Rosemary:

Good lord you are so deeply involved in this, it's not healthy at all.

For starters, the definition of "Tar Baby:"

QuoteThe Tar-Baby is a fictional character in the second of the Uncle Remus stories published in 1881; it is a doll made of tar and turpentine used to entrap Br'er Rabbit. The more that Br'er Rabbit fights the Tar-Baby, the more entangled he becomes. In modern usage, "tar baby" refers to any "sticky situation" that is only aggravated by additional contact.

That's the first definition that comes up in the Wikipedia article and anybody reading this thread can see TK's wit in action.  So all of your talk about South African history can be dismissed out of hand.

As far as your expenses go, you are making a serious mistake.  You mention $1000 USD for a multimeter?  Now _that's_ crazy.

All that you need is to borrow an ordinary scope and get a $30 multimeter.  Or buy a used scope on eBay.  Buy six new small batteries for perhaps $40 each so that's  $240.  Buy a cheap battery charger.

Then do a dim bulb test after you confirm that you see your "magic delicious oscillations" on your scope.  That's it because it will be game over, just like TK showed you with the Tar Baby.

The most important question is as follows:  Does you circuit have any merit?   The answer is NO, it has no merit at all.

Your circuit is a bloody joke.  It's a Grade Six Science Fair project gone nuts.

I give Stefan lots of credit for allowing all points of view about your "project" being expressed.  Some seasoned people with a lot of experience in analog design engineering have weighed in on your device and expressed their learned opinions of the experimental data presented so far.  They have made a valuable contribution to the forum and the readers of the forum are much better off and better informed because of it.

So you are not likely to get very far with your requests for censorship.  And some people with a world of experience that you don't have are going to express their opinions and that's tough luck for you.

You can spend as much of your money as you want and it's not going to make one bit of difference.  Your batteries will show the truth in the dim bulb testing.  You don't need any academics to endorse these tests.

Like I stated before, you wouldn't last more than 15 minutes in an interview with an academic anyways.  No electrical engineering professor would take you seriously when they soon realize that you don't even understand how your simple circuit works and you are unable to express yourself when it comes to electronics and energy concepts. 

Just go buy some small batteries and run your tests and confirm TK's results.  That's basically where you are at, replicating and trying to generate as much data as somebody that replicated you.  You have lost the leadership position and find yourself confirming someone else's results that the circuit doesn't work.

The whole thing is doomed and there is no point whatsoever in spending all of that money.

MileHigh

So... when you take an oscilloscope whose BNC probe grounds are all connected together inside the instrument, and cut off the line cord ground plug to make sure the scope isn't grounded......

And then you hook that scope up in strict parallel with another scope, which IS grounded back to earth through the line cord, all probe reference leads hooked to the "ground bus" of a circuit ...... what happens?

Or when you take that ungrounded scope and hook its probes up to a circuit, and then you clip a normal function generator to your circuit, with the FG's BNC "probe" ground lead connected to the same point as the grounds of the scope probes... what happens?

And just how, exactly, does an official calibration laboratory DO that magic "calibration" stuff anyway, I wonder?

   


(They are just questions, Leon.)

QuoteThat's a mountain or work.  And meanwhile, while I'm something of an insomniac - these long hours that I have every day - are largely monopolised in countering the ongoing attack related to 'tarring' my good name.  It is time consuming.  And Stefan.  If you are anxious to see me 'put foot' then I would also advise you that perhaps TK can defer his efforts on this thread.  Clearly he is not going to perform any more tests.  And then - in the interests of fair play - and in the interests of expediting all these tests - may I impose on you to lock TK's thread.  At least until I have been given my own.  Then I will have full moderation and you can give the same to him.  And he can then continue his abuses when I'm in a position to counter them.

Another lie. Where and how is it "clear" that I am not going to perform any more tests?

Contrariwise, now that Ainslie has acknowledged that Tar Baby is performing just like NERD in all significant respects, I will indeed be doing more tests, just as planned, just as according to schedule.

The first one scheduled is the comparison of MOSFETs which will demonstrate that the mean negative power product can be obtained with cheaper more common transistors. Further down the line will be some simple calorimetry, where I will get better measurements of heat dissipation and electrical power than anything Ainslie has ever done. If necessary I can also perform _precise_ and sophisticated calorimetry using real laboratory _calibrated_ bulk calorimeters... but I am confident that won't be necessary, as I have plenty of regulated power supplies and styrofoam ice chests, and with webcams and time-lapse video, data logging is not much of a problem in the "analog" DeepBunker.

Ainslie clearly seeks to have this thread censored and the work being done here suppressed. Yet all we are doing is repeating her own measurements and examining the validity of the conclusions she has made based on them... and based on her poor math and her misunderstanding of basic electronics and physics. Fair Play, to get this thread locked? What is preventing her from opening her own thread describing her PRESENT TESTING of her NERD DEVICE? Only her lack of testing, as far as I can tell. How would locking this thread be "fair play" in any sense at all? What would be fair play is for her to answer the questions asked, to correct her math and conceptual errors, to post corrections to her "papers", and to perform the tests that could actually demonstrate what she claims.... or fail to do so. What would indeed be "fair play" is to do what Stefan has asked: perform tests, on video, that demonstrate her claims, including refutations of my tests that she finds problematic.

I have never asked for moderation privileges and I don't want or need them. I have at times asked if there is some way to rein Ainslie in, to restrict her to factual discussion and checkable references. Efforts in that direction clearly require her cooperation, which will just as clearly not be forthcoming. 

Rosemary,

I have never cut a ground pin off the end of an AC cord.  When I do need to lift an AC ground, in the US we have adapters that allow isolation of the AC ground (they were not originaly intended for this purpose, but they work well for AC gnd isolators).  If I do need to maintain an AC gnd on bench equipment (which I usually do thru at least one path), there are other methods that can be used related to the power and signal common ground scheme that can ensure there are no "loops".

Possibly in SA there are no adapters available that allow easy isolation of the AC ground.  If this is so, and you do need to isolate an AC ground, you can make an extension cord from individual AC connectors and power cord and not hook-up the AC ground at one end.  This method would be particularly suitable for equipment that has a fixed, non-removable AC line cord.

However, most newer equipment, including the LeCroy,  use a standard IEC connector with a country specific AC connector at one end.  You could purchase a few new IEC cords suitable for SA and cut the AC ground pins from these new cords.  You could then use these cords whenever you need to isolate equipment that has an IEC connector.  Also, if it is necessary to isolate a piece of rental equipment, you can use one of your new isolated cords, leaving the original cord intact.

PW

Quote from: TinselKoala on May 06, 2012, 09:25:23 AM

And just how, exactly, does an official calibration laboratory DO that magic "calibration" stuff anyway, I wonder?

Stop it TK your making me laugh too much!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calibration

"In general use, calibration is often regarded as including the process of adjusting the output or indication on a measurement instrument to agree with value of the applied standard, within a specified accuracy. For example, a thermometer could be calibrated so the error of indication or the correction is determined, and adjusted (e.g. via calibration constants) so that it shows the true temperature in Celsius at specific points on the scale. This is the perception of the instrument's end-user. However, very few instruments can be adjusted to exactly match the standards they are compared to. For the vast majority of calibrations, the calibration process is actually the comparison of an unknown to a known and recording the results."