Rosemary:

QuoteWhich means - TK - that what's actually UNBELIEVABLE is that you are all overlooking this FACT.  Here's the thing.  That you power a string of LED's - that you turn a motor - that you do anything at all with electric current it ALWAYS obeys those INDUCTIVE LAWS.  And by trying to INSIST that the function generator actually passes it's own current supply to a circuit is not only INCORRECT - it is UNBELIEVABLY incorrect.  It shows a want of precision that is entirely inappropriate to the study of science.  And it reflects - not on my competence - but on your own.  I am VERY well aware of what you can 'infer' by 'implying' that the function generator itself is passing its current to the circuit.  The induced current flow that results from its applied signal can only return to the probe and to the terminal of that probe and back to its own source.  Nowhere else.  And then any current that is induced as a result of that flow of current  between the terminal probes will return to ITS source.  And so on.  Ad infinitum. If a current cannot find its source then it will SPARK - it will manifest some discharge to ground or it will not resolve that applied voltage as current flow.

Rosie Posie
And you can contradict this as often as you please.  It will ALWAYS be wrong. 

I have told you about your severe problems with your communication skills when it comes to circuits and electronics.  Your description of the current flow is severely lacking and enigmatic.

Please post a drawing of the current flow.  Note also that previous drawings that you have posted have been totally unacceptable.  Post a clear drawing with the full, complete circuit that shows exactly how the current flows through the circuit.  You can mark up an existing drawing or draw the circuit out by hand, we don't care.

Your drawing MUST be complete and it MUST be clear and it MUST show EXACTLY how the current flows in the circuit according to you.

Right now nobody reading the thread can understand your description of the current flow.  This is FACT, I assure you, so you must clear up this problem by providing a drawing.

MileHigh

Rosemary:

I have a suggested study assignment for you.   Do a Google search on "output impedance of a function generator" and start reading the links and work on understanding how the function generator really works.  Task yourself with getting a mastery over the concepts related to the output impedance of a function generator.

If you can master the material uncovered in the Google search then what should fall out of that newly gained knowledge on your behalf will be the end of this ridiculous "current vs. no current" debate.

One more time, I am challenging you to pull yourself up by your own bootstraps and climb up the learning curve so we can have more rational and more productive discussions with you.

MileHigh

QuoteAnd you can contradict this as often as you please.  It will ALWAYS be wrong.

A little slip there, that betrays your guilty knowledge? Yes, Rosemary....your "this" will ALWAYS be the "it" that is wrong.

Yet another magic function generator does the impossible: sources a current that lights an LED and moves the coil of a moving coil ammeter. And at no time do I ever saw anyone in half !

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExEPFy-aFxM

The magic function generators in the DeepBunker can perform even more stupendous feats: they can use an external BATTERY to provide a DC OFFSET which is reflected in the total voltage of the two Power Sources in series.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11q28mKtNlE

Stunned silence. Crickets chirping.

Or is that the sound of the....

IsoTech GFG 324. That's the function generator that was used in the "papers". Isn't it?

What is it?
Where can I find information about the IsoTech GFG324? This must be the only function generator made anywhere in the world that can produce Voltage but not current, and that does not allow an external current to flow through it.