New Rosemary Ainslie Demonstration Scheduled for Sunday, 4 August 2013

[TinselKoala]

I would also like it formally known that Rose has flatly declined to perform a Pbat "sanity check" using either the scope-measured MEAN Vbat and Vcsr voltages, or DMM measurements of the same. And this despite strong advisement from both Steve and myself.

Amazing. Utterly amazing.

A week ago she agrees to specific tests to be done in specific ways... and then, literally on the eve of the rehearsal... she unilaterally changes everything, from the components specified, to the tests to be performed, even the nature of the claims made.

And she freezes out poynt99, who has been so patient with her and has devoted so much time and careful effort to her case.

Astounding. But.... not at all unexpected. Will we see anything Sunday? Who cares. It is the SATURDAY rehearsal that will be most revealing. I certainly hope that it will be recorded, both video and audio.

[MileHigh]

TK and .99 and gang:

Demo delayed and waiting for parts.  And some "People in Conflict" drama like usual.

Let me comment on the sanity check with the hope that an alternative explanation sinks in:  With the correct setup, the battery voltage "oscillations" will be reduced to a kind of smallish peach fuzz superimposed on the battery voltage.  The "peach fuzz" will primarily be due to the inherent inductance of the batteries in series interacting with the switching.  For example, when the MOSFET switch switches off, a tiny tiny positive peach fuzz spike will be seen on the battery voltage.  When the MOSFET switch switches on, a tiny tiny negative peach fuzz spike will be seen on the battery voltage.

Any dual-slope integration digital multimeter will easily average this peach fuzz out and give a very accurate average voltage measurement.  The "secret" is that the averaging is being done by a capacitor performing integration with "infinite" (very very high bandwidth) resolution.

I fear when Rosemary uses the term "battery voltage oscillations" that she believes that seeing any kind of battery voltage oscillation means that there is a recharging cycle going on.  That is of course not the case, the only way to conclude the battery is recharging is to look at what's going on with the current sense resistor.

The same dual-slope integration will be done on the current sense resistor and hence you will get a very accurate measurement of the average battery current.  Here is where Rosie is going to be startled, because any negative voltage on the current sensing resistor indicating recharging is going to be mighty mighty tiny.  It's going to look like peach fuzz on top of peach fuzz, or peach fuzz-squared.

The bottom line is that the the multimeter is able to give you a very accurate average battery voltage measurement.  The voltage is always positive, even if you see an oscillation superimposed on it.  The multimeter is able to give you a very accurate average current measurement.  Multiply the two together to get your average battery output power.

There may be some apparent recharging going on, but it will minuscule and there is a good chance that what appears to be recharging will mostly be due to wire inductance effects. (i.e.; a fake-out, there isn't actual recharging when you are seeing wire inductance effects)

It's reasonable to view batteries as sluggish.  It's hard to say how much the battery voltage will drop in reality when the MOSFET switches on when the oscillations are happening.  There may be a kind of "battery pseudo capacitive effect" and the switching cycle is already over before the sluggish battery's output impedance kicks in and the voltage actually does drop.  It's very possible that if you could remove all of the inductive effects that the battery voltage would do a small droop and be near-DC while the MOSFET is in the oscillation phase.  Another way to say it is that my gut feel is telling me there is a kind of low-pass filter associated with the battery output voltage.

So if you make the thought experiment of stripping the circuit down to it's bare essentials, this is what you have during the infamous oscillation phase:  The battery voltage has a slight droop but is still otherwise near-DC.  The current is just unidirectional pulses.  Any returning "recharge" pulses are peach fuzz-squared, they are the tiniest wisps of current, something that would only impress a 10 picofarad capacitor.  Also, because of the battery's sluggishness, it doesn't even "see" these minuscule recharge pulses as actually recharging the battery.  They are so narrow and contain so little energy that they just dump their energy into the battery resistively.  So the harsh truth is that the battery doesn't recharge at all.  Even if it could recharge, the return power into the battery is so tiny that it would take five years worth of continuous peach fuzz-squared pulsing to recharge it.

And that's the way it is!  lol

Did you know that you can make money at home working on your computer?  Philip Hardcastle has a job offer for Rosemary!  lol  Who needs the NSA?   

[TinselKoala]

In Ainslie's most recent "open letter" that Mark Dansie has posted on his website, she emits this curious statement:

In effect – it would need the most naive of players to EVER assume that these same forums are intended to prove anything at all.  It seems rather that they're intended to discourage the claims and the claimants both with such energy – such persistence – such dedication – that one is inclined to see an agenda behind these attacks from a well paid group of players who work under a mandate.  And, since the ONLY beneficiaries of these attacks are our energy suppliers – then the question is this.  Are they secretly and silently funding that protest?  It certainly seems so.  Because how else would someone like Tinsel Koala (Mr Little), for example, be able to spend day after day, month after month, year after year, doing NOTHING but shout down our own work in this regard?

And this really makes me laugh. Ainslie is so arrogant and self-important that she imagines that her fantasy world is my only occupation... day after day, month after month, year after year, doing NOTHING else.....

What delusions! What fantasies! Ainslie can't even watch my video notebooks on YT to inform herself of her massive multiple errors, to see the real, significant things that I have been working on for years like dozens of different Arduino projects, stroboscopic photography of spark discharge effects, spark-gap and solid-state Tesla coils, ultraviolet lasers, inductive and capacitative power transfer systems, mechanical systems like MrWayne's hydraulic fantasy and Laithwaite gyro precession systems, instructional efforts wrt Joule Thief and Bedini SGM, and many more.... yet she in her arrogant fantasy world thinks that I am only concerned with her "little" delusions! What a conceited oaf she is. Ne Kulturny, as well.

"Mr Little" !! The arrogant fool still persists in this insane fantasy that I am someone called "Bryan Little". She can produce absolutely no evidence in support of that insane contention, and every time she makes it, she adds another proof to the gigantic pile of proofs of her delusional fantasy system.

[TinselKoala]

I realize this is not likely to do any good at all, since LMM has no math past simple arithmetic... but here goes, anyhow.

A short video:
http://www.brightstorm.com/math/calculus/the-definite-integral/average-value-of-a-function/

And below is a diagram and explanation from a calculus textbook on Safari:

[TinselKoala]

To put it plainly: Ainslie frequently parrots "vi dt" or as she has it lately, "vi/dt" and "integrated analysis" as the proper way to compute "power". And so it is.  But she has no clue what she's talking about, she is just parroting words, as her present disagreement about "average" or "mean" values indicates.

She is talking about using the INTEGRAL of the instantaneous power curve, the Energy in Joules, which is found by "the integral from time t=0 to time t=T of ( v x i) dt" . In other words, you take the voltage and current values at each instant, multiply them together to get an instantaneous power value, then multiply that by the duration of a sample interval -- the "dt" or differential slice of time -- to arrive at an ENERGY value in Joules during that tiny time interval. Then you add those little energy values all together. Then you divide that by the number of time slices to get the AVERAGE or MEAN of the POWER during that time. Simples.

And of course... this is the same thing as taking the Mean aka Average value of the instantaneous power curve during that same time interval.