Testing the TK Tar Baby

[TinselKoala]

What's the matter, Ainslie? Not so sure of your identification of me as Brian (or Byran) Little any more? Couldn't quite bring yourself to make that silly claim in your letter to Dansie?

Every time the mendacious deluded old woman makes reference to me as "little TK" or as Brian, or Bryan Little, she reveals YET AGAIN that she has no regard for truth, cannot support her assertions with proof or even outside references, has no respect for the wishes of others to remain anonymous or private, and even actively seeks to harm people whose identities she has "ferreted"... or rather RATTED out.



@MrSean2k:
The only professional qualifications I need mention in this context, out of the many I hold, are that I know how to use and read and interpret an oscilloscope, and I have many years of experience doing so; and that I can do the necessary maths: simple arithmetic, algebra and some basic calculus.

And anyone else who shares that competence can see for themselves from Ainslie's own data -- and the interpretations and claims -- that she does not know how to use and read and interpret oscilloscopes. And she cannot even add and subtract, multiply or divide. Or read technical information with comprehension.

[TinselKoala]

lol, what a nut case. Mark has always been in support of OU.

Thing is, you dont have OU. Nothing there to support.

Magsy

Mark is a bright fellow. He'll see right away that Ainslie has no clue, if he hasn't already. The text of the letter is hilarious!  I'd like to see Ainslie stand at a whiteboard in front of a couple of bright physics grad students and derive some result, using her "thesis".... while they try to keep from snickering at the silly old woman squawking terms she's read in a popular novel but cannot even begin truly to understand.

He knows better than to bite at the bait, too. The last person I know about that Ainslie tried to contact took her at her word at first.... and  wound up with several reams of correspondence, wasted time, and clogged email accounts, and finally chucked it all into the recycling bin as the pile of garbage it actually was.

[TinselKoala]

An open letter to Mark Dansie:

Hi Mark
It was good to hear from you again. As you may recall, I have assembled quite a large database of Ainslie material, all in one place. I have screenshot images of many of her forum posts wherein she makes crazy "calculations", contradicts herself from one day to the next, insults people who are trying to help her understand her circuit, and simply and outrageously lies about her "experiment" and the results therefrom.
I've gathered together all of the scopeshots that I can find into one place, and MrSean2k has graciously hosted many of these scopeshots at
http://seani.justemail.net/rosemary_ainslie/
Please note that Ainslie herself posted all of these shots at different times in various places.... and has fought tooth and nail to try to prevent them from being gathered together, because when they are, and are examined wrt her claims, they clearly do not support the claims and in some cases even refute them soundly. In addition , several of the scopeshots simply indicate operation with blown or disconnected mosfets, and ALL of Ainslie's current data -- obtained by voltage drop across current viewing resistors -- is invalid because of the location of the "black" output lead of the Function Generator.  All available pictures and videos of every Ainslie apparatus extant show this lead attached to the common ground reference at the negative battery terminal.... a location which allows a current path to bypass the CVR altogether. The published schematics, prepared by Ainslie's "team" only _after_ this fact was pointed out, mendaciously give the location as being in the technically "correct" location on the transistor side of the CVR.... not the "wrong" location that was actually used.
There are many many more discrepancies, misrepresentations, and outright mendacities committed by Ainslie.  It's all there in black and white and "purple"..... and mostly in her own words and published images.
Of course I know that you won't fall for Ainslie's bait, so there is really  no need for you to waste your time, but should you be curious as to the true nature of this particular episode of pathological pseudoscience, just let me know and I'll send you the whole database of Ainslie material.... over 7 gigabytes, because it includes a lot of the reference material from scope manufacturers explaining points that Ainslie has denied or garbled, such as AC-DC coupling, function generator offset, current paths thru FGs, mosfet parasitic oscillations, power measurement protocols, battery  measurement protocols, etc. as pdf files. In addition, it contains several videos, including the mendacious "DEMO" video which she lied about not posting, which contains several outright lies and coverups, and for which at least FIVE different schematics have been presented.
That is, my Ainslie database not only includes the lies, misrepresentations and errors committed by Ainslie, but also the refutations and correct interpretations and the reference material she so blithely ignores and refuses to absorb.
Thanks, and good luck, keep in touch.
Sincerely--
--TK

Here are a few representative quote from Rosemary Ainslie, included in my database by uneditable screengrabs as images:

Correctly it is one Joule per second - but since 1 watt = 1 Joule and since 1 Joule = 1 watt per second - then AS I'VE EXPLAINED EARLIER - the terms are INTERCHANGEABLE.  Which is ALSO explained in WIKI.

According to what has been carefully established it takes 4.18 Joules to raise 1 gram of water by 1 degree centigrade.  We've taken a little under 900 grams of water to 82 degrees centigrade.  We ran that test for 90 minutes.  Then we upped the frequency and took that water up a further 20 degrees to 104.  We ran that part of the test for 10 minutes.  Ambient was at 16.  Joules = 1 watt per second.  So.  Do the math.  4.18 x 900 grams x (82 - 16) 66 degrees C = 248 292 joules per second x 90 minutes of the test period = 22 342 280 joules.  Then ADD the last 10 minutes where the water was taken to boil and now you have 4.18 x 900 grams x (104 - 16) 88 degrees C = 331 156 joules per second x 10 minutes = 3 310 560 Joules.  Then add those two values 22 342 280 + 3 310 560 = 25.6 Million Joules.  All 5 batteries maximum potential output - available for work - is 10.3 Million Joules. In that test alone the battery outperformed its watt hour rating.  And that was just one test.  Now.  Over the 10 month period that those batteries have been running at various outputs - which, when added to the output on just this one test - then I think its safe to say that the evidence is conclusive.  Those batteries have outperformed. They are still at OVER 12 volts EACH.  They are all of them still FULLY CHARGED.

So... DO THE MATH. Yes, please do... I did. Do you come up with numbers like Ainslie does? Her batteries were 60 A-H, 12 volt nominal silver-calcium lead acid batteries. Please note, Mark, that her entire "proof" of her "thesis" is based on conclusions drawn from this calculation right here, and others just as egregiously bogus.

Let's first deal with some pertinent issues.  What you are trying to do is to get me to believe that a function generator is able to pass current from a battery supply source via its terminal to its probe. Since I KNOW that is is impossible I'm afraid I'm not receptive to you trying to teach me or anyone else.  So NO.  I spare me your 'lessons'.

(sic)

[TinselKoala]

I wonder if the insane madwoman realises that whenever she refers to Brian (or Bryan) Little's "pickle" she is making both a sexual slur and revealing her own perverted fantasies.


Here is her latest bit of drunken trolling. What a slapper she is!

And after that, I show the original reference to "pickle" in the locked thread .... very clearly a reference to a man's sexual organ.  (can't spell it right because of the forum software) . No doubt about it.

This goes along with her original "identification" of me as cheeseburger/humbugger. I laugh and laugh at the idiot madwoman, swilling sherry in the morning and typing out her nonsense and her sexual fantasies of Brian (or Bryan) Little's itty bitty pickle.

[TinselKoala]

AN OPEN LETTER TO ROSEMARY AINSLIE:

Provide some proof for your assertions, idiot madwoman, or bugger off and shut up.

Sincerely, I remain

Your contemptuous correspondent,
TinselKoala