another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.

[fuzzytomcat]

I say nothing of the sort.  Glen Lettenmaier - aka Fuzzytomcat advises us all via his scribd account - that he WHOLLY supports our COP>17 claim.
Then you must accuse Glen Lettenmaier of this.  Not me.  Our accredictors took the trouble to REPLICATE the tests for themselves or were 'hands on' in their own applied measurement parameters.
When does a company produce a standardised response to say 'yes you may use our names as accreditors of your experimental evidence'?  What would be standard about any such reply - assuming that ever was the reply? 
I do not claim anything of the sort.  AGAIN  Glen Lettenmaier states that he has replicated our COP>17 experiment.  Nothing to do with me.

How many ways do you want this stated powercat?  I'm happy to try them all.  Because every time I do so then they remind our readers about Glen's replication.  And it cannot be said too often.  I've already said this.  Your contributions to this thread are invaluable.

Rosie Pose

Rosemary .....

Your a fucking liar ....

I do not and never have supported a COP>17 claim of yours. Show me PROOF where I did support your COP>17 claim ..... liar

I have never made a CLAIM of a COP>17 ever no where.  Show me the PROOF where I did claim a COP>17 ...... liar

The IEEE SCRIBD pre-print of the preliminary results has nothing to with my final evaluation of a modified Quantum 2002 circuit ..... it's here you fucking liar !!!! OH, that's right you can't fucking read can you ROSEMARY !!!

http://www.energeticforum.com/inductive-resistor/5359-mosfet-heating-circuits-3.html#post93746     05-02-2010, 09:23 AM

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.

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Rosemary .....Your a fucking liar ....I do not and never have supported a COP>17 claim of yours. Show me PROOF where I did support your COP>17 claim ..... liar I have never made a CLAIM of a COP>17 ever no where.  Show me the PROOF where I did claim a COP>17 ...... liar The IEEE SCRIBD pre-print of the preliminary results has nothing to with my final evaluation of a modified Quantum 2002 circuit ..... it's here you fucking liar !!!! OH, that's right you can't fucking read can you ROSEMARY !!!

Guys,

Not only does our Glen Lettenmaier use the rather limited range of expletives enjoyed by your average low life criminal sociopath - but it seems that he's suffering from the same complete lack of understanding of principle.  Could someone else perhaps explain the significance of the following statement in his publication on his Scribd Account.  I don't think there's anything ambiguous here.  And he claims UNDER OATH to the scribd authorities that this is exclusively his work.  Here's a direct transcript.

The opening paragraph stipulates that ...The objectives of these tests are to replicate and evaluate the published heat signatures developed with an aperiodic resonatingfrequency with subharmonics that are induced through the fine tuning of the interactive duty cycle of a MOSFET switching circuit.  Resultsindicate that the produced transients enable improvements of performance efficiency well above COP.4 in line with the predictions of an alternative magnetic field model

the introduction states that...The following tests were designed to replicate an experiment that was described in Quantum Magazine (QuantumTest) published in October, 2002. [1] That earlier test pointed to anomalous heat signatures that were achieved, as predicted by a non classical  magnetic field model, hereafter referred to as ‘MMRA’ (Magnetic Model by Rosemary Ainslie) [2]. This open source submission details the experimental apparatus, the applied measurements protocol and the data together with a variety of related tests that were designed to evaluate  the adequacy of those applied test parameters. Because test replication results were in line with those detailed in the publication, it was considered that this submission of the experimental results would allow a wide dissemination both of the experiment and of the questions relating to those anomalies, as being preferred and required.

Until he withdraws this then he's on record.  He does, MOST ASSUREDLY, claim a replication of our earlier COP>17 test.  Should he withdraw that publication then he would be entitled to deny that it's a replication.  Then I can reclaim ownership of my own work and publish that paper on my own account.  And he will then have yet more grounds to sue me.  As I've mentioned - I would welcome this.

Kindest regards,
Rosemary

[fuzzytomcat]

Guys,

Not only does our Glen Lettenmaier used the rather limited range of expletives enjoyed by your average low life criminal sociopath - but it seems that he's suffering from the same complete lack of understanding of principle.  Could someone else perhaps explain the significance of the following statement in his publication on his Scribd Account.  I don't think there's anything ambiguous here.  And he claims UNDER OATH to the scribd authorities that this is exclusively his work.  Here's a direct transcript.

The opening paragraph stipulates that ...The objectives of these tests are to replicate and evaluate the published heat signatures developed with an aperiodic resonatingfrequency with subharmonics that are induced through the fine tuning of the interactive duty cycle of a MOSFET switching circuit.  Resultsindicate that the produced transients enable improvements of performance efficiency well above COP.4 in line with the predictions of an alternative magnetic field model

the introduction states that...The following tests were designed to replicate an experiment that was described in Quantum Magazine (QuantumTest) published in October, 2002. [1] That earlier test pointed to anomalous heat signatures that were achieved, as predicted by a non classical  magnetic field model, hereafter referred to as ‘MMRA’ (Magnetic Model by Rosemary Ainslie) [2]. This open source submission details the experimental apparatus, the applied measurements protocol and the data together with a variety of related tests that were designed to evaluate  the adequacy of those applied test parameters. Because test replication results were in line with those detailed in the publication, it was considered that this submission of the experimental results would allow a wide dissemination both of the experiment and of the questions relating to those anomalies, as being preferred and required.

Until he withdraws this then he's on record.  He does, MOST ASSUREDLY, claim a replication of our earlier COP>17 test.  Should he withdraw that publication then he would be entitled to deny that it's a replication.  Then I can reclaim ownership of my own work and publish that paper on my own account.  And he will then have yet more grounds to sue me.  As I've mentioned - I would welcome this.

Kindest regards,
Rosemary

Rosemary ....

You just don't "GET IT" .....

ROSEMARY"S  EXAMPLE -

The EARTH was believed to be "FLAT" and the center of the "UNIVERSE" ...... this is incorrect and all documents world wide "MUST BE DESTROYED" with no trace of anything ever being written.

Let's make this simple for even a "GRADE" school child, so prove you can fucking read ROSEMARY !!

There are two dates shown in GREEN.

1) Which is the FIRST date ?

2) Which is the SECOND date ?

3) Which order are the DATES in and the FORUM THREADS NAMES or LINKS ?

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________

http://www.scribd.com/doc/23455916/Open-Source-Evaluation-of-Power-Transients-Generated-to-Improve-Performance-Coefficient-of-Resistive-Heating-Systems
( attached "DOWNLOAD" - 23455916-Open-Source-Evaluation-of-Power-Transients-Generated-to-Improve-Performance-Coefficient-of-Resistive-Heating-Systems.pdf  ) 

PAGE NUMBER 1

Manuscript received Dec 1, 2009. This work was supported entirely as a global open source project by independent persons oriented toward its success

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


http://www.energeticforum.com/inductive-resistor/5359-mosfet-heating-circuits-3.html#post93746     05-02-2010, 09:23 AM

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.

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Yet again, guys, someone needs to explain this to Glen Lettenmaier in some simple language that it seems I cannot manage.  Notwithstanding my best efforts.

The required procedure in the publication of anything at all is to stand by those numbers.  If, subsequent to publication - it becomes apparent that there has been any new evidence brought to bear that voids the evidence in that early publication - then the honourable procedure is to publish a retraction and withdraw any extant publications.  Anything short of this would lend credence to the claims in that publication that would also, thereby, mislead the public.

It would not matter if that publication was 10 years in advance of the actual dates.  It NEEDS MUST BE WITHDRAWN.  And until it's withdrawn it's considered to carry the endorsement of all those names of all the collaborators on that paper.  This includes, not only Glen Lettenmaier's name but that of Harvey Gramm, and Ashtweth Palise, both of whom have also joined forces with Glen to deny the evidence.

Sorry to impose,
Kindest regards,
Rosemary

[fuzzytomcat]

Yet again, guys, someone needs to explain this to Glen Lettenmaier in some simple language that it seems I cannot manage.  Notwithstanding my best efforts.

The required procedure in the publication of anything at all is to stand by those numbers.  If, subsequent to publication - it becomes apparent that there has been any new evidence brought to bear that voids the evidence in that early publication - then the honourable procedure is to publish a retraction and withdraw any extant publications.  Anything short of this would lend credence to the claims in that publication that would also, thereby, mislead the public.

It would not matter if that publication was 10 years in advance of the actual dates.  It NEEDS MUST BE WITHDRAWN.  And until it's withdrawn it's considered to carry the endorsement of all those names of all the collaborators on that paper.  This includes, not only Glen Lettenmaier's name but that of Harvey Gramm, and Ashtweth Palise, both of whom have also joined forces with Glen to deny the evidence.

Sorry to impose,
Kindest regards,
Rosemary

When you PROVE pigs fly Rosemary !!