fact: tinselkoala/alsetalokin has no extant material evidence available to support his claim of being taught by masters. when asked to provide said evidence, tinselkoala/alsetalokin refuses and changes the subject.

Quote from: TinselKoala on July 24, 2012, 02:03:56 PM

imagine that! it's like deja vu...
this is just like the last time i asked you to be accountable for your asinine claims. you cussed me out and ran off home to mommie... looks like you've matured a little since then.  but... you're still running away after you've talked yourself into a hole. that's something for you to work on, like not saying ummm or ahh once every 10 seconds in your 'videos'... 

still waiting on some sort of verification that you studied under "masters"... it's gonna be like that mea culpa you owe me isn't?

Quote from over there:


"I've elaborated on this in the follow up post.  Can you comment on that?  I'm not sure that I want you to outline anything related to current flow until we've tested that first protocol test number.  Unless you're up for it.  I was referring to the argument per you and picowatt - that explains the oscillation as energy delivered by the battery as a consequence of the gate switch at Q2 being on - or even partially 'on' during the 'off' period at Q1.  My take is that the battery is disconnected during the oscillation period.  Your take is that it is 'on' and is responsible for that oscillation.  Something like that?  Not quite sure.

Regards
Rosie'

I do not believe you have fully grasped the DC conditions regarding Q2.  If you did, you would now be able to understand the negative feedback that regulates the bias current thru Q2 under DC conditions.  Once you understand negative feedback, positive feedback is a bit easier to understand.

In any case, and very briefly:

If you look at your FIG4 in the first paper, you can see Q2 being modulated on and off.

Channel 3 is the voltage at the source of Q2.  You will observe a series of negative peaks that resemble "V"s.  During the descending portion of the "V", Q2 is being turned on.  During the ascending portion of the "V", Q2 is being turned off.

During oscillation, the MOSFET capacitances are either being charged (VDS increasing) or discharged (VDS decreasing) with their charge/discharge current passing thru the CSR (and, to a lesser degree, thru the FG).

Cgd, Cgs, Cds, the CSR, and gate lead inductance are the primary components that form a feedback network that modulates Q2's on state.

If the battery is disconnected during the oscillation period as Ainslie claims and believes, then it should make no difference whatsoever to the oscillations if you REALLY disconnect the battery by removing one of the wires.



It's a funny sort of "disconnection" that requires a CONDUCTIVE WIRE CARRYING CURRENT connecting the "disconnected" components, for the system to continue to work.

Let's see the explanation for that howler of a claim. How come, if the battery is DISCONNECTED, it still needs to be CONNECTED for the system to operate?


Of course, this is the Red Queen's world, where the Winter Equinox comes on July 21 (or was that the solstice?) and words mean whatever Ainslie wants them to mean, at the moment.

Quote from: TinselKoala on July 24, 2012, 03:44:45 PM
How come, if the battery is DISCONNECTED, it still needs to be CONNECTED for the system to operate?

Zipons?