Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims

[TinselKoala]

Rosemary Ainslie has now reportedly found the "lost" Quantum Magazine apparatus, the single-mosfet circuit that many of us began researching in 2009 or before.

She has made a handful of posts today in which she severely misrepresents and even lies blatantly about my own statements, findings and involvement. Some of the lies she told today are of course directly refuted in this video, which I made and posted a bit over a month ago:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2-gokjcDQQ

The point is that the schematic that Ainslie published in the Quantum article CANNOT POSSIBLY produce the duty cycle she claimed to use, and in fact produces the exact inverse. As I show in the video, both the duty cycle and the frequency of the circuit can of course be adjusted (refuting Ainslie's lies made today) and at no time do I say it is a fixed duty cycle that is produced by the circuit.

It is impossible to tell what duty cycle or schematic Ainslie ACTUALLY used.... we know she has lied, made mistakes, and even gotten other people to bear false witness for her in terms of schematics and conditions under which data is gathered. Only good photographs of the apparatus in use, combined with contemporaneous measurements, will allow anyone to know what arrangement of equipment, at what settings, she actually might use at any given time.

The Quantum-17 circuit published under Ainslie's name has been shown many times, unequivocally, to be unable to make the duty cycle she claims. So either she did not use the published circuit, or she did not use the claimed duty cycle,... or both. Either way the paper is false. If she now shows her apparatus to be using SOME OTHER CIRCUIT....  or she shows that the apparatus makes a different duty cycle than she has claimed.... then the article is false and must be withdrawn, just as her other false "papers" have been.

If she chooses to claim that the 555 timer is irrelevant.... then she must explain why, when the 555 is removed, the circuit is then exactly the Unclamped Inductive Test circuit found in the back of the IRFPG50 data sheet.

[TinselKoala]

@Mark Dansie:

I see that Ainslie has fired off another "open letter" to you. Please note that she lies to you several times, blatantly, in this open letter, and does not provide any evidence for her lying assertions.

1. I have never said her published circuit produced a fixed duty cycle, or a 90 percent duty cycle only.

2. Mark E's graphs are NOT from simulations, they are from actual builds of the circuit and variants.

3. When other builders here and at Energetic Forum also showed the same thing I showed, Ainslie DID acknowledge the "error" in the Quantum circuit and even "apologised" for misleading people. Now she pretends that only Mark E and I have shown the circuit to be false, when in reality every one who has built it or simmed it knows it is false.

Poynty and Steve are well able to determine if it is designed to apply a variable duty cycle.  If it DOES show this - then TK - aka Tinsel Koala - commonly referred to  as Little TK or 'ickle pickle' WILL BE CALLED ON TO RETRACT HIS OBJECTIONS IN WHOLE AND IN PART.  As will MARK EUTHANASIUS.  THEN.  Under those circumstances our claims on this subject STAND.  And in the interest of impartial investigation into matters of science - as is widely claimed by both Sterling Allen and Mark Dansie - I INSIST that those retractions be made public.  That - after all - is only fair.

How can I "retract" something THAT I NEVER SAID? It is Ainslie who needs to retract her lies and false claims and misrepresentations of the work and words of others.

No.... what is "only fair" is that Ainslie stop lying about me and what other people have also proven. And I INSIST that Ainslie's apologies and retractions of her PROVEN LIES be made public.

[poynt99]

Here are a couple of relevant documents.

Useful info on the test protocol and wave forms.

Unfortunately all the image files linked-to (EF posts) at the end of the IEEE submission were removed.

[TinselKoala]

Thanks for that. As usual, the real information comes from someone other than Ainslie.

Here's what the mendacious troll has to say this morning:

Here's the link to TK's post. http://www.overunity.com/13743/rosemary-ainslie-quantum-magazine-circuit-cop-17-claims/msg368786/#msg368786  Unlike him we ALWAYS give the required links when we reference anything.  TK doesn't.  He daren't.  Lest you become aware of the FULL complaint against him.

What a liar! I ALWAYS INCLUDE ACTUAL IMAGES OF AINSLIE's OWN WORDS. Yet she cannot give you a reference for any of her absurd claims about me.
Required links, Ainslie? Where is a link to ANY POST where I have ever said you have a non-adjustable duty cycle? Where is a link to ANY POST where I have said you use an 11 percent, or a 90 percent duty cycle? There are none.

In Ainslie's present set of posts she illustrates that she is not only willing to lie blatantly about the work of others and her own, she also DOESN'T EVEN UNDERSTAND THE ISSUES or the importance of her false claims in an article that bears her name.


HERE YET AGAIN IS WHAT I HAVE SAID IN REFERENCE TO AINSLIE'S DUTY CYCLE:

The Article presents a schematic and makes claims about its performance. The claims are NOT TRUE. The schematic presented CANNOT make the duty cycle and frequency claimed, and in fact makes the _exact inverse_ duty cycle, something that could not have happened by a mere "accident" or typo concerning the 555 circuit.
Either the circuit used by Ainslie was NOT the published circuit that bears her name... or the duty cycle used was NOT the 3.7 percent ON that Ainslie claims. Either way the article lies. There are no other alternatives!


Now.... Ainslie has made many claims about me recently, and in her twisted mind she thinks she can do this without providing any evidence at all, yet she wants me to provide LINKS.... to posts that I have already imaged for you and attached to these posts. More delusions--- Ainslie cannot provide any support for her allegations, yet she ignores all the evidence that I provide. She cannot refute me at all with checkable outside references or demonstrations of her own.

Where are the detailed photographs that Ainslie promised?

[TinselKoala]

Here are a couple of relevant documents.

Useful info on the test protocol and wave forms.

Unfortunately all the image files linked-to (EF posts) at the end of the IEEE submission were removed.

In the first file you linked, YET ANOTHER schematic is presented. Suddenly there is a recirculation diode, that DOES NOT APPEAR in the original report of this experiment and in fact is not even mentioned. Also there is no 555 timer schematic, instead a Function Generator symbol appears.

Once again, we have CONFLICTING and SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT descriptions of the apparatus used in this experiment. The EIT paper even says that the schematic WAS USED.... but where is the recirculation diode in the Quantum schematic? Nowhere. Where is the detailed 555 schematic? Nowhere, it has been suppressed because of the smoking gun it contains.

Note the schematic from this "paper" below. No 555 timer circuit is given, no separate 12 v power supply for the timer is shown,  and a recirculation diode is included, and the claim is made that this was the Quantum magazine circuit: 

I am rolling on the floor laughing.