another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.

[TinselKoala]

Of course not...  because they aren't. But not only are they not correct ( in the sense of simple math errors or typos ) they betray that continuing fundamental conceptual error about energy, power, time, and electrical parameters that Rosemary clings to in her wilful ignorance.
Lack of education is one thing... decisions made long ago, neither here nor there. But in the present moment, discussing these topics, for her to remain ignorant and to persist in these errors is inexcusable and can only be deliberate on her part. Wilful ignorance. This is why I suggested that she herself find someone with the knowledge, that she can trust, to explain the matters to her in person. Of course, since she knows it all already -- or that is her basic attitude, in spite of her periodic false humility -- she won't bother to do this.

I had to go back thirty pages to find the best page in the thread. Has there been any progress at all since then? I don't really think so. Except of course that Rosemary is now likely doing her "back-channel" communications by PMs to various individuals.

http://www.overunity.com/11675/another-small-breakthrough-on-our-nerd-technology/660/

I must admit that I am surprised that she hasn't gone back and edited the post # 666 for its revealing content. That's why I've preserved it in multiple quotes in my own posts here -- posts that she cannot edit to change their meaning, as she has done so often in the past.

[Rosemary Ainslie]

LOL  Guys,

Lets go back to this statement.

NOW.  Let's look at your 'self-runner' demands.  We have never recharged those batteries - with one exception.  Two caught fire and BOTH were fully recharged.  We've had those batteries since January 2010.  We've been running them since August 2010.  I've now FINALLY checked their rated capacities.  They're 40 ampere hours each.  We've used 6 of them continually since that time.  According to this rating they are each able, theoretically to dissipate 12 volts x 40 amps x 60 seconds x 60 minutes x 1 hour x 6 batteries.  That gives a work potential - a total potential output of 10 368 000 JOULES. 

According to what has been carefully established it takes 4.18 Joules to raise 1 gram of water by 1 degree centigrade.  We've taken a little under 900 grams of water to 82 degrees centigrade.  We ran that test for 90 minutes.  Then we upped the frequency and took that water up a further 20 degrees to 104.  We ran that part of the test for 10 minutes.  Ambient was at 16.  Joules = 1 watt per second.  So.  Do the math.  4.18 x 900 grams x (82 - 16) 66 degrees C = 248 292 joules per second x 90 minutes of the test period = 22 342 280 joules.  Then ADD the last 10 minutes where the water was taken to boil and now you have 4.18 x 900 grams x (104 - 16) 88 degrees C = 331 156 joules per second x 10 minutes = 3 310 560 Joules.  Then add those two values 22 342 280 + 3 310 560 = 25.6 Million Joules.  All 5 batteries maximum potential output - available for work - is 10.3 Million Joules. In that test alone the battery outperformed its watt hour rating.  And that was just one test.  Now.  Over the 10 month period that those batteries have been running at various outputs - which, when added to the output on just this one test - then I think its safe to say that the evidence is conclusive.  Those batteries have outperformed. They are still at OVER 12 volts EACH.  They are all of them still FULLY CHARGED.

That was the test that was intended as a public demonstration and that was the same demo where no experts attended.  What we planned was to take the water to boil and then simply make a couple of cups of tea.

And then to this latest

Of course not...  because they aren't. But not only are they not correct ( in the sense of simple math errors or typos ) they betray that continuing fundamental conceptual error about energy, power, time, and electrical parameters that Rosemary clings to in her wilful ignorance.
Lack of education is one thing... decisions made long ago, neither here nor there. But in the present moment, discussing these topics, for her to remain ignorant  and to persist in these errors is inexcusable and can only be deliberate on her part. Wilful ignorance. This is why I suggested that she herself find someone with the knowledge, that she can trust, to explain the matters to her in person. Of course, since she knows it all already -- or that is her basic attitude, in spite of her periodic false humility -- she won't bother to do this.

I had to go back thirty pages to find the best page in the thread. Has there been any progress at all since then? I don't really think so. Except of course that Rosemary is now likely doing her "back-channel" communications by PMs to various individuals.

http://www.overunity.com/11675/another-small-breakthrough-on-our-nerd-technology/660/

I must admit that I am surprised that she hasn't gone back and edited the post # 666 for its revealing content. That's why I've preserved it in multiple quotes in my own posts here -- posts that she cannot edit to change their meaning, as she has done so often in the past.

LOL.  I've taken out all that 'glow'.  Something's very wrong in this software of Harti's. In any event.  OF COURSE I'm not going to edit anything.  There's nothing substantial that's wrong with that much referenced post of mine.  It's only a tad out.  I've allowed this posturing as I was well aware that it would likely be well referenced by TK.  And I was anxious to see those 'multiple quotes' LOL that he referenced with such reckless abandon.  There are even more amusing ones.  Ones where he tries to teach myself and all and sundry how to calculate JOULES.  And then both TK and Schubert post that TK 'ROCKS'.      No so much 'rocking' as 'rocky'.      Not sure if Schubert was being sarcastic.  And I'm not sure that Poynty saw TK's multiple 'errors' in his 'multiple quotes'.  Either way.  Here's the thing.

I stand by that earlier analysis but am, indeed, a tad out.  Our batteries are possibly 60 ampere hours.  Which means that I understated their potential output by about 2 million Watts or thereby.  Otherwise all's in the right ballpark.  And I think I've now left this unanswered for about as long as is required.  Guys, everyone.  There is absolutely NOTHING wrong with the analysis above.  I've even taken the trouble to get this checked out with experts.  I'll explain it in the unlikely event that TK again tries to imply all that he tries to imply.  What a joke. 

Kindest regards
Rosemary

It's actually been hilarious - and shows up TK for being an ace propagandist or a really poor scientist.  Not sure which. 

[Rosemary Ainslie]

And Mags, - here where you quoted me - highlighted in red.

hey rose

"Like Glen did on our own claim.  The problem is that - having tested it - then he tried to claim it as his own discovery.  Nothing to do with a replication.  Very confusing."

Oh. Id like to read up on that. 

Mags

I gave you a link.  Here it is again. 
http://www.scribd.com/doc/23455916/Open-Source-Evaluation-of-Power-Transients-Generated-to-Improve-Performance-Coefficient-of-Resistive-Heating-Systems

Kindly note that NOT ONLY does the paper detail a TEST but it is a declared 'REPLICATION' of our own COP>17 test.  He didn't get to COP>17 But he never got his mind around the exploitable 'math function' on his  loaned Tektronix - that would have enabled this.  But he did his best.  And COP>4 which is claimed in that paper courtesy the incorrect analysis of Harvey Gramm - or COP>7 which is closer to the fact - is still COP>1 - which is basically all that we're trying to bring to eveyone's attention.  And right now we've got a circuit that's giving us COP Infinity.  And it seems to be born out by the fact that the amount of energy dissipated is way in excess of the potential energy available from those 5 batteries we used for this water to boil test.

I hope that's clear.  As well as the fact that there are now claimants from South Africa who have got technology that apparently falls in line with Mylows earlier claims.  Those claims that apparently TK debunked - through the simple expediency of referencing a wire that may or may not have been in the original test.  Who knows?  Hopefully they'll have the good sense to keep their claims off forum lest TK get involved again.  God knows he does damage.  It's his mission in life.

Kindest regards,
Rosemary

[Rosemary Ainslie]

So Guys,

Here's what TK is hoping you'll believe.  Provided we get water to boil - then it matters not how long we keep it boiling you never again reference the amount of joules other than the amount required to reach boiling point in the first instance.  So.  If you want to calculate how much energy it takes to keep a pot boiling for 6 hours or so - to cook some ox tail say - then don't worry.  The actual amount of energy in joules - is only applicable to taking that water to boil.  Would that our electrical suppliers saw sense in this.  Our utility bills would not then be quite so onerous.

Unfortunately our utility suppliers are also not that idiotic.
Kindest as ever,

Rosemary

[TinselKoala]

So Guys,

Here's what TK is hoping you'll believe.  Provided we get water to boil - then it matters not how long we keep it boiling you never again reference the amount of joules other than the amount required to reach boiling point in the first instance.  So.  If you want to calculate how much energy it takes to keep a pot boiling for 6 hours or so - to cook some ox tail say - then don't worry.  The actual amount of energy in joules - is only applicable to taking that water to boil.  Would that our electrical suppliers saw sense in this.  Our utility bills would not then be quite so onerous.

Unfortunately our utility suppliers are also not that idiotic.
Kindest as ever,

Rosemary

Nope, that's not true at all.
And it is in fact typical of Rosemary's argumentation. She is claiming something that "I'm hoping for you to believe" when that simply isn't true at all. In other words.... it's another lie from Rosemary.
You should be grateful that the electric utilities DON"T calculate your energy usage the way Rosemary does... you'd be in for a big "shock" when you got your next bill.


I am referring, continually and ONLY for the purpose of the present argument, to the post you made. It's right there in your own quote of my quote.

"There's nothing substantial that's wrong with that much referenced post of mine.  It's only a tad out."

Rosemary.... as I have shown several times, it's out by a factor of about 75. That is, your claimed energy of 25.6 MILLION Joules is SEVENTYFIVE TIMES larger than the actual correct figures arrived at by correct calculations from your own basic input data: 900 grams of water raised from 16 degrees to 104 degrees (hah!) in 100 minutes. Your claim is equivalent to applying over  FOUR KILOWATTS, that is, over FIVE HORSEPOWER, continually, for 100 minutes, to your liter of water. That is absurd, no matter where the water-- or power-- came from. Your oxtail soup would be long boiled completely away.

And a JOULE is NOT a WATT PER SECOND.

Do you see? She DOES NOT EVEN UNDERSTAND where and what her errors are in the calculation.

Guys, everyone.  There is absolutely NOTHING wrong with the analysis above.  I've even taken the trouble to get this checked out with experts.  I'll explain it in the unlikely event that TK again tries to imply all that he tries to imply.

OK... please please pretty please EXPLAIN IT. Checked with experts? You really really are a piece of work. Experts in what? Cosmetics?

Let's start here: How many Joules does it take to raise 900 grams of water from 16 degrees C to 104 degrees C?
Or, if that's too much for you, how many Joules does it take to raise ONE gram of water from 16 degrees to 17 degrees? (Hint: the answer is in your quote, and it's the only thing you got right).