another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.

[TheCell]

Two important men confirm the effect:

http://www.icehouse.net/john1/tesla.html
->The scalar wave battery charger (Bedini)


http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/scalchrg.htm

The scalar battery charger tests (Naudin)
<quote Naudin>
The most strange event is that after 19 hours of running time,
the battery voltage drop to 0 volts,
and the motor continued to run ( !!! ?? !!! ).
It seemed that the condensators could maintained power to supply motor
after this first deadline.
You could see on my report that the charge of battery restart after,
for new 4 hours ( strange and curious event ?? ).
<quote end>

[TheCell]

.

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Sorry - this has been duplicated.  Just look at the post hereunder.

[Magluvin]

Hey Rose  ;]

Sounds like a good thing. ;]    Will be very interesting. 

I have a question.  The heating element you used. Do you know any specs on it?

Like cold resistance, and running temp resistance

Inductance?  Hot and cold.

And rated voltage and current.

I have a possible alternative way of doing your project. Possibly easier. 

I just want to get some idea of what those heating elements specs are to see if it fits my idea.  Will share if Im right. ;]

Thanks and all the best! ;]

Magsy 

[Rosemary Ainslie]

THROWING THE GAUNTLET

Hello everyone,



I've salvaged this thread from the back of beyond - to make public our invitation to both Poynty and Steven E Jones to evaluate our experiment that we can claim their much vaunted prizes.  I've also extended the offer to Harti - but am reasonably sure that he'll not be interested as he's already declined this before. 

In any event, the motive for this was that Ramset is now on the hunt to deny some poor Russian enthusiast the opportunity to successfully present his own experimental evidence.  I've described what I think may be Ramset's motives in the this post which, as ever, carries the caveat that this is simply my opinion.  But frankly I'm tired of this 'attack' on those many claims of our poor unsuspecting experimentalists.  The truth is that they none of them access the required sophistication of measuring equipment and their claims are then hobbled.   Here's that link.

http://newlightondarkenergy.blogspot.com/2012/01/221-another-troll-alert.html

But as it IS my opinion then my motive here is to test the intention behind Poynty's and, for that matter, Steven E Jone's much vaunted prize offer for proof of over unity.  It is only in the offer of those prizes that they have any authority to comment at all. I trust you all realise this.  Our own results are detailed in a 2-part paper that has now been sent to all parties.  This gives a comprehensive account of the extent of our claim and the measurement protocols applied to those experiments.   I've never before put this to them for their validation because, quite frankly, to challenge them for the prize is like taking candy from children.  Just way too easy.  BUT.  I now think that this will HELP us all to bury those prejudices against over unity.  And certainly it will test he actual agenda behind both those personalities.

Poynty and sundry other contributors who remain 'anonymous' run a blogspot on the internet dedicated to hate speech against me.  But the point is this.  They claim that our measurements are fraudulent - therefore, by extension I am a FRAUD.  Therefore, indeed, it is long overdue that I defend our claim. Here's a link to my public announcement of this.

http://newlightondarkenergy.blogspot.com/

We all have an overriding concern that our equipment will be tampered with and that both Steven E Jones and Poynty Point - may misrepresent the data that they test.  This is based on the fact that Steven E Jones has not shown himself to be impartial in the evaluation of Rossi's device technology related to LENR - or Cold fusion as Rossi prefers to call it.  He has indulged in an unsubstantiated 'attack' on the character of Rossi that is entirely inappropriate to this Rossi's work - to the professionalism that calls for some protection of one's colleagues good name in the face of unsubstantiated allegations - and to the assessment of the results that Rossi claims which, for some reason and despite expert accreditation, Steven prefers to REFUTE.  Then there's Poynty's need for impartiality.  You will all note that he is an active contributor to the 'hate speech' related to that blogspot.  Why?  Why the need to go out of one's way to besmirch my name - when I'm guilty of nothing more than PROVING over unity?    Here's that link.

http://rosemaryainslie-publicblog.blogspot.com/

So.  In the light of this highly emotional and partial attack on me and my good name, we are none of us inclined to entirely trust either party.  Therefore we will not send any apparatus to such highly partial adjudicators.  Rather I've invited them to come here.  We'll film the necessary, subject to their acceptance of this proposal.  If there's any problem with the availability of funding to afford that trip then let us know.  We could possibly manage a small contribution from that sale of Professor's coins when we get them, or from the prize money that Poynty et al have solicited.  The terms of that acceptance are, in any event detailed in my post.



So.  That's the gauntlet - ON THE GROUND.  Let's now see what comes of this.  If ANYTHING.  If the claim is rejected then it must be based on a measured argument which will also require reference to that paper.  For the record, they are free to publish both papers in their blogs or in this blog.  And may I remind you all.  Our claim is NOT COP greater anything at all.  It is COP INFINITY.  That is the measurement that we PROVE despite their facile denials of this.



Kindest regards,
Rosemary

edits.  I kept posting the wrong link.  Apologies.  Hopefully it's now right.