Testing the TK Tar Baby

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Hello MileHigh

Woo!  My brain is hurting!

That was a lot of mental energy and keystrokes expended to review the concepts of instantaneous and average power.

Delighted to see that you've been following the argument.  Sorry to see that your brain hurts.  There is NO argument.  TK had FINALLY got around to our 'water to boil' test and he CAN'T replicate our numbers.  OBVIOUSLY  Therefore he and picowatt are preparing the ground to deny it on any basis that they can manage.  Right NOW they're relying on that SPURIOUS measurement of 20 watts being enough to manage that extraordinary HEAT signature with the application of nothing more than a product of 0.04mA and the applied voltage from our battery supply source.  BUT.  They need to argue that it's a CONTINUALLY applied wattage at 20 watts or their argument falls on it's face.  AND INTO THAT TAR. Quite apart from which 20 watts - APPLIED CONTINUALLY FROM A VARIABLE DC SUPPLY SOURCE - gives us a heat signature of plus/minus 90 degrees centigrade above ambient.  And our resistor was measuring 200 degrees centigrade above ambient.  SO.  That little 20 watts as the 'alleged' or 'implied' or 'inferred' SOLUTION - has buckled to it's knees and baptised itself in a bucket of tar.  LOL

But the actual argument - if such it is - is based on TK's spurious assumption that instantaneous wattage is ever applicable on a 'switched circuit'.  The unit measurement of Watts is ONLY representative of any viable and dependable value when it is applied from a steady state supply source.  Plug distribution points and battery supplies do - under normal applications - supply this.  It is a unit measurement that is based on a fair assumption of the continual and average rate of current supplied. Therefore under those conditions one can CERTAINLY apply the product of the measured amps to the applied voltage to get a reliable WATT value.  The minute one deals with a switched circuit then that rather simplistic SOLUTION becomes UTTERLY inappropriate.  IF one were to apply 20 watts for a brief 12.5% of any switched cycle - and then STOP supplying it for the balance of 87.5% of each cycle - then one can confidently predict that the full force and effect of 20 watts will REDUCE that level of heat during that LONG interval where no further energy is applied.  Power or Energy measurements are based on an accurate and CONTINUAL measure of the applied wattage.  Time is therefore EXPLICITLY a required factor.   Therefore there is only one correct way to factor in any 'interrupted' power supply which is to incorporate the time.  And that time is fully defined in each duty cycle.  For reasons best understood by TK, picowatt, PhiChaser, FTC and evolvingape - it seem that it is LESS THAN CONVENIENT to acknowledge 2.5 watts as the ACTUAL number.  They need to spin that I am THAT STUPID and THAT UNSCHOOLED - that I do NOT realise that 20 watts is CORRECT.  Sadly.  They're wrong.  And sadly - they seem to think that it's enough that there are 5 of them claiming this - for it to be 'carried by majority opinion'.  LOL.  I've said this before.  Science cannot be determined by popular opinion.  If it were then we'd still be in the dark ages - assuming that the universe itself revolves around us poor mortals.

Rosie Pose

[TinselKoala]

@PW: Are you reading ahead? There's always one.....


I've had some things come up so I won't be able to get to it right away. But yes, I think I can duplicate the drive conditions in that scopeshot and record some time-temp data on TB's load. If I don't fall asleep. Maybe I should time-lapse video the time/temps. For more exciting viewing.... next we'll do grass growing, and paint drying.

And unfortunately I wasn't able to make a parts run or work on the Altoid edition today, but I'll get to it asap. I think it will make a great party favor. Maybe it should even include a little resistor that you can touch and feel that it is heating a load, along with the LEDs. A 1/8 Watt metal film resistor can get pretty warm, dissipating all that power in such a tiny volume....   
After all.... "ordinary" battery lifetime isn't really much of a concern as long as a stout negative mean power can be obtained... right?

Naturally, before I waste any time doing really comprehensive time-temperature load heating data collection, I have wanted to be sure that there was agreement that Tar Baby performed just like NERD as far as the negative mean power product and all other known parameters are concerned. Personally, I think I'm "close enough for government work" but I think I'll still try to add some more inductance here and there to get the oscillation frequency down into the 1.5 mHz range for the definitive load heating trials. I also want to put a thermocouple or two on the mosfets, so that means I'll have to dig through some boxes to find the equipment.
Operating the Q1 mosfet in this tricky region on a small heatsink without fan cooling.... I can see that it would be easy for the mosfet to start heating, carrying more current, heating up more, and pretty soon it's carrying a lot of current and getting quite warm....  If I can find the TCs maybe I'll set up an overtemp alarm using an Arduino.

So the slow boat finally arrived? Well.... good.

[TinselKoala]

@MH: She's decompensating. (technical term alert.)

I've been reading over her old forum threads and it's easy to see the deterioration in her thinking over the past three years.

There have been so many of her lies and errors and distortions and episodes of sheer ignorance exposed, like this latter one, that her ego integrity is severely threatened and all her defense mechanisms are in full deployment. I really hope that she's got people nearby who understand her and can take care of her properly.

It's cruel in a way to be torturing and taunting her the way I do, I suppose.  But it's just so easy, when she keeps sticking her nose out for another whacking. I'm looking at it lately as the same kind of thing that an owner of three dogs has to do daily, to keep the back yard safe for foot traffic. An odious chore, done with a certain chagrin and wrinkled nose perhaps, but absolutely necessary if one is to walk freely without making a misstep.

Reading those old posts one can almost see a childlike innocence and enthusiasm, something that's not evident any more. Now there's just this bitterness and desperation in her tone, and she clutches at whatever straws she can, but sadly, without her advisors to help her, she's slipping further and further away down the rabbit hole.

I mean, look. She's been standing up arguing with her own hallucinations for the past two days, completely missing the point and contradicting herself multiple times, and making really basic math errors while misrepresenting and misquoting everybody on this forum and WIKI too... and yet she still has the temerity to show up day after day, bringing even more irrelevant and ignorant argument INSTEAD OF TESTING.

[TinselKoala]

But what a masterful RED HERRING this has all been.

Isn't it wonderful how attention has been skillfully deflected away from YET ANOTHER refutation of an AINSLIE ridiculous claim? This has been buried under the Ainslie-piles yet again.

Ainslie asserted, in her overweeningly arrogant and disrespectful manner:

What you are trying to do is to get me to believe that a function generator is able to pass current from a battery supply source via its terminal to its probe. Since I KNOW that is is impossible I'm afraid I'm not receptive to you trying to teach me or anyone else.  So NO.  I spare me your 'lessons'.

And TK replied, refuting her exactly and soundly:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GuBWVmRmUtc


Polly Parrot is the QUEEN of disinformation. She's attempted to have this thread suppressed, she's obfuscated and prevaricated and distorted and bloviated and ranted, but what she has NEVER done is to honestly and openly try to DISPROVE her own interpretations of her data. Nor has she made the slightest effort to fill in the yawning chasms in her education by studying a little basic algebra and electronics. 

But she is really good at burying anything that conflicts with her delusions.

See what I mean?

[Rosemary Ainslie]

LOL MileHigh.  I MISSED this.  What a gem of a post.  It's brightened my dawn.  LOL

Those four-plus full pages of postings on this thread about instantaneous power vs. average power were an exercise in irrational and nonsensical idiocy on your part.  It was ridiculous in the extreme and your accusations that none of us knew what we were talking about with respect to power analysis were ridiculous.

Not actually.  The idiocy is on TK's part.  He's trying to apply and instantaneous power analysis to a switched circuit.  JUST CAN'T BE DONE.  And those pages - I actually think more than 4 - were NOT my contribution.  I only addressed their nonsense.

That whole episode was just a baffling Tar Baby entanglement for nothing.

I think that's a fair description of the Tar Baby tests.  They're certainly 'baffling'.  And 'entangled'.  And 'illogical'.

It's like it served as a temporary platform for you to bash us in the most illogical and irrational way.

That's the Tar Baby calling the 'kettle black'.  LOL.  I'm entirely satisfied that the invective and 'bashing' was entirely from TK and picowatt and evolvingape and FTC and PhiChaser.  Me?  I merely argued their SPURIOUS assumption and their SPURIOUS allegation that 20 watts was representative of the energy applied to our element resistor.

Somewhere inside you you had to know that this was all just a ridiculous exercise.

LOL.  It was indeed a ridiculous proposal.  Clearly 20 watts was NEVER applied on ANY continual basis at all. Therfore, correctly the wattage should have read 2.5 watts.

You have observed technical discussions and analyses from some of us for years, and you are well aware of our competencies.

I am INDEED.  Very well aware of them.  You are all of you seasoned anti overunity campaigners.  It is a sad truth that our poor science must fall victim in that campaign.  And the flaunted credentials in support of that claimed 'competence' is lacking in EVIDENCE.  TK must be the only student that has graduated with a degree in electrical engineering - with HONOURS - that STILL does not know that a MOSFET is not a mosfet - that a CSR is NOT a CVR - and who then further supposes that any part of any single voltage value from a switched cycle can represent the ACTUAL level of WATTAGE.  He is also the ONLY such honours graduate who applies Ohm's Law without factoring in impedance.  And notwithstanding the BURDEN of of all this professed professionalism - indulges in level of invective that would - outside of the freedoms that Harti is allowing him - make him criminally accountable.