another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.

[Rosemary Ainslie]

There was no 'kill'.  It was more like death by suicide. 

Gravock

I see that now.  It was the premature baying of hyenas based on an assumption of death? 

Kindest regards
Rosemary

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Anyway guys, here's the thing.

The fact is that when the signal generator applies a negative signal at the switch at Q1 - then at that same moment it is applying a positive signal to the source of Q2.  There is no CONVENTIONAL explanation that would then allow a current to pass from the battery - back to the source - unless there were something connecting it.  There's nothing to enable this.  NIX - NADA NOTHING.  Just can't happen.  Which is why we are able to argue that the battery is INDEED disconnected from the circuit.  And then.  IF it was disconnected the oscilloscope probes would not pick up it's battery voltage.  The only voltage it could then read is the voltage across the circuit components connected via those transistor body diodes.  Which I've argued previously.  And which, thank HEAVENS Poynty has managed to draw your attention to.  I never know what needs emphasising.  But I must admit.  I thought that this much was clear.   

But we're only touching on the 'fringe' of the implications of all this.  I'm hoping that the discussion will progress to what that current may, indeed, be doing.  In any event.  I'm continually intrigued with the urgent need to deny our claims.  This is dedicated attempt.  And probably as well.  The thing is this.  It's no good reminding the world and his wife that I'm not schooled in electronics - when this is already known.  Nor is it that I'm after fame, fortune, or even Poynty's ou prize.  In fact, when our definitions are FINALLY ironed out - there is absolutely NO WAY that we claim over unity at all. We'll probably have to recuse ourselves.  The object of that paper and those tests is SIMPLY to address the question and anomalies that the circuit exposes.  And - all I have EVER tried to do is to share some rather extraordinary insights.  That there's an efficient use of energy at the end of the line is a good thing.  But whatever we're dealing with - will MOST CERTAINLY be outpaced by new and emerging technologies.  I keep saying this.  We've got nothing extraordinary.  But what we do have are some interesting insights related to 'field' physics - that may be worth exploring.  That's why I spend all this time at the key board.  Because that is really interesting.

Kindest regards,
Rosemary

   

[energy1234hope]

Hi Rosie Glad to see your battling the powers that be again good luck with that. On another note the professor jones has made a comment for you under his post 8times more out. all the best ron

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Hi Rosie Glad to see your battling the powers that be again good luck with that. On another note the professor jones has made a comment for you under his post 8times more out. all the best ron

Hope - as ever.  Nice to see you dipping in here - and there.  I'll check it out.  But right now I need to get some sleep.  It's been another allnighter.
Always a pleasure, and take care

Rosie

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Hi guys,

Have now heard from Prof Steve E Jones, aka  JouleSeeker.  Here it is.

Rose,
The answer is here --

http://www.overunity.com/11661/new-renaissance-prizes-offered-to-encourage-energy-experimenters/msg304423/#msg304423

I copy the basics here for your convenience:

So I need to ask you, are you willing to:
1. submit your entry for me to look at... I will also pay shipping both ways.

and very important for these prizes are to benefit mankind and hopefully quickly --

2.  Do you agree to make the device available to mankind worldwide quickly?

By this I mean "open source" of the details of the device and NOT seeking a patent -- hopefully with a fair return to the inventor(s) as explained previously.