N.R.M.R.E. An investigation.

[tinman]

Thanks Grum,

Ok my build is shit.





For starters I have not got a fancy schmancy power supply. I'm using a battery & resistors. I see the most interesting waveform at around 600mv. I'm still trying diff transformers. I have a big 25w lamp load on it atm off to get neons tomoz forgot them today DOH! Brad do Jaycar sell any ok power supplies?

Yes they do.

https://www.jaycar.com.au/power-products-electrical/power-supply/laboratory-bench/c/402A


Brad

[tinman]

Mags
not that simple, he has called Builders here OU fraudsters purposely hiding the truth

EVIDENCE ??

NONE

this has lead to members here choosing to leave instead of being called Crooks by a man who does nothing here but tell lies about members and make trouble everywhere he can.

I will be talking with Stefan in a few hours .

Easy to tell he is in the army lol.

[ramset]

Your burning the midnight oil...

[Zephir]

And you are a builder? Have you shown your projects in which to compare what a builder really is?

It's not my intention to interfere anyone here. But I'm not required to be a builder or broody hen for to recognize a smelling aged egg. Two replicators already posted their replicas here, that's perfect - but what I'm saying is, these replicas don't correspond the Nelson Rocha's circuits and they omitted detail (IMO crucial, actually working principle) - which has been also neglected in all previous (equally clueless) threads about Nelson Rocha's device and I don't want to repeat the same mistake here again.

Now as a moderator you have only two options in essence: to adhere on rule, that only members, who already did show their attempts for replication are allowed to affect the discussion and to comment another builders - and to wait, until some builder will finally recognize, what I posted at beginning of the forum (and with increasing time and length of thread this option will cease to zero). Or you'll adhere on strict conformance of all replicas with Nelson Rocha's device for all builders from their very beginning - no matter how "recognized" or "meritorious" they already are. Because every seemingly tiny detail may decide, whether some laborious thousand pages long thread will be finally successful or not.

You know, the generic problem with builders is, they have rather tendency to replicate circuits as a whole and to solve technical details (choice of components and so on). They're explorative and opened to improvisation without strict adherence on some theory of circuit function. And vice-versa: the theorists usually don't bother with practical details and tinkering. They don't want to wait for complete replicas - but to analyze principle of function on parts of circuit first. Now you have a chance to promote cooperation of both types of people - or to continue in existing modus vivendi of this forum, which contains mixture of theoretical proposals and builder threads - both equally clueless and arguably unsuccessful for last twenty years.

The problem of this collaborative mode is, the theorists are essentially expected to tell, what the builders should exactly do - which may or may not be palatable for members, who already gained social credit with their attempts for replication here.

[Magluvin]

It's not my intention to interfere anyone here. But I'm not required to be a builder or broody hen for to recognize a smelling aged egg. Two replicators already posted their replicas here, that's perfect - but what I'm saying is, these replicas don't correspond the Nelson Rocha's circuits and they omitted detail (IMO crucial, actually working principle) - which has been also neglected in all previous (equally clueless) threads about Nelson Rocha's device and I don't want to repeat the same mistake here again.

Now as a moderator you have only two options in essence: to adhere on rule, that only members, who already did show their attempts for replication are allowed to comment another builders and to affect the discussion and to wait, until some builder finally recognize, what I posted at beginning of the forum (and with increasing time and length of thread this option will cease to zero). Or you'll adhere on strict conformance of all replicas with Nelson Rocha's device for all builders from their very beginning - no matter how "recognized" or "meritorious" they already are. Because every seemingly tiny detail may decide, whether some laborious thousand pages long thread will be finally successful or not.

You know, the generic problem with builders is, they have rather tendency to replicate circuits already given and to solve technical details (choice of components and so on). They're quite liberal and opened to improvisation without strict adherence on some theory of circuit function. And vice-versa: the theorists usually don't bother with practical details and tinkering. Now you have chance to promote cooperation of both types of people - or to continue in existing modus vivendi of this forum, which contains mixture of theoretical proposals and builder threads - both equally clueless and arguably unsuccessful for last twenty years.

The problem of this collaborative mode is, the theorists are essentially expected to tell, what the builders should exactly do - which may or may not be palatable for members, who already gained social credit with their attempts for replication here.

Well then build it and show them how its done. If not then you have said enough to get your message out in 1 post. But you go on and on. The majority here have complained about your posts and its getting heard. So either join as a builder or just sit and watch instead of just bashing. If not you will have no choice other than to sit back and read only.

Walk the walk or talk the talk. The walk gets better results, as you are experiencing here.

Mags