Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims

[TinselKoala]

The Great Scientist is still lying about Glen, too, I see, while at the same time flaunting her ignorance and lack of reading comprehension. All of Glen's work is publicly available and has always been so, and I've given the link to it in this thread and other threads many times. Yet she still lies about it, saying that it isn't. Amazing.

But her idiocy extends even deeper than that, since she seems incapable of reading these words for herself:

Steve Weir said:

Yes, this works at frequencies above about 100Hz to 100's of MHz.  I have precise measurements that confirm the theoretical basis for why it does.  This gives you average current and voltage.  It does not yield average power.

You can get average power by using a stiff bypass network to reduce the AC voltage source impedance.  I calibrated up a current sense and power bypass board last year.  I designed that board with the intent of getting it to Rosemary Ainslie for the August demonstrations.  In speaking with them extensively I judged that such a fixture would add unwanted changes that they would have a difficult time understanding.  I never sent them one and they obtained different low inductance current sense resistors of their own.

And it is that very board, built by Steve Weir, that I am using.

And see his further comments on my YT video here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMeHpTW_QIA

And he was of course right.... they, or rather Ainslie, has a difficult time understanding the English language, because she is too busy TALKING garbage, to listen to the Truth from people like Steve Weir... or anyone else, for that matter.

As far as waveforms go... I have reproduced every waveform Ainslie has made, including the fraudulent Figure 3 and the bogus "Test 4", as anyone who has been following my work knows, even AINSLIE HERSELF. She trumpets her ignorant arrogance in such a comical fashion that it has become boring to continue to refute her. But refute her I shall continue to do, every time she emits another series of lies, stupid claims and misrepresentations.

Ainslie also lies about the Tektronix incident and Glen's role in that. I've already shown the quotation from the Tek representative asking Ainslie to remove the misrepresentations she made about them, so I'll not show it again. It is amazing the depths of mendacity coming from that woman.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-wy8w9MWJY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O5svsFA8XRg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FdZAPZG6Fyo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufEZW5iTv6Y

But of course... when Ainslie and Martin try to do it, this is the result:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QAYeW0PBfLw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4bxAobjN98

[MarkE]

In the latest video there is a minor mistake in one of the comments.  The positive gate drive to Q1 is three divisions above the baseline: 6V.

[TinselKoala]

In the latest video there is a minor mistake in one of the comments.  The positive gate drive to Q1 is three divisions above the baseline: 6V.

Yes, that's right, thank you for pointing it out. I'll put an annotation in the video at that point. The Q1 drive indicated voltage is of course limited for a similar reason that the Q2 drive is. With more main battery voltage this indicated positive gate drive voltage goes up, at the same FG amplitude knob setting. This was also demonstrated by Ainslie in last summer's demonstrations although they probably don't realize it. The Q1 is turning nearly fully on, as evidenced by the peak currents measured on the Link DSO (about 2.78 A) and the total circuit resistance of around 13ohms: 2.78 A x 13 R = ~ 36.1 V, essentially the supplied voltage.

For the visually and mentally challenged, I've put some rough annotations on the Link DSO capture, explaining what the traces are. The Link is only a two-channel scope, so of course I cannot display the full Etch-a-Sketch colored patterns that Ainslie loves so much.... but I show quite clearly the Battery Voltage VBatt and the Current in the CSR. Ainslie doesn't recognize the VBatt trace, though.... because the FAKE OSCILLATIONS in VBatt that SHE LOVES are gone, eliminated by the proper design and tight filtering and the non-inductive probe connections.

MarkE, please check your PMs, I've left a tidbit for you in my dropbox.

[TinselKoala]

Oh, I guess I forgot to put a link to the most recent video here.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XaTjnZVqto

[MarkE]

I see:  Ms. Ainslie is befuddled by clean measurements.  One thing worth noting is that the battery voltage shown is the voltage across the battery less the voltage drop across the CSR, because the circuit common is the Q1 source terminal side of the CSR.  Maybe your digital scope can reverse that out, in which case the battery voltage will look even flatter than it already does.  I imagine that she could easily be confused by the current sense trace as well.   Instead of 3.5V pp across the sense resistor, during the oscillations your set-up shows something more like 215mV, or more or less 850mA pp.  Of course we know yours doesn't have all the wiring inductance problems that plague Ms. Ainslie's set up.  All those demonstrations that you did and poynt99 did showing the effects of inductance on the current sense fell on deaf ears.

I don't know how good the resistors are that Ms. Ainslie and her collaborators obtained that they used at the battery August 11.  Steve may know what they used.  I see from the August 11 video that they indicated about 3V pp across nominally the 1 Ohm resistor at the battery.  If their CSRs were about 100nH - 150nH then they would have around 2.5X - 4X magnitude gain at 4MHz.  Combine that with any differences in open circuit voltage between your set-ups and the readings they got are pretty readily explained.  That explanation is that your measurements are far more accurate.  Isn't it funny how the accuracy of a result depends a lot more on the set-up and the operator than it does on whether one uses a scope that can be had for a couple hundred dollars versus one that goes for more than $5000.?

Even the 215mV pp you have may be a little elevated depending on the exact inductance of the CSR its resistance and the frequency content of the oscillations. Are you measuring across the CSR or across the frequency compensated sense?  Steve told me that the compensated sense has a corner frequency of about 50MHz.  If I had to guess the corner without compensation is probably no higher than 10MHz.