Testing the TK Tar Baby

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Well Guys,

There's no question that they've rifled files from my computer.  I saw it in action - very briefly and then pulled out my flash drive.  It strikes me as really extraordinary that they could do this - considering the security that's related to Apple computers.  In any event.  I'm strangely gratified.  It shows the sheer unrelenting effort that they need to expend to try and get me 'gone' and our technology with it.  Why would such a charming group of individuals feel so compelled to discredit this technology?  Surely if there was nothing here then the ONLY sensible thing would be to let it well alone?  No-one is that clever that they can claim exceptional energy performance without the evidence. And the only evidence that they've managed to snaffle is precisely what supports our claim.  We've got well over 300 samples on one flash drive and a whole whack more on others.  I look forward to making these readily accessible but will do so on a forum of our choice. 

The forum that sean has established is showing information that DOES NOT BELONG TO HIM AND THAT HAS NOT BEEN PUT IN TH PUBLIC DOMAIN.  Typically of the 'type' there is a flaunted criminal disregard and disrespect for the law.  And NOTA BENE.  This activity carries Harti's implicit approval.  I've long doubted his commitment to new energy sources.  And it entirely supports my contention that these forums are only here to dupe the unsuspecting to make disclosures.  The minute they become exceptional and strong - then there is this unrelenting attack of the claimant and the claim - based on any reason at all.  None of it needs validation. They're substantially out of reach of any accountability  I'm prepared to invest a certain amount towards this to see if it IS possible to establish some kind of legal precedent.  Much needed.  But this kind of unremitting relentless attack is PRECISELY why you all need to consider the motives behind all this. 

Regarding that instantaneous wattage that sean and TK are trying to advance.  The principle is simple.  Take your standard duty cycle and IF you did not factor in the time related to both the applied voltage and the applied current flow then you'll exaggerate the amount of energy delivered or dissipated.  It's a standard and elementary mistake.  In effect if, for example, one applied a 10% duty cycle to a switched circuit - then effectively the product of the voltage and current needs must be represented as that percentage over time.  !0 volts * 2 amps is not 20 watt.  Ever.  It's 20 * 10% = 2 watts.  And the amount of energy either dissipated or delivered that is computed as watts will NEVER supply nor dissipate more than that 2 watts.  Not even 'instantaneously' as TK's trying to imply.  Either they're hoping you don't realise this - or they don't know this themselves.  Either way.  It speaks rather sadly to their competence or to their intentions.  As ever. Take your pick. 

I'm afraid that I need to keep 'off line' for a while.  They'll be back here - now that they've got that easy route.  And the only way I can prevent any further incursions is if I stay off line.

Regards as ever,
Rosemary

[TinselKoala]

Well Guys,

There's no question that they've rifled files from my computer.  I saw it in action - very briefly and then pulled out my flash drive.  It strikes me as really extraordinary that they could do this - considering the security that's related to Apple computers.  In any event.  I'm strangely gratified.  It shows the sheer unrelenting effort that they need to expend to try and get me 'gone' and our technology with it.  Why would such a charming group of individuals feel so compelled to discredit this technology?  Surely if there was nothing here then the ONLY sensible thing would be to let it well alone?  No-one is that clever that they can claim exceptional energy performance without the evidence. And the only evidence that they've managed to snaffle is precisely what supports our claim.  We've got well over 300 samples on one flash drive and a whole whack more on others.  I look forward to making these readily accessible but will do so on a forum of our choice. 

The forum that sean has established is showing information that DOES NOT BELONG TO HIM AND THAT HAS NOT BEEN PUT IN TH PUBLIC DOMAIN.  Typically of the 'type' there is a flaunted criminal disregard and disrespect for the law.  And NOTA BENE.  This activity carries Harti's implicit approval.  I've long doubted his commitment to new energy sources.  And it entirely supports my contention that these forums are only here to dupe the unsuspecting to make disclosures.  The minute they become exceptional and strong - then there is this unrelenting attack of the claimant and the claim - based on any reason at all.  None of it needs validation. They're substantially out of reach of any accountability  I'm prepared to invest a certain amount towards this to see if it IS possible to establish some kind of legal precedent.  Much needed.  But this kind of unremitting relentless attack is PRECISELY why you all need to consider the motives behind all this. 

Regarding that instantaneous wattage that sean and TK are trying to advance.  The principle is simple.  Take your standard duty cycle and IF you did not factor in the time related to both the applied voltage and the applied current flow then you'll exaggerate the amount of energy delivered or dissipated.  It's a standard and elementary mistake.  In effect if, for example, one applied a 10% duty cycle to a switched circuit - then effectively the product of the voltage and current needs must be represented as that percentage over time.  !0 volts * 2 amps is not 20 watt.  Ever.  It's 20 * 10% = 2 watts.  And the amount of energy either dissipated or delivered that is computed as watts will NEVER supply nor dissipate more than that 2 watts.  Not even 'instantaneously' as TK's trying to imply.  Either they're hoping you don't realise this - or they don't know this themselves.  Either way.  It speaks rather sadly to their competence or to their intentions.  As ever. Take your pick. 

I'm afraid that I need to keep 'off line' for a while.  They'll be back here - now that they've got that easy route.  And the only way I can prevent any further incursions is if I stay off line.

Regards as ever,
Rosemary

That is another lie. You posted every one of those scopeshots on this forum or your blog. EVERY SINGLE ONE.

The only things that are in that zipfile that you did not post are the conversions to correct the filename duplicity that you perpetrated and my few blowups for analysis. Most of the files are there in duplicate: the actual file you uploaded but with the correct .bmp extension, and that same file converted to the much smaller jpg format for web display here. I kept both versions in there for obvious reasons, you litigious tort.

Stefan doesn't like bitmap images because they are so big. For example your bogus .jpgs which are really .bmp are 301.1 kb in size and the same file as a REAL jpg is only about 70 to 75 kb in size, a considerable savings. But you overrode that by duplicitously changing the file extension to get them uploaded ....without actually converting them to smaller filesizes like jpg or png.

And as far as Ainslie's present argument is concerned, clearly the LONG PERIOD of 2 minutes, where the 18 percent duty cycle results in an ON time of 21.6 seconds..... how do we calculate the power for that then?  Huh? Have you ever held onto a 20 Watt soldering iron for 21 seconds? Huh? HAVE YOU? How does the middle ten seconds of that DC power know that it is anything other than DC power, so it can hide some of its watts?

I laugh at you Ainslie, because you are so wrong you are right once in a while and you are so stupid that you don't even realize it when other people are telling you that.

[TinselKoala]

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/powerac.html#c3

[TinselKoala]

Well Guys,

There's no question that they've rifled files from my computer. (snip)
I'm afraid that I need to keep 'off line' for a while.  They'll be back here - now that they've got that easy route.  And the only way I can prevent any further incursions is if I stay off line.

Regards as ever,
Rosemary

Bye bye now.

But we know that .... You'll be baaaack before we even know you're gone.

Because next you will accuse "them".... that is, us, meaning mostly ME,  of destroying your files, which are only destroyed because you pulled your drive while it was being accessed.

[MileHigh]

Well well,

Is Rosie perhaps starting to get cold feet?  Perhaps some self-doubt is creeping into her thoughts?  Perhaps she is feeling that the tide is going against her?

Well the solution for that is to claim that your computer has been attacked!  It seems to me that it has happened several times before under similar circumstances.

Run!  Run!  Run away!!!  lol

Regarding that instantaneous wattage that sean and TK are trying to advance.  The principle is simple.  Take your standard duty cycle and IF you did not factor in the time related to both the applied voltage and the applied current flow then you'll exaggerate the amount of energy delivered or dissipated.  It's a standard and elementary mistake.  In effect if, for example, one applied a 10% duty cycle to a switched circuit - then effectively the product of the voltage and current needs must be represented as that percentage over time.  !0 volts * 2 amps is not 20 watt.  Ever.  It's 20 * 10% = 2 watts.  And the amount of energy either dissipated or delivered that is computed as watts will NEVER supply nor dissipate more than that 2 watts.  Not even 'instantaneously' as TK's trying to imply.  Either they're hoping you don't realise this - or they don't know this themselves.  Either way.  It speaks rather sadly to their competence or to their intentions.

Rosemary, the above is absolute nonsense.  I have told you about five times already that rational human beings have no reason whatsoever to argue about the concepts of instantaneous power and average power, NONE.  These are concepts that can't be "spun" by anybody, they simply exist.

Are you a rational human being?  What's your problem?

I have also highlighted your prose above where your brain is not working and you are spouting nonsense.

MileHigh