Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011

[Rosemary Ainslie]

I await your admission to the contrary, and your apology any time soon.

.99

You've got a long wait Poynty Point.  LOL.  All I concede is that there is - indeed - a modification to the positioning of the Gate and Source pins.  We made full disclosure - but I was rather hoping you'd try those replications - and then explain what was required.  It would have been a delicious opportunity to 'teach' you as I'm rather sick of being 'taught'.  But be that as it may.  The results persist.  It's an advantageous arrangement - AND - you see for yourself - it gives us an oscillation that is EXTREMELY BENEFICIAL.  That's all that matters.

I will admit that I did not expect you to pick up on this.  LOL.  I just wondered how you managed all those Spice replications.  I had an idea you must have seen this then.

Take care Poynty. I admit to being trumped.

Rosie-posie.

[cHeeseburger]

I absolutely will NOT engage on this unless and until I have the absolute confirmation that this will cut it.  That thereafter there will be wide and complete endorsement by the entire academic community and assurance of that endorsement given in advance of the test, by not less than 5 experts.

Let me get this straight..you are demanding that 5 academic experts swear in writing that the entire academic community will accept and endorse your claims?

And so far you yourself have been unable to get the attention of even one such expert to even give a five minute perusal of your work?

You must have a very strange concept of academia, Rosemary, to think that any worthy scientist would ever make any guarantee that even one other scientist would necessarily agree or endorse anything, much less all of academia.  Your concept of reality is really, really strange.

But if you're looking for a solid way to avoid real testing, this demand will certainly do the trick.  No one could ever possibly even begin to arrange any such ageement or promise from even the most incompetent of academics (and there are plenty of them around).

Humbugger

[cHeeseburger]

You've got a long wait Poynty Point.  LOL.  All I concede is that there is - indeed - a modification to the positioning of the Gate and Source pins.  We made full disclosure - but I was rather hoping you'd try those replications - and then explain what was required.  It would have been a delicious opportunity to 'teach' you as I'm rather sick of being 'taught'.  But be that as it may.  The results persist.  It's an advantageous arrangement - AND - you see for yourself - it gives us an oscillation that is EXTREMELY BENEFICIAL.  That's all that matters.

I will admit that I did not expect you to pick up on this.  LOL. I just wondered how you managed all those Spice replications.  I had an idea you must have seen this then.

Take care Poynty. I admit to being trumped.

Rosie-posie.

Am I reading this right?  You have known for some time that four of your five MOSFETs were wired in with gate and source backward?  And you never mentioned that?  You were hoping that people would try to replicate based on a known incorrect schematic?  And you were just going to sit there and wait hoping no one would discover this gross error?  And now that it has been poynted out, you have the audacity to laugh about it and say you were keeping it mum in hopes that you could teach someone a lesson?  It's no wonder no one is expending any effort to replicate.

Now, with this admission, you have just killed all possibility that earnest replicators will ever trust anything you present or say.  This is just unbelievably bad science, rosemary, and is an insult to the integrity of the entire FE community.  You have just lost any vestige of credibility you may have had left even with the "true believers".

Humbugger

[poynt99]

You've got a long wait Poynty Point.  LOL.  All I concede is that there is - indeed - a modification to the positioning of the Gate and Source pins.  We made full disclosure - but I was rather hoping you'd try those replications - and then explain what was required.
Take care Poynty. I admit to being trumped.

Rosie-posie.

I don't recall seeing any disclosure identifying this reversal of the Gate and Source connections on mosfets 2-5. Does anyone?

Perhaps you could point out this disclosure explicitly showing this?

I also rather doubt that you were even aware of this until now.

.99

[poynt99]

I expect you're also going to say that the erroneous mislabeling on the proto-board of circuit nodes "F" and "C" was intentional too?



.99