Testing the TK Tar Baby

[TinselKoala]

The question you are again avoiding was. Why are you adding your own whimsical and arbitrary qualifications?

How does it feel to be a sock puppet, with someone's hand up your skirt?

Read what the NERDs have said. They have said repeatedly that the circuit won't run on capacitors, and I am saying it will. Are you now saying that the NERD circuit will run on capacitors, and that the NERDS have acknowledged that? Or are you saying that the NERDs are saying that it WON'T run on caps? Either way, I  am happy....

Because if they are saying it WON'T..... then they lie. And if they are saying it WILL.... then fine.... let them do so and show the progression of the oscillations.

The statement in the quotation misrepresents the true state of affairs, which is that if the circuit is provided with a realistically sized capacitor it will run just fine and will make oscillations that are indistinguishable from the "real thing" running on the battery. The only difference is that the energy in a capacitor can be known with some precision, and the energy in a battery cannot. Thus, testing with a capacitor will not allow the kind of handwaving sloppiness that results in the false claims of the NERDs.

And this is why the NERDs have resisted testing with capacitors and only cite... as an anecdote, not as real data.... the "capacitor test" described in the quote.

What was the value of the capacitor used? Can anyone tell me? Can any NERD supporter even tell me why that is important?

Can any NERD supporter even make a post on this forum?

[anomdeguerre]

How does it feel to be a sock puppet, with someone's hand up your skirt?

Ask your mom.

Read what the NERDs have said. They have said repeatedly that the circuit won't run on capacitors, and I am saying it will. Are you now saying that the NERD circuit will run on capacitors, and that the NERDS have acknowledged that? Or are you saying that the NERDs are saying that it WON'T run on caps? Either way, I  am happy....

Because if they are saying it WON'T..... then they lie. And if they are saying it WILL.... then fine.... let them do so and show the progression of the oscillations.

The statement in the quotation misrepresents the true state of affairs, which is that if the circuit is provided with a realistically sized capacitor it will run just fine and will make oscillations that are indistinguishable from the "real thing" running on the battery. The only difference is that the energy in a capacitor can be known with some precision, and the energy in a battery cannot. Thus, testing with a capacitor will not allow the kind of handwaving sloppiness that results in the false claims of the NERDs.

And this is why the NERDs have resisted testing with capacitors and only cite... as an anecdote, not as real data.... the "capacitor test" described in the quote.

What was the value of the capacitor used? Can anyone tell me? Can any NERD supporter even tell me why that is important?

Can any NERD supporter even make a post on this forum?

Read what I said. I'll say it again. Why are you avoiding the question Wilby asked you?
Your tactic of constructing an argument against an inaccurate representation of the original proposition is a classic definition of a 'strawman'.

[MileHigh]

I think "anomdeguerre" is Rosemary.

[The Boss]

MileHigh,

That was my first thought as well ..not difficult to spot.

[poynt99]

From the paper:

The batteries were then disconnected leaving the capacitors in series with the circuit and the oscillation then collapsed to a zero voltage.

The definition of collapse:

v.intr.1. To fall down or inward suddenly; cave in.2. To break down suddenly in strength or health and thereby cease to function: a monarchy that collapsed.3. To fold compactly: chairs that collapse for storage.v.tr. To cause to fold, break down, or fall down or inward.n.1. The act of falling down or inward, as from loss of supports.2. An abrupt failure of function, strength, or health; a breakdown.3. An abrupt loss of perceived value or of effect:

The term "collapse" is generally associated with a sudden brief event. In electronics for example, we speak of the collapsing magnetic field of an energized inductor when the souce of energy is cleanly removed from it.

From the context in Rosemary's quote it is fairly clear she meant the oscillations ceased to persist within a few seconds of removal of the batteries. Relative to the 2 minute long period of the duty cycle they used in their tests, the term "immediate" is a fair assessment of the time required for the oscillations to cease.

Regardless of how long it actually took for the oscillations to cease in their test, their conclusion was that the circuit would not operate when powered by capacitors. The simulation and TK's TB and altoid tests indicate otherwise.