another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.

[fuzzytomcat]

Howdy there to the three faithful readers ....

It appears all the hoopla on the secret paper of the fictitious COP>INFINITY circuit and device, was published in December 2011 months ago at "SCRIBID" ......

http://www.scribd.com/doc/74884882/2nd-Paper-for-Download

It was uploaded by a " stevex2 " whom owns the copyright on the document and now that it's been published it can't appear at all in a technical or academic journal in its present context and has to be totally rewritten.

Actually I can see why it was published after reading half way through ..... I couldn't stop laughing !!!  

FuzzyTomCat


added - Please note there is no "Copyright" shown on this document

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Guys,

I have freely circulated our 2nd part of the the 2-part paper to many members of this forum and to many academics who have not actively been a part of this forum.  I also sent a copy to Poynty and to Harti.  Those are the only two who I know actively work against this technology.  I will not allude to who may or may not be responsible for this.  That publication in Scribd constitutes a criminal act of fraud - as the publication implies rights of ownership of that document that is exclusively our own.  One can only conclude that this is yet another attempt to prevent publication in a reviewed journal.  Which is clearly intended to sabotage our efforts at publishing.  Fortunately it does not.

I trust that if anyone at all still doubts that our technology is SERIOUSLY attacked - then this latest ploy will be seen as yet more evidence.  Not only is there a dire want of professionalism associated with the level of traducement applied to me - but there's an evident anxiety that this publication is discounted on whatever pretext that can be managed.  And PROOF that this thesis of ours is considered positively dangerous - is precisely the criminal lengths to which sundry discreditors will go to try and prevent publication.  Apparently it is not enough to simply accuse me of lunacy and incompetence.  They must do their damnedest to prevent any respectable publication at all. 

Fortunately for us all - there is now such an acute interest in the claim and the thesis that supports this claim that there is nothing that will actually stand in the way of publication.  That's the inevitable consequence of any inappropriate or disproportionate efforts at silencing me and discrediting the technology.  It has, curiously, evoked more interest in this than otherwise.  LOL.  Who would have thought?  And.  I have been assured - repeatedly - that if there were not this very patent drive to 'attack' and to discredit both me and the technology - then the claim itself would have been more easily discounted.   Which just goes to show how History both orchestrates and determines its own ironies. It seems that 'truth' will out - and I suspect that this over unity drive of ours - of all of us who are actively working to salvage our planet - that we will also be the ultimate beneficiaries.   

Again.  Guys.  We have proposed NOTHING that is new.  We have only pointed to the source of energy that has been most perfectly defined by our Greats and by our competent mainstream scientists.  I look forward to the actual definitive publication as a reviewed paper.  Because when that happens then our academics can comment without the disgrace associated with what is considered eccentric science.  And it will be considered eccentric UNTIL it's ultimate publication in a reviewed journal.  Can't wait. 

It's also alarmingly apparent that Harti has no objections to the malicious traducement that Glen indulges in this thread.  It  will always be here as long as this forum remains - as the rather questionable evidence of Harti's commitment to over unity.  One hopes that he has good reason to permit this disgraceful breach of 'forum guidelines'.  This matter should be of some considerable interest to you all.  I have given up trying to understand Harti's permission of Glen's posts.  It tends to a liberal indulgence of any critical input - regardless of its evident lack of moderation or appropriateness.  When the green eyed monster takes over a person's psyche - then, evidently, that psyche becomes seriously deranged. 

Kindest regards,
Rosemary

[fuzzytomcat]

Howdy there to the three faithful readers ....
______________________________________________________________________________________

http://www.overunity.com/10407/rosemary-ainslie-circuit-demonstration-on-saturday-march-12th-2011/msg277705/#msg277705  (read me  )

Quote-
Hello Everyone,

TinselKoala wonders...
All of the circuit components specifications are given EXCEPT:
Function Generator and 6x12V batteries â€" Raylite Silver Calcium.
This is very strange, why would you omit the specifications of such vital circuit components and yet provide the others ?

For example, the Raylite batteries sold by Battery Centre list this page for Raylite Silver Calcium cells:
http://www.batterycentre.co.za/fnbSpec02/b-spec.asp?id=3

and this page for the features and benefits of this technology:
http://www.batterycentre.co.za/SilverCalciumBattery.htm

So which model of 12V silver calcium cell did Battery Centre give you ? It will say the model number on the casing
______________________________________________________________________________________

Ah yes .... the battery ....

For years now we have asked for a "SIMPLE" part number and have we ever gotten one ..... no, no, no

These eight ( 8 ) batteries shown which are the six ( 6 ) used for "ALL" the experiments .... no identifying marks ( 1 through 8 ) on any of the images

What is the battery AH (amp hour) rating and other specifications ..... but at this point in the development of nothing, or a COP>INFINITY is it even important

FuzzyTomCat

[TinselKoala]

All right... let's try this another way, since Rosemary won't answer my simple and direct questions about her energy calculations.

Rosemary....  let's say I have 100 grams of water at 20 degrees C, and I raise that water to 80 degrees C over a timespan of 60 minutes. How much energy have I put into the water to heat it up? Assume a nice insulated container for the water.
What is the _average_ power that I must use?

Please show your work.


Note that if Rosemary can't do this simple calculation, or does it wrong, or bullshits about it, you will NEVER be able to agree on your analysis of the results from your current set of experiments.

[eatenbyagrue]

All right... let's try this another way, since Rosemary won't answer my simple and direct questions about her energy calculations.

Rosemary....  let's say I have 100 grams of water at 20 degrees C, and I raise that water to 80 degrees C over a timespan of 60 minutes. How much energy have I put into the water to heat it up? Assume a nice insulated container for the water.
What is the _average_ power that I must use?

Please show your work.


Note that if Rosemary can't do this simple calculation, or does it wrong, or bullshits about it, you will NEVER be able to agree on your analysis of the results from your current set of experiments.

6.97 Watts?