Testing the TK Tar Baby

[picowatt]

Ainslie said, in reference to PW's statement:Nowhere has PW claimed that. Ainslie, you are lying and misrepresenting PW's statement.


PROVE YOUR CLAIM, AINSLIE, by quoting where PW said what you say he said. YOU CANNOT, because he never said nor meant what YOU ARE CLAIMING HE SAID.

And we are supposed to have confidence in ANYTHING you say? You are a joke. You are arguing with your own hallucinations and rationalizations, and you are SIMPLY AND INEFFABLY WRONG.

TK,

TK, forgive me, I stand corrected.  I see now that she typed Q1 in both instances in that quote.  Yes, she either miswrote or misquoted..  I Totally missed it...

Edited the confusion...

[picowatt]

TK,

Does anyone have a clue as to what that scribbled schematic is?  Is this yet another schematic?

In that schematic I see that the Q2 source and gate are apparently connected.  But not the one in the paper.

Do we even know which schematic is correct now, again...

PW

[TinselKoala]

She's made these statements before, as if drawing schematics was difficult or posed problems in some regard. She doesn't seem to realize that any component can be drawn and connected to any other component in any manner at all, using lines, dots, and non-connecting "jumpovers", although there are two conventions in use for "jumpovers". Simply drawing components connected together requires no sanity checking or functionality at all, you can just do it. Connect an LED in series with a microwave oven transformer and a laboratory rat, if you like, on paper: it can be done consistently and understandably. Except by Ainslie.

Tight layouts for PC boards and the like can be done nowadays by computer programs which optimize circuit topology based on the original rat's nest haphazard layout that the designer may have entered into the program. But some basic knowledge of schematic conventions and symbols is _assumed_ to exist within the users of such programs.... and even in within the persons who claim such incredible genius as to be overturning Quantum Electrodynamics with a circuit full of superluminal zipons.

[TinselKoala]

@PW: sorry, crossed posts. That "schematic" scribble was produced by her in an effort to explain to someone how the connection error .99 discovered was supposed to be conceived. She's referred to the crosswiring elsewhere as "holding hands".

Why she cannot simply draw standard component symbols and connect their standardly-labelled terminals with black lines representing wires, I cannot explain, other than it is another symptom of her willfull ignorance and overweening arrogance.

It's like someone speaking to you in an imaginary made up language and expecting you to understand, especially when words in that language sound just like words in YOUR language, but mean the opposite.

[picowatt]

@PW: sorry, crossed posts. That "schematic" scribble was produced by her in an effort to explain to someone how the connection error .99 discovered was supposed to be conceived. She's referred to the crosswiring elsewhere as "holding hands".

Why she cannot simply draw standard component symbols and connect their standardly-labelled terminals with black lines representing wires, I cannot explain, other than it is another symptom of her willfull ignorance and overweening arrogance.

It's like someone speaking to you in an imaginary made up language and expecting you to understand, especially when words in that language sound just like words in YOUR language, but mean the opposite.

TK,

But it is nothing like the schematic in the "paper", nor is it all that understandable.  Is this an altogether different version of the circuit?

PW