Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims

[TinselKoala]

You've listed a lot of them but there are even more. But never mind, I'm completely disgusted with that baldfaced liar at this point. One cannot trust ANYTHING that comes from her unless it can be verified independently. Is the Figure 8 text "20 ms" really referring to the period of 20 milliseconds, or is it another of Ainslie's "typos" caused by her ignorance of common abbreviations, and did she really  "mean" to say 20 microseconds instead? Who knows? We weren't there to confirm the settings, so it is literally impossible to trust even the description of the scopeshot.

Ms. Ainslie does not publish the June 29th video on her web site, but it is available around the web.

Indeed it is, in spite of Ainslie's attempt to suppress it, in all its dead-air, thumb-over-microphone, senseless cellphone camera work glory. But for those who can't sit through the entire four hours of nonsense and dead air (they actually went to dinner during the demonstration, just abandoning their audience without explanation...)... I have excerpted the relevant bits.

http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLml9VdOeqKa_6b8yMpkYJHIR7F9ah3-1q

At the end of the Ainslie demo clips I have added a few of my own that treat some of the issues raised in the demonstration.

[MarkE]

When someone has magical beliefs it can be very difficult to devise tests.  In the latest bit of pretzel logic, Ms. Ainslie objects to your proposal to disconnect the Q2 source pin as a way of testing whether current goes through the function generator during the "Q1 Off" times or not. 

OK so the hypothesis is that Q1 is essential to these oscillations.  Then just disconnect the gate lead of Q1 and connect that to the Q1 source, or disconnect Q1 completely.  If the oscillations still occur, then the hypothesis that Q1 is carrying the circuit current during the oscillations is disproved.  Assuming that is the case, since you have already shown that it is so, then the Q2 source can be disconnected.  Let's see what Ms. Ainlie's objection is to testing her claim.

[SeaMonkey]

This thread/discussion/rampage has become a
humorous near perpetual motion/emotion display
of the secrets of free energy.

It would seem that Rosemary has become quite
adept at, with little expenditure of energy, stimulating
an intense burst of energy in reaction to the action.

A wee bit of a "windup" and the Energizer Bunny
just goes, and goes, and goes...

At its present rate this "relationship" could go on
for decades more.

[Pirate88179]

Her intellect is challenged alright.  Good word for it and it is her word from her own post.

Bill

[TinselKoala]

That is amazing! Her ignorance really knows no bounds! As Mark says, I have ALREADY SHOWN Many Times that the Q2 can oscillate all by itself. Just pull the Q1 out of its socket during an ordinary demonstration! Oh... she doesn't use sockets. What an idiot.

What the hell does she think she's doing, anyway, with all her lies and misrepresentations. I don't know whether to do YET ANOTHER DEMONSTRATION THAT UTTERLY REFUTES HER SILLINESS, or just to repost all the times I've already demonstrated it.

But didn't I tell you that she would find some handwaving excuse not to do the experiment? And she emits such nonsensical rationalizations. Seriously, how does this woman get through her day, without being able to think her way out of a wet paper sack?

When we were discussing the Figure 3 scopeshot, what was the initial cause that I believed (and still believe) was the reason for the Zero Current in the Q1 ON phase? It was that the Q1 was blown, or disconnected somehow. And I demonstrated the EXACT FIGURE 3 WAVEFORMS by pulling the Q1 out of its socket. Does she think that was FAKED?  Or does she just ignore it because it contradicts her stupidity? WHY DOES SHE NOT DO THE EXPERIMENT HERSELF? Because she can't, that's why, she dare not. She can only bloviate, insult, make false claims and whine.

Oh I am so angry right now I could shoot hoops. That post of hers is literally INSANE. Ainslie is completely and totally deluded.

OK, I've made another video. I'm afraid I let my anger vent a bit. The video uses the circuit built over the schematic so there is no doubt that it is wired "correctly", that is according to the Actual schematic used by Ainslie, with the exception that I am only using a single Q2 (and one Q1 of course). In the video I demonstrate the full circuit operating on 74 volts Vbatt, and I show the normal oscillations. Then I CUT THE WIRES to the pins of the Q1, and show that this DOES NOT AFFECT THE OSCILLATIONS AT ALL. Not a bit. This demolishes Ainslie's stupid assertions about That. Then I replace the Q1 mosfet and again show the full oscillation suite, with enough + gate signal to turn the Q1 ON and heat up the load. Then I CUT THE WIRE from the FG TO THE SOURCE OF THE Q2 MOSFET. Does anyone want to guess what happens then? You there, the wrinkled old crone in the back of the room, what do YOU predict?

Oh, I am still so mad. How can someone be so utterly STUPID as Rosemary Ainslie, and live to adulthood? I just don't get it. She is the very most arrogant and willfully ignorant person I have EVER encountered, the grandest liar, the worst troll ever. Some day, she will get exactly what she deserves, of that I have the utmost faith.

What utter NONSENSE her last post is!

BUT NOTICE WELL... she no longer can claim that the Q2s are DISCONNECTED... since she has herself stated that their sources need to be CONNECTED to the gate of Q1 in order to oscillate. This is of course false, but she has blatantly CONTRADICTED HERSELF.... as all liars do eventually.


Ainslie, child, you should be spanked hard and sent to your room without dinner, and you should be grounded for at least a month.
Take away your cellphone and internet until you GROW UP and learn to respect your betters.