another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.

[poynt99]

Poynty Point?  Just read the follow up post.  That's the reason I included these observations.  Still not sure of your question.

I do not know to what you are referring. I'd be grateful if you re-posted your response to my question, specifically dealing with those last two points I mentioned.

Nice to see that you're still so interested in all this.  Are you able to find an academic to endorse the protocols for that draw down
test?  That would be really nice.

I do not personally know any academics (that I can recall), and I have not pursued any. And I have no intention to.

Kindest regards Poynty Point.  And please extend my regards to Professor Jones.  I haven't heard from his at all - since I challenged
him for those coins.  Hopefully he's still interested in checking our claim.

I would suggest if you want to get the attention of Steven Jones, you send him a PM. If he does not wish to respond to you, then that is his decision, and I will not try to persuade him otherwise.

[Rosemary Ainslie]

I do not know to what you are referring. I'd be grateful if you re-posted your response to my question, specifically dealing with those last two
points I mentioned.

LOL  No Poynty Point.  I'll pass if you don't mind.  I've already posted it over twice.  And I think there's enough of my posts littering this thread
now that Glen's getting into his full stride.  If only he had the ability to propose an original observation.  AND if only he could keep his posts to
the Thread size.  As it is - I'm inclined to suppose that he's trying to detract from this thread.  Surely not?

I do not personally know any academics (that I can
recall), and I have not pursued any. And I have no intention to.

I thought you may have a tame academic in tow - as you seemed to make liberal reference to his reactions when you detailed that novel take on
a battery delivering a negative current flow.  I recall that he was 'astonished' I think was your description.  Perhaps that was just some kind of
literary license to lend you some kind of authority?  Not sure.  In any event.  I'm actually going to see if I can perhaps rally a couple of
academics myself.  But I'll wait for publication of the paper.  That way there's likely to be more cause for engagement.

I would suggest if your want to get the attention of Steven Jones, you send him a PM. If he does not wish to respond to you, then that is his decision, and I will not try to persuade him otherwise.

I'll defer this too - until I get that public demo under way.  And, if you don't mind - I'd like to reserve rights here.  I'm hoping that
publication won't be too far away now.   I'll keep you posted - in any event.

Take good care Poynty Point.  Your efforts in this over unity drive have been surprisingly counter productive.  Thank God.
Kindest regards,
Rosie

[poynt99]

LOL  No Poynty Point.  I'll pass if you don't mind.  I've already posted it over twice.

Alright, could you post a link to your response please? Or would you rather I guess which post it is?

I thought you may have a tame academic in tow - as you seemed to make liberal reference to his reactions when you detailed that novel take on a battery delivering a negative current flow.  I recall that he was 'astonished' I think was your description.  Perhaps that was just some kind of literary license to lend you some kind of authority?

I have no idea what or to whom you are referring.

[Magluvin]

Wow those 3 readers are busy.  Over 1890 reads since last night.
Those busy little buggers.   ;]

Mags

[TinselKoala]

Rosemary Ainslie claims:

NOW.  Let's look at your 'self-runner' demands.  We have never recharged those batteries - with one exception.  Two caught fire and BOTH were fully recharged.  We've had those batteries since January 2010.  We've been running them since August 2010.  I've now FINALLY checked their rated capacities.  They're 40 ampere hours each.  We've used 6 of them continually since that time.  According to this rating they are each able, theoretically to dissipate 12 volts x 40 amps x 60 seconds x 60 minutes x 1 hour x 6 batteries.  That gives a work potential - a total potential output of 10 368 000 JOULES.

According to what has been carefully established it takes 4.18 Joules to raise 1 gram of water by 1 degree centigrade.  We've taken a little under 900 grams of water to 82 degrees centigrade.  We ran that test for 90 minutes.  Then we upped the frequency and took that water up a further 20 degrees to 104.  We ran that part of the test for 10 minutes.  Ambient was at 16.  Joules = 1 watt per second.  So.  Do the math.  4.18 x 900 grams x (82 - 16) 66 degrees C = 248 292 joules per second x 90 minutes of the test period = 22 342 280 joules.  Then ADD the last 10 minutes where the water was taken to boil and now you have 4.18 x 900 grams x (104 - 16) 88 degrees C = 331 156 joules per second x 10 minutes = 3 310 560 Joules.  Then add those two values 22 342 280 + 3 310 560 = 25.6 Million Joules.  All 5 batteries maximum potential output - available for work - is 10.3 Million Joules. In that test alone the battery outperformed its watt hour rating.  And that was just one test.  Now.  Over the 10 month period that those batteries have been running at various outputs - which, when added to the output on just this one test - then I think its safe to say that the evidence is conclusive.  Those batteries have outperformed. They are still at OVER 12 volts EACH.  They are all of them still FULLY CHARGED.

Rosemary, do you STAND BY THIS CLAIM, or do you not? Are your numbers and your conclusions accurate?

Let me repeat again: If Rosemary Ainslie says that this claim above is CORRECT AND TRUE.... then she is engaging in clear scientific misconduct by continuing to claim excess performance from the batteries when a correct calculation based on her data shows no such thing.

If on the other hand Rosemary admits that it is WRONG and NOT TRUE, then she needs to retract it and publish a correction.

(And in Fuzzy's example where Rosemary is quoted above..... 0.2 Watts is indeed a Ridiculous power dissipation figure for a pulse motor rotor.... ridiculously HIGH. A decent design should be able to run on a tenth of that or even less, as many of us showed during the Steorn Orbo replication days.)