Solid State Switching Devices and Over Unity

[TinselKoala]

RM has a pretty good head on her shoulders.  It seems clear that she's working with others on her ideas.


I think TK don't like her because his cluelessness is threatened by her.


After all, we are ALL pretty clueless....relatively speaking.


TS

Think so? Here are just a few of the ridiculous things Ainslie has said recently:

"Per", as in "miles per hour" or "Joules per second" NEVER indicates division.
There is no such thing as Inductive Reactance.
In South Africa, the Solstice (or is it the Equinox) comes in July.
One Watt is one Joule, the terms are interchangeable.
One Joule is one Watt per Second.
"0.8" and "one-eighth" are the same quantity, and 800 microFarads is more than one-third of a Farad.
80 + 20 = 104.
Water can exist as a liquid in South Africa in an open container at 104 degrees C.
Took water to boil... but really, the water wasn't actually boiling... there were tiny bubbles.
A Function Generator cannot pass current between its "probe" and its "terminal" output leads.
Her batteries do not discharge.
TK and MrSean2k have hacked into her computers several times.
TK is someone called "Brian Little" (or Bryan).

And there are many many more statements and claims like this, from RM's "good head on her shoulders". I can provide images of the actual posts concerned if you are interested.

You think I'm "clueless" and "threatened by her"? Well, she has threatened me, several times, that's provable. But as far as me being "clueless".... support your claims with citations. You cannot.

[TechStuf]

Perhaps, when and if you are her age, TK, you may understand.  If you are there already, then please forgive my impetuous assumption.  As for dialogue, I do recommend one sift through the quotes of some Nobel winners of years past.  You'll find some Real Winners.  Some of the greatest 'discoveries' have filtered to us through minds very much like Rosemary's.  I am unfamiliar with the former interactions between yourself and her and cannot comment.  For many, familiarity breeds contempt.  For others, it may foster empathy and greater understanding.  One's faculties need hardly be complete in order to completely change any given course of science.  Or else we're all in a world of trouble. 


Bad choice of words, for that is exactly what we're in.


TS

[Thaelin]

        The minute I saw the name of Ainsley, I knew that TK would be all over it. They have a long history.
And by jove, TK didn't let me down. This has been such a show. For what its worth, TK I am in awwwwww.
It's been so much fun watching the back and forth between.

thayu

[TinselKoala]

Ainslie is now crowing about Mark Dansie talking to her, and arranging for someone to "replicate" her circuit (which one? Remember.... FIVE different schematics have been claimed for the circuit she is using.) She continues to lie about the performance of her device and the tests that have actually been performed.

Don't forget..... the ENTIRE substance of her overunity claim is contained within calculations and reasoning like this:

NOW.  Let's look at your 'self-runner' demands.  We have never recharged those batteries - with one exception.  Two caught fire and BOTH were fully recharged.  We've had those batteries since January 2010.  We've been running them since August 2010.  I've now FINALLY checked their rated capacities.  They're 40 ampere hours each.  We've used 6 of them continually since that time.  According to this rating they are each able, theoretically to dissipate 12 volts x 40 amps x 60 seconds x 60 minutes x 1 hour x 6 batteries.  That gives a work potential - a total potential output of 10 368 000 JOULES.

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.

Yes, please do DO THE MATH. Work through the problem and find her errors and faulty reasoning.... and use the right numbers in the first place: don't forget.... the batteries she used were actually 60 A-H capacity, not 40. And she NEVER MEASURED the temperature of the water itself, and the water "wasn't actually boiling.... there were tiny bubbles". And on and on. When the problem is worked correctly..... is the conclusion affected at all? Yet Ainslie has NEVER made the correct calculation nor revised the conclusion based on the 'math' shown above.



Here's my prediction: Neither Mark Dansie, nor his colleagues, nor Ainslie's "ACADEMICS", will find anything other than what has ALREADY BEEN FOUND, by me, by .99, and by everyone else who has built and tested her circuit and her claims.

And, eventually, these newcomers will find out what we old-timers already have seen: anyone who tries to argue with or educate Ainslie will wind up being the brunt of her insults, threats, disrespect and calumny. This pattern has repeated itself over and over, for at least 12 years, through many web forums and blogs.

I would LOVE to see Mark Dansie, his electronic consultants, and Rosemary Ainslie and her "academics" fully "engaged" in testing her claims about her circuit. It will be like watching re-runs of old Sesame Street episodes -- except that the children will be speaking made-up languages and can't understand the adults and Grover at all.

[tinman]

Well i made it to 2m40s in part one,then i just wanted to reach into the monitor and slap her face-what is with the banging on the table and swinging arm's?

No such thing as inductive reactance?
And here i was thinking that it was used to describe resistance in an inductor when being supplied with an AC current (X)-so as not to confuse it with dc resistance within an inductor.