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: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims  (Read 404446 times)

Tseak

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 42
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #675 on: March 10, 2014, 12:20:30 PM »
What happened to North and South?
Thats taken care of by the formula. But there is a dependency on Mars approaching Neptune

MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #676 on: March 10, 2014, 12:32:43 PM »
Thats taken care of by the formula. But there is a dependency on Mars approaching Neptune
And if Saturn is also retrograde, then what?

poynt99

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 3582
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #677 on: March 10, 2014, 02:22:00 PM »
Some of you may remember "innovation station"?

nanobot=>innovation station?

MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #678 on: March 10, 2014, 02:33:22 PM »
Some of you may remember "innovation station"?

nanobot=>innovation station?
The poor guy is suffering fatal case of troll-itis.  For at least the time being, there is nothing factual going on of any interest.

synchro1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4720
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #679 on: March 11, 2014, 12:23:21 AM »
Tinselkoala is bullshit.

TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #680 on: March 11, 2014, 12:33:23 AM »
Tinselkoala is bullshit.

Where's your data, stinkro?

MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #681 on: March 11, 2014, 02:14:46 AM »
Tinselkoala is bullshit.
That's nice.  What in particular are you claiming that he has said is wrong?  What evidence do you have to support your claim?

MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #682 on: March 11, 2014, 02:22:55 AM »
I have one of those floor-standing room heaters that looks like a small radiator.  It works by convection and circulates oil like hot bubbly lava.

When the relay clicks on at either peak of the sine wave, it chimes out this musical note, "Ping!!!"  The R word.

It might be over unity.  :)

The Boss

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 52
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #683 on: March 11, 2014, 02:45:32 AM »
It took a while, but the Ainslie team of experts are finally posting.

TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #684 on: March 11, 2014, 08:17:14 AM »
Posting? For a moment there I thought you were serious. Ah.... but it's just a bunch more delusional nonsense that reveals both the depths of the Great Scientist's misconceptions and the heights of her arrogance.  Ranting, more like it.

Meanwhile...

I've been working on this Arduino-based time-lapse data logging made simple. Not only is the necessary information captured, but a visual record of the experimental runs is preserved. There can be no doubt about this kind of record-keeping. This video just illustrates the system, it's a "shakedown" to see if I could actualize my conceptions. I think the process worked pretty well, all things considering.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXH4ikaMUM0


MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #685 on: March 11, 2014, 09:41:18 AM »
Posting? For a moment there I thought you were serious. Ah.... but it's just a bunch more delusional nonsense that reveals both the depths of the Great Scientist's misconceptions and the heights of her arrogance.  Ranting, more like it.

Meanwhile...

I've been working on this Arduino-based time-lapse data logging made simple. Not only is the necessary information captured, but a visual record of the experimental runs is preserved. There can be no doubt about this kind of record-keeping. This video just illustrates the system, it's a "shakedown" to see if I could actualize my conceptions. I think the process worked pretty well, all things considering.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXH4ikaMUM0
It looks good.  You might want to prop the meters up slightly depending on the camera angle.

MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #686 on: March 11, 2014, 02:31:58 PM »
Sometimes little reminders are in order:

"The experiments conducted:  June 29, August 10, and August 11 failed to reproduce the results reported here."

"We therefore obtained heat output that was only a fraction of the input power."

"As we are unable to replicate our earlier reported results, we respectfully withdraw this paper in both of its parts."

In the educated world, when one cannot reproduce an extraordinary result, the extraordinary result is suspect:  It cannot be relied upon as valid.  There is always the option to determine the root cause for the unreproducible result.  One could for example note ways that the apparent result can be reproduced as the result of one form of error or another.  For example if a measurement appears to anomalously no current over a 14 second interval when other evidence suggests copious current flow, one could investigate and find that the experimenters did not connect their oscilloscope probes correctly as the Ainslie team discovered June 29, 2013.  Or if for example, a very large AC current appears to flow, one might investigate and find as the Ainslie team discovered June 29, 2013, that the AC signal they read was not across a non-inductive current sense resistor, but across a wiring inductance.

There are unfortunately those who cannot be educated even by their own direct observations.



TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #687 on: March 11, 2014, 03:15:46 PM »
Did you know that if something isn't copied over, mentioned or explicitly refuted, it is thereby ENDORSED?

That's really good to know, since it means that the Great Scientist Rosemary Ainslie thereby ENDORSES all of my video demonstrations she doesn't mention, the ones that explain all the features of the circuits, and that prove that she is utterly and hopelessly wrong in her silly claims.


Or does it? We've seen before that the Great Scientist isn't subject to the limitations or requirements of ordinary mortals. What's good for the gander apparently isn't good for the goose, in this case. Perhaps Ainslie can't tell that her rants, which only display her continuing ignorance, misconceptions and mendacities, are not rising to the level of significance worth noticing. Does one need to "refute" or even mention every housefly buzzing, every parrot squawking, that annoys one during important activities like naptime? Of course not.

MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #688 on: March 11, 2014, 03:42:58 PM »
Did you know that if something isn't copied over, mentioned or explicitly refuted, it is thereby ENDORSED?

That's really good to know, since it means that the Great Scientist Rosemary Ainslie thereby ENDORSES all of my video demonstrations she doesn't mention, the ones that explain all the features of the circuits, and that prove that she is utterly and hopelessly wrong in her silly claims.


Or does it? We've seen before that the Great Scientist isn't subject to the limitations or requirements of ordinary mortals. What's good for the gander apparently isn't good for the goose, in this case. Perhaps Ainslie can't tell that her rants, which only display her continuing ignorance, misconceptions and mendacities, are not rising to the level of significance worth noticing. Does one need to "refute" or even mention every housefly buzzing, every parrot squawking, that annoys one during important activities like naptime? Of course not.
Did you know that if someone doesn't object to your thoughts even if you don't express them, that constitutes endorsement?  This is all starting to fit together.  This "If someone doesn't come and argue whatever silly thing I say or think, they endorse my ideas." reasoning could explain a lot.  Think about all the endorsements that Ms. Ainslie has claimed but has been woe to evidence.  They could all very well be the same sort of imaginary endorsements of which she currently speaks.

TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #689 on: March 11, 2014, 04:28:31 PM »
Sure, but it is even more likely that they are complete fictions, total fabrications. They allegedly happened 12 or 14 years ago and there has never been presented a scrap of evidence, not so much as an email, that the alleged vettings and endorsements actually ever existed. Look at how she distorts and misrepresents the events of six months ago, of three years ago, and even of the present time, where records actually DO exist! I think that she is just making it up, with perhaps a tiny kernel of reality that has been embellished, sculpted and encrusted upon over all these intervening years. As I've said many times before, you cannot believe _anything_ that Ainslie says unless you can find some independent outside confirmation. They, meaning Donovan Martin and Rosemary Ainslie, are demonstrated and admitted liars, and if there is no evidence presented to support their contentions, you are not required or even expected to believe them. In fact, by disbelieving _everything_ they say, you are more likely than not to be correct.