Look!  A bisexual vulgarian out-of-the-closet drug abuser with a pickle of disgusting dimensions!

Quote from: TinselKoala on July 09, 2012, 01:46:57 PM
# 3778. Matching. Match the internet alias on the LEFT, with the personality characterisation from Ainslie, on the RIGHT. Draw lines connecting the pairs. Each item from either list may be used in several pairings if applicable.

MileHigh                 drug abuser
PicoWatt                religious fanatic
FuzzyTomCat         vulgarian of disgusting dimensions
.99                        picoqualified
evolvingape            well-paid agent
TinselKoala            closet gay

# 3778. Matching. Match the internet alias on the LEFT, with the personality characterisation from Ainslie, on the RIGHT. Draw lines connecting the pairs. Each item from either list may be used in several pairings if applicable.

MileHigh                 drug abuser
PicoWatt                religious fanatic
FuzzyTomCat         vulgarian of disgusting dimensions
.99                         picoqualified
evolvingape           >well-paid agent
TinselKoala            closet gay

Quote from: TinselKoala on July 09, 2012, 01:46:57 PM
# 3778. Matching. Match the internet alias on the LEFT, with the personality characterisation from Ainslie, on the RIGHT. Draw lines connecting the pairs. Each item from either list may be used in several pairings if applicable.

MileHigh                drug abuser
PicoWatt                religious fanatic
FuzzyTomCat         vulgarian of disgusting dimensions
.99                        picoqualified
evolvingape            well-paid agent
TinselKoala            closet gay

A format error, I assume.

0:33

http://www.overunity.com/12182/testing-the-tk-tar-baby/msg327592/#msg327592

Ah... I see that there IS a genrad 130 Variac in there. I missed it. Thanks.... that's a classic clip indeed.


Meanwhile... the "matching" question wasn't assembled in any particular order (except I saved the juiciest bit for myself) so I hope everybody is equally offended if I got you opposite the wrong -- or right -- personality trait from Ainslie's post.

There is one person missing from that list.  The most offensive thing of all is that after about two years RA is still struggling at this very moment to understand how Q2 switches on, while at the same time she has generated tons of bla bla bla verbage in an attempt to sound authoritative about her own circuit.

As of today she is still struggling to understand how Q2 is switching on:

QuoteThere's that distinction again.  If we're applying a negative voltage at the gate of Q1 - and this restricts the 'clockwise' flow of current from the battery supply - then HOW does it enable the clockwise flow of current through Q2's source leg.  I just can't get there.

MileHigh                 drug abuser
PicoWatt                religious fanatic
FuzzyTomCat         vulgarian of disgusting dimensions
.99                        picoqualified
evolvingape            well-paid agent
TinselKoala            closet gay
Rosemary               Failed bluffer about the NERD circuit

MileHigh

Quote from: TinselKoala on July 09, 2012, 02:16:08 AM
Yes, that's right, but the poly roll caps that I used on the transmitter are 5 % tolerance, and measure right on with my silly ProsKit meter. The poly caps in the receiver match, to the accuracy of the meter. But you are right, however I think this circuit is more sensitive to the inductance... probably precise snipping of the loops would be the way to tune. Marko showed some effect of inductors inside the loop but I haven't been able to see any yet.
I think all the rest of that is right. But the non-inverse square falloff... how do you account for that? If it was simply a matter of being in true resonance, it would seem that you would still get the 1/r² dependence. But what seems to be happening is that the system increases the output power to compensate for the increased distance, and the bulb stays the same brightness. Is this a result of it being somehow "phase locked" and trying to stay in that nice true resonant notch?

That is what I was thinking. The Tx has a freq that it runs at naturally. And the Rx when within certain proximity may follow long(not short ;] ) with the Tx freq. Like the whipmag CCW stator, having not just one, but a couple of speeds that it would sync at compared to the rotor speed mag pulses.
But then if brought very close, the Tx and Rx , they totally synchronize.

Like you said, the Rx just might be off tune of the Tx.


The input going up when allowing more distance between the Tx and Rx, that is interesting.

I remember the whip, when the CCW was in sync, with my Robowhip adjustable stator positioning, the CCW stator applied quite a bit of drag on the rotor. And that drag did not decrease as the sync'ed stator was moved further from the rotor. I cant say that the drag was more the further out it was, but the super nova thing reminded me of it. Meeehhmries. ;]

Maybe you can apply the Tx driver to the Rx LC and see if they run at different freq naturally. If so, then you can use that basis to fine tune one or the other. ;]

The fact that the input goes up when increasing distance between Tx and Rx shows some sort of dependency involved while in that mode.  What I want to try is, to see if more Rx can be driven by the loft side of the Rx, like a chain reaction.  It most likely would cause more draw from the input. But if all Tx and Rx are very closely tuned, there may be some better results, what ever they may be. ;]

Mags