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

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: 83535
  • *Latest: Fritzman

  • *Total Posts: 514381
  • *Total Topics: 15304
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 7
  • *Guests: 14
  • *Total: 21

Author Topic: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims  (Read 249359 times)

Offline Grimer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 455
    • Frank Grimer's Website
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #165 on: January 09, 2014, 01:25:28 AM »
...
Where is an _earlier_ demonstration of Mylow's fishing line drive than mine? Sterling Allen even acknowledged that I was the first "replicator" of Mylow's motor, but he weaseled and wouldn't give me the prize he offered, because my replication wasn't OU. Never mind that I did it the same way as Mylow, that it was a true and precise replication of all the important features, never mind that Mylow's wasn't OU either ....

Yes, some people did video analysis that showed the fishing line in Mylow's vids at about the same time but these weren't demonstrations or replications like I performed, and they were widely challenged by the usual flock of believing sheep. Not until I actually demonstrated that the fishing line drive would work across the room and even around corners did it finally sink in that Mylow was a cynical fraudster.
...
What really pissed me off about Mylow was that he had a statue of St Joseph clearly visible in his videos. No doubt to give assurance to people like me that he was being honest. Diabolical - which figures since the devil is the father of lies.


I say, do you think Rosemary is possessed. :D


It would certainly explain her persecution of you and all her lies (allegedly). I added that because I'm in no position to judge her science.


Do you remember that appalling poster who attacked me on the Steorn forum, TK, with multiple references to shit and stuff. I'm sure he was possessed. I felt most uncomfortable - it was really horrid. Fortunately Shawn eventually banned him.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #166 on: January 09, 2014, 02:41:44 AM »
I don't think I believe in "possession" in quite the same way you do, Frank. I definitely do believe in evil people, though, and I believe in "evil" as a force or attribute of human consciousness. Externalizing it and anthropomorphizing it into "demons" and a "Satan" as some personal adversary of "Good" .... well, if it helps some people come to grips with what is inside of every human, then fine. A model can be as good as reality for some purposes even if the model is "incorrect".

Ainslie is evil, in my opinion. The evidence for this can be seen in her insulting and disrespecting language, as well as in the manifest lies she has told. Your Satan is the "Father of Lies" after all.

I've given links to three of Ainslie's YouTube accounts, where anyone can see the videos she made, and the descriptions, which carry her inimitable style, and the personal details which describe her. It is a violation of YouTube's terms of service for a person to let other people use one's YT logins. Further, just because someone else may have been sitting at the computer to press the "Enter" key to initiate the upload... Ainslie is nevertheless fully, 100 percent responsible for those things that are uploaded, in her name, on her YT channels. Hence, for her to protest, over and over, as she has been doing lately, that she isn't responsible for them and didn't upload them... is more baldfaced lying, distorting the truth, or whatever you want to call it. Certainly it is NOT the TRUTH for her to claim no responsibility for the videos and the uploads to channels bearing HER NAME and HER CONTACT DETAILS. So there's no need for you to put "allegedly" in there. She has been proven to be a liar, over and over again, and the YT videos on her channels constitute just one set of proofs. The schematics in the various versions of her "papers" are another set of proofs of her lying: the Quantum magazine schematic has been explained over and over as being utterly unable to perform at the specified values, and the two different 5-mosfet schematics posted in her "papers" show the Black FG lead in a location where it was never actually used by Ainslie or her team, and in fact _could not have been used_ due to the groundloop problem that would have existed with her _non-isolatable_ equipment. The month-long deception about the true circuit used, after the earlier demonstration, constitutes another set of proofs of Ainslie lying, continually and repeatedly.


Quote
In all my life - I have NEVER posted any youtube video anywhere at all.  I do not know how it's done.  I rely on others to do this.  It's a failing that I don't usually bring to public attention.

http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCAbOZ4AUgzJBbit6Yu_ee-g/videos
http://www.youtube.com/user/dooziedont/videos
http://www.youtube.com/user/aetherevarising

A wife who hires a hitman to kill her husband.... may NEVER have fired a gun in her life, may not know how it is done, may RELY ON OTHERS TO DO THIS for her. But morally and legally she is JUST AS RESPONSIBLE, or even more so, than the person who actually pulled the trigger. I can cite case after case where the triggerman got less punishment than the person who hired him. If something is done by your order, in your name, using materials you provide, and it would not have been done without your instigation.... then you are responsible, just as if you yourself performed the entire act. Legally, morally, we all know this to be true. All of us, except Rosemary Ainslie.

Offline gmeast

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 485
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #167 on: January 09, 2014, 08:01:45 AM »
I don't think I believe in "possession" in quite the same way you do, Frank. I definitely do believe in evil people, though, and I believe in "evil" as a force or attribute of human consciousness. Externalizing it and anthropomorphizing it into "demons" and a "Satan" as some personal adversary of "Good" .... well, if it helps some people come to grips with what is inside of every human, then fine. A model can be as good as reality for some purposes even if the model is "incorrect".

Ainslie is evil, in my opinion. The evidence for this can be seen in her insulting and disrespecting language, as well as in the manifest lies she has told. Your Satan is the "Father of Lies" after all.

I've given links to three of Ainslie's YouTube accounts, where anyone can see the videos she made, and the descriptions, which carry her inimitable style, and the personal details which describe her. It is a violation of YouTube's terms of service for a person to let other people use one's YT logins. Further, just because someone else may have been sitting at the computer to press the "Enter" key to initiate the upload... Ainslie is nevertheless fully, 100 percent responsible for those things that are uploaded, in her name, on her YT channels. Hence, for her to protest, over and over, as she has been doing lately, that she isn't responsible for them and didn't upload them... is more baldfaced lying, distorting the truth, or whatever you want to call it. Certainly it is NOT the TRUTH for her to claim no responsibility for the videos and the uploads to channels bearing HER NAME and HER CONTACT DETAILS. So there's no need for you to put "allegedly" in there. She has been proven to be a liar, over and over again, and the YT videos on her channels constitute just one set of proofs. The schematics in the various versions of her "papers" are another set of proofs of her lying: the Quantum magazine schematic has been explained over and over as being utterly unable to perform at the specified values, and the two different 5-mosfet schematics posted in her "papers" show the Black FG lead in a location where it was never actually used by Ainslie or her team, and in fact _could not have been used_ due to the groundloop problem that would have existed with her _non-isolatable_ equipment. The month-long deception about the true circuit used, after the earlier demonstration, constitutes another set of proofs of Ainslie lying, continually and repeatedly.


http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCAbOZ4AUgzJBbit6Yu_ee-g/videos
http://www.youtube.com/user/dooziedont/videos
http://www.youtube.com/user/aetherevarising

A wife who hires a hitman to kill her husband.... may NEVER have fired a gun in her life, may not know how it is done, may RELY ON OTHERS TO DO THIS for her. But morally and legally she is JUST AS RESPONSIBLE, or even more so, than the person who actually pulled the trigger. I can cite case after case where the triggerman got less punishment than the person who hired him. If something is done by your order, in your name, using materials you provide, and it would not have been done without your instigation.... then you are responsible, just as if you yourself performed the entire act. Legally, morally, we all know this to be true. All of us, except Rosemary Ainslie.


TK, YOU ARE A PSYCHO ... OCD TO THE MAX.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #167 on: January 09, 2014, 08:01:45 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Grimer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 455
    • Frank Grimer's Website
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #168 on: January 09, 2014, 08:34:36 AM »

TK, YOU ARE A PSYCHO ... OCD TO THE MAX.


No he isn't.


He is a seeker after the truth. And that makes him unpopular with people like you.

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #169 on: January 09, 2014, 11:00:03 AM »

TK, YOU ARE A PSYCHO ... OCD TO THE MAX.
GMEAST Whatever else TK may or may not be, he has proven himself an excellent experimental scientist.  He uses sound methods to investigate the subjects he is interested in, is willing to be surprised by what what he observes, and shares his methods and results in clear and comprehensive presentations.

We are now more than eleven years past the publication of Ms. Ainslie's magazine article.  In all of that time there has not been a single replication of the heat output energy gain over input electrical energy that she and her collaborators reported.  In all of that time neither Ms. Ainslie nor any of her collaborators have reconciled the absolute proven fact that the  "precise circuit" depicted in that article is incapable of producing the timing also specified in that article as producing the alleged energy gain.  Many experimenters have attempted variations of the circuit and timing and none have obtained her reported gains.  However, TK has reliably demonstrated that the gains reported in the magazine article could easily be the result of Ms. Ainslie misunderstanding the operation of her own test apparatus.  Rather than honestly explore TK explanation to determine if it is the truth, she has engaged in very personal public squabbles.

TK and many others have spent many hours attempting to find out from Ms. Ainslie exactly what circuit was used to obtain the observations that led her and her collaborators to their extraordinary conclusions.  I have myself fully investigated and reported on the timing portion of the apparatus reported in that article.  To this day, no one knows for certain what circuit was used or what measurements were observed.  That fault lies with Ms. Ainslie and her collaborators, not with the replicators, including TK.  In fact of late Ms. Ainslie expresses the view that the "precise circuit" does not matter.  Yet, neither she nor any of her collaborators have shown any configuration that yields the results claimed in that magazine article.

It is now several years since Ms. Ainslie first presented her "Q-Array" circuit, and composed with her collaborators the two papers:  "Experimental Evidence of a Breach of Unity
Measured on Switched Circuit Apparatus", and "Proposed variation to Faradays Lines of Force to include a magnetic dipole in its structure".  Ms. Ainslie to her credit publicly reproduced her private tests of August 10, 2013 on August 11, 2013 showing that the energy gains that she thought she had obtained with the "Q-Array" fixture were in fact illusions caused by measurement errors.  She showed that the actual heat output from the heating element using the "Q-Array" circuit was only 20% of the energy drawn from the battery.  Also to her credit, she then withdrew the two papers.

Now, with absolutely no new evidence, Ms. Ainslie attempts to reinstate her claims.  These are claims that she and her collaborators proved false in August 2013.  Coincident with that incredible decision, Ms. Ainslie has elected to throw barb after barb against persons who have not only consistently shown their work, but shown their work to be correct.

If as your posts suggest, you believe Ms. Ainslie's claims then I suggest you attempt to replicate her experiments and claimed results, and stop taking cheap shots at people who already have.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #169 on: January 09, 2014, 11:00:03 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline poynt99

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 3586
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #170 on: January 09, 2014, 03:22:30 PM »
There are a few psychos on this forum (including one posting in this thread mentioning and with OCD), but TK is certainly not one of them.

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #171 on: January 09, 2014, 07:44:20 PM »
Thanks for chiming in, Mark E.

The "groundloop" problem is this.

The Negative pole of the battery is used as the common ground reference point for all oscilloscope probes. The primary scope used by Ainslie, the LeCroy WaveJet 324, has all of the probe reference leads connected to the chassis ground, which is connected to the mains ground through the ground pin of the power cord. All scope probe "grounds" or references are connected to chassis and mains ground.
See pages 10 and 11 in the 300 series manual.

http://cdn.teledynelecroy.com/files/manuals/wj300a-gsm_reva.pdf

However, the "ground" or Black output lead from the Function Generator should NOT be connected at this point because doing so allows the FG to bypass the circuit's Current Sense Resistor (CSR or CVR). To allow the CSR to see all the important currents in the circuit the FG Black output lead must be connected on the transistor side of the CSR, not the battery side.

BUT.... on many Function Generators, the Black (BNC shield) output lead is also connected to the chassis ground and the mains ground! This means that a groundloop is formed: the Black FG lead is connected to the scope grounds, back through the Mains ground connection. So, in the claimed Ainslie circuit given in the two daft manuscripts, the scope grounds are on one side of the CSR and the FG ground is on the other side of the CSR, effectively shorting it out. Therefore the CSR will not give reliable readings of the currents in the circuit.

The Function Generator used by Ainslie was the IsoTech GFG 8216a. I can't tell explicitly in the manual whether the chassis ground is permanently connected to the Black (BNC shield) output, but going by the "ground" symbols on each of the BNC connectors I believe it is.

http://www.artisantg.com/info/PDF__496E7374656B5F4746475F38323535415F4D616E75616C.pdf

IF the GFG8216a FG does indeed have its Black output lead connected permanently to chassis and mains ground... then the only way that one may get valid readings from the CSR when connected as shown in the two manuscripts would be to use a ground lift adapter on one or the other of the instruments, to avoid shorting the CSR by the groundloop. No mention of this problem, or the use of a ground lift adapter, is made in the manuscripts. But we know already that the Ainslie team never actually used this connection! They always used the FG Black output lead connected at the common circuit ground, the battery Negative pole.

Tl;dr: All the current data from the scope used in the Ainslie reports is invalid. It was either obtained with an effectively shorted CSR (If they actually used the schematic in the reports) OR it allowed the current path through the FG to bypass the CSR altogether (if they used the same connection they always used in all available photos and demonstrations.) The only way around this difficulty would be for the Ainslie team somehow to show that, for the manuscripts, they did indeed use the connection in the schematics given, AND used either a ground-lift adapter or an isolated FG. Otherwise, all the current data is invalid.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #171 on: January 09, 2014, 07:44:20 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #172 on: January 09, 2014, 11:33:32 PM »
Thanks for chiming in, Mark E.

The "groundloop" problem is this. ...

TinselKoala, you are welcome.  During the June 29 demonstration Donovan Martin confirmed what you note:  The Instek function generator black lead connects to the mains earth.  The function generator was connected to the battery instead of the transistors as they documented in their papers.  The function generator debacle is one of the discrepancies between what Ms. Ainslie and her collaborators said they had done and what they actually did that you and others have exposed. 

Ms. Ainslie and her collaborators should be grateful that skilled persons such as yourself and poynt99 have taken so much time to figure out her actual circuits and test configurations.  She should be grateful that you have determined major error sources.  Were Ms. Ainslie to have actually made a discovery, knowing the actual conditions needed to reproduce that discovery would be important to all concerned.

Over these many years Ms. Ainslie and her collaborators have shown that they have not made the discoveries that they have claimed.  Diligent efforts by replicators such as poynt99 and yourself, as well as Ms. Ainslie's own June and August demonstrations have established without any doubt that the thermal energy gains that they thought they had were all illusions.  Those demonstrations probably would never have happened had it not been for you and poynt99.  Whether they acknowledge it or not, Ms. Ainslie and her collaborators are deeply in your collective debt.


Offline gmeast

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 485
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #173 on: January 10, 2014, 02:19:13 AM »
GMEAST Whatever else TK may or may not be, he has proven himself an excellent experimental scientist.  He uses sound methods to investigate the subjects he is interested in, is willing to be surprised by what what he observes, and shares his methods and results in clear and comprehensive presentations.

We are now more than eleven years past the publication of Ms. Ainslie's magazine article.  In all of that time there has not been a single replication of the heat output energy gain over input electrical energy that she and her collaborators reported.  In all of that time neither Ms. Ainslie nor any of her collaborators have reconciled the absolute proven fact that the  "precise circuit" depicted in that article is incapable of producing the timing also specified in that article as producing the alleged energy gain.  Many experimenters have attempted variations of the circuit and timing and none have obtained her reported gains.  However, TK has reliably demonstrated that the gains reported in the magazine article could easily be the result of Ms. Ainslie misunderstanding the operation of her own test apparatus.  Rather than honestly explore TK explanation to determine if it is the truth, she has engaged in very personal public squabbles.

TK and many others have spent many hours attempting to find out from Ms. Ainslie exactly what circuit was used to obtain the observations that led her and her collaborators to their extraordinary conclusions.  I have myself fully investigated and reported on the timing portion of the apparatus reported in that article.  To this day, no one knows for certain what circuit was used or what measurements were observed.  That fault lies with Ms. Ainslie and her collaborators, not with the replicators, including TK.  In fact of late Ms. Ainslie expresses the view that the "precise circuit" does not matter.  Yet, neither she nor any of her collaborators have shown any configuration that yields the results claimed in that magazine article.

It is now several years since Ms. Ainslie first presented her "Q-Array" circuit, and composed with her collaborators the two papers:  "Experimental Evidence of a Breach of Unity
Measured on Switched Circuit Apparatus", and "Proposed variation to Faradays Lines of Force to include a magnetic dipole in its structure".  Ms. Ainslie to her credit publicly reproduced her private tests of August 10, 2013 on August 11, 2013 showing that the energy gains that she thought she had obtained with the "Q-Array" fixture were in fact illusions caused by measurement errors.  She showed that the actual heat output from the heating element using the "Q-Array" circuit was only 20% of the energy drawn from the battery.  Also to her credit, she then withdrew the two papers.

Now, with absolutely no new evidence, Ms. Ainslie attempts to reinstate her claims.  These are claims that she and her collaborators proved false in August 2013.  Coincident with that incredible decision, Ms. Ainslie has elected to throw barb after barb against persons who have not only consistently shown their work, but shown their work to be correct.

If as your posts suggest, you believe Ms. Ainslie's claims then I suggest you attempt to replicate her experiments and claimed results, and stop taking cheap shots at people who already have.


Someone may or may not be 'an excellent experimental scientist' (as you put it), but when that person obsesses over 'needing' to crush or destroy someone else, as he does, any admirable qualities are overshadowed by this serious character flaw ... it is tantamount to pouting and stomping his feet in an uncontrolled fit. And to call someone "EVIL" is a little bit over the top ... very immature.


As for if I believe Rosemary Ainslie's claims, and if so why don't I replicate the experiment? I have been familiar with some of the observations made of Inductive Resistor Heater experiments performed by researchers over the course of the past 20 years. Upon learning of Rosiemary Ainslie's work I decided to finally build a variant of here experiment. My YouTube channel has a video slide show of my experiment and the results. I am convinced that there is something to what she claims. Of course TK considers any support for Rosemary Ainslie's claims to be scientific haressy, and so I have become just as Evil (I guess) and guilty by association. That sort of reasoning is childish ... again, very immature.     


Later,


Greg

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #173 on: January 10, 2014, 02:19:13 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #174 on: January 10, 2014, 02:35:46 AM »
LOL....

No, not by association, but rather, guilty in your own right.

Offline picowatt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1988
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #175 on: January 10, 2014, 02:40:46 AM »

Someone may or may not be 'an excellent experimental scientist' (as you put it), but when that person obsesses over 'needing' to crush or destroy someone else, as he does, any admirable qualities are overshadowed by this serious character flaw ... it is tantamount to pouting and stomping his feet in an uncontrolled fit. And to call someone "EVIL" is a little bit over the top ... very immature.


As for if I believe Rosemary Ainslie's claims, and if so why don't I replicate the experiment? I have been familiar with some of the observations made of Inductive Resistor Heater experiments performed by researchers over the course of the past 20 years. Upon learning of Rosiemary Ainslie's work I decided to finally build a variant of here experiment. My YouTube channel has a video slide show of my experiment and the results. I am convinced that there is something to what she claims. Of course TK considers any support for Rosemary Ainslie's claims to be scientific haressy, and so I have become just as Evil (I guess) and guilty by association. That sort of reasoning is childish ... again, very immature.     


Later,


Greg


Apparently you now no longer believe a battery is necessary to produce your observed "effect" and have considered performing your experiment with $15,000 worth of capacitors in place of the battery.

Would it not be wise to first perform your experiment using one $5 capacitor fed by a DC supply?

It would be quite impressive if your circuit produced more heating in the load for a given power supply I and V than when that same power supply I and V is connected directly to your load resistor.

If necessary, and as I suggested some time ago with regard to the use of a battery, the DC supply can be isolated from your circuit regarding AC (i.e., HF) using inductors.     

PW


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #175 on: January 10, 2014, 02:40:46 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #176 on: January 10, 2014, 02:57:23 AM »

Someone may or may not be 'an excellent experimental scientist' (as you put it), but when that person obsesses over 'needing' to crush or destroy someone else, as he does, any admirable qualities are overshadowed by this serious character flaw ... it is tantamount to pouting and stomping his feet in an uncontrolled fit. And to call someone "EVIL" is a little bit over the top ... very immature.


As for if I believe Rosemary Ainslie's claims, and if so why don't I replicate the experiment? I have been familiar with some of the observations made of Inductive Resistor Heater experiments performed by researchers over the course of the past 20 years. Upon learning of Rosiemary Ainslie's work I decided to finally build a variant of here experiment. My YouTube channel has a video slide show of my experiment and the results. I am convinced that there is something to what she claims. Of course TK considers any support for Rosemary Ainslie's claims to be scientific haressy, and so I have become just as Evil (I guess) and guilty by association. That sort of reasoning is childish ... again, very immature.     


Later,


Greg
Greg, when discussions degenerate to mud slinging there is little that can be accomplished.  That applies to everyone.  I don't know and I don't care who threw the first punch.  The fighting goes on as long as people keep throwing them.

TK's criticisms of Rosemary Ainslie's: claims, methods, and self-contradictions are scientifically valid.  If you dismiss the information that he or anyone brings to the table because of personal dislike, then you only deny yourself knowledge.

I briefly went through your slide show.  I see that you took efforts to develop an experiment protocol that you believe is sound.  I note that you believe you are seeing possible energy gains of around 25%.  That is very different than Rosemary Ainslie's claims of 16:1 from the magazine article and 10:1 or more from the Q-Array papers.  It is also close enough to 1.0 to want to question the assumptions and test them to make sure the 25% gain is not due to measurement error.  If it is real then you've found something extraordinary.  If there is a different thread where your experiments have been discussed, let me know and I will respond to your experiments there.

Offline gmeast

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 485
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #177 on: January 10, 2014, 05:29:35 AM »
Greg, when discussions degenerate to mud slinging there is little that can be accomplished.  That applies to everyone.  I don't know and I don't care who threw the first punch.  The fighting goes on as long as people keep throwing them.

TK's criticisms of Rosemary Ainslie's: claims, methods, and self-contradictions are scientifically valid.  If you dismiss the information that he or anyone brings to the table because of personal dislike, then you only deny yourself knowledge.

I briefly went through your slide show.  I see that you took efforts to develop an experiment protocol that you believe is sound.  I note that you believe you are seeing possible energy gains of around 25%.  That is very different than Rosemary Ainslie's claims of 16:1 from the magazine article and 10:1 or more from the Q-Array papers.  It is also close enough to 1.0 to want to question the assumptions and test them to make sure the 25% gain is not due to measurement error.  If it is real then you've found something extraordinary.  If there is a different thread where your experiments have been discussed, let me know and I will respond to your experiments there.


"Briefly" is NOT good enough. This is the problem with those with TK's narcissistic mind-set .  I don't care about Ainslie's 16:1 or 10:1 or anything else including the Q-Array papers.  My tests have been done multiple times and not only by me. In other forums I have shown tests conducted that take into account the Charge/Discharge efficiency of the battery and charger... the results are the same and there is no measurement error that can account for the results. You have simply found a forum wherein you can be the social misfit bully you most assuredly are in real life. Your intent here is NOT to make any significant contribution to the betterment of mankind and to free humanity from the choke-hold of the energy monopolies ... just like TK, Picowatt, and Poynty-ass. I feel very good about my place in this and my honest motive to help mankind. What can you say toward that end. Oh, by the way ... have you ever heard me ask for money? The answer is "NO"! ... So don't go anywhere down that road. Welcome to the forum ... you have been well indoctrinated by the likes of TK and clan ... AKA: The 3 Stooges. You seem to fit in very well. Congratulations ... mankind will assuredly show their appreciation and gratitude to you for your support of mankind's perpetual enslavement by the energy brokers.

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #178 on: January 10, 2014, 05:37:16 AM »
Still at it?

Consider the "rofl" repeated!


Here's what happened when GMYeast tried to 'replicate' Ainslie's Quantum magazine circuit.

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #179 on: January 10, 2014, 06:01:27 AM »

"Briefly" is NOT good enough. This is the problem with those with TK's narcissistic mind-set .  I don't care about Ainslie's 16:1 or 10:1 or anything else including the Q-Array papers.  My tests have been done multiple times and not only by me. In other forums I have shown tests conducted that take into account the Charge/Discharge efficiency of the battery and charger... the results are the same and there is no measurement error that can account for the results. You have simply found a forum wherein you can be the social misfit bully you most assuredly are in real life. Your intent here is NOT to make any significant contribution to the betterment of mankind and to free humanity from the choke-hold of the energy monopolies ... just like TK, Picowatt, and Poynty-ass. I feel very good about my place in this and my honest motive to help mankind. What can you say toward that end. Oh, by the way ... have you ever heard me ask for money? The answer is "NO"! ... So don't go anywhere down that road. Welcome to the forum ... you have been well indoctrinated by the likes of TK and clan ... AKA: The 3 Stooges. You seem to fit in very well. Congratulations ... mankind will assuredly show their appreciation and gratitude to you for your support of mankind's perpetual enslavement by the energy brokers.
Greg, I am sorry, but I wanted to watch Gary Hendershot's program and did not have time for anything more than a cursory look before Gary's program started.  I wanted you to know that my comments were based on a first brief look.

If you are going to make your introduction to me a fit of personal attacks, then I will simply let you go your own way.  I don't see how your attacks on others are any more acceptable than TK's behavior you criticize.  And I certainly do not see anything that justifies the vitriol you direct at me.

If you want help getting at the truth, whatever it may be, then I am happy to offer advice on tests that you can do to get there.  If you are correct, then that can help you produce evidence that will be persuasive to a wider audience.  If you are mistaken, then that can help you find where you went wrong.  I leave it up to you:  If you want my help then just be civil with me as I have been with you.  If you don't, then good luck with your research anyway.

 

OneLink