Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie

[IceStorm]

are you suggesting that when attempting a 'replication' one should use whatever parts they can substitute rather than the specified components? is that your idea of good science?

No, i dont mean to use whatever part but in same time that dont invalidate the result that TinselKoala and I got, Rosemary already said that the Fet is not a critical part and she used other fet's too. When you take a circuit who should use 3.7% ON duty cycle and finaly you find that in reality its 96.3% ON duty cycle, that kind of thing can invalidate all the circuit, if the 555 part is erroneous, can you trust the rest of the circuit ? no.

Think about that, if you was "CLAIMING" to have a OU Device, and in same time you want to share it with the rest of the world, im sure you will take GREAT care to make the schematic exactly the same as what you used, no ? you will not burn your name on something that is not what you created, and you will be "THE MAN" to explain exactly how it work and why you choosed each parts of your circuit and what can be used if X part is not available.

Dont get me wrong , i whish it was a OU device, the world need that right now. But when i see people unable to answer clearly to any simple question, that make me think its BS, and when lab test testify its BS , then its ...

Best Regards,
IceStorm

[TinselKoala]

@TK
I started writing a reply and half way through understood how futile it was, LOL. I can only be thankful I do not live in your little world where one can never be wrong.
Regards
AC

I am quite willing to be PROVEN wrong, and I will be grateful when it happens, because that is the only way I will be able to learn.
So if you think I am wrong about ANYTHING, please provide some evidence that supports your position. Whenever I say that something is wrong, you will note that I always provide some support for my position.

Come on, PROVE ME WRONG about something.  In this thread, please provide some evidence that I am wrong about anything that I have posted about the Ainslie circuit. So that I may correct it. Because I, unlike some others apparently, do not want my name or identity attached to something that is clearly in error.

Now, if you want to read some posts from someone who actually does fit your description, please take a look at Ainslie's thread on nakedscientists.

Thanks in advance.

[TinselKoala]

are you suggesting that when attempting a 'replication' one should use whatever parts they can substitute rather than the specified components? is that your idea of good science?

What part of "Rosemary said that the Fet is not a critical part" are you having trouble understanding?

Is your idea of good science identical with trolling? You are making the same post over and over, a point which I happily conceded many pages, many days ago. That is a textbook definition of trolling.

Especially since your point has no longer even the slightest trace of validity, if it ever did. Because you see, I've been using the IRFPG50 mosfet for some time now, and if I didn't tell you which one I was using for any particular test, you would not be able to tell the difference with any instruments you might know how to use. Like a hammer.

Can't you come up with something constructive, or at least not so damn monotonous?

[TinselKoala]

I've uploaded a couple more videos. I see that one of my fans has already assigned a "one star" rating to #4.

In the second one (#5) I show an effect that I found interesting. I'm not sure of the explanation. Perhaps some of the actual scientific thinkers on this thread can give some kind of explanation.

I'm sure the trolls will have their opinions too.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lXielVyBauo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4x0wQJrc9To

[WilbyInebriated]

What part of "Rosemary said that the Fet is not a critical part" are you having trouble understanding?

Is your idea of good science identical with trolling? You are making the same post over and over, a point which I happily conceded many pages, many days ago. That is a textbook definition of trolling.

Especially since your point has no longer even the slightest trace of validity, if it ever did. Because you see, I've been using the IRFPG50 mosfet for some time now, and if I didn't tell you which one I was using for any particular test, you would not be able to tell the difference with any instruments you might know how to use. Like a hammer.

Can't you come up with something constructive, or at least not so damn monotonous?

she said that long after you used the incorrect fet. my point still has the same validity it always did. which is, substituting what you have on hand while attempting a 'replication' is not good scientific method, even if it turns out later that the part may be acceptable. why do you have such trouble understanding that? nice try at the misdirection though. too bad you don't know the textbook definition of exactly, identical or replicate.