Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims

[MarkE]

I think that there are a few points that deserve highlighting.

Ms. Ainslie's 555 circuits as she depicted them in the "Quantum" magazine article have been proven unable to produce the waveforms represented in the article.
Ms. Ainslie did say that she intentionally misrepresented the circuit used in the "five parallel" MOSFET demonstration.
Ms. Ainslie's own demonstrations of June and August 2013 established that the measurements in the Paper 1 and Paper 2 publications were not as represented.
Ms. Ainslie's own demonstrations showed that her circuits draw much more battery power than her heating elements evolve as heat.
Ms. Ainslie ran her demonstrations to the point that she was satisfied that there was no hope of them demonstrating the gains that she wanted, and then cut the demonstrations short.
Ms. Ainslie withdrew the papers 1 and 2 based on the results of her own demonstrations :  June and August 2013.
Ms. Ainslie later decided without new data to "reinstate" the papers.
None of Ms. Ainslie's supporters have produced evidence that supports Ms. Ainslie's claims for any variation of her circuits.

[Acca]

To memoryman Tinselkoala and MarkE  are shills resident trolls who destroy any sense of any real debate that should happen here .......

as you can read for yourself it's too bad that these trolls are squatters here ... on overunity dot com

"self appointed so called experts are just high count trolls"

Acca...

[MarkE]

To memoryman Tinselkoala and MarkE  are shills resident trolls who destroy any sense of any real debate that should happen here .......

as you can read for yourself it's too bad that these trolls are squatters here ... on overunity dot com

"self appointed so called experts are just high count trolls"

Acca...

We are discussing established points concerning Ms. Ainslie's claims, in light of the contrasting fantasies that Ms. Ainslie continues to serve up.  If you disagree with any of the statements made, you are free to debate them.

[memoryman]

If I am a troll, then I am not very active.
Instead of calling people names, stick to refuting their excellent analysis of the technical issues. If YOU don't have the expertise to do that, how can you judge someone else's?
Mark E and TK earned my respect by their comments. With > 50 years of hands-on electronics design and repair myself, I bow to their superior capabilities.

[TinselKoala]

To memoryman Tinselkoala and MarkE  are shills resident trolls who destroy any sense of any real debate that should happen here .......

as you can read for yourself it's too bad that these trolls are squatters here ... on overunity dot com

"self appointed so called experts are just high count trolls"

Acca...

Let us be reminded that ACCA will post photos that he THINKS might be you, or me, or anyone else, without any support or confirmation that the photo actually DOES represent the person he is stalking/trolling. ACCA wants to violate my privacy.

Yet ACCA cannot refute anything I have ever posted on this forum. He cannot provide checkable outside references, facts from reliable sources or demonstrations of his own that refute me. Most especially IN THIS THREAD concerning ROSEMARY AINSLIE's claims... ACCA is impotent, ignorant and a mere rabble-rousing troll. He has nothing at all substantive to contribute. Where is his construction of the Ainslie circuit? Where is his raw data record, his thermal time-temperature graphs, his OPEN AND FREE DISCUSSION of the Ainslie circuit and her claims?

Nowhere, that is where. Acca is another blowhard, thumbless troll who cannot DO for himself. He cannot present coherent and viable arguments concerning FACTS so he resorts making posts like the above, being utterly impotent to do anything else.