Language: 
To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
  the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.

GDPR and DSGVO law

Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding.
Amazon Warehouse Deals ! Now even more Deep Discounts ! Check out these great prices on slightly used or just opened once only items.I always buy my gadgets via these great Warehouse deals ! Highly recommended ! Many thanks for supporting OverUnity.com this way.

User Menu

Tesla Paper

Free Energy Book

Get paid

Donations

Please Donate for the Forum.
Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.(Admin)

A-Ads

Powerbox

Smartbox

3D Solar

3D Solar Panels

DC2DC converter

Micro JouleThief

FireMatch

FireMatch

CCKnife

CCKnife

CCTool

CCTool

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Products

WaterMotor kit

Statistics

  • *Total Members: 84218
  • *Latest: RhineX

  • *Total Posts: 897385
  • *Total Topics: 15815
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 3
  • *Guests: 29
  • *Total: 32

Author Topic: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.  (Read 775117 times)

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #270 on: January 23, 2012, 02:23:45 AM »
Yes, exactly. So a non-saturable core material is preferred, as each "slosh" as the energy goes between inductance and capacitance is an opportunity for energy to enter the system from outside and reinforce the resonance. Careful selection of your resonant frequency is also important here.... if you push the "swing" at too fast or too slow a rate you won't get optimal coupling of your input power to your resonant storage, so if you're looking to pick up energy from outside the system you need to have some idea of how to match its frequency. (My little contribution to the general theoretical BS around Tesla and MEGs and so on.)
Air (vacuum) works pretty good for a core material at the energies we are using. I hope you've had a chance to look at my TinselKoil videos on YT. I am using a similar switched-mosfet circuit as Rosemary does (except that I use a full bridge -- 4 mosfets -- instead of essentially 2), but because I know a bit about what I'm doing, I've gotten much better results.
Golly TK.  This is not actually addressed to me but I wonder if I could impose on you to explain what you mean by 'slosh'?  And what exactly do you mean by non-saturable core mateial?  And how does this toing and froing of energy between capacitance and inductance allow for energy to enter into the system from outside>  Outside where?  The vacuum of space, the vacuum around that non-saturable (whatever that means) core material.  Around the atoms in that material?  From our atmosphere?  What?  And what exactly is that energy?  From outside?  What does it do?  Are you proposing that all we need to do is set up any kind of really pacey resonance - and we'll be able to tap into INFINITE ENERGY SOURCES?  Somehow?  Rather magically I might add.  As Schubert has mentioned.  This is REALLY exciting.

@Rosemary, you seem to have trouble accepting that circuits like these can have current peaks in the multi-kiloAmpere range. Let me assure you this is not only very possible but common. POWER, as you have finally figured out, is the rate of energy dissipation. As a rate, it incorporates a time dimension. If the time duration of a high-current spike is small, there will be little POWER in it, hence little heating of conductors, and so on.
I'm more comfortable here.  It seems that I'm actually being addressed.  Thank you for that.  I was rather concerned that you were ignoring me.  But with reference to your statements.  I have absolutely NO DIFFICULTY in picturing waveforms that have their peaks in the multi-kilo - ampere range - as you put it.  What the hell. Make it even higher.  The multi - giga ampere range.  I'm really, really imaginative.  What I have difficulty believing is that one can ever actually measure at that pace.  No doubt doable.  But NOT within the ambit of those rather excellent scopes we use.  Also I'm rather concerned that you propose that the slower the pace - or as you rather ponderously refer to it - the 'time dimension' - then the less power in it. What do you mean by 'slower'?  That the spike is for a shorter duration?  Or that it occurs less frequently?  We have measured spikes on other tests that are there for very, very small 'moments' - of very short duration - and they COOK our resistor.  Indeed we've referenced one such in our 4th and final test of our paper.  You see my problem TK.  It's with the terms that you all bandy around - without any kind of qualification.  And then you presume that any of us reading here are able to understand it.  We'd first need to read you mind.  God forbid. 

@.99-- yes, I can see that now-- the mosfet behaviour will be sensitive to the relationship between the battery voltage and the FG's output voltage level, and the mosfets will interact through the circuit's capacitances. It would be interesting to apply the FG's signal through an appropriately chosen series capacitor, to assure only AC coupling.
It is the very first time that I've read that the MOSFET interacts with the circuit capacitance.  I thought the MOSFET was simply a solid state switching device that was triggered at the gate by an applied signal.  Who would have thought?  The explanations in the standard model are clearly very misleading.

It's clear from the blather above that Rosemary really still doesn't understand her circuit, nor the basics of power measurement, and most especially artifacts induced by measurement probes and other wiring. Still--- isn't it relatively easy to build this circuit, or sim it, and show how it actually behaves?
You really need to explain where my blather is INCORRECT.  I've mentioned this before.  It can only improve the general tone of this thread if we all tried to refer to the arguments and NOT to allegations about anything at all.  Otherwise one is left with the distinct impression that you've made a valid point.  Again.  God forbid.

And indulge me here.  I need to go back to this point again.
Air (vacuum) works pretty good for a core material at the energies we are using. I hope you've had a chance to look at my TinselKoil videos on YT. I am using a similar switched-mosfet circuit as Rosemary does (except that I use a full bridge -- 4 mosfets -- instead of essentially 2), but because I know a bit about what I'm doing, I've gotten much better results.
May I ask you to not use this thread to advertise yourself?  Or your work?  I only say this because I'm a little concerned that you're trying to steer this discussion away from the point.  We absolutely are not, to the best of my knowledge, discussing anything other than our claim related to our circuit.  Golly.  If I didn't know better I'd be inclined to think that you are anxious to take this argument onto some kind of irrelevant discussion on how to access strange energies - that have absolutely nothing to do with the standard model or our claim.  That way you will, MOST CERTAINLY, be able to corrupt this thread.  Which again - I am sure is NOT your intention.

Kindest regards
Rosie

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline poynt99

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 3582
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #271 on: January 23, 2012, 02:32:45 AM »
Still--- isn't it relatively easy to build this circuit, or sim it, and show how it actually behaves?
I've simulated this circuit to the nth degree, and I understand fairly well how it functions. I've also produced very similar results to Rosemary's own with my simulation, and she agrees that I have (I think this is the only thing we DO agree on).

FYI, Rosemary's circuit is not a switching circuit that builds up amplitude via resonance. It is a linear single-MOSFET amplifier that with the right amount of bias, bursts into oscillation (ever see a MOSFET audio amp oscillate?).

Regards,
.99

Offline SchubertReijiMaigo

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 343
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #272 on: January 23, 2012, 11:13:22 AM »
Quote
FYI, Rosemary's circuit is not a switching circuit that builds up amplitude via resonance. It is a linear single-MOSFET amplifier that with the right amount of bias, bursts into oscillation (ever see a MOSFET audio amp oscillate?).Regards,.99

 1: If her circuit have no amplification of the oscillation it will be difficult to have OU...

@ Rosemary:

Hector Perez speak that the energy come from 1) Ambient thermal, 2) Gravity distortion(Anti-gravity) 3) Time distortion...
Work done and energy is two different things: if you can recycle energy you can done with the same Joule, work over over and over...

1) Energy is never destroyed or created but always recycled...
2) Work is not conserved, but energy always...
3) Work and energy are different...
4) Perpetual energy is not possible (energy conserved) but perpetual WORK is possible...
5) This is also my view of things, I'am also skeptic about to create energy out of nothing...

It's only a theory but an attractive theory that can allow OU while fully comply Conservation of Energy...

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #272 on: January 23, 2012, 11:13:22 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #273 on: January 23, 2012, 11:59:16 AM »
Schubert - I agree with every single one of these postulates at some level.  Here's our arguments
.  Thermal is this magnetic dipole OUT of a field condition.  It is then chaotic.
.  Gravity is the interaction of a toroidal three dimensional field of dipoles with the orderly binding fields in coalesced matter
.  The particle in the field is invisible as it exceeds light speed.
.  Therefore it does not manifest in our time frame - except when the field loses it structure to become chaotic
.  Which is when it also manifests its thermal properties and is measured as heat.
.  Out of the field - in a chaotic condition -  it also manifests as visible flame - sparks - fire  which is when the dipole is slow
.  When those dipoles are in their 'hot' state they are not binding atoms
.  When they bind atoms they then decay back into an orderly field formation - to bind those atoms.
.  Effectively the 'flame disappears
.  In transferring their energy from chaotic to orderly - or from orderly to chaotic they are able to influence matter
.  Which means that - given the right conditions they can move from orderly back to chaotic back to orderly - into perpetuity

Which I think covers every point you've made here.  It is interesting Schubert.  I am well aware of the fact that we've discovered nothing new.  The only benefit that there is in our own proposals is that if you propose that magnetic dipole in a magnetic field - then it resolves all those outstanding questions in science.  And there are many.  We've been looking at the electric field for too too long, without actually determining its properties.

I'm attaching a link to my personal quarrel with the standard model in it's methods of resolving those outstanding questions.  You may want to dip in there.

http://newlightondarkenergy.blogspot.com/2010/11/more-on-inconvenient-truths.html

KIndest regards,
Rosemary

Hector Perez speak that the energy come from 1) Ambient thermal, 2) Gravity distortion(Anti-gravity) 3) Time distortion...
Work done and energy is two different things: if you can recycle energy you can done with the same Joule, work over over and over...

1) Energy is never destroyed or created but always recycled...
2) Work is not conserved, but energy always...
3) Work and energy are different...
4) Perpetual energy is not possible (energy conserved) but perpetual WORK is possible...
5) This is also my view of things, I'am also skeptic about to create energy out of nothing...

It's only a theory but an attractive theory that can allow OU while fully comply Conservation of Energy...

edited. I added a point.  Sorry. You may want to refresh the page.  I can't remember where.
 

Offline poynt99

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 3582
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #274 on: January 23, 2012, 02:38:15 PM »
1: If her circuit have no amplification of the oscillation it will be difficult to have OU...
The circuit bursts into oscillation due to the bias and a healthy serving of stray inductance in the Gate and Source leads. The oscillation becomes amplified where she is taking her so-called "battery" measurement, because the probe is actually on the load, and NOT the battery terminal. There is a substantial length of wire connecting the two, and hence a significant amount of inherent inductance. The voltage at the load can be on the order of 200Vpp or so.

This is ONE of the fundamental flaws in the measurements that her team has taken, and misinterpreted as "the battery voltage". Clearly it is not, and I've pointed this out several times. Read my analysis Schubert, and you will see exactly what I am referring to.

.99

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #274 on: January 23, 2012, 02:38:15 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #275 on: January 23, 2012, 04:39:25 PM »
Poynty,

The oscillation most certainly does not depend on length of lead.  We've easily generated that oscillation using entirely different circuits with the signal from 555 switches.  And where  the loads are nothing but LED's and/or virtually any kind of load up to and including a solder iron.  In both these examples it results in a negative wattage.  And in none of those tests - and certainly in neither of these two load test examples that I've mentioned here - were the loads connected to our own batteries. AND in at least one test we've used an alkaline type battery.  Can't remember what type but it's those typical torch battery numbers. At a guess I would say that the length of wiring - including the wires in the switching circuit - was under 16 inches - or thereby - including the connections to those batteries.

Therefore, with respect, this is simply not correct.
 
The circuit bursts into oscillation due to the bias and a healthy serving of stray inductance in the Gate and Source leads.
While parasitic oscillations are most certainly the result of transistors in parallel - there is no paralleling in that 555 switching configuration.  Just the use of 2 transistors.  And that oscillation has very little in common with parasitic oscillations as it PERSISTS for the duration that a negative signal is applied to the gate of Q1. 

The oscillation becomes amplified where she is taking her so-called "battery" measurement, because the probe is actually on the load, and NOT the battery terminal.
THIS MUCH IS CORRECT.  We have LITERALLY applied the probe DIRECTLY to the terminal of our own batteries - applied a single 12 volt battery to the test apparatus - and YET WE SEE THAT WILD VOLTAGE SWING ACROSS THOSE BATTERIES - when it gets into oscillation.  I've already argued this.  Not only that but I believe I've informed you fully on those results.  They were those early claims of yours where you again insisted that everything was due to the lengths of wire that we use.  But back to the point.  The probe is only able to read voltage potential of the collapsing magnetic fields from the circuit material.  It most certainly is NOT reading the battery voltage.  And why would that be?  Could it be that the battery is 'disconnected'?  At both gates - Q1 and Q2?  If NOT, and as I've argued - we MUST therefore conclude that the battery is DISCHARGING at a rate of delivery that defies the evidence. 

There is a substantial length of wire connecting the two, and hence a significant amount of inherent inductance. The voltage at the load can be on the order of 200Vpp or so.
There it is again.  Do you mean by Vpp - Voltage peak to peak OR voltage point to point or virtual power plant - OR WHAT?  It would help if you would define your terms.

This is ONE of the fundamental flaws in the measurements that her team has taken, and misinterpreted as "the battery voltage". Clearly it is not, and I've pointed this out several times. Read my analysis Schubert, and you will see exactly what I am referring to.
Not at all.  I've explained this.  And may I please ask you to read OUR claim on OUR experimental evidence?  As opposed to your own?  Our results are significantly at variance.  The only similarity is that you also compute a negative wattage.

Regards,
Rosemary

Edited.
Sorry I've been struggling to get rid of that nested quote.  Golly.
And have now also changed 'so' to 'NOT'.  That was a serious oversight.  lol
Had to change 3 transistors to 2 transistors.  Sorry.  I've just seen it.
« Last Edit: January 24, 2012, 01:42:35 AM by Rosemary Ainslie »

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #276 on: January 23, 2012, 05:07:30 PM »
Anyway Poynty, here's the thing.

The nub of this argument pivots on the some kind of explanation for the positive voltage that is measured during each half of that oscillation.  The standard assumption is that this is being delivered by the battery supply - your first argument based on the fact that there's a commonality at the positive terminals.  IF this argument were valid then it would mean that variously

.   The battery was able to find a path through the gate of Q2 where you argued that there would be a positive signal. 
.   BUT - if the battery is discharging then it is discharging in the region of upwards of 72 000 amps per battery - per oscillation.  Clearly this is not correct.
.   Also.  It would then be able to deliver either through Q1 or Q2 AS REQUIRED.
.   Which would result in a continuous discharge at a greater than zero voltage.  Which is not evident.  It crosses zero every time.
.   The ground of the signal generator is not applying a positive signal to the gate of Q2.  It's applied a positive signal to the source rail.
.   Under all circumstances and in terms of the standard model - this would BLOCK CEMF.


IF every half of each oscillation was delivered by the battery then notwithstanding - the wattage measured to have been delivered is still LESS than the wattage that is measured to have been returned to the battery supply.  I'm only arguing this to remind you that the evidence suggests that THERE IS SIGNIFICANT ENERGY CAN BE MEASURED ON THE CIRCUIT WHILE THE BATTERY IS APPARENTLY AND ENTIRELY DISCONNECTED.

Regards.
Rosemary
edited.
Modified those bullet points and the emphases

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #276 on: January 23, 2012, 05:07:30 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline poynt99

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 3582
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #277 on: January 24, 2012, 01:51:41 AM »
.   The ground of the signal generator is not applying a positive signal to the gate of Q2.  It's applied a positive signal to the source rail.

You've misunderstood the full meaning of what I said.

The first inversion is caused by connecting the FG- to the Q2-Gate, and the FG+ to the Q2-Source. It would normally be connected in reverse of this.

The second inversion is caused by introducing negative offset to the FG (as shown in the video), such that the FG output, if measured with a + probe on the + terminal and - probe on the - terminal, would measure a negative voltage when the FG output is in a LOW state, and a 0V or slightly positive voltage when the FG output is in a HI state.

The resulting Q2 VGS voltage is such that Q2 will turn partially ON (the bias) and completely OFF.

As Q1 G-S is connected in reverse of Q2, Q1 is always OFF with this setting.

.99

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #278 on: January 24, 2012, 02:23:16 AM »
You've misunderstood the full meaning of what I said.

The first inversion is caused by connecting the FG- to the Q2-Gate, and the FG+ to the Q2-Source.
I'm not sure what you mean by the first inversion?  What inversion?  Are you talking about an inverted waveform across the battery?  Or across the load?  Nor do we connect the FG- (presumably function generators ground) to the Q2's Gate.  We connect the signal generator's ground to the source rail.  It's difficult to argue this unless we use the same words to mean the same things.   

It would normally be connected in reverse of this.
How?  I simply don't understand what you're trying to say.  Normally one connects the probe EXACTLY as we show it.  We NEVER change that position.  The only thing that changes is the applied signal to that probe.  Which can be positive or negative.  When it's negative then it opens the circuit and prevents a discharge from the battery.  When it's closed or positive then it allows a discharge from the battery.  And the readings - positive or negative - are relative to the battery supply. BUT ALWAYS IT STAYS WERE WE PUT IT.  AT THE GATE OF Q1.

The second inversion is caused by introducing negative offset to the FG (as shown in the video), such that the FG output, if measured with a + probe on the + terminal and - probe on the - terminal, would measure a negative voltage when the FG output is in a LOW state, and a 0V or slightly positive voltage when the FG output is in a HI state.
Again, with respect.  I'm not following you.  What inversion?  And which terminals?  Are you referring to the battery terminals? 

The resulting Q2 VGS voltage is such that Q2 will turn partially ON (the bias) and completely OFF.

As Q1 VGS is connected in reverse of Q2, Q1 is always OFF with this setting.
Nope.  I just don't understand you.  I'm struggling here.  Let me know what you mean by inversion and I'll give this another shot. 

Regards,
Rosemary

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #278 on: January 24, 2012, 02:23:16 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline poynt99

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 3582
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #279 on: January 24, 2012, 02:28:16 AM »
As an example; If one was to take the FG leads that are connected to the G and S of a MOSFET (normally + to the Gate, and - to the Source), and swap them around, THAT would be an inversion.

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #280 on: January 24, 2012, 02:31:51 AM »
As an example; If one was to take the FG leads that are connected to the G and S of a MOSFET (normally + to the Gate, and - to the Source), and swap them around, THAT would be an inversion.

OK.  Then the answer is simple.  We DO NOT connect the G (gate) and S (source) of the MOSFET like this.  Ever.  But I think I'm getting into your argument.  I'll give it another shot.

BRB (be right back) 8)
R

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #280 on: January 24, 2012, 02:31:51 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #281 on: January 24, 2012, 03:11:13 AM »
OK.  We now understand that 'inversion' is defined as follows 'the physical transposition of the signal generator's probe from the gate of Q1 TO the gate of Q2.  In which case - in order to function - then the ground of the signal generator would still be applied to the Source.   And the assumption is then made that the Q2 is the 'functioning' transistor.  In which event Q2 has simply REPLACED Q1.  This would result in a voltage that is steady - greater than zero.  Until - again that switch was opened by the application of a negative signal applied to that gate.  There would be no evident inversion of the waveform.  It would remain greater than zero.  There would simply be an alternate path opened.

So.  When you state, as you do here ...
The first inversion is caused by connecting the FG- to the Q2-Gate, and the FG+ to the Q2-Source. It would normally be connected in reverse of this.
...then I'm not sure that it's right.  The ground of the signal generator (FG-) is NOT connected to Q2-Gate.  It's connected to Q2 source.  It's only link to the drain is via that Gate - through the drain rail.  The logical and unarguable assumption then is as you've stated it.  The applied signal from the signal generator (FG) has simply changed from Q1 to Q2.  The one has replaced the other.  In which case?  We SHOULD, by rights, have a continual DC current flow discharged by the battery with, at the most, some spiking at the transitional phases of the duty cycle.  That's NOT evident.

The second inversion is caused by introducing negative offset to the FG (as shown in the video), such that the FG output, if measured with a + probe on the + terminal and - probe on the - terminal, would measure a negative voltage when the FG output is in a LOW state, and a 0V or slightly positive voltage when the FG output is in a HI state.
Ok.  I think I'm beginning to see it.  The applied positive signal now changes to a negative signal.  You're suggesting that during that transitional phase then the actual applied voltage from the signal itself, gradually diminishes - over time - from say - +5 volts to -5 volts - as the signal changes and the new voltage level kicks in.  Which is fair comment.  BUT.  While the signal at Q2 is changing back to an 'open' or 'negative' signal - then simultaneously the signal at the gate of Q2 is changing in anti phase.  The sum of both those changes would allow precisely the same amount of delivery of current from the battery.  What it would do is possibly show a small 'drop' from say a high of 12 volts to a zero - then back to 12 volts.  In a partial oscillation that would still be entirely above ground. There would be no oscillation as seen in our waveforms as the current flow from that applied battery voltage would always be maintained.

The resulting Q2 VGS voltage is such that Q2 will turn partially ON (the bias) and completely OFF.
During which time there is some moment when the applied signal is crossing zero and there's no voltage at all. Agreed.  But that would still not account for the zero crossing as evident in the oscillation. See the above point.

As Q1 G-S is connected in reverse of Q2, Q1 is always OFF with this setting.
Q1 ground source is not connected in reverse.  It is never disconnected from the circuit. 

Regards,
Rosemary

added - two points - an another - so.  3 points added.  I hope they're highlighted.
and took out 'to' - repetitive
Sorry and a whole lot more corrections.  I really need to check the 'preview' more often.  Apologies.

Offline poynt99

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 3582
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #282 on: January 24, 2012, 03:42:52 AM »
So.  When you state, as you do here ......then I'm not sure that it's right.  The ground of the signal generator (FG-) is NOT connected to Q2-Gate.  It's connected to Q2 source.

I'm going to try another slightly different approach.

I'm going to take your diagram from your paper, Fig. 1, and focus ONLY on the connections between the FG and Q2 for the moment. I am going to erase all of the components and connections (wires) except the FG and Q2, and the electrical connections between them. I am not going to draw any new lines in. See the changes below.

1) From the cleaned up diagram, which FG lead is connected to the Q2 Gate lead?

2) From the cleaned up diagram, which FG lead is connected to the Q2 Source lead?

Offline Rosemary Ainslie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #283 on: January 24, 2012, 03:47:32 AM »
I'm going to try another slightly different approach.

I'm going to take your diagram from your paper, Fig. 1, and focus ONLY on the connections between the FG and Q2 for the moment. I am going to erase all of the components and connections (wires) except the FG and Q2, and the electrical connections between them. I am not going to draw any new lines in. See the changes below.

1) From the cleaned up diagram, which FG lead is connected to the Q2 Gate lead?

2) From the cleaned up diagram, which FG lead is connected to the Q2 Source lead?

There is only one FG or signal generator.  The probe is signed  '+'  the ground of the signal generator is signed '-'.  This does not vary.  What varies is the applied signal at the probe.

R

Offline poynt99

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 3582
Re: another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.
« Reply #284 on: January 24, 2012, 03:58:42 AM »
There is only one FG or signal generator.  The probe is signed  '+'  the ground of the signal generator is signed '-'.  This does not vary.  What varies is the applied signal at the probe.

R

My focus for the moment is ONLY on the wired connections between the FG and Q2. The actual signal from the FG isn't the issue at this point. Let's establish FIRST which FG lead is connected to which lead of Q2 please.

Now, with reference to the two questions above, please post your two answers.

 

OneLink