Rosemary Ainslie Circuit Demonstration June 29, 2013 Video Segments

[TinselKoala]

Ainslie is at it again. She has posted her letter to S.Weir, in which she follows her usual course of lying, misrepresenting, constructing false arguments against what she makes up, not what her critics actually say.

This statement here:

You mention that you want ME to define the points requiring measurement?  I'm not the right person.  I know that my colleague wants to measure the Gate current at Q1 - but I'm not sure where he puts the shunt.  What I did - AGAINST the advices of just about everyone I know - was put the Function Generator's terminal reference AWAY from the probe references - as shown on that schematic. That was motivated by the clamorous insistence of our 'debunkers' that this was REQUIRED.  Which also means that I was roundly DUPED by those same players.  I get it that this must now change.  It needs to share the SAME position.  But the concern then is that the Rshunt does NOT show the true current in and out of the batteries.  In point of fact the difference in the values across that shunt are negligible - regardless of which position we put that FG reference.  And - that this current then moves through the batteries is also unarguable.  We see it in the oscillations across those batteries.  In my own simplistic way of thinking I actually put the FG probe and reference DIRECTLY across the Gates of Q1 and Q2.  That ALSO gives the same oscillation.  And REGARDLESS of where I position it - those negative voltages persist.

[/color]

This is a BALDFACED LIE. Go ahead, ask Ainslie to provide ANY evidence whatsoever that she EVER actually used the schematic shown in the paper. As I have documented many times, EVERY SINGLE PHOTO AND VIDEO that exists, shows the Black FG lead connected to the Circuit Common Ground along with all the scope probe references. She has NEVER used the correct location shown in the schematic in the paper, certainly NOT for the experiments described in the paper.

Ask her for proof that she ever used the correct location "AWAY from the probe references - as shown on that schematic." She cannot produce any... because she NEVER ACTUALLY USED that location. Never.

And further.... note the contradiction.

In my own simplistic way of thinking I actually put the FG probe and reference DIRECTLY across the Gates of Q1 and Q2.  That ALSO gives the same oscillation.

Examining the two schematics concerned, we see that Ainslie ACTUALLY uses the first one below...... but it is the SECOND one below that has the "FG probe and reference DIRECTLY across the Gates of Q1 and Q2." In short....... once again she garbles, misrepresents, and flat-out lies about the actual events and schematics used.

Below:
1. The ACTUAL schematic showing the Black FG hookup point that Ainslie has ALWAYS used, which bypasses the CSR with the FG's current;
2. The CLAIMED schematic in the papers, which has the FG's Black output lead on the transistor side of the csr, which DOES NOT bypass the csr with the FG's current, and which DOES put the FG "probe and reference" (false terminology) directly across the Gates of the Q1 and Q2 transistors.

3. The post containing her current set of claims in the letter to S. Weir.

[TinselKoala]

And of course once again, in both the letter to S.Weir and in the posts to .99 concerning his excellent, clear and simple demonstrations.... she reiterates her ignorance, saying she's not an experimentalist, she doesn't understand the circuitry, she doesn't know what measurement points to use, she cannot understand .99's demonstrations or explanations... yet she has the utter temerity to argue about these things with people who DO understand them! And she defers to Donovan Martin, using his absence as an excuse not to answer questions.

Well, I say this: Forget about Ainslie, she has no clue about her apparatus and doesn't even know how to operate or measure it. LET US TALK TO DONOVAN MARTIN. Rosemary Ainslie is irrelevant. DONOVAN MARTIN is the responsible party here and it is downright IMMORAL of him to let his admittedly ignorant and incompetent co-author Rosemary Ainslie attempt to answer questions and meet critical objections about something that she can't even describe honestly and coherently, much less discuss rationally... or even operate physically.

WHERE IS DONOVAN MARTIN in all this? Why is he letting Ainslie flap in the breeze like a tattered flag? Is this his "tough love" way of letting her make an utter and complete fool of herself in public?

[MileHigh]

I have to confess smiling when reading Steve Weir's recommendations to Rosie Posie.

2a. Replace the four resistors with a single non-inductive shunt resistor on a heat sink.  A Caddock MP930-0.25F is in stock at Digikey, as is a suitable heatsink:  Ohmite RA-T2X-64E.  Purchase a small one sided copper clad board and drill a hole in it to fit the BAT- side of the current sense resistor.  Face the copper away from the resistor body so that it cannot touch the heatsink.  Solder five 1/2" long 18AWG solid wires to the board to provide a place to clip the scope probe ground clips and the Bat- clip.  The Caddock is a 30W resistor.  In simple terms the amount of power through the heating element will be at least 40 times the power through the current sense resistor.  That means that we are safe with this resistor to over 1000W average power through the heating element.  The resistor and the heat sink together establish a thermal mass with a time constant that is in the minutes.  We only need to worry about the average power that goes through the resistor. 

OMG, the guy is awesome!  He is the real thing for sure.

I sense a deer frozen in the headlights.  Break 9!  Break 9!

[TinselKoala]

People have made suggestions to her before.

Since early 2009, when I came in, many tests and modifications and experiments have been suggested to Ainslie. Even the laboratory to which she sent her whole apparatus off to last year made suggestions for tests to her. The ONLY thing she has EVER done in response to any of these tests and suggestions is to buy and install the "noninductive" Vishay thick-film power resistors she has placed on the board where the original wirewound resistors were.
She paid no attention to the actual power requirements, and she  -- or rather Donovan Martin -- installed these new resistors in such an amateurish manner that nearly all the benefit of their reduced inductance was cancelled by the installation.

There is zero chance that she will implement the instructions given her by S.Weir. Her eyes will glaze over after the first sentence, and if she gets as far as the 40-1 ratio of power and the mention of 1000 W average power, she will start arguing with him about "averages" and how power has to be equal in all the elements, and so on.

Ten days or so until the next demonstration's first announced date. Will she be able to complete a DigiKey order in that time? She doesn't even have the apparatus at home any more according to  her. Time's a-wasting!

[poynt99]

It's only a matter of time; I think Rose will turn on Mr. Weir at some point.

She has done so every in single case when her unsubstantiated assertions have been challenged. And if Weir is as sincere, honest and altruistic as I believe him to be, there are going to be a lot of "corrections" made (or at least attempted) at that demo, and there's the very real potential for a few feathers to get ruffled as a result.