Joule Thief 101

[MileHigh]

As you wish:

A circuit which is able to boost ultra low voltage to a
level sufficient to switch a MOSFET which permits
efficient boosting of millivolt level source voltage
to several volts as desired.

The initiating oscillator for priming boost is a
JFET switch.

Thanks, and I made a mistake an assumed that a JFET required some Gate-Source voltage to be ON, when that is not the case.  So I retract my statement to Brad in post #1450 about it "not making any sense at all" because clearly I was wrong.

MileHigh

[tinman]

Yeah well I would have to say that that doesn't make any sense at all.  But don't let that stop you since this whole thread is filled with nonsensical statements by you and just about nobody says anything about it.

Again MH?

You are saying !once again! that my statement is nonsensical--and once again you are wrong.
You need to stop MH,and do some research of your own before accusing me of making nonsensical statement's-->which are not.

Brad

[MileHigh]

Again MH?

You are saying !once again! that my statement is nonsensical--and once again you are wrong.
You need to stop MH,and do some research of your own before accusing me of making nonsensical statement's-->which are not.

Brad

I was wrong about this one, but it still doesn't belie the fact that you have made tons of statements that are nonsensical.   Meanwhile PW discussed how in many cases the frequency setting on your function generator is not relevant when looking at how a circuit responds, it's the frequency content in the waveform that counts.  You didn't acknowledge that and I wonder if you might be ignoring that because you "can't see it on your bench."  I have to have discussed this same issue with you in the past but obviously it didn't stick.  If you were wise and you are indeed ignoring what PW said, then you should go back and try to understand what he is saying because it is extremely important.

[minnie]

   MileHigh,
          the Wiki thingy on Fourier is very good, I can remember that the Junkie
chose to ignore it too!
               John.

[tinman]

I was wrong about this one, but it still doesn't belie the fact that you have made tons of statements that are nonsensical.   Meanwhile PW discussed how in many cases the frequency setting on your function generator is not relevant when looking at how a circuit responds, it's the frequency content in the waveform that counts.  You didn't acknowledge that and I wonder if you might be ignoring that because you "can't see it on your bench."  I have to have discussed this same issue with you in the past but obviously it didn't stick.  If you were wise and you are indeed ignoring what PW said, then you should go back and try to understand what he is saying because it is extremely important.

Lets get something straight MH.
So far,you have been the one that has been incorrect,and i have been the one that has proven that you have been incorrect--resonant systems in and around ICE's,whether good or bad,they are there.

As far as frequency content (noise) go's,it has nothing to do with the frequency the circuit is running at,and to introduce such,is only adding to confusion that need not be there.
When we are talking about frequency,it is the frequency that the device is running at,or the signal it receives from the FG. If we rectify the output,then the frequency of the output will match that of the running or provided frequency--not the noise that exist within that frequency.

If my scope read's the same frequency as what is supplied by the FG,then that is the operating frequency of the device,and when we use these force switching method's in stead of running at a resonant frequency,then once again,noise that ride's on the back of this frequency has little to nothing to do with the way the circuit operates.

I chose to ignor it,because it has little to no impact to what we are doing here,and if you claim it dose-along with PW,then please feel free to show it.


Brad