Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Do you see where I'm going with this Poynty?  Here are the options.  The signal at Q2 HAS to be positive else the positive flow from the battery cannot have a path.  So.  Why do you show this as a negative or -5V's.  Do you see now why I did NOT realise that you were referring to the voltage applied to the gate?  You need to explain this.  Are your schematics WRONGLY configured?

Regards,
R
I'm in a panic that you won't see this.  So.  For PERFECT CLARITY.  If the applied voltage at the Q2 is postive as it relates to the source voltage - then it's negative as it relates to the drain voltage.  Therefore.  Counter clockwise current flow is permitted.  Clockwise current flow is BLOCKED. IS THIS RIGHT?

[poynt99]

The voltage at the Gate wrt the Source (called VGS),

Do you know what that means? If so, please explain it, otherwise this discussion can not progress.

.99

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Do you know what that means? If so, please explain it, otherwise this discussion can not progress.

.99

NO POYNTY.  You're ducking the issue.  Here's what you wrote.

'The voltage at the Gate wrt the Source (called VGS), has about a +5V potential (minus some drop across the 2 Ohm resistor). The VGS is also modulated up and down by the oscillation.'

If the voltage WRT the SOURCE is +5V then is the voltage WRT the DRAIN -5V? 

And don't get sniffy with me. That 'this discussion is going nowhere' bit.  I'm asking some very appropriate questions and I very much doubt that you'll be able to answer them.  I hope to be proved wrong.
Again
R

[poynt99]

If the voltage WRT the SOURCE is +5V then is the voltage WRT the DRAIN -5V? 

No.

I admit I am losing patience with you and I prefer not to get into another arduous discussion that results in you still not understanding anything I am trying to convey.

.99

[MrMag]

Thanx for the info TK and thank-you Rose for the clarification of the comments.

I was held back for a year as it was considered that I was just too emotionally immature to cut it so I wrote my M levels 'university entrance to SA universities' when I was 15.  I then went to university - only because I was too young to get a job. BUT when I was old enough to make my OWN decisions I LEFT UNIVERSITY.  That was after 2 years when I FINALLY turned 18.  And 1 year before my finals.

That's pretty good Rose. To bad you didn't decide to stay until you were finished. That was pretty stupid to just quit with only one year left before your degree. I'm also not sure that you have fully grown out of the emotional immaturity bit.

Since NONE of these endeavors included science they are also ENTIRELY irrelevant.   And since all of them require some measure of a functioning intelligence I think you can largely discount Poynt's assessment of me being an outright moron.  But since I still post here then even I'm inclined to doubt this.

Yes, interesting but I agree irrelevant. I was wondering more about a technical background or training. I hope Poynt didn't call you an outright moron. It's hard too believe that he has. Because if he did, why would he be putting in all the time and energy to try to help you understand the circuit.

This is also a lot of baloney.  I was VERY CAPABLY TAUGHT by the writings of Gary Zukov, Murray Gell Mann - and a list too long and too boring to include here.  AND most specifically - I was also taught by Dyson in that IMPECCABLE STUDY OF CONCEPTUAL PHYSICS.  SO.  I was taught DIRECTLY by the masters or by brilliant writers ABOUT the master - not through the fractured muddles of those who teach the MASTERS.  And my lack of knowledge as it pertains to ELECTRONICS PERSISTS.  I only USE circuit components in a VERY LIMITED APPLICATION to prove my thesis.  I STILL do not know how a capacitor works.  AND I wont know until I've finally taken one apart and worked it out for myself.  I cannot be accused EVER to taking anyone's word for it on any issue at all - unless I've also UNDERSTOOD the issues.  That's the downside in being me.

If you have learned by the writings of these people by reading their books, wouldn't you consider it self taught? It is a little confusing that you won't know how a capacitor works until you take one apart, but you believe in the writings of Zukov, Mann and others. Isn't a capacitor a little easier to understand then some of their statements. I really think your reaching here. It's the same as saying that I have a good understanding of magic and wizardry since I've read all of the Harry Potter books.

ALSO NOT TRUE.  The paper was pubished on SCRIBD and withdrawn because FUZZY claimed it was his WORK.  And he's not capable of writing an articulate paragraph let alone that paper.  Nor can he dream up the parameters required for the tests he replicated and then CLAIMED was his own work.  lol.   Right now that paper is PUBLISHED on my blogspot and has enjoyed a VERY WIDE readership.

Just because you uploaded a couple of documents I wouldn't necessarily say that you published some papers. You make it sound as if they/it has been accepted which I don't think it has.

For 'many years' read 3 years - and during the most of 1 of those 3 years I was pretty effectively SILENCED. 

I really don't think you were SILENCED because of your alleged discovery. I would guess that it was probably because of your unprofessional attitude and slanderous remarks to and about people.

    More of those euphemisms TK.

What part of his comment is a euphemism and why do you say that it is.

It's true.  I make a very good marmalade.  I LOVE cooking.

No offense, but maybe this is your true calling.