Rosemary Ainslie Circuit Demonstration, June 1 2013

[picowatt]

I find it kind of funny in a way with how the "drama" is still so intense.

MH,

Yeah, me too... yawn...

PW

[The Boss]

Stefan,

Contact your attorneys !

[TinselKoala]

So she claims that she will..... at some point..... be demonstrating the _same schematic_ as was in her first daft manuscript then. How will this be different in any way to what has gone before? Look at the pictures. If anything, there is even more lead inductance at the battery bank, and the "noninductive" advantage of the expensive special resistors is negated almost totally by their ignorant installation.

We can see, however, that she most definitely has a larger heatsink on Q1. Why? She has always claimed, repeatedly and insultingly, that this mosfet stays cold. (I know why: it does not stay cold, because it dissipates I²R watts as heat, and its minimum R_dss is 2.0 Ohms.)

We can see that she has only three batteries connected (to something). Why? Why not use all six to demonstrate the High Heat mode as she has claimed? (I know why: it is because this Q1 mosfet will overheat and fail if she tries long duty cycles at full battery voltage.... and she knows this too.)

We can clearly see an extra pair of black and red wires snaking off behind the oscilloscope to something concealed under the cloth. It looks to me like these wires are even connected to the board, not the batteries. This is clearly a powersupply or battery charger connection. Why? Ainslie has repeatedly made the claim that her batteries do not discharge, so why is a charger or external power supply needed? (I know why: it is because her batteries DO discharge, and discharge normally, and the only way to get them back to the required voltage is to use an external charger on them.)

And we can clearly see the scopeshot in the first daft manuscript, given as Figure 3, that she claims to be able to reproduce at will , with all functioning mosfets wired as shown in the schematic. Ever since the posting of the manuscripts she has been challenged over this scopeshot; she has again very insultingly and over and over claimed that she can reproduce it, and show that all is functioning and wired correctly. But she has never done it, and I submit to you that that is the REAL reason why she did not perform any demo on June 1 and why she will NEVER perform any real test of her device in public. She cannot reproduce this scopeshot with operating transistors, but the claims in the papers completely depend on her interpretation of this scopeshot... and this means the manuscripts are lies, and they MUST BE RETRACTED.

[TinselKoala]

Also, notice the strength of MY claim. I am not making some wishy washy challenge here: I am stating bluntly that Ainslie cannot reproduce the scopeshot shown above with functioning mosfets in the circuit as claimed.

All she or anyone else has to do to refute me, shoot me out of the water, get their revenge against me, make me look like an idiot... is to do it. Reproduce that scopeshot.  She has the apparatus and the batteries (previous excuses involved not having these items assembled or at her location). She has photo and video recording gear. She has her own private forum where nobody can question her. So where is her proof, where is her humiliation of me? It would take just about any reader of this forum five minutes to do it and show it on a video, if it were possible.

SHE CANNOT DO IT.

And her favorite sycophant Gmeast is silent on this issue. Why doesn't HE use his wonderful talents, so respected by Ainslie, to put this simple circuit together with functioning components and demonstrate that HE can reproduce that scopeshot? I know why: because HE CANNOT. The mosfet is blown!

Chessnyt, with his famous lab and skills? He cannot do it.

Who else is there? I can't think of anyone else with building skills that is currently supporting Ainslie. Anyone with the equipment can see for themselves what that scopeshot _should_ look like with all transistors operating: the difference in the current trace is not subtle. It will resemble this one below, only with even more pronounced current amplitude, since the shot below is only using 4 batteries, not six:

[TinselKoala]

I find it kind of funny in a way with how the "drama" is still so intense.

Ainslie claimed that she would do a demonstration on June 1. She has been claiming ever since the demo of March 2011 that she would repeat testing and show some specific things when she did. Finally she puts a date on it and publicizes it on PESN and other places on the internet, and also writes letters to all sorts of people inviting and "requiring" that they attend. In this material that Ainslie puts out, she lists references to her "papers" which she claims are published in a peer-reviewed journal.

Right so far? She claims to be engaging in a scientific process and uses, or tries to use, jargon from the sciences in her rhetoric, and pretends to have written some scientific papers.

However: her "papers" are complete BS, because they depend strongly on the result shown in Paper 1, Figure 3 and reproduced in the second paper as Figure 2. This "result" is spurious, caused by a malfunctioning, miswired or totally missing mosfet, or has been produced by a different circuit than that claimed in the paper. Therefore, the claims made about this condition are wrong, the interpretations and implications cited in the papers are wrong, and the entire house of cards that Ainslie has attempted to foist off on the community--- including the attempts to gain monetary prizes--- is bogus. Even this would not be so bad, but for the amazingly arrogant, mendacious, insulting and willfully ignorant way that she has proceeded. I first locked horns with her over her false claim to have a "patent" for the Quantum single-mosfet circuit! (Still available to view in the archives of the Naked Scientists forum.)

So yes, it's intense, and for so long as she continues to insult, libel and make the false claims.... for her claims about Figure 3 are easily demonstrated to be false... it will remain intense, for some of us who have been mightily offended by that Rosemary Ainslie person.