Rosemary Ainslie Circuit Demonstration, June 1 2013

[picowatt]

On second thought, I think a 250mA fuse will be a lot easier.

TK, I'm not particularly interested in performing the long period tests, so I won't be pursuing that, at least not right now.

.99,

At -10volts open circuit, you are probably only going to see 120-150ma of DC current thru Q2, which is why I suggested a 150ma fuse.  I'd size the fuse with the smallest ma. rating you can reliably get away with (fast blow of course). 

If you have a couple 10-15volt zeners, a pair of them in series "back to back" at the PG output would help to clamp any overvoltage until the fuse blows or during the fuses brief arc currents.     

PW

[TinselKoala]

On second thought, I think a 250mA fuse will be a lot easier.

TK, I'm not particularly interested in performing the long period tests, so I won't be pursuing that, at least not right now.

By "the long period tests" you can only mean the Figure 3 scopeshot. You aren't interested in pursuing that? Not even after Ainslie has offered to guide you through the settings necessary?

I am flabbergasted. If anyone could reproduce the Figure 3 scopeshot, with or without Ainslie's help, under the conditions claimed, that would be a highly significant result, much more important than a "measured negative wattage" which we already know the reason for and the cure for.

But you aren't particularly interested. At least not right now. It would take you all of five minutes, probably, with her "guiding you through" the settings necessary.

OK, fine, whatever.

She's offered to do it live for Sterling. On Skype for Mark Dansie. On June 1st, then on June 22nd, and now on June 29 --- right. She's offered to show you how, and it's supposed to be _easy_. But nobody will actually do it or have her show it to them. Are you just teasing me, trying to string this all out, or is there some other reason why you all are avoiding producing the PROOF that Ainslie is either FOS as I maintain, or the greatest inventor since Thomas Edison and Nikola Tesla combined........

Oh... by the way, this is what I get when I click on the link she provided for the demo on the 29th. Do you suppose I'll be on the invited guest list?

[TinselKoala]

It's really rather important for .99 to reproduce the Figure 3 scopeshot under Ainslie's instruction.

If she does it somehow, during the upcoming promised demonstration, she is right about one thing: it will be hard for anyone to believe her, since she's engaged in deliberate, blatant, and severe deception in the past (remember the month-long discussion, over 400 forum posts, when she kept hidden the true schematic used in the March 2011 demo and even expressed the desire to .99 that it remain hidden even longer).

However, we have no such doubts about .99's integrity or skills or knowledge. Therefore, Ainslie should strive with all possible effort to show .99 the settings (while he's still in her good graces) and have _him_ reproduce the Figure 3 scopeshot (including all of the conditions attached to it). That will be much more believable by everyone concerned than any "live" demo that Ainslie herself undertakes.

As far as I am concerned, this is the very most important test that could possibly be performed with any replication of Ainslie's device. Why? Because all the rest has already been done, many times, by everyone who has actually built the circuit, and there is no new knowledge to be gained _other than_ how to make the Fig. 3 scopeshot as Ainslie claimed-- or to have her admit that it's impossible. And of course that would require that she retract her claims and her papers.

If .99 thinks that adopting a slow and patient pedagogical approach is worthwhile for some reason...... I can only remind him of the last two years of discussion between him and her. It is clearly evident, just from her last few posts, that absolutely no progress has been made in explaining to her the operation of her circuit, and one big key to this is her failure to understand or even accept something that is so basic we can't even believe she misses it: the linear operation region of the mosfet, where it can act as an amplifier and produce classical feedback oscillations.

[MileHigh]

I have some pearls of wisdom.  Let Poynt do exactly what he wants to do exactly when he wants to do it.  He built the circuit and he will set up the testing and it will "flow" as per his wishes.  Let him go into "The Zone" and do his thing.  It's a creative and technical process and let him enjoy it.  I think lots of us have been there and know how it feels.

No backseat driving, you know he is going to present good clear and professional data.

[poynt99]

Any period can be used to demonstrate Fig. 3, but I have no intention of blowing any MOSFETs so I won't let it burn at 72V for x number of minutes. At that range of period, there's almost no need for any switching; just tie the Gate to +12V and wait till it pops.

I showed Fig. 3 in the simulation, and I didn't use a "minutes" period. Same can be done on the bench. The point in my mind for that test is to determine whether it is possible to achieve that wave form with a functioning and properly-connected Q1. One doesn't need a "minutes" period to do that.

I know TK you want to prove that Q1 is going to pop under such conditions and that the wave forms of Fig. 3 will appear by default. But I'm not interested in pushing the tests to the point of destruction. I'll try to show Fig. 3 with a much shorter period and a 10% duty cycle.

At some point later I might just connect the Gate to +12V with a 72V supply and monitor the FET temperature. I'll let it get to maybe 120ºC or so then stop the test (unless it pops before that point).