Testing the TK Tar Baby

[Rosemary Ainslie]

I have no idea where the "factor of 12" comes from either, Rosemary please enlighten us with the answer.

LOL.  I think my math may have been out a tad.  I think that number should be 8. 

Rosie Pose

[Rosemary Ainslie]

LOL  Guys,
I'm FINALLY beginning to enjoy all this.  It's just a question of perspective.  Regarding this post of TK's...

What does it say in the first paragraph of this blog post? Are you now publicly retracting that claim? Fine.

What it says in that paragraph is what it says.  Nowhere do I claim anything differently.  Our integrated power analysis PROVES that there's zero energy discharged by the battery supply.  And where you calculate 320 mA we only measure 0.04 - which is certainly NEGLIGIBLE.

Rosie Pose

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Here, I thought this would help Rosemary a bit with her math:

From wikipedia regarding joules, watts, et. al.

Joule = Watt * Second
Watt = Joule / Second 
This is THE MATH.

Let's be more specific shall we?
A Watt is often written as a Joule PER Second. PER MEANS DIVIDE.
I know this can be confusing but...
This is NOT the same as a WattSecond, which is a Watt MULTIPLIED by a Second.   
Perhaps this is why you are confused on a watt and a joule being 'interchangeable'?

If you look closely, a Watt and a Joule are NOT interchangeable (directly), there is an equal sign there which means that you need to do the same mathematical process to BOTH sides of the equal sign in order for the equation to be remain TRUE. 

Put another way: (W=V*A) One Watt equals one Volt multiplied by one Amp. (i.e. Instantaneous)
A Joule is: (J=V*A*s) One Volt multiplied by one Amp multiplied by one Second. (i.e. Over TIME)
Also known as a WattSecond. (A watt is NOT a JouleSecond.)
Please feel free to correct any errors...

Perhaps this will help Rosemary 'DO THE MATH'?

Regards to the regular readers of this rubbish heh heh,
PC
Edited to switch the words 'volt' and 'amp' to represent equation
BTW, can't wait to see the 'Altiods' rig.

No PhiChaser - you're STILL wrong.

Wattage cannot be divorced from the concept of power - either delivered or dissipated.  And it must always factor in time.  Here's the CORRECT equation which is also - inter alia - it's DEFINITION.

[Rosemary Ainslie]

And guys, as for this post by FTC...

I have worked TIRELESSLY and at my OWN EXPENSE to promote this knowledge related to switching circuits that were PREDICTED in terms of a modest thesis based on a revision of Faraday's Lines of Force.   I am widely accused on doing NOTHING but furthering a THEORY where  I REPEATEDLY advise that I have none.


AND I PUT IT TO YOU ALL IT IS BECAUSE WE HAVE THE THESIS THAT SUPPORTS THAT CLAIM.

I think he's drawing the distinction that there a difference between a theory and thesis.  A theory must first be proved correct.  We have no theories about anything.  The 'thesis' that we promote has NOTHING to do with anything outside standard physics.  We would NOT presume to innovate either.  That would indicate that we're suffering from that Dunning Kruger syndrome. 

Regards,
Rosemary

[fuzzytomcat]

And guys, as for this post by FTC...
I think he's drawing the distinction that there a difference between a theory and thesis.  A theory must first be proved correct.  We have no theories about anything.  The 'thesis' that we promote has NOTHING to do with anything outside standard physics.  We would NOT presume to innovate either.  That would indicate that we're suffering from that Dunning Kruger syndrome. 

Regards,
Rosemary

A theory must first be proved correct.

There has been numerous statements made that a NERD device with claim of a COP>INFINITY has been proven correct by Rosemary based on her predicted theory and the published testing and evaluation of this device at her blog site and here at Over Unity. This THEORY now with her claimed proof of a THESIS is also known as her "standard model" which is not a main stream belief or taught in any electronic college, university or trade school on the long standing excepted theory of electricity.

It should also be noted that any "ERRORS" at all submitted to academics in testing and/or evaluation of a device for a proposed theory leading to a thesis is doomed a short life and a long death.

FTC