Testing the TK Tar Baby

[fuzzytomcat]

Howdy everyone,

I thought I'd copy over a few postings that Rosemary refuses to acknowledge other professional opinions on her COP>INFINITY device claim.

http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=645&cpage=1#comment-244556

In the Maximum Power Transfer Theorem [1], Wikipedia describes the maximum power transfer ratio (Power delivered to the Load/Power available from source).

In their new paper, authors ‘D. R. E. A. M. & R.’ convert battery power into a burst oscillatory waveform that delivers power to load impedance RL1. The Max. Pwr. Transfer theorem states that at a condition of maximum power transfer there is 50% efficiency. That is, the power delivered to a load is usually less than or, at best, equal to the power lost (e.g. heat dissipation) in the source.

Increased efficiency can be realized by reducing source resistance (or impedance) to near zero and/or increasing load resistance (or impedance) to near infinite. Of course, that drops the power transferred to the load.

If more than 100% of source power can be delivered to a load, the authors should be congratulated for more than doubling the maximum power previously available.

References
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maximum_power_transfer_theorem

Joseph Fine

QUOTE - authors ‘D. R. E. A. M. & R.’ .... "Experimental Evidence of a Breach of Unity on Switched Circuit Apparatus" [ ROSSI-JOP-1-PDF.pdf ]   

Donovan Martin
Rosemary Ainslie
Evan Robinson
Alan Macey
Mario Human
Riaan Theron

REFERENCES - [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maximum_power_transfer_theorem

In electrical engineering, the maximum power transfer theorem states that, to obtain maximum external power from a source with a finite internal resistance, the resistance of the load must equal the resistance of the source as viewed from its output terminals. Moritz von Jacobi published the maximum power (transfer) theorem around 1840; it is also referred to as "Jacobi's law".[1]

The theorem results in maximum power transfer, and not maximum efficiency. If the resistance of the load is made larger than the resistance of the source, then efficiency is higher, since a higher percentage of the source power is transferred to the load, but the magnitude of the load power is lower since the total circuit resistance goes up.

If the load resistance is smaller than the source resistance, then most of the power ends up being dissipated in the source, and although the total power dissipated is higher, due to a lower total resistance, it turns out that the amount dissipated in the load is reduced.

The theorem states how to choose (so as to maximize power transfer) the load resistance, once the source resistance is given, not the opposite. It does not say how to choose the source resistance, once the load resistance is given. In fact, the source resistance that maximizes power transfer is always zero, regardless of the value of the load resistance.

[TinselKoala]

Guys - as for the schedule of nonsense.  There's not ONE comment that's correct.  At the time that these batteries caught fire I was NOT running a test.  At the time that this fire took place I was not even in discussion with TK as TK.  He was posting under the name HUMBUGGER.  Nice to see his OPEN ADMISSION of this fact.  FINALLY.

What open admission? YOU ARE LYING again, deluded hallucinator Ainslie. I am not and never have been HUMBUGGER, you bloviating mendacious idiot. And you most certainly were ATTEMPTING a test when you made your stupid miswiring attempt.

We have taken MULTIPLE downloads of the scope DIRECTLY on the terminals from a 24 volt battery supply.  And the MYSTERY LABORATORY have also measured and confirmed across ALL 6 BATTERIES TO CONFIRM THAT THEY DO INDEED OSCILLATE IN LINE WITH THE MEASURED VOLTAGE EVIDENCE.

SO? Big deal, nobody is contesting YOUR MEASUREMENTS, idiot lying Ainslie. I confirmed the same thing, months ago, remember?
This is a very different thing from measuring ACROSS THE LOAD, doing it incorrectly and damaging your equipment, which is what we have been talking about and is what you attempted. But you don't even know enough about your own circuit to realize the difference or the significance. And the amazing thing is that you don't even have sense enough to realize that with every inane comment like the above, you dig yourself in deeper and deeper, proving to everyone that you have no clue about your own circuit's operation.

And sparks, with respect, one loses all respect for the platitudinous mouthings of biblical quotes - when the attempt is to enjoy the rather sparse pickings of moral superiority. The simple truth is that you are promoting and endorsing the single most disgusting effort ever made - and that made publicly - to wrest authority of comment - from the authors of a discovery that properly belongs to the world.  It does not belong to TK and does not deserve the systematic abuse of TK and his 'gang of thugs' and BULLIES

Regards
Rosemary

ADDED to emphasise the 'bleeding obvious' as referenced by Basil Fawlty'.

Got that, Sparks? You are treading perilously close to being placed on Ainslie's Black List. Soon she will be threatening YOU with letters from imaginary lawyers.

[Rosemary Ainslie]

This is a very different thing from measuring ACROSS THE LOAD, doing it incorrectly and damaging your equipment, which is what we have been talking about and is what you attempted. But you don't even know enough about your own circuit to realize the difference or the significance. And the amazing thing is that you don't even have sense enough to realize that with every inane comment like the above, you dig yourself in deeper and deeper, proving to everyone that you have no clue about your own circuit's operation.

The only one of the two of us who has no CLUE how to determine the wattage dissipated at the load is you. We're all still waiting for some measurements.  Clearly you're trying very hard to avoid reference.  I can't help but wonder why?

And TK.  I'm looking forward to implementing those imaginary procedures from my imaginary lawyers.  I'll do that when I've completed those imaginary tests of mine.  And then you can comment on all those imaginings to your heart's content. 

And while you're at it - we're also all waiting that learned discourse of yours or picowatt's where you EXPLAIN how the battery is fully connected during that oscillation.

What a prize idiot you are.  All you can do is assemble circuitry of greater and greater complexities to confuse the hell out of its actual function and intention.  And then pretend that you know what you're talking about.  The comfort is that you've stopped that laughable exposition on the mysterious electron current flow.  There are always some small mercies on offer.  We're spared those ridiculous analogies that impress the Seans and Mags of this world ... and the PhiChasers.  LOL.  What a load of blockheads - to a man.  A bunch of electrical engineers and / or technicians trying to pass themselves  off as EXPERTS in particle physics. There's no such animal.  Two entirely different mindsets.  Two entirely different skill sets.  And yet there's YOU - the shining 'truth' as you present yourself.  What a JOKE.

Rosie Pose

added
And may I add.  Had I damaged any equipment then I would have CLAIMED for that damage from an insurance taken out for precisely that purpose.  NO SUCH DAMAGE WAS EVIDENT.  ALSO.  I would have to be as stupid as you to BUY damaged equipment.  That's a skill set that is ONLY entertained by yourself.  God knows your only access to decent equipment is after or before repair.  That's a little puzzle in itself.  LOL

[TinselKoala]

And guys,

May I caution you YET AGAIN.  TK's manifold 'postings' of our forum work is his attempt to keep you 'misinformed' as to what we're saying.  I would earnestly advise you that IF indeed you want an 'unbiased' account of what is happening there then his references are NOT THE WHOLE STORY.  He is simply hoping to stop the traffic there.  Give up TK.  Our hit rate is already more than 800 a day.  And we're not even 6 weeks old - as a forum.

Again,
Rosemary

Sure, Ainslie. You've put up a forum where you posted two daft manuscripts full of errors and lies, that aren't even consistent with your "official" versions on Rossi's JNP. You lie about every aspect of your story, from the Quantum magazine article on. You lie about having discovered something of significance, you lie about me, and you lie about your former collaborators and their findings. Anyone can put up a web forum full of lies and get lots of hits. How many hits will you get when you come clean and have to tell the truth for a change?

It's interesting to watch a psychotic person like yourself melt down in public. I imagine that a lot of those lurking readers are psychology students, watching a textbook example of the Dunning-Kruger effect confirming, in front of everybody with a little knowledge of the subject, that she -- AINSLIE -- is not only an ignoramus but also a willfull idiot, spitting in the eye of those who are trying to help her understand her embarrassing suite of errors.

[Rosemary Ainslie]

And I wonder if I could impose on you TK - to show us the documented PROOF which you claim you have that I was hospitalised from some psychotic incident which you need as PROOF of my being entirely MAD AND DELUDED.  We're all waiting.  Without it I, for one, am rather inclined to think that you're FABRICATING THE TRUTH.  Not all that gleam and glitter that you claim when you reference yourself as THE TRUTH that SHINES OUT all over the place.  LOL

Then.  While you're at it - EXPLAIN EXACTLY WHERE I MADE PUBLIC DISCLOSURE OF THOSE ZIPPED FILES THAT SEAN AND YOU MADE PUBLIC - AND...

Then show me EXACTLY - with the required LINKS - the DETAILS OF THOSE GENTLEMEN WHOSE NAMES AND TELEPHONE NUMBERS YOU PUBLISHED. 

My CLAIM is that both PROVE that you have both RIFLED MY COMPUTER.  And we all know that that's a felony.

Rosie Pose

Highlighted - for emphasis

AND ADDED
Then we will all know that the support that you get from FTC and PICOWATT and the rest is the SUPPORT FOR CRIMINAL ABUSE OF OPEN SOURCE AND CRIMINAL PRACTICES GENERALLY.  What's new? Just a whole bunch of criminals abusing the facility of open source to misdirect the public