Wilby, you said you would send me a mosfet, in order to trick me into revealing an address. You did not send me that mosfet and in fact you never intended to. You are a liar.
QED.

What are the chances that you will continue with your strawman ad hominem bloviation? One hundred percent. What are the chances that anything of significance will ever come from you? Precisely zero.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1uGwIIalOEI

Isn't it interesting how whenever significant results are reported in this thread, or some absurd claim or lie from Ainslie is refuted YET AGAIN, the trolls come out, and between them Wilby and Ainslie manage to bury those posts under sheer trolling, irrelevant nonsense, insults and more lies? I find it extremely interesting. It's completely hilarious that these so-called "free energy researchers" working on "open source projects" in these "public forums" so often try to hide, cover up, or bury data, just as they hide their devices from and keep their little secrets about actual schematics and continue to make false claims. That is, the few of them that actually _do_ have devices at all. It seems that most of them don't actually possess opposable thumbs at all and prefer to jibe and tack and pass wind instead of actually doing work.

Quote from: TinselKoala on June 28, 2012, 11:03:19 AM
Isn't it interesting how whenever significant results are reported in this thread, or some absurd claim or lie from Ainslie is refuted YET AGAIN, the trolls come out, and between them Wilby and Ainslie manage to bury those posts under sheer trolling, irrelevant nonsense, insults and more lies? I find it extremely interesting. It's completely hilarious that these so-called "free energy researchers" working on "open source projects" in these "public forums" so often try to hide, cover up, or bury data, just as they hide their devices from and keep their little secrets about actual schematics and continue to make false claims. That is, the few of them that actually _do_ have devices at all. It seems that most of them don't actually possess opposable thumbs at all and prefer to jibe and tack and pass wind instead of actually doing work.

listen troll... i wouldn't have said a word had you not lied about what you actually did and misrepresented what i actually said... isn't it interesting that you cannot just stick to the science and have to repeatedly engage in your juvenile name calling, lying and taunting? and then blame the person you lied about or taunted or called a name when they come to defend themselves...

again... tu stultus es!

as an aside, i'll bite on your red herring... what "significant results" were you reporting? you know the ones you accuse me of obfuscating... the only posts you've recently made is some pictures of a crappy little tesla coil. is that your "significant results"? or is it that you are worried someone might miss your precious little "steam was evident at all times" picture? but... that can't be the case because you've spam posted that picture almost a dozen times now... just look back a few pages before i "intruded" by defending myself against your false accusations and lies and there it is. oh there it is again. and again...

The crappy little Tesla coil, Wilby you itinerant window-washer you, is using substantially the same circuit as the single-mosfet Ainslie circuit, and is oscillating for the same reasons. The difference, and the reason that I am showing it, is to illustrate what a PROPERLY SWITCHED and OSCILLATION CONTROLLED mosfet can actually do with its input power. Do you dare to apply the same "power calculation standard measurement protocols" that Ainslie uses to THIS simple mosfet switch that works EXACTLY in accordance with Faraday's Laws of Induction and Kirchoff's Circuit Rules?

And the reason I keep posting the DIFFERENT DAILY IMAGES of the same page from Ainslie's JNP article is because THAT is the only "official" publication of her "work" and it CONTINUES TO CONTAIN THE 5.9 MegaJoule LIE that she has LIED about "retracting". Every day that remains up there, conflicting with the new, sanitized version on her new forum, is YET ANOTHER LIE by someone who is trying to benefit monetarily by convincing people that the lie is true. DO THE MATH, you logic-challenged CMOS smoker, you.

And the significant results that you are attempting to bury go all along through this thread. For example, the FUNCTION GENERATOR PASSING CURRENT result which clearly refutes a significant claim of Ainslie's, and another is the fact that the Figure 7 image in the paper on the new forum AND NOWHERE ELSE had the zero baselines edited out, then magically re-appeared after I called them on it.... and the absurd 5.9 megaJoule claim and the dangling battery capacity sentence are just GONE, without explanation, but they REMAIN in the official version on Rossi's JNP site. The lie PERSISTS TODAY so I'm posting yet another image of the lie that she claims, lying still, to have "retracted publicly". That, Wilby, along with the withholding of the data that she has been promising for over a year to freely share, is a SIGNIFICANT RESULT which once again shows that Ainslie cannot be trusted, that she lies, and that she cannot -- or rather, arrogantly _will not_ -- clean up after her own messes.

This image is NOT the same as the earlier ones of the same page. This image was taken moments ago from the JNP publication.

And _this_ image is another, showing the crappy little ClassE Tesla coil using the SAME CIRCUIT, basically, as the Ainslie single-mosfet circuit, using its 300 W input (4 Tar Baby Batteries at 6 amperes) to actually do something useful: make corona and ozone to purify and beautify the environment. And, yes, it is making Heat in the Load as well; the secondary runs at a stable 150 degrees F in the ambient 70 degree airconditioning of my DeepBunker.

Do I measure any "depletion of potential difference in the supply"?
Wouldn't that depend on how I did my measurements and what I considered to be data? I mean, the batteries measure the same voltage before I start the demo and after I finish the demo. Therefore, no, I cannot measure any depletion of potential difference in the supply. And these batteries have been hooked up to the coil since yesterday afternoon.


Of course, the coil hasn't been turned ON for all that time.....