Testing the TK Tar Baby

[TinselKoala]

Here are a couple more images for your reading pleasure. These are screenshots I made from the sources mentioned just now.

The first is from Ainslie's honeytrap forum version, posted there some weeks ago.

The second is from the same daft manuscript, but from the "official publication" on Rossi's Journal of Nuclear Physics, which she was so proudly crowing about, posted on July 27 as a "publication".

Notice any significant differences?

What if you wanted to buy the Function Generator listed in the Official Publication?
Does the difference in the schematics make a difference in interpreting scope shots? Circuit performance in high-heat mode? Mosfet longevity? Size of inductances (mHy vs. uHy)?

WHICH SCHEMATIC WAS ACTUALLY USED for the experimental trials described in the papers? One or the other? Both? NEITHER???
Neither of these correspond to the Video Demo apparatus: that apparatus was close to the first schematic but the FG black lead (wrongly and misleadingly marked "minus" in these diagrams) is misplaced.

[TinselKoala]

Here is what I believe:

Ainslie used the setup exactly as shown in the Video Demonstration. That is, the FG black lead is hooked to the battery side of the "shunt" current viewing resistor, instead of the transistor side as shown in the two different "paper" diagrams. The actual hookup used, to generate her data and conclusions, is the Video Demo hookup. And this same erroneous hookup is present in her single mosfet version as well.

As we all know, the Video Demo hookup allows a current path in the system to bypass the current viewing resistor totally. Thus, the data gathered in this manner, purporting to use the current in the CVR as part of an input power measurement.... are wrong and invalid.

This error in the actual circuit, versus the published schematics, of course invalidates both papers entirely.

All available evidence: the photographs from the demo video, combined with what we know about Ainslie's conceptions and competencies, tell us that she would have naturally hooked the FG's "minus" or "ground" connector to the other circuit common grounds, exactly as shown in the demonstration apparatus in the video.

There is no evidence whatsoever, other than her statements in these two conflicting schematics above, that the FG black lead was correctly placed to allow the CVR to include its current in the measurements.

[picowatt]

Regarding the internal resistance of a battery, all batteries have an internal DC resistance.  In fact, anything that conducts electricity, short of a superconductor, has resistance.

An example was given wherein a 12 volt battery's measured voltage dropped to 11.8 volts when a 10 ohm load was applied to the battery.

To determine the internal resistance of a battery I use the following (which is just simple math and Ohm's law):

Vopen - Vloaded = Vdrop

Vloaded / Rload = Iload

Vdrop / Iload = Rbatt

Plugging in the numbers from the given example:

12 volts-11.8 volts = .2 volts

11.8 volts/10 ohms = 1.18 amps

.2 volts/1.18 amps = .1695 ohms

So, under DC conditions, the internal resistance of the battery in this example is 169.5 milliohms. 

Multiplying Vdrop by Iload will also provide the power being dissipated inside the battery as heat under these conditions.  From the above, .2 volts X 1.18 amps = .236 watts.  So, in the example given, 236 milliwatts is being lost as heat inside the battery (while 11.8 X 1.18, or 13.9 watts is being dissipated as heat at the 10 ohm resistor).

Again, all batteries have an internal DC resistance...


ADDED:  "Hybrid" and "all electric" auto manufacturers wish batteries did not have an internal resistance.  It would eliminate the need for all their required active and passive battery cooling methods, which adds bulk, weight, and cost to their battery packs.


 

[picowatt]

I would suggest the following as part of her measurement protocols:

1.  Arrange the batteries so that the interconnect wires between the batteries in the series string can be made as short as possible.  If five batteries are used, it should be possible to get the four interconnect wires down to 6cm or so each.

2.  Position the batteries immediately next to the circuit being tested so that the positive most and negative most battery terminal wire lengths to the circuit board can be made as short as possible (30cm or so).  Elevate the circuit board to the same level as the battery terminals to further shorten the required battery lead lengths.

3.  Consider using larger gauge wire or multiple parallel connected wires for both the battery interconnects and the battery wire leads to the circuit board.  Larger gauge or multiple parallel runs will reduce the wire inductance.  Using two wires in parallel for each connection will cut the inductance of a single wire in half.

4.  Use a non-inductive resistor for the CSR.  Metal oxide, carbon, carbon film, and metal film resistors typically have an inherently low inductance.  Stay away from wire wound resistors for the CSR unless they are specifically made to be non-inductive and it is clearly stated that they are non-inductive. 
   

   

[TinselKoala]

If you really want to cut battery jumper inductances you should use flat copper ribbon or busbar. But of course we know that won't happen.

She will NOT do anything that could falsify her claim! Reducing the oscillations on the battery trace has already been ruled out by her as being "nonsensical".... for the very reason that her claim depends on them.


But a much more serious issue, I think, is that the papers are invalidated by the mistake in the FG black lead hookup, which was clearly different than the papers claim.

Do we seriously think she took a photo of the one-mosfet device with the black lead hooked to common ground, then assembled and tested and recorded data on the five-mosfet system with the black lead hooked up correctly, then unhooked it and moved it back to the common ground for the Video Demo?

I sure don't. She mismeasured the current the entire time, and made the false claims in the papers as to where the black FG lead was actually hooked to the circuit.