another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.

[fuzzytomcat]

Hi members and guests,

It appears Rosemary is fishing again and making slanderous unfounded claims against me , this has be hashed over four (4) times in different threads in
different forums, it's getting old just like the FRAUDULENT claim on a COP greater than INFINITY ........ or ....... COP>INFINITY .

For your references and for the libel claim -
__________________________________________________________________________________________________

http://www.energeticforum.com/inductive-resistor/5359-mosfet-heating-circuits-3.html#post93746


I'm sorry it took so long to do a detailed overview of the "LIVE" broadcast I did in the "Open Source Research and Development" channel on
the January 9, 2010 5 Hour non stop video recording.

This video as you are aware is one of the best ever recorded representation of the preferred mode of operation but only in a non stop 5 Hour video. I'm sure that
many members and guests don't realize the difficulty in capturing this effect for the purpose of recording the data properly and if given the time looking at the
recorded video everyone can see the problems that we face in getting accurate data.
The constant 24 volt battery bank voltage fluctuations going up and down the Mosfet "drain" spike oscillating from 500 to 900 volts, battery voltage down the
Mosfet spikes, battery voltage up the Mosfet voltage to normal operating range, back and forth over and over.

I have tried to get as close to this mode of operation in   Test #13    which was used in the IEEE submittal
Open Source Evaluation of Power Transients Generated to Improve Performance Coefficient of Resistive Heating Systems the team including yourself did, and
in   Test #22 but never being able to record the data scientifically correct because of the circuits complex oscillating waveforms. I don't think everyone, members
and guests understands that the Test #13 was done with a Tektronix TDS 3054C which has a maximum resolution of 10K of data spread over a 10 x 10 grid
or divisions so each one has 1k of data samples separately for each of the 4 channels. The data collected in Test #22 was with a Tektronix DPO 3054 which has
a maximum resolution of 5M of data, but I used the 100K which is spread over the same 10 x 10 grid or divisions so each one has 10k of data samples separately
for each of the 4 channels ..... ten ( 10 ) times the data of the TDS 3054C used in Test #13.

The problem being we need to find a method of capturing the data continuously in real time, there's nothing wrong with Tektronix TDS 3054C or the DPO 3054
these are the finest instruments I've ever used and are extremely accurate, but if you push the acquire button at the wrong time you can appear to get conflicting
or skewed data, not the case .... were you before the spike, during the spike or after the spike when the data was collected. I had a allotted dedicated set time to
record the data, It was the time frame I used with the 6 minutes or as fast as the data could be physically collected with the finest equipment I had at my disposal.

I am in total agreement with you that something "good" is happening in the Mosfet Heating Circuit and can be plainly seen in the recorded videos, we just need
to somehow get a streaming real time data recording. Maybe by somehow obtaining a   Real-Time Spectrum Analyzers from Tektronix or some other method to
verify the data findings as you suggested, the equipment I previously used as good as it is, just isn't enough to totally capture what is occurring during the
preferred mode of operation.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

[fuzzytomcat]

http://www.overunity.com/11675/another-small-breakthrough-on-our-nerd-technology/msg315956/#msg315956      Reply #1224 on: March 19, 2012, 12:40:13 AM

Rosemary ..... your saying your "correct and completed" papers submitted for PEER REVIEW and possible publications that the content are 100% TRUE and Factual.

YES   or   NO !!!

This is being recorded as your statement of fact, any thing other than a yes or no 24 Hrs from this posting if not answered, will be a "NO" and recorded as such !!

We established "CUT OFF" dates for your NERD RAT published device schematics based on established 12 MARCH 2011 "VIDEO" evidence .....

http://www.overunity.com/11675/another-small-breakthrough-on-our-nerd-technology/msg315729/#msg315729      Reply #1117 on: March 17, 2012, 12:45:43 AM

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________


YOUR 24 HOURS ARE UP ............. THERE WILL BE A FINAL STATEMENT ON THIS SUBJECT TO COME !!

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Guys I must apologise for Glen Lettenmaier

He is that anxious that you never read his posts that he ensures they all 'fall off the page'.  It's an irritating technique because it also obliges
the rest of us to carefully edit the line length of each post - to get it back into perspective.  He is entirely unable to post an original opinion -
relying as he does on other's writing to fill up as much space as possible.  I am afraid he is rather committed to stealing this entire technology
with whatever methods he can manage.  And they're limited to this 'cut and paste' process that renders this thread unreadable.

Nor has he any idea of how to apply any kind of professional restraint.  Nor does he know how to argue.  He can only shout - in multi colour. 
For some reason he's inordinately proud of this ability.  I am not entirely sure of his emotional age.  But from the appearances I would not be
inclined to peg this too high.

Meanwhile - I have learned a bitter lesson.  Which is that it is better not to trust the presentations of members of these forums.  Would that I
had realised this sooner.  It is a matter of abiding shame that I ever associated mine and a co-author's good name with his.

Regards,
Rosemary Ainslie

[Rosemary Ainslie]

AGAIN
Here's a repost for Poynty Point as this has again fallen off the page without an answer

Poynty - here's the revised proposed definitive draw down test.

1    We apply the element resistor to a variable power supply source
2    We adjust the applied voltage until the applied power measures approximately 60 watts. 
3    On our 10 Ohm resistor this is anticipated to be 24 volts x 2.4 amps = 57.6 watts or thereby
4    We measure the stable temperature of that element at that level of wattage delivered by the variable supply
5    We note the exact rate of current flow to sustain that required temperature - over time.
6    We anticipate that this will be close of 2.4 amps.
7    Therefore I^2R = the required wattage to manage that required heat signature.
     This will represent the control setting.

9    We then apply the required number of batteries in conjunction with the required adjustments to the switch and offset settings
10  To match the same heat signature over the experiment as was evident in the control
      This will represent the experimental setting

11  We attach the same number and type of batteries in the control as used in the experiment
12  We adjust the resistive load to ensure that 2.4 amps or thereby is discharged when placed in series with that supply. 
13  The Ohms value of that resistor will be chosen and applied accordingly.
      This will represent the control test

14  We apply the element resistor on the circuit.
      This will represent the experiment.

15  We run both tests concurrently and measure all data including the rate of battery draw down - continuously
16  We will recharge both sets of batteries in series.
17  We will then apply the control batteries to the experiment and the experimental batteries to the control
18  We will then rerun those tests
19  This to ensure that there are no battery vagaries are associated with the previous results.
      Should the control supply deplete well in advance of the experiment in both test periods - then that will constitute a 'win'.

Does that cut it Poynty?  Let me know.
Kindest regards,
Rosie

[Rosemary Ainslie]

And this on the conditions
CONDITIONS

Just for general discussion.  Here's what's proposed

.  That the protocols are approved by not less than 2 academics as unequivocal proof of claim
.  That all data is measured continuously through appropriate data loggers
.  That both tests are continuously streamed 'on line' for public verification of results
.  That there is sufficient continuous supervision of these results to ensure that there is no 'tampering'.
.  This in any event should be evident in the data logger and the filming of the experiments
.  That the function generator is not grounded

Add to this if anything occurs to you Poynty.

Kindest regards
Rosie