Testing the TK Tar Baby

[Groundloop]

picowatt?

I take it then that you're not 'up for it'?  You realise that those two questions are the ONLY questions that actually pertain.  And they're the only two questions that have not yet been addressed.  All that emphases that you've all relied on related to my innate stupidity - all that?  They're irrelevant to the argument.  What's needed is some kind of reasonable explanation for the evidence of a negative wattage that is dependably and accurately measured over a circuit.  And then some discussion as to why.  TK.'s experiments were designed to 'infer' gross measurement errors.  And Groundloop has come up with the proposal that it may be a mere 'oscillation' that has no intrinsic benefit.  So.  Let's hear your 'summation'?

And TK - I always run a spell check.  You Americans - unfortunately - have yet to learn how to spell.  In fact, you've made 'misspelling' English into an art form - since you re-invented it - with your Declaration of Independence.  There's an excessive use of 'z's and an omission of 'our' in the suffix of certain nouns - to be represented as 'or'.  But on the plus side - you all make English sound SO delectable - who cares? 

Kindest regards to you both and comforting to see that TK is still 'abusing' all those forum guidelines.  But no doubt he's in need of all that propagandising. So it's to be expected.  It's becoming a bit repetitive though TK.  People will start 'skimming' your posts - like I do with your videos.

Again.
Rosie Pose

Rosemary,

>>>And Groundloop has come up with the proposal that it may be a mere 'oscillation' that has no intrinsic benefit.

Don't put words in my mouth!

I have explained to WHY your circuit oscillates when the FG is a negative pulse and offset.
I have never said anything about the usefulness or not of the oscillation.

GL.

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Rosemary,

>>>And Groundloop has come up with the proposal that it may be a mere 'oscillation' that has no intrinsic benefit.

Don't put words in my mouth!

I have explained to WHY your circuit oscillates when the FG is a negative pulse and offset.
I have never said anything about the usefulness or not of the oscillation.

GL.

Apologies Groundloop.  I assumed.  And one should never do so.  I am - as ever - a great admirer of your work.

Rosie



added
I've just seen your earlier post BTW.  I'll study it and get back to you.  But I think I see your point about it's being similar.  I just have to work out the implications of that oscillation.  Groundloop - you know my sketch?  I'll post it again - if I can find it. 

[TinselKoala]

Willfully ignorant.
I imply, you infer.
And my experiments are designed to duplicate yours and they have. What I imply and what you infer are different things, Rosie Poser.
I imply that your circuit, since it is just like mine, also is not overunity. What I state clearly and overtly is that my circuit performs just like yours in all significant respects, and I offer it to anyone qualified to test this claim side by side with yours. Any where any time. You infer from this that I am trying to "debunk" you. But my claim only _refers_ to your circuit... it doesn't try to debunk it. I'm leaving that to you. You are doing a really great job of it, too.
Spell check this, Rosie Poser.

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Willfully ignorant.
I imply, you infer.

No TK.  You can both infer from 'inference' and by 'inference'.  I imply that you've 'inferred' in the same way as you 'infer' what I've implied. And no need to spell check your posts.  They're American - which only approximates to English.  In the same way as your tests only 'approximate' to our own.

Rosie Pose

added

[picowatt]

picowatt?

I take it then that you're not 'up for it'?  You realise that those two questions are the ONLY questions that actually pertain.  And they're the only two questions that have not yet been addressed.  All that emphases that you've all relied on related to my innate stupidity - all that?  They're irrelevant to the argument.  What's needed is some kind of reasonable explanation for the evidence of a negative wattage that is dependably and accurately measured over a circuit.  And then some discussion as to why.  TK.'s experiments were designed to 'infer' gross measurement errors.  And Groundloop has come up with the proposal that it may be a mere 'oscillation' that has no intrinsic benefit.  So.  Let's hear your 'summation'?

And TK - I always run a spell check.  You Americans - unfortunately - have yet to learn how to spell.  In fact, you've made 'misspelling' English into an art form - since your re-invented it - with your Declaration of Independence.  There's an excessive use of 'z's and an omission of 'our' in the suffix of certain nouns - to be represented as 'or'.  But on the plus side - you all make English sound SO delectable - who cares? 

Kindest regards to you both and comforting to see that TK is still 'abusing' all those forum guidelines.  But no doubt he's in need of all that propagandising. So it's to be expected.  It's becoming a bit repetitive though TK.  People will start 'skimming' your posts - like I do with your videos.

Again.
Rosie Pose

Rosemary,

I am not sure what two questions you refer to, I believe asked three.

Back in the other thread I spent a great deal of time trying to teach you how to read values from the display on a 'scope.  I believe, regarding the horizontal measurement, that you stated even an 8 year old could understand it.  I have indeed taught 8 year olds how to use a 'scope.  I have taught pre-schooler's how to solder.  All of them were more receptive to learning than you.

It is not that I am not "up for it", it is merely that I do not believe you will attempt to understand it and will only want to argue rather than discuss and learn.  It would just be a waste of my time.  Life is too short.

If you want to have a discussion, it has to be based on a common ground of knowledge and language.  If you will not allow me to ask questions, and then be provided succinct answers by you so that I know your level of understanding, any further discussion can go no where.

You act as if the questions somehow insult your intelligence, but just a short time ago in another thread and from your paper, you apparently did not believe Q2 could ever turn on to any degree at all, and that an FG cannot pass current.  So the questions were merely to see if you had resolved and accepted these very basic issues.  If not, I was willing to discuss that further.  If you did understand, I was going to move on to the MOSFET's inherent current regulation action in this circuit and how it is biased into linear operation.  Just basic DC before proceding to AC.

I am glad however, that you are at least an expert at spelling.

PW