another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.

[fuzzytomcat]

Howdy members and guests,

I personally want to thank everyone for the enormous response being totally unaware of the many
individuals interested in contributing information and documentation related to context of this
thread in regards to Rosemary Ainslie and/or her "COP" devices.

Please note that all items of utmost interest must have a original signed "NOTARIZED AFFIDAVIT"
on each submission for publication at Open Source Research and Development for legal reasons
or it can not be used.

I can be e-mailed at - ExecutiveProducer@OpenSourceResearchandDevelopment.org

Regards,
Fuzzy

[TinselKoala]

Rosemary, you are completely misinterpreting my video demonstrations.... as I knew you would.

But that's all right, because everyone reading here who DOES understand electronics... and capacitors.... knows what I've shown.

The oscillations you and I are seeing in our circuits --- identical, even down to the frequency of over 1 MHz --- is indeed a type of noise: it's FEEDBACK. And it's caused by the DC current path through the function generators: yours and mine. When this DC path is blocked by inserting a series capacitor the feedback stops. The capacitor is perfectly capable of passing the FG's square wave output along to the mosfets, so they switch normally... and cleanly.

I assure you that there is no hidden trickery going on... no more than in your own demonstration, which does include the same "hidden" DC current path that I illustrate in my videos. In my circuit and yours, the FG is providing considerable power to the circuit. Because I am using lower voltages in the battery pack, the FG's contribution is obvious. In your circuit with your higher voltage, it is not so obvious but it's definitely there, and you can prove it in the same way I have done: by capacitively coupling your FG to eliminate the DC component.

I suppose I'll have to make another video illustrating the capacitive coupling and its effect.

There are many other falsehoods and incorrect interpretations in your "analysis" of my videos. You show your abject ignorance in many ways, and in combination with your overweening arrogance and your continual self-contradictions it does become rather tedious.

And by the way.... the LEDs light up because the FG is providing them with power. With the DC blocking cap in place, the FG switches the mosfets just fine, but the LEDs don't light up

[Rosemary Ainslie]

My dear TK.  I feel positively intimidated when I see a post actually addressed to me that doesn't also relate to my poor math abilities. I hardly know how to respond.  However I see that your personal comments - your gratuitous insults -  are still all over the place.  Strangely it's enormously comforting.  I'd be very sorry if you thought highly of me and even sorrier if you acknowledged any merit in our technology.  I rather depend on your apparent neurotic need to deny us both as it's my personal measure of value.  I see it in the context of Hitler giving unequivocal support to Gandhi.  Or better still.  Gandhi giving unequivocal support to Hitler.  There's a certain lack of commonality - notwithstanding which of two occupies the moral high ground.  Which is NOT to imply that I'm Hitler - or even that you're Gandhi.  But you get the drift?  And TK.  You need to wise up.  Your 'attacks' are hopelessly disproportional and your propaganda is losing its edge.  That reliance on my stupidity and general moral irrectitudes may satisfy you and your 'four'? is it? ...'friends'.  I'm not sure that everyone is so readily convinced.  Anyway.  Far be it from me to teach you how to be effective.  I'm rather grateful that you're not..

The oscillations you and I are seeing in our circuits --- identical, even down to the frequency of over 1 MHz --- is indeed a type of noise:

Not actually TK.  It's a question of scale.  Noise is never 'robust'.  Nor are your oscillations. 

it's FEEDBACK. And it's caused by the DC current path through the function generators: yours and mine.

In which case you'll have to explain why it oscillates from a 555 switch with no function generator in sight.  And it works when that switch is powered by the same batteries as the supply.  And it works when its simulated.  And we even get that oscillation with the continual negative signal applied at Q2.  You see the problem?   Whichever way you cut it.  It just keeps on keeping on.

When this DC path is blocked by inserting a series capacitor the feedback stops. The capacitor is perfectly capable of passing the FG's square wave output along to the mosfets, so they switch normally... and cleanly.  I assure you that there is no hidden trickery going on... no more than in your own demonstration, which does include the same "hidden" DC current path that I illustrate in my videos.

Really?  Then how is it that you get any voltage at all across the batteries when the batteries are disconnected?  Not only that - but those disconnected DC batteries seem to measure a negative and positive voltage which is EXTRAORDINARY.  A miracle of some considerable magnitude.  But.  Since your scope probe and your signal terminal probe are at a co-incident position - a shared junction - then I'm inclined to suspect that you're showing us the voltage across the switch.  Which is really, really clever - considering what you're trying to imply.  As Poynty says.  You ROCK.

edited a pronoun.  LOL

[Rosemary Ainslie]

In my circuit and yours, the FG is providing considerable power to the circuit.

Not actually.  But in YOUR circuit - whatever it is - there's MORE voltage applied from the signal generator than is available from the supply.  Under such absurd test conditions I would expect the signal generator to become an active participant in all that applied potential difference.  Wouldn't you?  That's certainly the ONLY justification in using such a paltry pack of batteries.

Because I am using lower voltages in the battery pack, the FG's contribution is obvious. In your circuit with your higher voltage, it is not so obvious but it's definitely there, and you can prove it in the same way I have done: by capacitively coupling your FG to eliminate the DC component.

During our switching period - when the oscillation is in full swing - the applied voltage from the function generator is zero.  As you keep saying.  Do the math. It's a REALLY easy exercise to measure the amount of current discharged by the function generator.  Our own results point to MORE energy being RETURNED to the generator - than supplied.  AND. Until you replicate that measurement then you have NOT replicated our circuit.

I suppose I'll have to make another video illustrating the capacitive coupling and its effect.

By all means.  That would be nice.  But what you ACTUALLY need to do is replicate our actual results.  Anything short of this is simply YET ANOTHER exercise in misdirection.  It reminds me of those tests conducted at MIT to disprove cold fusion.  I believe it was led by a Dr Vest.  To their shame.  They forgot that the ONLY way to disprove a claim is to NEVER replicate the experiment.  And - of course.  That can never be done.  Unless of course Time simply stops.  That's where we have the edge TK.  Unfortunately it's a bitter pill - and you needs must swallow it.

[Rosemary Ainslie]

There are many other falsehoods and incorrect interpretations in your "analysis" of my videos.

There it is again.  You don't IMPLY that I'm lying.  You come out and say it.  LOL.  My dear TK.  Wake up.  I'm way too old to waste my life in trivialities.  And 'lies' or 'falsehoods' as you put it - are absolutely not going to add to the quality of my life.  If you want to 'allege' this - then do us all the courtesy of pointing out which falsehoods you're referring to. 

You show your abject ignorance in many ways,

Very likely TK.  But I have nowhere near your talents for displaying stupidity.  The most glaring evidence of this is in your reliance on everyone else's. 

and in combination with your overweening arrogance and your continual self-contradictions it does become rather tedious.

I'm not sure that you're under any obligation to tolerate it.  All you need to do is move away.  I for one would be sorry.  I'm beginning to enjoy this exercise in 'debunking'.  It's as valuable as Poynty's earlier arguments in fundamental physics. 

And by the way.... the LEDs light up because the FG is providing them with power. With the DC blocking cap in place, the FG switches the mosfets just fine, but the LEDs don't light up

Golly. Who would have thought.

Kindest regards TK,
Rosie Pose.