Testing the TK Tar Baby

[WilbyInebriated]

the Tar Baby is NOT a NERD RAT replication. Got that? This gives me considerable freedom to experiment, as well as the liberty to apply for the various prizes she has applied for, should I be able to demonstrate battery charging and overunity performance in the Tar Baby device, which is NOT an Ainslie replication.

[PhiChaser]

@ Rosemary:

I am STILL waiting for your NEW MATH...
Where is the new math?
Where is the new math?
Where is the new math?
Where is the new math?
Where is the new math?

Or the Dim Bulb Test?

Where is that 555 timer test?
(TK has told you why your circuit won't work with a 555 timer Rosemary. Did you understand his explanation? )



Now I'm also waiting for the 'Proof of Threats' copy/paste post...
How are you gonna 'cherry pick' something that doesn't exist?
Waiting, waiting, waiting again...

These people don't hate you Rosemary, they are just tired of trying to help you when all you do is deny deny deny. It is just hard for me (any of us) to understand how you can't just ACCEPT THE FACTS!!! Your COP>17 was because of IMPROPER TESTING METHODS and BAD MATH. ACCEPT IT!
Learn from TK, quit with the endless denials!! Your 'paper' hasn't proven ANYTHING!!!

PW actually described how he helped kids learn how to solder and you treat that like it's a bad thing?!? That GIVES him credentials in my book, regardless of his posts (which BTW show an understanding of electronics FAR superior to yours).

TK has done more work to educate people on how your circuit (or a similar circuit if you want to be specific) works than you have ever done and will ever do! Don't you get it>?! He spent HIS TIME trying to understand something because YOU DIDN'T understand it yourself. He has made HOURS of videos about your 'negative current' (or whatever you're calling it these days) and done viable research. How dare you critique his 'work' when you haven't done ANY.>>>WHERE ARE YOUR VIDEOS ROSEMARY?  
(And please don't post your scope shots, they are a MESS. Those aren't traces, those are HASH.)

I just had a novel idea: YOU should try building a TK Tar Baby and see if you get different results!  Never know, you might learn something! 

Or you could find more irrelevant things to focus on instead of YOUR LACK OF NEW MATH!! Just lay off the paranoia pills for a while, too much stress is not good for you.

Still waiting,
PC

[TinselKoala]

Post after post of the same nonsense, to try to cover up the real issues:

Ainslie lied about posting the video and about her YT "doozydont" alias. See image below and the following quote:

Not only free legal advice but you solicit it with all the finesse of a 5 year old.   I DID NOT POST THAT VIDEO.  IT DOES NOT REPRESENT OUR CLAIMS.  OUR CLAIM IS ONLY RELATED TO THE CLAIMS IN OUR PAPERS.  ALL OTHER WORK IS MERELY RELATED TO THAT CLAIM WHICH IS IN THAT PAPER. No amount of repeated allegation will change this until you manage to PROVE that I made that video publicly accessible.  When you've PROVED this - then LET ME KNOW.

Ainslie cannot do simple power and energy calculations.

In any event it has now been running for 67 hours.  Therefore it's dissipated 10 x 60 x 60 x 67 = 2 412 000 watts. Sorry I've overstated this.  It's been running since Friday 10.30am therefore only 54 hours.  Therefore 1 944 000 watts dissipated. It's rated capacity is 60 ah's = 60 x 60 x 6 batteries @ 12 volts each = 1 296 000 watts. Technically it's already exceeded its watt hour rating at absolutely NO EVIDENT LOSS OF POTENTIAL DIFFERENCE.

http://newlightondarkenergy.blogspot.com/2011/07/134-more-results-this-is-getting-bit.html
Do The Math..... (tm RA).


Anslie cannot even draw a coherent schematic diagram. See image below.




But she ALWAYS corrects her errors and posts retractions of the claims base on them, doesn't she?

And she has two tripods and an HD video camera !!  Therefore TK is an alien.

[TinselKoala]

Let's first deal with some pertinent issues.  What you are trying to do is to get me to believe that a function generator is able to pass current from a battery supply source via its terminal to its probe. Since I KNOW that is is impossible I'm afraid I'm not receptive to you trying to teach me or anyone else.  So NO.  I spare me your 'lessons'.

How would you design a test of this hypothesis? Suppose you DIDN'T know, just for a moment, or suppose you had to prove the claim to a skeptic with a million dollars in a suitcase just waiting to give it to you if you prove it.

What kind of test would you do, to show that there isn't, or is, current flowing through the FG?

Would you place a shunt in the positive "probe" lead and then look at the voltage across this shunt? And if it remained at zero, what would you conclude? And if it DID NOT remain at zero... what would you conclude?

Is there some other test you could think of, like using a non-contact current probe at the FG hookup?

Or is it so impossible, that you don't even need to test the idea... sort of like the clerics that wouldn't look through Galileo's telescope at the moons of Jupiter and the "ears" of Saturn?

What test would convince ME that you are right... what test would convince YOU that you are wrong?

I personally would gladly accept the test that I suggest: use a scope channel to look at a shunt (current viewing resistor) in series with the FG output, at either end, black clip or red clip. Black would be better since that way you can still use the common ground.

If it shows no current while your device is operating... then I'll happily acknowledge my error. If it DOES show current while your device is operating.... what will you do?

[picowatt]

And IF any single MOSFET can be both 'on and off' then it is operating in a condition that is NOT applicable to our own uses of this.

With this one statement you prove you have no idea how your circuit operates when the FG output is negative.  Nor will you ever understand how and why it oscillates, nor will TK's viideos demonstrating bias current be of any meaning to you whatsoever.

It is sad really, there was so much that could have been learned.

A saying comes to mind, in paraphrase, "A person who believes they know it all, will not attempt to learn anything".

PW