Testing the TK Tar Baby

[MileHigh]

All:

It's evident from her recent postings that Rosemary still doesn't understand that the source of a MOSFET passes all of the DC current and the gate passes none.  It's also evident that she still does not understand how to turn Q2 on because she is still making references to making the Q2 gate high and she makes no reference to the fact that she needs to apply a voltage across two points.

Note that Poynt tried his best to teach her this material step by step just the other day.  It just doesn't register with her.  Anything technical that's more than seven minutes in the past is forgotten by Rosie.  Plus there is the Dunning-Kruger effect in play also.

It's really hopeless, like I mentioned a week or so ago.

So.....  Who cares?  It's just a sideshow now.

It's a bloody Twilight Zone episode.

MileHigh

[KHaeus]

Hi there,

it is not my party, but since this is an official forum, I want to state my opinion.

As a newbie in this forum I am really surprised and a little bit shocked about the fact, that obviously some people (hero members!) are fighting war against each other (I guess you know whom I talking about).

This is not free energy, it is the opposite -> LOST energy    From the technical discussions inbetween the "war in words" I assume that you are brilliant engineers/scientists. Why don't you put all "your energy" into the tremendously interesting topic of this thread? Stop fighting, and if not, exchange email adresses and do it there.

Peace (also to you) 
Kurt

[poynt99]

This is based on Rose's last comments. It appears to be the same as your last one TK.

[TinselKoala]

@.99: Thanks.

So... I simply pull Q1 out of its socket, I remove the horizontal wire at the very bottom of the original schematic, freeing the transistor end of the Rshunt, and I place a jumper between the FG RED and that free end of the shunt, and everything else stays hooked up as before.

Right?

[TinselKoala]

@ Khaeus: did you understand that single sentence of mine describing the changes proposed for the test? Can you explain why it took all those words and all those posts on two different forums to get to this point? Do you really think that this is just a public flame war, and that the participants on the "two sides" are equals in any way? Have you actually read the thread? I wish you would, and get back to me on whether or not Ainslie has lied about anything, distorted or misrepresented anything anyone has said, or made any really really stupid comments like "PER NEVER MEANS DIVISION" or "ONE JOULE IS ONE WATT PER SECOND". And while you are at it, you should check out my video explanations of some of the other absurd claims and statements Ainslie has made, like the one that engendered this present FG argument.

Khaeus, I don't know you or what you know. Do you know anything about power and energy calculations? Here's an example of how Ainslie does it, and where the "tremendously interesting topic" of this thread came from:

Now.  Conservatively speaking on the water to boil test - we're running that battery current at an outside maximum of 0.1 volts over 0.9 Ohms x 60 volts x 18% duty cycle which represents the ONLY measurable discharge from the battery - and that during the ON period of each switching cycle.  That comes to a wattage discharged at 1.19 watts.  The capacity of each of those batteries is let's say 10 amp hour MAX.  Therefore each battery's maximum wattage potential is 120 watts - being 10 amps x 1 hour.  We use 5 in series to get it to that 'water to boil' point.  The batteries are in series.  So.  1.19/6 = 0.199 watts per battery.  Again.  Each battery has a capacity of 10 amps x 1 hour = 120 watts.  This means that each battery will last 120/0.19 = about 630 hours or so.  Theoretically.  5 batteries will therefore last a mere 3150 hours or so. 3150 hours / 24 means the test should be proved after a test run of only 131 days.  So now the three of us will be able to give you a conclusive result over a little under a 4 months.  That's assuming that any energy at all is being discharged at the battery.  Because we can't find that in the results.

Alternatively - let us assume that we're dissipating not less than 100 watts as measured in the heat discharged.  That would be the amount of energy needed to get a little under 1 liter of water to boiling point.  Now we get to the following sum.  The battery's capacity is 120 watts.  We've got 6 in series giving us a maximum capacity of 720 watts.  We're dissipating 100 watts as evident in the temperature of the water.  Therefore in a mere 7 hours and 12 minutes we would have ENTIRELY discharged all those batteries. 

(sic)

See.... 10 amps x 1 hour = 120 Watts, the maximum wattage potential of the battery. I'll bet you didn't know that, for sure.

Ainslie's CLAIMS are based on "calculations" like that. Her own DATA refute her claims. The only things of tremendous interest remaining are the Ainslie pathologies, and those are playing out in these forums. There is no point whatsoever in sending emails.

Thanks for your interest though. I hope you are learning something about human behaviour, if not about electronics, here.

Just for fun... a 12 volt, 10 A-H battery contains how much energy? 12V x 10 A x 60 min/hr x 60 sec/min == 432000 JOULES, or wattseconds.
What is the "maximum wattage potential" of such a battery? Well... how much current would flow if you just dropped a crowbar across the terminals? 100 A? More? DO THE MATH (tm Ainslie).