Testing the TK Tar Baby

[picowatt]

@gmeast,

As an alternate means to confirm your circuit's power consumption, you might consider replacing your batteries with a properly sized capacitor and connecting your DC supply to the capacitor to power the circuit.  A diode in the supply's positive leg would ensure that the supply can only provide power to the circuit and not load down any return power to the cap from your circuit.

If you believe the batteries are necessary, you can use the same set up with the batteries.  With the circuit powered off, set the supply so that it is just slightly below the battery voltage (plus one Vdrop from the series diode) so that no current flow is observed from the supply.  Connect the circuit and let it run until the battery voltage decreases below the DC supply voltage, at which time the supply will provide current to maintain the battery voltage.

With either setup, simply multiplying your power supply DC voltage by its indicated DC current will provide a fairly accurate indication of your circuit's power consumption in watts (within the accuracy of your supply's meters).


Just a suggestion,

PW

[TinselKoala]

Again, thanks for the attention.  Nice light show TK. 

Do you doubt that this "nice light show" device would produce MASSIVE overunity results using the methodology you are using? Let's recap: I am making a _continuous_ 4 to 6 inch arc of burning air plasma, that persists during the "off" times of the output pulsations, using a 24 volt input at under 7 amperes.

I CHALLENGE YOU to come anywhere near that OUTPUT PERFORMANCE using straight DC to your load of any kind.

In other words, comparison to a straight DC situation is inappropriate for my device, because it would give spurious results. And my device is a switched mosfet circuit in self-resonant oscillation, similar to the Ainslie circuit-- so similar, in fact that I have merely made a few alterations and edits to HER OWN PUBLISHED SCHEMATIC-- one of them anyway -- to illustrate my circuit. The main difference is that I am taking advantage of the real inductive properties of the load, properly, instead of thinking that I can use a diode somehow to capture an inductive spike and keep a battery charged, which has been proven false many times.

If you think that your load resistor heating up on plain old DC "less" than it does with the equivalent power to your circuit -- based on thermometry like you are doing -- is a significant result, then you should also agree that my situation with the device I show in that photograph is also significantly "OU", according to your protocols. I'm heating a final resistive (air) load to incandescence and conductivity by turning it into plasma over a distance of six inches on well under 200 watts measured input power. Let's see you do that with straight DC and compare the results using your methods.

But of course we know you won't accept this challenge or any of the others, because they would actually TEST your methodology, and your ego, GMEAST, donkey kisser sycophant, won't be able to handle it.

"IT WORKS IT WORKS IT WORKS".... but what does it do? Do the batteries discharge, or not? Ainslie claims that they do not. Does it boil water , dissipate 5.9 megaJoules in 90 minutes into under a liter of water.... or not? Ainslie claims that the NERD circuit does. Oh... .that's right, you aren't replicating an Ainslie circuit, are you. You just STARTED to replicate one, shown by your postings in a thread that was called Protocols of NERD and COP>17 Tests. But you soon dropped that project. Why? I know why.
To refresh your memory, some screenshots are included below.

Along with one other, illustrating that Ainslie cares nothing for the truth and blithely makes promises that she never intends to keep, even invoking God's will when she does so.

[TinselKoala]

Since Ainslie claims to be conducting some kind of testing currently, one wonders if she is still so abjectly muddled about the function and purpose and usage of the AC - DC coupling feature of her oscilloscope.

We've tried to explain to her that the "DC coupling" setting is normally used for _ALL_ types of input signals AC or DC when they are within the voltage range determined by the screen height and vertical amp attenuation setting. The "AC coupling" setting is used to block an unwanted, usually large, DC component to allow the viewing of a much smaller "ac" or time varying portion riding on top of that.

Say for example you have a DC power supply producing 250 volts DC from your AC main line input. But this power supply is for a precision instrument and the supplied DC voltage must not be allowed to "ripple" more than 50 milliVolts from its main 250 volt level. How to display that on an oscilloscope? There are two ways. One can set the vertical amplifier to read, say, 10 mV per division..... and then the 250 volt signal level will push the trace VERY far off the screen so that it must be returned by using the trace position or DC offset controls.... not a good idea really but possible in many cases.
-OR-
You can use the "AC Coupling" setting for what it was designed for, to block that 250 volt baseline DC and view only the ripple _AS IF_ it were a true AC signal, varying +/- around a zero volt baseline (which is now actually near the true 250 volt level of the main signal). Then you can use the 10 mV per division vertical setting and make sense of the ripple magnitude without messing up your trace position or offset settings. Simply by flicking the coupling switch or selecting it in the channel setup screen of your DSO. Note that the ripple on top of a 250 volt DC signal is NOT AC. The current never reverses direction, the voltage just rises and falls around some 250 volt reference level.
Ironically, if you use the "AC coupling"  setting on a true, symmetrical AC signal.... it will look exactly the same as if you view the same signal using "DC coupling".

I just happened to have my Tektronix RM503 down off the rack for a tune-up so I thought I'd show how this classic, precision low-frequency oscilloscope performs this mysterious function.

The first picture below shows the front panel section of the inputs to the vertical amplifier. Instead of using a polarity invert switch the 503 series allows you to use positive and negative inputs to switch the displayed polarity of a signal, or to add two signals together. But each input has its own "AC DC Ground" coupling setting switch, a three-position slide switch. The "ground" setting grounds that amplifier input but leaves the input signal itself open, not grounded or connected to anything.

And as shown in the second picture below, the AC coupling setting merely switches a precision 0.022 microFarad capacitor IN SERIES with the input signal. That is all it does. In every oscilloscope analog or digital old or new made by any manufacturer, this is how this miracle of signal processing is performed, with perhaps different cap values of course. In a DSO you can sometimes hear the relay clicking as your digital coupling selection is translated to an actual switch inside the instrument, switching the input to the capacitor (or to ground, if that's what you selected). I suppose it's possible to do this digitally as well... but why bother.

[TinselKoala]

Nearly three months ago Ainslie said,

OK Guys and Girls,

We'll be doing our first video this afternoon - God willing.  That's in about 12 hours from now.  So, hopefully by supper time - in America - you'll have our first test on line.

Fail Number One. Suppertime came and went, in fact September came and went, and October has come and nearly gone without any video from Ainslie. Therefore one can only conclude that God is not willing. Or... that Ainslie herself is not able.

Our very first test is to challenge those repeated claims by picowatt at OU.com that sullied my own thread and then meandered through TK's disgusting thread.  The claim was that the voltage measured across Q1 had sufficient voltage to ensure that the switch was 'on' and therefore the battery should have delivered current flow.

Was it indeed? Sorry... no.  When someone who actually knows what they are doing speaks of the "voltage across" a transistor they will mean the Drain-Source voltage for mosfets or the Collector-Emitter voltage for bipolar transistors.  But this is not and never was the issue. We are talking about Q1 receiving a positive 12 volt signal to its GATE wrt source, and yet no current flows in the SOURCE - DRAIN channel, as shown by the scopeshots.

The evidence therefore should have been some voltage value across the shunt that was greater than zero.  I answered this - REPEATEDLY.  I mentioned that the in the first instance the coupling had not been set to AC. 

DC coupling is the appropriate setting for all channels of the oscilloscope in this case. This objection of Ainslie's is specious and once again indicates that she does not understand the AC-DC coupling feature of her own instrument.

And I explained that the voltage was further compromised by the justification of the 'off set' switch on the function generator.

The oscilloscope knows nothing of the function generator's settings. The scope only reads voltages, the voltages it sees at its probe tips wrt their grounds. That is all. The function generator is delivering +12 volts to the gate of Q1, as is shown by the oscilloscope. Whatever settings the function generator is set to, offset and amplitude of output, the unit is still doing just what the oscilloscope is measuring it to do: delivering +12 volts to the gate of a mosfet.... which then does NOT conduct in the drain-source channel as a functioning, properly wired mosfet would do. This set of voltages and events is clearly shown in Ainslie's scope shots, reproduced here and included in her "papers".

So.  Our first video will be to repeat that test.  We will show that we can generate that oscillation for a duration of very nearly 3 minutes -

This has never been questioned; it can in fact be generated for any duration desired BY APPLYING A DC BIAS SIGNAL just as the NERD Function Generator does, or a 555 timer will do, or a negative battery supply will do, for as long an interval as desired or even continuously.

with absolutely NO energy delivered by the battery supply source during the 'on' time of each switching cycle.

This claim has been refuted many times, first in Ainslie's own published scope shot data, then in simulations and actual builds by independent replicators, then by the independent chemical laboratory she sent her system to in the USA, and even by her current set of sycophants.
But our objection to the scopeshots is that when the Q1 transistor is supposed to be ON it is not conducting, therefore it is miswired or blown. If Ainslie isn't going to address the ACTUAL objections we make, what is the purpose of doing this (nonexistent) video "refutation" at all?

And we will show the difference between the AC and DC settings on that function generator.

Will you, now? Amazing.  My Function Generator has a DC output setting as well. But what does that have to do with anything? Oh... that's right I am supposed to KNOW what Ainslie means when she makes stupid typos or misspeaks like this. OK, then she is referring not to the FUNCTION GENERATOR but to the oscilloscope's AC and DC coupling settings. Great ! I'd like to see what she shows, and see if it corresponds in any way with what LeCroy and Tektronix test engineers tell us about those functions. That will be a real hoot.

Then.  At the conclusion of those tests we'll show you that all those MOSFETS are PERFECTLY in tact.

How? Just how does Ainslie intend to show that all those mosfets are PERFECTLY "in tact" (sic)? The finding that you can provide a PERFECTLY "in tact" N-channel IRFPG50 mosfet with a 12 volt gate signal, with 72 volts potential difference between drain and source and a 10 ohm load, and NOT have it conduct upwards of 5 amperes or more, would definitely be of interest to the designers at International Rectifier. Especially if you can apply those parameters to a mosfet that is improperly heatsunk, for periods of 18 to 20 seconds at a time and not have it heat up and blow out.

Kindest regards,
Rosie 

Ainslie is neither kind, nor does she hold her interlocutors in any "kind regard". In fact her contempt oozes from every word and every hypocritical closure like this one.

Where is the video promised here? Where is the refutation of any of the statements and analyses we've made here? Where is the demonstration that scopeshots like the one attached can be made with "PERFECTLY in tact" mosfets, using any combination of oscilloscope coupling settings and function generator output and offset settings?

[Magluvin]

Well,


I've removed my primary 'work' computer from the outside world for now.  If you were not such an assumptive fool, you'd check the IP's and see that I'm in the US and she's in SA.  Talk about delusional?


Yesterday I performed another test providing a second proof that that it works, and works consistently .. albeit not at COP>17, but it works.  I believe you guys are fearful that your hateful attacks will soon be moot and you'll have nothing else to do because I have succeeded in proving: IT WORKS, IT WORKS, IT WORKS, IT WORKS, IT WORKS, IT WORKS, IT WORKS, IT WORKS, IT WORKS, IT WORKS, IT WORKS, IT WORKS, IT WORKS, IT WORKS, IT WORKS, IT WORKS, IT WORKS, IT WORKS, IT WORKS, IT WORKS, IT WORKS, IT WORKS, IT WORKS, IT WORKS, IT WORKS, IT WORKS, IT WORKS, IT WORKS, IT WORKS.  Sorry guys it really is valid.  I'm happy to have been a part of this. MAGS ... what in the world happened to you? I remember your participation in the Water Spark Plug, forums, the Bob Boyce-related forums, and others I dropped in on or participated in. I can't believe you have been taken in and turned toward evil by the likes of Turkey Krap and poynty-head.  And poynty-head, how dare you DIRTY John Henry Poynting's name by using it as your handle ... poynt99, HA! ... poyntLESS is more like it.  Why can I say these things?  ... because I have PROOF and TRUTH on my side now.  These two things REIGN VICTORIOUS OVER EVIL ... EVERY TIME, EVERY TIME.  Oh, by the way, I'm not religious in any way, so don't go down THAT road when next you ASSume you've one-upped me.  I think I'll get back to my FAKERY ... I know saying that really pisses you off MAGS.  This has been so much fun I can't tell ya'. I now know how to push each and every one of your guys' buttons.  "TRUTH" and "PROOF" ... powerful stuff! Learn it.

"I've removed my primary 'work' computer from the outside world for now.  If you were not such an assumptive fool, you'd check the IP's and see that I'm in the US and she's in SA.  Talk about delusional?"

lol. Ok. I was just relating you to Rose because she does the same stuff. Reading my post and twisting it for, what ever reasons. Anyone here can attest that I was not associating you with fakery. 


"MAGS ... what in the world happened to you? I remember your participation in the Water Spark Plug, forums, the Bob Boyce-related forums, and others I dropped in on or participated in. I can't believe you have been taken in and turned toward evil by the likes of Turkey Krap and poynty-head.  And poynty-head, how dare you DIRTY John Henry Poynting's name by using it as your handle ... poynt99, HA! ... poyntLESS is more like it."

Nothing happened to me other than I finally found out how Rose really is. That is 'our' connection here. I am actually trying to help you. But you cant see that in my posts. Somehow you see me attacking you.

As I remember I had only dealt with one thread that involved HHO and that one was a coil around a test tube filled with water highly saturated with sodium hydroxide. Supposedly applying the right freq and power level to the coil causes the reaction to happen in the solution itself without electrical contact, as sodium hydrochloride is a metal.

Ive read on Bob Boyce, but never was in a thread of a forum on that subject. Unless you can prove it.    So are you making that up?    Why is that?

As I see it, the only reason you have anything against Poynt is because of Roses indoctrination you fell into. Can you prove and show that Poynt has pointed you in the wrong direction at any time? I would 'really' be interested in seeing proof of that. If he did suggest something, did you just do otherwise just for spite?  I dont think you can produce such evidence. I do believe Rose is really pissed and is pulling your strings like a puppet. You are her mule. Good luck with all that.



"Why can I say these things?  ... because I have PROOF and TRUTH on my side now.  These two things REIGN VICTORIOUS OVER EVIL ... EVERY TIME, EVERY TIME.  Oh, by the way, I'm not religious in any way, so don't go down THAT road when next you ASSume you've one-upped me.  I think I'll get back to my FAKERY ... I know saying that really pisses you off MAGS.  This has been so much fun I can't tell ya'. I now know how to push each and every one of your guys' buttons.  "TRUTH" and "PROOF" ... powerful stuff! Learn it."

You think Im pissed? I didnt see any  in my post, just .    And Im the one thats delusional?   Go down the religious road? I fight for God just about every day on the Probality Of God thread.  Lots of twisted evil over there.  But hey, you brought it up.

Well im glad you have fun thinking you are pushing our buttons.  lol and you call me a fool.

I may not have put out a YT vid in a while but I am always working on stuff. Just busted apart a pancake motor from a car cooling fan. Will be posting pics here this evening. After laundry. Not saying it and 6 months later still nothing like you know who.

It has a very interesting architecture. A flat armature with windings encased in plastic(with windings visible on the surface of the plastic casting) and commutator on the shaft...  Ill be posting it later.

Anyways, be well G. Come back and bash me for nothing some more when ever you get the time. The only person fooling anyone is yourself. The readers here can fact check your posts regarding me. Its simple. Some here can do this amazing thing called 'remembering' also, in case you havnt heard of it. You are making memories. 


Mags