Do we know Weir? It certainly seems like he knows exactly what the circuit will do, and when. I've explained all these points in my videos, but I hope he attained his knowledge independently.

"Let's not worry about _explanations_ yet ... let's make sure that we share the same _observations_".

That deserves being chiselled in stone, or tattooed on the foreheads of the NERDs, or something.

Quote from: TinselKoala on June 29, 2013, 06:32:36 PM
Yes, it switches. On my viewer the probe is already back to the correct side at the indicated time, as the image shows. No matter though.... please look at my last post. I don't think there is any current indicated, with the probe on the wrong side.

TK,

Look at FIG3 compared to FIG6.  One could argue that FIG6 shows a hint of current flow while FIG3 shows none.  I would think FIG6 to be consistent with the probe being on the wrong side of the CSR, with the CSR trace showing the Vdrop in the wiring between the CSR and common ground point. 

One would have to wait for clear captures to be certain, but even your annotated screen capture looks a bit more like FIG6 than FIG3 to me. 

PW

Quote from: picowatt on June 29, 2013, 06:50:31 PM
TK,

Look at FIG3 compared to FIG6.  One could argue that FIG6 shows a hint of current flow while FIG3 shows none.  I would think FIG6 to be consistent with the probe being on the wrong side of the CSR, with the CSR trace showing the Vdrop in the wiring between the CSR and common ground point. 

One would have to wait for clear captures to be certain, but even your annotated screen capture looks a bit more like FIG6 than FIG3 to me. 

PW

Fig 6 is ambiguous. It was taken about an hour before Figure 7 which does not show current flow, I believe.

In the Figure 6 shot the Gate signal is about 8.5 volts. In the Fig 7 shot it is not possible to read the Gate trace because the channel is set to 50 V/div!!
Note that, for once, the Figure 6 baseline is almost exactly on the center reference graticule marker and the settings box indicates a slight positive offset of 20 mV. The Fig 7 shot's current trace is offset by 2.2 volts or more.

I will bet that we are looking at a DC bias issue here on Fig 6 and not an indication of current flow.

Fig 6 is SCRN0351, and I've attached her original upload of this shot below. It might be a little clearer than the repro in the paper.

This shot is associated with her blog post 117:

http://newlightondarkenergy.blogspot.com/2011/05/117-this-test-took-water-to-boil-with.html

The Figure 3 shot first made its appearance in blog post 84:

http://newlightondarkenergy.blogspot.com/2011/03/84-10-days-to-go-and-yet-more-surprises.html

(You have to be careful with these LeCroy screens. They are the only scopes I have ever seen that have five minor divisions per major, horizontally, but only four minor divisions per major vertically. I'd like to shake the hand of the engineer responsible for that little "feature".)

So what happened?
Is there a discussion going on or not?

Is Weir doing what no man before has ever managed to do: penetrate Ainslie's ego defenses and make her see reason?

ETA: Sometime in the past week or so, in her discussions with .99, she mentioned moving the probes around the CVR. I thought she was talking about the ground reference lead, which is wrong on her boards and right on the schematic, but with her habit of garbling things, maybe she _has_ been deliberately moving the probe itself to the other side of the CVR, because she likes the waveforms better on that side!

She has been known to discard data that she didn't like, before.