaks of the voltages displayed and the voltage should be read accordingly.  Therefore the value is something less than 6 volts.  And this adjustment because the signal from the generator is NOT DC but AC. 

Now - PicoWatt - let me know something from you.  I'd like to see it again - in black and white.  You have advised us that actually the offset as displayed needs to be applied to ALL values.  Let me know what you mean?  Are you suggesting that we must adjust the battery voltage from the mean average voltage displayed as DC to that -170 odd volts shown in the ofs display number?  And equally - are we to determine the voltage across the shunt to be offset by some 4 volts positive as displayed in that offset box?  Let me know.  Then I'll take your argument straight to my expert for comment.  It will be most entertaining.

Again,
Rosemary

I had to scroll back 8 pages to find this file reference.  That's how long it's been that this has been discussed.  Which says much about the value of discussion on this matter.  It's circular and going nowhere.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2091 on: April 10, 2012, 09:39:33 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2092 on: April 10, 2012, 09:43:54 AM »
You've exceeded her math capability with that question.
That's why her answer is word salad and refers to her "expert". She cannot read an oscilloscope unless it has numbers in boxes. I know this is hard for you to believe, but by now you must realize it is true. Else, why can't she just come out and say, 1 and a quarter divisions, at 10 volts per division, equals 12.5 volts. It's because she doesn't understand what a division on the screen means, or even what a "tick mark" is.

Offline picowatt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2036
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2093 on: April 10, 2012, 10:22:51 AM »
In the first instance that display was to determine the applied frequency.  Not the voltage.  In the second instance - the DC voltage is NOT applicable.  Therefore - the voltage across the gate should be read as an AC voltage.  That's the advices that I was given.  Left to my own devices then I would say that the zero crossing line is midway between the peaks of the voltages displayed and the voltage should be read accordingly.  Therefore the value is something less than 6 volts.  And this adjustment because the signal from the generator is NOT DC but AC. 

Now - PicoWatt - let me know something from you.  I'd like to see it again - in black and white.  You have advised us that actually the offset as displayed needs to be applied to ALL values.  Let me know what you mean?  Are you suggesting that we must adjust the battery voltage from the mean average voltage displayed as DC to that -170 odd volts shown in the ofs display number?  And equally - are we to determine the voltage across the shunt to be offset by some 4 volts positive as displayed in that offset box?  Let me know.  Then I'll take your argument straight to my expert for comment.  It will be most entertaining.

Again,
Rosemary

Rosemary,

I must respectfully disagree with the answer you have given.  The voltage indicated on the FIG 3 capture for channel 3 during the portion of the cycle wherein the function generator output is a positive value is shown as approximately +12.5 volts.

I would like to see as well where I said that the offset value must be added to anything.  I did no such thing.  I believe it was you that stated I must somehow use the "ofs" numbers to measure or correct my values from the screen.

Regarding the -172volt offset indicated for channel 2 in that same FIG 3 scope capture, the -172volts is merely telling us how far down the position of the channel 2 zero volts line is from the center of the screen.

Referring again to FIG 3, the zero volt reference indicator to the left of the screen for channel 2 is 1.72 major divisions below the center of the screen.  The vertical sensitivity of channel 2 is set to 100volts per division.  1.72 divisions times 100volts per division is -172volts.  Therefore the zero volts reference line (and indicator) has been positioned (via the offset control) at -172volts below the center of the screen.  And that is what and all the "ofs" numbers are saying.

As to what the indicated battery voltage is.  During the portion of the cycle wherein the function generator is a positive voltage, I see the battery voltage trace (channel 2) as being approximately 2.5 minor divisions above the channel 2 zero volt reference line (again, the indicator to the left of the screen).  Channel 2 is set to 100volts per division.  There are four minor divisions per major division so each minor division equals one fourth of 100volts, which is 25volts.  2.5 minor divisions times 25 volts equals 62.5 volts, which is in close agreeent with the indicated 65volt mean value.

No where in estimating the voltages from optically reading the traces on the screen did I need, use, or require the "ofs" number.

All that is required to read a value off the screen is the "zero reference line" indicated to the left of the screen and the "volts per division" setting for the channel I am measuring. 

PW





Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2093 on: April 10, 2012, 10:22:51 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2094 on: April 10, 2012, 10:24:33 AM »
Here, PicoWatt. Maybe this will help you explain the offset to Rosemary. Maybe not.

Rosemary, do you realise that the Tek oscilloscope doesn't even display the offset value in a box on the screen, because it is generally of no use or interest to the user? The Zero levels are indicated, of course, but it is up to the user to count the tick marks from the scope's center line to the channel marker if the offset value is, for some strange reason, needed.

In the LeCroy diagram below, from the demo, the offset of the GREEN channel, the common mosfet drains, is explained. The offset value read in the channel settings box is nothing more than the "distance" that the channel's zero marker has been moved from SCREEN CENTER. It has nothing to do with what is traced on the channel. This number will be the SAME no matter what the waveform in the trace is, flatline or the most complex you can imagine... because all it is telling you is how far down or up the trace has been moved-- with the vertical position knob-- from the screen's exact centerline. It has NOTHING to do with the waveform or the values of the waveform's parameters.
You can see that the distance in volts, using that channel's scale, down from center, is the offset value given in the box.

You can prove this for yourself, Rosemary, if you have the scope handy. Just turn it on , don't give it any input, and wiggle the channel position knobs. You will see that the offset value given in the box depends only on where that little zero marker under the channel number on the left side of the screen is, relative to the center of the screen, and scaled by the channel volts per division setting. It has nothing whatever to do with the waveform at all.


Offline picowatt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2036
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2095 on: April 10, 2012, 10:35:24 AM »
TK,

Although I appreciate your assistance, I was hoping Rosemary and I could have a quiet discussion regarding the points raised.  Surely she has a copy of her paper and the FIG 3 I have been referencing.

I would like to resolve the value readings with her regarding the LeCroy as that is the the scope used in the captures discussed.

But thank-you for your efforts,
PW

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2095 on: April 10, 2012, 10:35:24 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2096 on: April 10, 2012, 10:37:05 AM »
Rosemary, just considering that very brief portion of the rectangular gate drive pulse that is at its highest value, and not oscillating.... is that portion of the signal DC, or not? I'm talking about a single pulse, just the highest portion, that straight line that persists until the signal drops again and oscillates. DC, or not?

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2097 on: April 10, 2012, 10:37:40 AM »
TK,

Althouh I appreciate your assistance, I was hoping Rosemary and I could have a quiet discussion regarding the points raised.  Surely she has a copy of her paper and the FIG 3 I have been referencing.

I would like to resolve the value readings with her regarding the LeCroy as that is the the scope used in the captures discussed.

But thank-you for your efforts,
PW

OK, I get the message. Have fun. But you are travelling down a well worn and rocky path that leads nowhere.

Offline picowatt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2036
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2098 on: April 10, 2012, 10:46:23 AM »
Rosemary,

The scope captures discussed were from your papers.  I do not understand how you can think in any way that discussions related to values indicated by those captures are of little value to you or replicators.

The discussions related to values indicated are only "circular" as you say, because you disagree with how I am reading the captures.

I believe this began when I stated that the channel 3 trace in FIG 3 was at +12.5 volts during the portion of the cycle wherein the function generator output is a positive voltage, and I continue to stand by that statement.

PW 

Offline fuzzytomcat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 676
    • Open Source Research and Development
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #2099 on: April 10, 2012, 11:31:43 AM »
Howdy members and guests,

After the repeated requests for Donovan Martin's input the main known NERD RAT collaborator in the two papers or manuscripts Rosemary submitted to accredited journals or magazines for possible peer review and publication. I couldn't believe how fast that sharp shovel of Rosemary's with dirt a flying everywhere and went to bury my post under her eighteen (18) in a row postings .... some kind of Rosemary's weird cryptic shorthand script which on it's face is really disturbing the context of the posts.  :o

http://www.overunity.com/11675/another-small-breakthrough-on-our-nerd-technology/msg316652/#msg316652
http://www.overunity.com/11675/another-small-breakthrough-on-our-nerd-technology/msg316653/#msg316653
http://www.overunity.com/11675/another-small-breakthrough-on-our-nerd-technology/msg316654/#msg316654
http://www.overunity.com/11675/another-small-breakthrough-on-our-nerd-technology/msg316656/#msg316656
http://www.overunity.com/11675/another-small-breakthrough-on-our-nerd-technology/msg316657/#msg316657
http://www.overunity.com/11675/another-small-breakthrough-on-our-nerd-technology/msg316658/#msg316658
http://www.overunity.com/11675/another-small-breakthrough-on-our-nerd-technology/msg316659/#msg316659
http://www.overunity.com/11675/another-small-breakthrough-on-our-nerd-technology/msg316660/#msg316660
http://www.overunity.com/11675/another-small-breakthrough-on-our-nerd-technology/msg316661/#msg316661
http://www.overunity.com/11675/another-small-breakthrough-on-our-nerd-technology/msg316662/#msg316662
http://www.overunity.com/11675/another-small-breakthrough-on-our-nerd-technology/msg316663/#msg316663
http://www.overunity.com/11675/another-small-breakthrough-on-our-nerd-technology/msg316664/#msg316664
http://www.overunity.com/11675/another-small-breakthrough-on-our-nerd-technology/msg316665/#msg316665
http://www.overunity.com/11675/another-small-breakthrough-on-our-nerd-technology/msg316666/#msg316666
http://www.overunity.com/11675/another-small-breakthrough-on-our-nerd-technology/msg316667/#msg316667
http://www.overunity.com/11675/another-small-breakthrough-on-our-nerd-technology/msg316668/#msg316668
http://www.overunity.com/11675/another-small-breakthrough-on-our-nerd-technology/msg316669/#msg316669
http://www.overunity.com/11675/another-small-breakthrough-on-our-nerd-technology/msg316670/#msg316670


The problem now after speed reading many of her postings or reply's I found a answer to a question asked about the open source community needing to talk to him as he was the only one that is listed on the newly submitted COP>INFINITY NERD RAT papers with a known engineering background familiar with electronics and has worked with Rosemary on the Quantum 2002 article claiming a COP>17 device in February 2009.  ???

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Experimental Evidence of a Breach of Unity on Switched Circuit Apparatus                              ( ROSSI-JOP-1-PDF.pdf )
Rosemary Ainslie, Donovan Martin, Evan Robinson, Mario Human, Alan Macey, Riaan Theron

Proposed variation to Faraday’s Lines of Force to include a magnetic dipole in its structure  ( ROSSI-JOP-2- PDF.pdf )
Rosemary Ainslie, Donovan Martin, Evan Robinson, Mario Human, Alan Macey, Riaan Theron
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The answer why we haven't heard was directed to Poynt99 and not fully explained or reiterated again to the open source community ever even though it's been asked numerous times by other members and myself. The other thing which seems very dishonest, misleading and misrepresented to everyone is Donovan Martin's name as a "AUTHOR" on both papers .....  :o

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.overunity.com/10407/rosemary-ainslie-circuit-demonstration-on-saturday-march-12th-2011/msg286294/#msg286294                         Reply #1266 on: May 13, 2011, 08:33:35 PM

Poynty - Donny is NOT working on this.  He's working on other things. His time spent on this subject is very constrained. He'll only be able to concentrate time on this subject when we get formal research funding. He has a young family to support and works 24/7 on his own inventions that are absolutely cutting edge.  Mostly related to improvements on traditional energy savings and water savings.  But as in most 'new technologies' he has to forge all kinds of software and suchlike to get it all going.But he absolutely CANNOT afford time on something as radical as our tests because they do not YET carry enough credibility to afford research funding.  When they do - then he'll come to the party full time.  It's his passion.  But he does not believe in the value of forums although he believes in Open Source.  Not many do believe in the value of forums.  And considering my own history - it's probably a fair concern.  I only stick to it because I believe dialogue has a way of getting to those fundamental issues as well as a means of spreading the word.

Kindest again,
Rosie
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It appears to me that Donovan Martin's name was added to the papers in a attempt to give them some kind of blanket credibility but that cant be true at all when he didn't even work on the COP>INFINITY project in any way shape or form. No wonder he has been a "NO" show at the OU forum and impossible to reach through e-mails for comments on the device, testing and evaluation he did .... there wasn't any he did just students at CUPT in South Africa. I guess a claim of a COP>INFINITY wasn't good enough for Donovan Martin unless it had cash attached to it.

Cheers,
FTC
 ???

 

OneLink