What is over unity?

[Omnibus]

Notice also this. I'm am doing it completely open source. I'm not filing for patents as you do and I, unlike you, would be perfectly happy if someone else tries to reproduce what I'm doing even if he or she beats me to it. I have absolutely no financial stakes in this research and all I'm interested in is the truth about these phenomena. Nevertheless, like I said, no one is willing (aside from being polite and so on) to undertake serious efforts and partake in the getting to the bottom of it. That's the sad truth.

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Notice also this. I'm am doing it completely open source. I'm not filing for patents as you do and I, unlike you, would be perfectly happy if someone else tries to reproduce what I'm doing even if he or she beats me to it. I have absolutely no financial stakes in this research and all I'm interested in is the truth about these phenomena. Nevertheless, like I said, no one is willing (aside from being polite and so on) to undertake serious efforts and partake in the getting to the bottom of it. That's the sad truth.

WHAT PATENTS???  ARE YOU NOW TELLING ME THAT I HAVE EXTANT PATENTS.  I went to some considerable trouble to ensure that this technology CAN NEVER BE PATENTED.  Do you read what I write Omnibus?  Or do you just speculate on what I've written?

And what do you make of our own academics testing our appliance technology?  Are you accusing them of simply being POLITE?  HOW EXCESSIVELY PRESUMPTUOUS AND HOW EXCESSIVELY RUDE TO ATTRIBUTE A MOTIVE TO ANYONE WITHOUT FIRST ASCERTAINING THE FACTS. 

[Omnibus]

Then WHY IS IT that our own academics are using conventional instruments?  Clearly there are those who DO INDEED rely on classical measurments using classically acceptable measuring instruments.  I acknowledge that the calculation of a resonating circuit is very complex.  But when wattage is related to heat dissipated it is ABSOLUTELY UNARGUABLE. 

And I might add, when wattage delivered is based on measurements across a non-inductive calibrated shunt it is ALSO unarguable.  Go ask.  Even the most antagonistic disclaimers admit this.  ACROSS THE BOARD.

These academics are using conventional instrumentation but not for the purpose we're doing it. Case in point. During the studies this summer I found out that a Hall effect based current probe is crucial for the measurements. And, guess what, I went personally to some of the most prestigious universities not only in the US asking colleagues there if I could borrow one. Lo and behold, however, I was told that current measurements are highly uncommon in these electrical departments in those prestigious universities and there was only one colleague who turned out has a current probe but it was a high amp current probe, unsuitable for these studies.

Then, speaking of the flights to the Moon and so on. These are engineering pursuits, mostly based on empirical findings. Furthermore, the success isn't as clear cut as the propaganda puts it. You may recall the Patriot missile problems during the 'desert storm' I believe it was. Raytheon were heavily criticized for misrepresenting the actual successful hits. And that's. like I said, engineering. Here we're talking about some very precise let alone controversial measurements which aren't even the subject of study by academics.

As far as heat released, I'm of the opinion that these measurements we're talking about should resolve the problem purely electrically, avoiding calorimetry. Calorimetry at these power levels is a daunting pursuit, not to say that if the electrical measurements are accurate calorimetry is completely unnecessary.

[Omnibus]

WHAT PATENTS???  ARE YOU NOW TELLING ME THAT I HAVE EXTANT PATENTS.  I went to some considerable trouble to ensure that this technology CAN NEVER BE PATENTED.  Do you read what I write Omnibus?  Or do you just speculate on what I've written?

And what do you make of our own academics testing our appliance technology?  Are you accusing them of simply being POLITE?  HOW EXCESSIVELY PRESUMPTUOUS AND HOW EXCESSIVELY RUDE TO ATTRIBUTE A MOTIVE TO ANYONE WITHOUT FIRST ASCERTAINING THE FACTS.

Sorry about that. You were saying that there are some people somewhere who were following what you do and you didn't want to discuss the experiments openly. Somehow I thought you were concerned about patents but obviously I've misunderstood you. Again, sorry about that. The fact of the matter, however, is that you stated you will not divulge openly some aspects of the research until you finish it while I was posting data as I was obtaining it absolutely openly, without hiding anything whatsoever.

As for the colleagues, yes, I think they have mostly been polite. I told you that earlier. It's an undeniable fact that your studies were refused publication, isn't it? I also told you I think it was wrong that they refused to publish your results because it is the publishing of the results that actually subjects them to peer review. However, that's the sorry state of the affairs with the academic journals these days.

[Rosemary Ainslie]

I give up Omnibus.  I HAVE ALREADY SAID THAT THESE EXPERIMENTS ARE THE SUBJECT OF INTEREST AT A UNIVERSITY WHERE WE'RE DOING EXPERIMENTS.

And your example of 'missile hits' is irrelevant - with respect.  And to dismiss calorimetric measurements flies in the face of acceptable scientific practice.  You're on your own here.  I am not sure WHY you need to so urgently dismiss the evidence that we've gleaned over the years.  But I'm satisfied that your attitude is WHY this technology is only progressed against this 'twittering' barrage of irrelevancies.  Your attitude is defeatist and your argument based on spurious reasoning.  Perhaps you should rally interest instead of continually casting doubts in the face of this hard won evidence.  All measurements that we have done are based on highly acknowledged and respectable measurement protocols.  It would serve the general OU drive MUCH BETTER if you acknowledged this.  And it concerns me that you don't.

One thing I KNOW.  If there had not been these and similar detractions throughout these Open Source Forums - then the news of this technology would be more widespread.  It is surprisingly NOT well known.   Which, frankly, is why I am now looking to other means of 'spreading the word' and which is why I'm so thankful that we've got academics on board.