The only one of the two of us who has no CLUE how to determine the wattage dissipated at the load is you. We're all still waiting for some measurements.  Clearly you're trying very hard to avoid reference.  I can't help but wonder why?

Lie and insult all you like, bloviating Ainslie liar. I know a lot better than you do exactly how to determine power at the load. YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT POWER IS. One watt is one Joule, remember? Idiot. And I can do it electrically and calorimetrically. You think calorimetry is for someone on a diet.

And TK.  I'm looking forward to implementing those imaginary procedures from my imaginary lawyers.  I'll do that when I've completed those imaginary tests of mine.  And then you can comment on all those imaginings to your heart's content. 

You had better be careful about what you wish for. I have FACTS and SCIENCE on my side, as well as a large compendium of RECORDS that will prove to anyone that I am right, you are wrong, and in fact, your threats and insults are actually CRIMINAL.

And while you're at it - we're also all waiting that learned discourse of yours or picowatt's where you EXPLAIN how the battery is fully connected during that oscillation.

You won't watch my videos, which show how a capacitance equal to your mosfet's will indeed pass AC current in spite of NOT PASSING DC at the same time. In short...you still don't know how a mosfet works and you are incapable of learning. We will let .99 explain things to you.... although you are doing a great job of confusing yourself again because you won't even learn the tiny little increments that he is trying to show you.

What a prize idiot you are.  All you can do is assemble circuitry of greater and greater complexities to confuse the hell out of its actual function and intention.  And then pretend that you know what you're talking about. 

Ainslie, I am transmitting REAL POWER THROUGH SPACE, with great efficiency, using MY KNOWLEDGE of how things work. I've researched the issue, found example circuits, modified them, made advances, and garnered great interest. YOU, on the other hand, can't even hook your oscilloscope up properly, nor report the schematic you use. You are a PRIZE IDIOT indeed, jealous of your betters, so you have to insult them in any way you can. What you NEVER DO, and CANNOT DO, is to refute  me or PW or any one else who corrects you. YOU CANNOT, because you are wrong, laughably and incurably WRONG.

The comfort is that you've stopped that laughable exposition on the mysterious electron current flow.  There are always some small mercies on offer.  We're spared those ridiculous analogies that impress the Seans and Mags of this world ... and the PhiChasers.  LOL.

Have I stopped? My how naive you are. Unlike YOU, pitiful Ainslie, I have other, much more important things to do than spend ALL my time addressing the many issues of your bogus set of claims.

  What a load of blockheads - to a man.  A bunch of electrical engineers and / or technicians trying to pass themselves  off as EXPERTS in particle physics. There's no such animal.  Two entirely different mindsets.  Two entirely different skill sets.  And yet there's YOU - the shining 'truth' as you present yourself.  What a JOKE.

You are the blockhead JOKE, Ainslie. Look at what YOU have written about particle physics, and electronics. Thousands and thousands of words of logorrhea and schizophrenic word salad, that makes not a single quantitative prediction and is directly contradicted by hundreds of years of experimentation and research... not to mention the very existence of the computer you typed those words on.

Rosie Pose

added
And may I add.  Had I damaged any equipment then I would have CLAIMED for that damage from an insurance taken out for precisely that purpose.  NO SUCH DAMAGE WAS EVIDENT.  ALSO.  I would have to be as stupid as you to BUY damaged equipment.  That's a skill set that is ONLY entertained by yourself.  God knows your only access to decent equipment is after or before repair.  That's a little puzzle in itself.  LOL

You can add whatever lies you like, apparently, without any regard for truth or logic. You are such a liar. There is NO CONCEIVABLE REASON ON EARTH that you would have sent "your" LeCroy off for "calibration" unless it needed repair. All digital oscilloscopes perform an internal calibration and self-checking routine whenever they are started up. If it fails this internal calibration check... IT IS IN NEED OF REPAIR. If it does not fail.... it does not need calibration. IDIOT.

And I am supposed to be very well funded, am I not? With access to all kinds of special digital equipment. You have no clue whatsoever and you can't even keep your own deluded story straight.

Just to review:

Ainslie, in that last lying post of yours, you accused me of committing, as you say, the FELONY CRIME of unauthorised computer access. You have no evidence whatsoever for that accusation, but FURTHER, you announced in your forum the deliberate intention to sully, or "tar" as you put it, my good name and to do whatever you can to damage me and my reputation.

I want to hear from these lawyers of yours. I have the name of the law firm, from your earlier letter to Stefan. I WILL be contacting them at the opening of business on Monday, with a letter of my own, explaining that accusing someone of a FELONY without any evidence, and THREATENING physical harm and to destroy reputations..... is a no no and will get your hand slapped.

Just to review:

Ainslie, in that last lying post of yours, you accused me of committing, as you say, the FELONY CRIME of unauthorised computer access. You have no evidence whatsoever for that accusation, but FURTHER, you announced in your forum the deliberate intention to sully, or "tar" as you put it, my good name and to do whatever you can to damage me and my reputation.

NOT ACTUALLY little TK.  I simply wrote a little doggerel for a non-entity called Tinsel Koala.  He MOST CERTAINLY has committed a felony crime - far worse than the mere efforts to usurp ownership and authority on a technology that does not belong to him.  He's EXPOSED the names and telephone numbers of people that he rifled EXCLUSIVELY from files in my computer.  And he also exposed data in my own zipped files. And this WITHOUT LEGAL ACCESS.

I want to hear from these lawyers of yours. I have the name of the law firm, from your earlier letter to Stefan. I WILL be contacting them at the opening of business on Monday, with a letter of my own, explaining that accusing someone of a FELONY without any evidence, and THREATENING physical harm and to destroy reputations..... is a no no and will get your hand slapped.

WHAT a PRIZE IDIOT.  Feel free to write to whoever you want.  Just make sure you write under your own name.  They're not likely to answer a communication from someone who signs himself 'tinsel koala'.  In the real world that kind of signature is simply HUGELY amusing.

And I will NOT be writing to sundry colleagues of yours YET.  I'll wait until my tests are completed.  And then I'll be able to PROVE the extent of the damage that you have been attempting.  And my complaint will NOT only be to your colleagues.  It will be considerably more comprehensive.  You know what they say about the 'fat lady' that sings at the end of the show?  We're getting there.  AT LAST. 

LOL.

Rosie Pose

added

I know a lot more than you think, Ainslie. Details of that little incident, for example. And I've already established communication with the Law Firm of Manson Tobin. You have finally crossed a line with your threats and lies.

Manson Tobin Law Firm
P.O.Box 3584
 Durbanville 7551
South Africa
Email: alex@mansontobin.co.za
Tel: +27 (0) 21 975 5766
Fax: +27 (0) 21 975 5822

Dear Mr. Alexander Manson and Mr. Lee Jonathan Tobin

I wish to bring to your attention some severely abusive and threatening internet posts that have been made by Ms. Rosemary Ainslie, who alleges that she is a client of yours. Please refer to the attached .zip file for copies of many of the abusive and mendacious postings that Ainslie has made. Not only is she threatening and abusive, but she has also made many false statements concerning a research project that she has been engaged in for over a decade. I have documented these false statements and have attached documentary proof of her lies and distortions. Note especially the evidence provided in her own words where she admits to concealing material information for nearly a month, between March 22, 2011 and April 18 2011, causing over 400 forum discussion posts to be made in discussion of her claim that one particular schematic was used, when in fact a different one was actually used by her. And also note her statement that she fully intended to continue with the deception, which was finally revealed by a sharp-eyed correspondent.

You will note especially that lately she has been making accusations that I and others have "rifled" her computer. This is ridiculous on the face of it, especially since ALL information in the files I have sent you has been gathered from her own forum posts and blogs. As you can see from looking at the files, the locations where I obtained them are all listed and are all public. Yet Ainslie has seen fit to call me a CRIMINAL, a FELON, and a lot of other things too, as you can see from perusing the statements in the compendium.

I realize that you are not in a position to evaluate the mendacious technical claims made by Ainslie. I can assure you that the majority of scientific opinion agrees with me, re her claims and "thesis" . This latter "thesis" by the way, exists in multiple conflicting copies on the internet, with many errors and mistakes in each version, with claims made in some versions that do not appear in others, with data that is clearly altered by editing in some copies but not others... and so on. In short, Ainslie is not only threatening and insulting me and others, but she is also engaged in very clear and egregious scientific misconduct.

I am hereby suggesting that IF this Rosemary Ainslie is actually a client of yours, that you give her some badly needed legal advice. She has promised, as you can see, to attempt to damage my good name, my reputation, and even has threatened me with physical harm ("Kill two birds with one stone, one of them TK", an internet post made by her that some have interpreted as a death threat against me.)

Sincerely,
(real name and law firm contact data attached, IN CONFIDENCE)

Attachments:
RAForumPostsA.zip
RAForumPostsB.zip
RAForumPostsC.zip
RANewForum.zip
SCRN3.zip

And, of course:

You omitted the LINK - YET AGAIN.  Here's the little ditty with its addendum that you were so careful to EXCLUDE.


And while I'm at it may I add - it's not you sits on that chair
You've photographed your friend TK - I know this from the hair.

You make me laugh. I thought for a moment that you might actually have had my name and address. Now I know that you are still hallucinating and responding to your delusions and fantasies and that your threats are just as the barkings of a little yapping ratdog. Oh, you'll bite all right, if someone is stupid enough to try to help you, that's clear enough.

You really need to step back and take a look at yourself and what is happening, Ainslie. You are melting down, you've crossed a very definite line, and you will be experiencing consequences.

And guys, while I'm at it - may I remind you all.

This technology that we've open sourced is intended for applications that will enhance energy efficiencies - NOTHING ELSE.  TK is trying his damnedest to avoid reference to that efficiency and is taking you all on a goose path related to complex applications that have NOTHING to do with efficient energy transfer.

YOU LIE. Open source means that your information is HONESTLY, CORRECTLY, and FULLY available. None of this applies to YOU, you lying bloviator. You have lied about and concealed schematics, you have made error after error that have still not been corrected in the multiple conflicting versions of your daft manuscripts, and you are still to this day refusing to provide data that you claim exists... but probably actually does not. OPEN SOURCE? You are a hypocrite and a liar of the first water.

I do not care what applications come out of this technology.  But unless they address those efficiencies then he is wasting your time with irrelevancies.  And his  real intention is to usurp SOLE authority to comment on this technology when his agenda is precisely to DENY those efficiencies.  Therein lies the danger.

My real intention is to make you tell the truth, Ainslie. But you continue to lie and make false claims. YOU cannot support any of your claims, and I can refute them, at any time, in any venue whatsoever.

Please be aware of this objective.  It's shared with picowatt and Sean and 'The Boss' and FTC and the rest.  Some heavily vested interest in denials here.  And none of it reasonable - all of it unsubstantiated - and certainly - AT BEST - a gross abuse of open source objectives.

Lies yet again. There is FAR more substantiation for the REFUTATION of Ainslie's various mendacious claims than she has ever provided in support of them. All this is provable on demand, and NONE of what Ainslie claims, other than the numbers in her boxes, can be substantiated by her at all. The numbers in boxes have been shown to be incorrectly obtained and improperly analyzed and the claims based on them shown to be bogus... all documented by several independent researchers, all repeatable on demand, UNLIKE Ainslie's claimed "work".

I might add that not only is their standard of posting an ABUSE of forum guidelines, the most of their references to our work and my part in it is criminal - abusive - and it includes their criminality in making facts known that they've rifled from my computer. 

You repeat that slanderous lie as much as you like. Every time you do you are committing yet another CRIME that you will eventually pay for, so go ahead, dig yourself in deeper and deeper.

What's particularly ominous is that far from caring about this flaunted disrespect Stefan Hartman is actually encouraging it.  That's certainly cause for concern.

Kindest regards,
Rosemary

Nobody, but nobody, has EVER shown the degree of disrespect for our host, and the violation of forum guidelines that YOU YOURSELF have shown. Several of us have in fact ASKED STEFAN NOT TO BAN YOU, because we feel that you need to face your medicine here. This is the only place left where you are exposed to the truth about yourself and your claims, Ainslie. What is cause for concern is that you  open your own forums and blogs where contrary voices are censored and information is tightly controlled by YOU. You think you can lie and insult and threaten with impunity.... but you cannot. Your actions will have consequences, Ainslie, and you will soon be finding out what some of those are.

A challenge for picowatt

http://www.energy-shiftingparadigms.com/index.php/topic,2313.msg2762.html#msg2762

The quote:


"It seems that picowatt is rather anxious to challenge our claim that the battery is disconnected during the oscillation phase of each switched cycle.  Effectively he is relying on the assumption that the energy is either FROM the battery or FROM the function generator - OR BOTH. And that it NEVER adds to the general efficiency of the system.

He needs to substantiate this ALLEGATION.  And until he does - then I think we can ENTIRELY discount his opinion.

Regards,
Rosie"


Frankly, you have a very crappy attitude.  If you want to learn what is happening during the oscillation phase and understand the AC current path, then get off your "know it all" pedestal and just ask.

I particularly like this part:

"He needs to substantiate this ALLEGATION.  And until he does - then I think we can ENTIRELY discount his opinion."

This is not an allegation.  Its called "electronics".  Is this how you ask someone to teach you?  Such attitude.  If this were the rules, so to speak, your opinions would have been ENTIRELY discounted a long time ago.  I, for one, am still waiting for you to address the Q1 not turning on in FIG3, 6, and 7 issue.  But you don't, so should we just dismiss in entirety all of your opinions?  Possibly that would indeed make the most sense.   


After seeing you struggle with the simplest of concepts regarding your circuit's DC conditions, I will not waste my time trying to teach you "why" the circuit oscillates.

However, if you are only asking about how the AC currents pass thru Q2 while the circuit is oscillating and as Q2's on state is modulated, the AC current path is, for the most part, thru Coss, Ciss, and Crss, the intrinsic MOSFET capacitances.  This has already been discussed.  The three main MOSFET capacitances, Coss, Css, and Crss represent significant AC paths from the drain to the source of Q2.  These are very significant and very real capacitances, well documented in the IRFPG50 data sheet.  It is thru these capacitances that the bulk of the AC current flows during oscillation.

Next time you want to know something, drop the snotty attitude and just ask...


ADDED:

As I caught up on reading the thread this morning, all in all it was pretty ugly, with all that non-stop battling and threatening.  But, there was one good chuckle to be had.  That was the reference made to a bunch of EE's and tech's pretending to be particle physicists.  The only person pretending to be a "particle physicist" around here is definitely no EE or tech!