Rosemary Ainslie COP>17 Circuit / A First Application on a Hot Water Cylinder

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Anyone trying to claim exclusive recognition is rather defeating the general drive here - and anyone who tries to diminish the character or efforts of us poor promotors of this - you are simply doing yourselves and the general drive - a really gross disservice.  Just get over yourself Glen.  You've done NOTHING that we have not done.  And very soon we will have much much more to both show and discuss.  Not about boring OLD facts and evidence - BUT NEW STUFF - new approaches - new experimental circuit arrangements - new methods of switching - ALL aimed at getting to higher wattage levels.  Different applications.  Greater scope and range.  All that development that Ashtweth thinks that you could manage.  You don't even UNDERSTAND the technology.  HOW could you promote it?  HOW could I risk leaving this technology to you and Harvey?  All you appear to want is some kind of monopoly on a test - and a whole lot of personal accolades that DO NOT BELONG TO YOU - on an experiment that fundamentally is NOT that that usable.  Get over yourself and MOVE ON.

You are constantly trying to remind eveyone that your efforts matter.  They really don't.  They are just one of many - and you don't even understand what you're doing.  You really don't have that much to contribute beyond the REPLICATION which you now try and imply is your discovery.  If you want your efforts to count then show us WHY it matters to either kill this subject or promote it.  It's entirely impossible to understand what the hell you are either trying to do or say or show through those highly coloured SHOUTS of yours.  Other than the fact that you need us to clap our hands and keep looking at you.  It's BORING.  In the extreme.

And for Ashtweth to propose that you progress this?  How?  You wouldn't know how to.  Frankly it is my opinion that you are more than a little unstable - I think the term is a loose cannon - but in your case it would be better described as a rampant EGO.

Guys - here's my promise.  We will be posting our results on a blog, I believe it is - when I find it and learn how to use it.  And then - for those who are following this - if it's cheap and plentiful off grid energy that you're wanting?  I'ts around the corner.

The blog will be aimed at promoting not only the technology on an empirical basis - but it will be developed to give greater than unity results on multiple technologies.  The ONLY intention of our work is to show you all that Over Unity is not an elusive debatable or impossible technology - but that is is very much with us and is being developed - certainly NOT exclusively by ourselves - but by many very talented people on and off forums such as this.  I confidently predict that the required proof which has already been established - will be so widely apparent - that we will breach those HARSH and rather AUSTERE dismissals that have dogged our best efforts to date.

So take heart and pay heed.  And for God's sake just ignore Glen.  He's trying his damndest to kill your hopes.  Or not?  It's impossible to tell as he seems entirely incapable of speaking his mind.  LOL  Maybe he's just trying to say - LOOK AT ME.  Either way.  He's definitely managed to kill this thread.  More's the pity.

Regards,
Rosemary

[Rosemary Ainslie]

@RA

So when will people who need to, be able to heat their water? Or is all this commotion part of the ingredients?

From experience, it is best to not respond to counter-productive posts. You will just be compounding the waste of time. So feeding a useless fire only wastes wood. Just let it die off and persevere in what you know is right. Then @stefan will be able to see who is overdoing it and take care of the problem in the right way. Him removing you from moderator is a good thing to protect you.

Oh, in case you are worried, I saved all the pages of this thread and put it on my ftp site here;

http://purco.qc.ca/ftp/Overunity.com%20-%20Forum%20members/rosemarie-ainslie/

I'm not saying I will do this for each additional page, but at least you have till know in case you need it.

wattsup

PS: Beware of those who write in techni-color. lol

MANY THANKS WATTSUP.  I often see you here.  Nice to find support for these OU efforts.  I'm afraid that none of this commotion was either intended or expected.  But strangely it does help.  In any event - we're getting more students assigned to this task and the campus staff are doing their best to rally - within the constraints of really austere budgets.  You guys need to be patient.  But we're NOT talking years.  We're talking months. 

Here's the thing.  The ONLY thing between proof of concept and really high wattage levels is a switch that can carry high wattage.  Had Glen STUCK to the facts and acknowledged the results then we would have had motivation enough to persuade those transistor manufacturers to build the necessary.  But without this we need to get academic accreditation.  We're getting there.  Fast.  And then - at least this much will take us over the hurdle of getting the appropriate components.  Hopefully you ALL realise that the proof is very much at hand.  It's the levels that we're battling with.

Kindest regards,
Rosemary

[Rosemary Ainslie]

glad you are back. hope you are feeling better.

Wilby?  I missed this entirely - and it would have heartened me considerably.  I have paid tribute - often - to your remarkable skills on this forum.  I am delighted to see that you're still with me.  I also see that you posted on that joke of a thread that Glen started.  Another really nice point.

What really delights me in your support is that I know it's not based on any kind of judgement on the work itself - but simply on the efforts.  That's endorsement enough.  Truly grateful for it and thank you for your hopes and wishes here.

Kindest regards,
Rosie

[fuzzytomcat]

Howdy reading members and guests,

I have been notified the IEEE Scribid 10-0207-TIE submittal, a document water marked "for pier review" that Rosemary Ainslie ( aka aetherevarising ) has been referencing in all of her Forum postings and correspondence from July 07, 2010 has been removed from Scribd by IEEE for a copyright violation.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/26240411/PROVING-OVER-UNITY-THE-HARD-WORK-OF-MANY-DEDICATED-OPEN-SOURCE-MEMBERS

( http://www.scribd.com/word/removal/26240411 / This content was removed at the request of IEEE )


I would also like to add my e-mail correspondence that was sent by me to all the submittal authors on July 07, 2010 this was after my notification from Scribid on http://www.scribd.com/doc/26240411/PROVING-OVER-UNITY-THE-HARD-WORK-OF-MANY-DEDICATED-OPEN-SOURCE-MEMBERS being published at Scribid by aetherevarising ( aka Rosemary Ainslie )

************************************************************************************

----- Original Message -----
From: Glen Lettenmaier
To: Rosemary Ainslie
Cc: Harvey Gramm ; Ashtweth Palise ; Andrew Gardiner ; Steve Windisch ; Donovan Martin
Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2010 8:05 PM
Subject: Notice all Authors



I'm sure your aware that I alone hold the copyright on the "Scribd" Open Source Evaluation of Power Transients Generated to Improve Performance Coefficient of Resistive Heating Systems http://www.scribd.com/doc/23455916/Open-Source-Evaluation-of-Power-Transients-Generated-to-Improve-Performance-Coefficient-of-Resistive-Heating-Systems with over 3000 views and 160 downloads since 12-01-2009 usage of any part or parts of this document is "PLAGIARISM" without written permission from me on or for any further publications.

Secondly ....

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

QUOTE:  http://www.energeticforum.com/70207-post2913.html  ( can we use your data for a paper )
witsend
Senior Member
   
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,063
Guys - some more really good news.

IEEE have informed me that I can resubmit the paper with new revised information and evidence of open source duplication of the experiment provided that they are made fully cogniscant of the data available at the replication.

The implication is clearly that the first was not considered as having sufficient information. So Fuzzy. Would you please allow a collaboration on a new paper including your revised data - that we can submit this for peer review? We're game if you are. I see a comfortable collaboration between all parties here - provided you have no objections to us using your data.

In fact I think that many parties could come to the table here - all from our contributors and it would be so nice if you could pm Fuzzy, me, Aaron or Harvey with suggestions or considerations. Just think of it. The first collaborative attempt of a paper submitted by open source enthusiasts. And possibly the first proof of significant energy savings OU OR COP>17. Both are amazing.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I ..... Glen Lettenmaier, am withdrawing any use of my complete Test number "Thirteen" (13) data and image files for further usage, evaluation or publication, other than what has already been seen and posted at Energetic Forum, Panacea Bocaf and my "copyrighted" Scribd publication.


Sincerely,
Glen A Lettenmaier

************************************************************************************



This exposure should show that after the date of July 07, 2010 the usage of the word or words "we, our or us" in conjunction with the IEEE submittal(s) test results on Test #13 does not in any way express my views or opinions in any manner with Rosemary Ainslie.

Sincerely,
Glen A Lettenmaier
( aka FuzzyTomCat )

.

[WilbyInebriated]

oh it's plagiarism now... do you even have any idea what that word means glen? apparently not.

from the wiki:

Plagiarism is defined in dictionaries as "the wrongful appropriation, close imitation, or purloining and publication, of another author's language, thoughts, ideas, or expressions, and the representation of them as one's own original work."

usage is not plagiarism...  get a clue.

and just who was it again that asked rosemary to come to energeticforum?


as an aside, this one is amusing...

PROBLEM - How can a INVENTOR without the knowledge of electronic circuitry or electronic component operation or capability of construction of a electronic circuit INVENT a electronic circuit for a PATENT ?? and how can someone claim INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS as Rosemary Ainslie does on that electronic circuit ??

couldn't this same 'logic' be applied to you and your ignorance of 'peer review'?


and this post from peter lindemann seems to contradict what glen, harv and the sycophants keep harping on about...

In the Electric Motor Secrets thread, I showed how to produce mechanical energy while recycling the electricity. In the thread with Imhotep, we showed how to light fluorescent lights while recycling the electricity. Now, here, I am showing Rosemary Ainslie's method to produce heat while recycling the electricity.

This completes the "GENERAL CASE" of how to use electricity efficiently, first described by Nikola Tesla, and referred to by Gabriel Kron as "shuttle circuits". The real method to produce Heat, Light, and Motive Power, at efficiencies above the supposed limits described by the Laws of Thermodynamics, is now fully in the Public Domain.

God Bless you all!

and then there is this...

This thread is about Rosemary Ainslie's astonishing contributions to Science, and related developments.