Topic: Rosemary Ainslie COP>17 Circuit / A First Application on a Hot Water Cylinder (Read 45087 times)

Rosemary Ainslie · « **Reply #825 on:** November 09, 2010, 06:09:12 AM »

Oh Good God. More of those ridiculous flaming posts of Glen - with links to links to links - to prove some obscure fact that dies in the reference. He is entirely incapable of holding a written argument and seems to think that these absurd references somehow gives him some kind of credibility. When he actually manages to articulate his complaint then I will be very interested in what he has to say.

Without looking them up - I am ready to bet that two thirds of the links have everything to do with those posts of his that no-one reads telling the world that he has done a replication which he is hopeful will now be considered his own discovery. There is absolutely NO restraint in this clamorous need for attention to the work that he would not have been able to recognise on his own if it shook him by the hands and introduced itself.

In any event. Here's the thing. He is flaming this thread with repetitious posts and there's nothing that Harti is prepared to do to stop this. And this is precisely why this thread has now been killed. The moral of the story is this. If you want to get rid of a member - then here's the blue print. Just do as Glen does. His only interest is self-promotion and if anyone get's in the way - then he'll discharge these colourful links where he simply SHOUTS over the discussion. I've seen three year olds throw this kind of tantrum.

Free Energy · « **Reply #825 on:** November 09, 2010, 06:09:12 AM »

Sponsored links:

wattsup · « **Reply #826 on:** November 09, 2010, 06:43:12 AM »

@RA

So when will people who need to, be able to heat their water? Or is all this commotion part of the ingredients?

From experience, it is best to not respond to counter-productive posts. You will just be compounding the waste of time. So feeding a useless fire only wastes wood. Just let it die off and persevere in what you know is right. Then @stefan will be able to see who is overdoing it and take care of the problem in the right way. Him removing you from moderator is a good thing to protect you.

Oh, in case you are worried, I saved all the pages of this thread and put it on my ftp site here;

http://purco.qc.ca/ftp/Overunity.com%20-%20Forum%20members/rosemarie-ainslie/

I'm not saying I will do this for each additional page, but at least you have till know in case you need it.

wattsup

PS: Beware of those who write in techni-color. lol

Free Energy · « **Reply #826 on:** November 09, 2010, 06:43:12 AM »

Rosemary Ainslie · « **Reply #827 on:** November 09, 2010, 06:45:12 AM »

Anyone trying to claim exclusive recognition is rather defeating the general drive here - and anyone who tries to diminish the character or efforts of us poor promotors of this - you are simply doing yourselves and the general drive - a really gross disservice. Just get over yourself Glen. You've done NOTHING that we have not done. And very soon we will have much much more to both show and discuss. Not about boring OLD facts and evidence - BUT NEW STUFF - new approaches - new experimental circuit arrangements - new methods of switching - ALL aimed at getting to higher wattage levels. Different applications. Greater scope and range. All that development that Ashtweth thinks that you could manage. You don't even UNDERSTAND the technology. HOW could you promote it? HOW could I risk leaving this technology to you and Harvey? All you appear to want is some kind of monopoly on a test - and a whole lot of personal accolades that DO NOT BELONG TO YOU - on an experiment that fundamentally is NOT that that usable. Get over yourself and MOVE ON.

You are constantly trying to remind eveyone that your efforts matter. They really don't. They are just one of many - and you don't even understand what you're doing. You really don't have that much to contribute beyond the REPLICATION which you now try and imply is your discovery. If you want your efforts to count then show us WHY it matters to either kill this subject or promote it. It's entirely impossible to understand what the hell you are either trying to do or say or show through those highly coloured SHOUTS of yours. Other than the fact that you need us to clap our hands and keep looking at you. It's BORING. In the extreme.

And for Ashtweth to propose that you progress this? How? You wouldn't know how to. Frankly it is my opinion that you are more than a little unstable - I think the term is a loose cannon - but in your case it would be better described as a rampant EGO.

Guys - here's my promise. We will be posting our results on a blog, I believe it is - when I find it and learn how to use it. And then - for those who are following this - if it's cheap and plentiful off grid energy that you're wanting? I'ts around the corner.

The blog will be aimed at promoting not only the technology on an empirical basis - but it will be developed to give greater than unity results on multiple technologies. The ONLY intention of our work is to show you all that Over Unity is not an elusive debatable or impossible technology - but that is is very much with us and is being developed - certainly NOT exclusively by ourselves - but by many very talented people on and off forums such as this. I confidently predict that the required proof which has already been established - will be so widely apparent - that we will breach those HARSH and rather AUSTERE dismissals that have dogged our best efforts to date.

So take heart and pay heed. And for God's sake just ignore Glen. He's trying his damndest to kill your hopes. Or not? It's impossible to tell as he seems entirely incapable of speaking his mind. LOL Maybe he's just trying to say - LOOK AT ME. Either way. He's definitely managed to kill this thread. More's the pity.

Regards,
Rosemary

Rosemary Ainslie · « **Reply #828 on:** November 09, 2010, 06:55:19 AM »

Quote from: wattsup on November 09, 2010, 06:43:12 AM

@RA

So when will people who need to, be able to heat their water? Or is all this commotion part of the ingredients?

From experience, it is best to not respond to counter-productive posts. You will just be compounding the waste of time. So feeding a useless fire only wastes wood. Just let it die off and persevere in what you know is right. Then @stefan will be able to see who is overdoing it and take care of the problem in the right way. Him removing you from moderator is a good thing to protect you.

Oh, in case you are worried, I saved all the pages of this thread and put it on my ftp site here;

http://purco.qc.ca/ftp/Overunity.com%20-%20Forum%20members/rosemarie-ainslie/

I'm not saying I will do this for each additional page, but at least you have till know in case you need it.

wattsup

PS: Beware of those who write in techni-color. lol

MANY THANKS WATTSUP. I often see you here. Nice to find support for these OU efforts. I'm afraid that none of this commotion was either intended or expected. But strangely it does help. In any event - we're getting more students assigned to this task and the campus staff are doing their best to rally - within the constraints of really austere budgets. You guys need to be patient. But we're NOT talking years. We're talking months.

Here's the thing. The ONLY thing between proof of concept and really high wattage levels is a switch that can carry high wattage. Had Glen STUCK to the facts and acknowledged the results then we would have had motivation enough to persuade those transistor manufacturers to build the necessary. But without this we need to get academic accreditation. We're getting there. Fast. And then - at least this much will take us over the hurdle of getting the appropriate components. Hopefully you ALL realise that the proof is very much at hand. It's the levels that we're battling with.

Kindest regards,
Rosemary

Free Energy · « **Reply #828 on:** November 09, 2010, 06:55:19 AM »

Rosemary Ainslie · « **Reply #829 on:** November 09, 2010, 07:36:22 AM »

Quote from: WilbyInebriated on November 08, 2010, 11:00:05 PM

glad you are back. hope you are feeling better.

Wilby? I missed this entirely - and it would have heartened me considerably. I have paid tribute - often - to your remarkable skills on this forum. I am delighted to see that you're still with me. I also see that you posted on that joke of a thread that Glen started. Another really nice point.

What really delights me in your support is that I know it's not based on any kind of judgement on the work itself - but simply on the efforts. That's endorsement enough. Truly grateful for it and thank you for your hopes and wishes here.

Kindest regards,
Rosie

fuzzytomcat · « **Reply #830 on:** November 09, 2010, 09:42:29 AM »

Howdy reading members and guests,

I have been notified the IEEE Scribid 10-0207-TIE submittal, a document water marked "for pier review" that Rosemary Ainslie ( aka aetherevarising ) has been referencing in all of her Forum postings and correspondence from July 07, 2010 has been removed from Scribd by IEEE for a copyright violation.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/26240411/PROVING-OVER-UNITY-THE-HARD-WORK-OF-MANY-DEDICATED-OPEN-SOURCE-MEMBERS

( http://www.scribd.com/word/removal/26240411 / This content was removed at the request of IEEE )

I would also like to add my e-mail correspondence that was sent by me to all the submittal authors on July 07, 2010 this was after my notification from Scribid on http://www.scribd.com/doc/26240411/PROVING-OVER-UNITY-THE-HARD-WORK-OF-MANY-DEDICATED-OPEN-SOURCE-MEMBERS being published at Scribid by aetherevarising ( aka Rosemary Ainslie )

************************************************************************************

----- Original Message -----
From: Glen Lettenmaier
To: Rosemary Ainslie
Cc: Harvey Gramm ; Ashtweth Palise ; Andrew Gardiner ; Steve Windisch ; Donovan Martin
Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2010 8:05 PM
Subject: Notice all Authors

I'm sure your aware that I alone hold the copyright on the "Scribd" Open Source Evaluation of Power Transients Generated to Improve Performance Coefficient of Resistive Heating Systems http://www.scribd.com/doc/23455916/Open-Source-Evaluation-of-Power-Transients-Generated-to-Improve-Performance-Coefficient-of-Resistive-Heating-Systems with over 3000 views and 160 downloads since 12-01-2009 usage of any part or parts of this document is "PLAGIARISM" without written permission from me on or for any further publications.

Secondly ....

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

QUOTE: http://www.energeticforum.com/70207-post2913.html ( can we use your data for a paper )
witsend
Senior Member

Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,063
Guys - some more really good news.

IEEE have informed me that I can resubmit the paper with new revised information and evidence of open source duplication of the experiment provided that they are made fully cogniscant of the data available at the replication.

The implication is clearly that the first was not considered as having sufficient information. So Fuzzy. Would you please allow a collaboration on a new paper including your revised data - that we can submit this for peer review? We're game if you are. I see a comfortable collaboration between all parties here - provided you have no objections to us using your data.

In fact I think that many parties could come to the table here - all from our contributors and it would be so nice if you could pm Fuzzy, me, Aaron or Harvey with suggestions or considerations. Just think of it. The first collaborative attempt of a paper submitted by open source enthusiasts. And possibly the first proof of significant energy savings OU OR COP>17. Both are amazing.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I ..... Glen Lettenmaier, am withdrawing any use of my complete Test number "Thirteen" (13) data and image files for further usage, evaluation or publication, other than what has already been seen and posted at Energetic Forum, Panacea Bocaf and my "copyrighted" Scribd publication.

Sincerely,
Glen A Lettenmaier

************************************************************************************

This exposure should show that after the date of July 07, 2010 the usage of the word or words "we, our or us" in conjunction with the IEEE submittal(s) test results on Test #13 does not in any way express my views or opinions in any manner with Rosemary Ainslie.

Sincerely,
Glen A Lettenmaier
( aka FuzzyTomCat )

.

Free Energy · « **Reply #830 on:** November 09, 2010, 09:42:29 AM »

Sponsored links:

WilbyInebriated · « **Reply #831 on:** November 09, 2010, 10:26:58 AM »

oh it's plagiarism now...

do you even have any idea what that word means glen? apparently not.

from the wiki:

Quote

Plagiarism is defined in dictionaries as "the wrongful appropriation, close imitation, or purloining and publication, of another author's language, thoughts, ideas, or expressions, and the representation of them as one's own original work."

usage is not plagiarism... get a clue.

and just who was it again that asked rosemary to come to energeticforum?

as an aside, this one is amusing...

Quote from: fuzzytomcat on November 03, 2010, 07:25:56 PM

PROBLEM - How can a INVENTOR without the knowledge of electronic circuitry or electronic component operation or capability of construction of a electronic circuit INVENT a electronic circuit for a PATENT ?? and how can someone claim INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS as Rosemary Ainslie does on that electronic circuit ??

couldn't this same 'logic' be applied to you and your ignorance of 'peer review'?

and this post from peter lindemann seems to contradict what glen, harv and the sycophants keep harping on about...

Quote from: peter lindemann

In the Electric Motor Secrets thread, I showed how to produce mechanical energy while recycling the electricity. In the thread with Imhotep, we showed how to light fluorescent lights while recycling the electricity. Now, here, I am showing Rosemary Ainslie's method to produce heat while recycling the electricity.

This completes the "GENERAL CASE" of how to use electricity efficiently, first described by Nikola Tesla, and referred to by Gabriel Kron as "shuttle circuits". The real method to produce Heat, Light, and Motive Power, at efficiencies above the supposed limits described by the Laws of Thermodynamics, is now fully in the Public Domain.

God Bless you all!

and then there is this...

Quote from: peter lindemann

This thread is about Rosemary Ainslie's astonishing contributions to Science, and related developments.

Free Energy · « **Reply #831 on:** November 09, 2010, 10:26:58 AM »

b4FreeEnergy · « **Reply #832 on:** November 09, 2010, 10:39:07 AM »

Hi Rosemary,

I know it's tempting to answer latest posts again but don't, follow the advice of Wattsup, he is right!

Meanwhile: http://www.youtube.com/nespresso
It's good to laugh once I a while … ;-)

Cheers,
B

Free Energy · « **Reply #832 on:** November 09, 2010, 10:39:07 AM »

fuzzytomcat · « **Reply #833 on:** November 09, 2010, 10:42:36 AM »

Quote from: WilbyInebriated on November 09, 2010, 10:26:58 AM

oh it's plagiarism now... do you even have any idea what that word means glen? apparently not.

from the wiki:usage is not plagiarism... get a clue.

and just who was it again that asked rosemary to come to energeticforum?

as an aside, this one is amusing...couldn't this same 'logic' be applied to you and your ignorance of 'peer review'?

Hey Willy,

"BFD" your posted comments above are irrelevant and SPAMMING the board AGAIN to hide the TRUTH in pages of nonsense ! A Rosemary Ainslie trick ...... how much you get paid by her?

Quote from: fuzzytomcat on November 08, 2010, 03:11:01 AM

Hi Stefan,

Your quote of .....

I will not have anymore any boards with names of inventors...

This is actually a good move if you want to document and fully evaluate testing on a submittal for possible publication in a accredited Journal or Magazine. The problem being that for a "PIER" review and to be "UN BIAS" in the review process, no personal names or identities can be used in the submittal at all. Then if excepted after pier review prior to publication the names of people or identities are added.

So, if your Forum thread or posting in the submittal process is used, "NO" names can be in the context at all during the submittal process .... problem is now with your name on the threads or postings.

Best Regards,
Glen

You would think after Rosemary trying countless times at IEEE for a submittal approval she would know about a "UN BIAS" review ..... so why again did she name a thread after herself if she wanted to use the data for publication in a accredited Journal or Magazine?

Or did you think the "Mosfet Heater Circuits" a generic name was for some other reason over at Energetic Forum?

Do you just TROLL around and flap your lips in every thread on the forum ? or have you ever done any experimental device construction, testing and evaluation that's posted here at Over Unity that you would like to share? Hummm ..... http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=profile;area=showposts;u=10837 guess not ..... lots of one liners though .....

.

Free Energy · « **Reply #833 on:** November 09, 2010, 10:42:36 AM »

WilbyInebriated · « **Reply #834 on:** November 09, 2010, 10:45:57 AM »

Quote from: fuzzytomcat on November 09, 2010, 10:42:36 AM

Hey Willy,

"BFD"

You would think after Rosemary trying countless times at IEEE for a submittal approval she would know about a "UN BIAS" review ..... so why again did she name a thread after herself if she wanted to use the data for publication in a accredited Journal or Magazine?

Or did you think the "Mosfet Heater Circuits" a generic name was for some other reason over at Energetic Forum?

Do you just TROLL around and flap your lips in every thread on the forum ? or have you ever done any experimental device construction, testing and evaluation that's posted here at Over Unity that you would like to share? Hummm ..... http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=profile;area=showposts;u=10837 guess not ..... lots of one liners though .....

.

so you are saying yes, that 'logic' could be applied to you? or are you engaging in logical fallacy and avoiding the question entirely?

edited to reply to glen's edit of his post where he added this:

Quote from: fuzzytomcat on November 09, 2010, 10:42:36 AM

your posted comments above are irrelevant and SPAMMING the board AGAIN to hide the TRUTH in pages of nonsense ! A Rosemary Ainslie trick ...... how much you get paid by her?

my comments on plagiarism are irrelevant? how so? you referenced plagiarism first, i simply responded to your ignorance of what the word means...

Free Energy · « **Reply #834 on:** November 09, 2010, 10:45:57 AM »

Sponsored links:

powercat · « **Reply #835 on:** November 09, 2010, 12:13:48 PM »

Hi Rosie, what a mess all you need now is TK and MileHigh for some real Armageddon

I must say I totally agree with Whattsup, he knows what he's talking about when it comes to this forum, I would take his advice and let's get on with the science.
cat

Free Energy · « **Reply #835 on:** November 09, 2010, 12:13:48 PM »

Rosemary Ainslie · « **Reply #836 on:** November 09, 2010, 01:55:55 PM »

Guys - Glen has again managed to get Scribd to delete my posting of our paper. Over 6000 reads and at least 40 endorsements and a good forum for spreading the word. This is the second time he's done this. He will need to prove sole authorship - which will not be possible. In any event I'm in touch with them there.

The copyright is not his. He is not capable of writing a paper. God knows. He doesn't even know how to do the power analysis. He contributed NOT ONE WORD to any of it. Just his experiments. For that matter nor did Ashtweth. He would not be capable of writing a paper. He does not have the verbal skills. What a joke. Then Harvey will come into the story and CLAIM that he was sole author. And so it goes. I do hope that you ALL see what is going on here. They are DESPERATE. And just so anxious to close the doors - any doors - to me.

The good news is that I think what this is showing you all is that the NEWS is now truly breaking out of its stranglehold. AT LAST. It needed this commotion as wattsup pointed out. Meanwhile - I need to leave this to you guys to do with it what you can or must. I'm just too frantically busy. Maybe later on in the week.

Kindest as ever,
Rosie

Free Energy · « **Reply #836 on:** November 09, 2010, 01:55:55 PM »

fuzzytomcat · « **Reply #837 on:** November 09, 2010, 10:26:47 PM »

Quote from: Rosemary Ainslie on November 09, 2010, 01:55:55 PM

Guys - Glen has again managed to get Scribd to delete my posting of our paper. Over 6000 reads and at least 40 endorsements and a good forum for spreading the word. This is the second time he's done this. He will need to prove sole authorship - which will not be possible. In any event I'm in touch with them there.

The copyright is not his. He is not capable of writing a paper. God knows. He doesn't even know how to do the power analysis. He contributed NOT ONE WORD to any of it. Just his experiments. For that matter nor did Ashtweth. He would not be capable of writing a paper. He does not have the verbal skills. What a joke. Then Harvey will come into the story and CLAIM that he was sole author. And so it goes. I do hope that you ALL see what is going on here. They are DESPERATE. And just so anxious to close the doors - any doors - to me.

The good news is that I think what this is showing you all is that the NEWS is now truly breaking out of its stranglehold. AT LAST. It needed this commotion as wattsup pointed out. Meanwhile - I need to leave this to you guys to do with it what you can or must. I'm just too frantically busy. Maybe later on in the week.

Kindest as ever,
Rosie

Glen has again managed to get Scribd to delete my posting of our paper.

This is odd ...... you click on the link Rosemary provides for the IEEE submittal ..... marked for "peer review" 10-0207-TIE ..... the one without any of the authors names on it .....

http://www.scribd.com/doc/26240411/PROVING-OVER-UNITY-THE-HARD-WORK-OF-MANY-DEDICATED-OPEN-SOURCE-MEMBERS

and it says "this content was removed by the request of IEEE" ..... exactly where is my name that I removed it ??

Is this another unfounded slanderous allegation against me from Rosemary without any proof at all of her posted claims ?? more of the same from her .... no "PROOF" again.

.

Rosemary Ainslie · « **Reply #838 on:** November 09, 2010, 10:57:37 PM »

Quote from: fuzzytomcat on November 09, 2010, 10:42:36 AM

You would think after Rosemary trying countless times at IEEE for a submittal approval she would know about a "UN BIAS" review ..... so why again did she name a thread after herself if she wanted to use the data for publication in a accredited Journal or Magazine? Or did you think the "Mosfet Heater Circuits" a generic name was for some other reason over at Energetic Forum?

Guys - just to get the record straight. TIE is the only publication within the IEEE group of publications that require NO REFERENCE to author's names prior to review, is the first point. The second point is that no publication within the IEEE group will consider publication of this or any experiment that defies Thermodynamic Laws. It is considered to be an anomaly and no self-respecting journal will publish a paper based on an anomaly. If it is not an anomaly but predicted in terms of a thesis then it needs must be evaluated in line with the experiment which also means that it then needs to be published in a physics journal. There is no publication within the IEEE group that can evaluate that thesis. This was the reason given for IEEE and TIE refusing to review our paper. The third point is that to call a thread a Mosfet Heating Circuit - is inaccurate. The implication is that the effect is then somehow restricted to a MOSFET when virtually any kind of transistor or switch works very well. It is just that the MOSFET has an internal body diode that seems to assist in sustaining the required resonance for optimised performance. We have even tested this on a relay switch with a marked improvement in battery performance and a measured reduction in wattage delivered. But the wattage dissipated - albeit greater than that delivered - is painfully inadequate for practical purposes.

I do hope that this research being done on campus will be published that the students can get recognition. But that cannot happen until the thesis is first published. In any event, right now - publication is absolutely not a priority. It is enough that this research is taking place on a highly respectable campus.

Quote from: fuzzytomcat on November 09, 2010, 10:42:36 AM

Do you just TROLL around and flap your lips in every thread on the forum ? or have you ever done any experimental device construction, testing and evaluation that's posted here at Over Unity that you would like to share?

More to the point - have you? You may have managed the construction of one test circuit schematic and the disclosure of those results but it was done under guidance. And that's actually all you did. I have never seen any evaluation of those tests other than by Harvey or me. It helps no-one to pretend to expertise that you simply do not have Glen. And I rather think that Wilby is well able to do what you cannot do. What I find particularly sad is that you need to pretend to know so much more than you do. Which is not intended to detract from all that you do know. But don't now try and pretend that you ever did that power analysis. Frankly, in my book it made you the prefect experimentalist. You had no idea of your test results until we had finished the analysis. This is like Ashtweth going public and claiming to have contributed to the text of the paper that we submitted. His contribution was by my appointment only and that as the submission's author. Then pompously advises our poor members that they can't comment on his abilities unless they've also written a paper. Golly. He never contributed one word - other than his name. And then he reneged on his submission's duties and tried to give this to Harvey.

Anyway. It's all water under the bridge. Just try and keep abreast of the facts lest you get too carried away here Glen. Your work was really good. Just a crying shame it will be lost to history.

Regards,
Rosemary

Free Energy · « **Reply #838 on:** November 09, 2010, 10:57:37 PM »

Rosemary Ainslie · « **Reply #839 on:** November 09, 2010, 11:27:09 PM »

deleted.

Free Energy

News:

Author Topic: Rosemary Ainslie COP>17 Circuit / A First Application on a Hot Water Cylinder (Read 45087 times)

Free Energy

Free Energy

Free Energy

Free Energy

Free Energy

Free Energy

Free Energy

Free Energy

Free Energy

Free Energy

Free Energy