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 Posts: 524080
  • *Total Topics: 15602
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 0
  • *Guests: 9
  • *Total: 9

Author Topic: Testing the TK Tar Baby  (Read 1479761 times)

Offline poynt99

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 3585
Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #4890 on: September 23, 2012, 02:35:27 PM »
Good video TK.

Since Rose insists on deleting my on-topic posts and leaving my off-topic posts, I'll post the deleted ones here.

Greg,

Since you and Rose insist that you have admitted all errors regarding your Pin and Pout  computations, please summarize them here:

Pin = ?
Pout = ?
COP = ?

And Rose, how does this constitute an off-topic post? Anyway, the correct result for Greg's Pin is 10.5W. If he is still insisting it is half that or less, he is mistaken, and I guess so are you.

You said I need to be more adult-like? Should I be using Greg as an example model of how to be "more adult-like"?  :o

gmeast said:
Quote
Anyway, this is going private by invitation only.  You are not invited because you have nothing constructive to offer. [snip] As I said ... you're a plague on progress.

Oh, and glad to hear Greg's nonsensical erroneous computations will now be kept out of the public eye.  That's definitely for the best. ;)

happy trails...

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #4890 on: September 23, 2012, 02:35:27 PM »

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #4891 on: September 24, 2012, 06:05:18 AM »
Looks like Ainslie's been hitting the sherry pretty hard this afternoon.

She is in complete denial of fact. Reality makes no impression on her in her walled compound. For her, things are just so, and just because she says so, and if you do not agree so much the worse for you -- you will be deleted.

She has been soundly refuted on every point, from the fundamental claims all the way down to the tiny individual details such as her present belief that diodes are perfect little one-way valves. Yet she simply ignores the refutations as if they did not exist and continues to claim that she must be right _by default_ since nobody has the patience to deal with her continuous line of logorrhea and word salad, combined with fractured math and fairy tale scoposcopy.

I expect there to be another insulting doggerel "poem" from her shortly. But of course.... she won't watch or comment on any of my video refutations of her nonsense. That would require her taking her head out of her...... sandpile...... for a moment to look around, and actually to _think_ about something logically for a change.
« Last Edit: September 24, 2012, 08:59:48 AM by TinselKoala »

Offline poynt99

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 3585
Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #4892 on: September 24, 2012, 02:33:29 PM »
Indeed.

Where did she come up with E=V(IAVG)? Certainly not from me. And what is "E", energy? Goof grief! (sp mistake on purpose) ;)

Actually Rose, the equation I gave several times is: Pin(avg) = Vbat(avg) x Ibat(avg)

And did you really forget about the work I did on your circuit back in 2009, which is when that photo of my setup was taken? My, your memory is extremely poor isn't it?  ::)

Oh, and Rose, you know why I'm no longer in discussions with you (because I've told you several times), and it's not because I can't answer your questions, it's because I choose not to. Besides, you delete every PERTINENT post I make, so what kind of incentive is that? And finally, you've rejected my offer to learn anything new from me, so what's the point?

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #4892 on: September 24, 2012, 02:33:29 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline picowatt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2036
Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #4893 on: September 24, 2012, 03:30:28 PM »
Quote from "her", over "there"...

"If I were merely a deluded old woman with a lonely support for this - then the reasonable reaction would be to 'leave well alone' and let this flame burn out." 

With regard to her understanding of electronics (or lack thereof), I took the option above some time ago...


PW



Offline polln8r

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 81
Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #4894 on: September 24, 2012, 11:54:54 PM »
-in a nutshell...
"If you stay and argue while letting us censor you then that's all fine and wonderful. If you choose not to then that must mean we've been right all along and you admit that you've been wrong."

 

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #4894 on: September 24, 2012, 11:54:54 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #4895 on: September 25, 2012, 01:03:32 AM »
All the more nutty because of course .99 _has_ explained the "flow of current" in all conditions in the Ainslie NERD circuit. Some of it is illusory, an artefact of the inductances. Some of it is passing through the function generator, and some of it is passing as AC through the circuit's capacitances and the mosfet body diodes.

Poynt99 is able to predict, using his simulation, the current waveforms of the NERD circuit at any point. The circuit and its behaviour are UNDERSTOOD, by everyone except Ainslie, who is still trying to justify her Zipon "thesis", in spite of the fact that her "explanation" uses a diagram and a circuit path that is NOT EVEN PRESENT in the apparatus she claimed to use for the experiment.

Look at the labels on the cartoon mosfets! She doesn't even have her explanation describing the actual wiring of the circuit! So how could it POSSIBLY explain the operation of the circuit! It cannot.

So we have the "classical" model of electronics, standard physics, that is able to simulate and predict all of the NERD circuit performance accurately with the correct, actual schematic published as the one used by Ainslie ..... vying with a "thesis" that cannot make any quantitative predictions at all and whose only explanation of the current flow in the Ainslie circuit uses a wrong wiring arrangement entirely -- one that was NEVER used by any NERD circuit at any time -- and thus cannot explain anything.

The cartoons and the "explanation" were clearly prepared during the time when Ainslie and her "collaborators" did not yet realise their miswiring error--- they thought all the mosfets were in parallel AS IN THE CARTOON BELOW. And Ainslie in her arrogance and ignorance has never bothered to correct this fatal mistake, constantly pointing to this very "explanation", when in fact it corresponds to nothing that she ever tested or showed.



Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #4896 on: September 25, 2012, 11:05:02 AM »
I guess Ainslie is still refusing to watch my simple video demonstrations of how silly her claims are. Imagine.... she believes that diodes are perfect little one-way valves! And she thinks that people should pay attention to experimental evidence. Well, I certainly agree with that. Her own evidence refutes her claims completely, and as she continues to make fractured claim after silly claim, the evidence piles up that shows, beyond any doubt, that she is an overweeningly arrogant, ridiculously silly and mendacious old woman with rudimentary knowledge about electronics and none at all about real quantum electrodynamics.



Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #4896 on: September 25, 2012, 11:05:02 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #4897 on: September 26, 2012, 08:09:45 PM »
What did I tell you? Another insulting bit of drunken verbiage from Ainslie has dribbled out of her senile mind like the slackjawed drool it is.

The overweeningly arrogant, insulting and miraculously ignorant fool Rosemary Ainslie is now biting the hand that's been feeding her so carefully and patiently for these past years.

Meanwhile, the lies from Ainslie make such a big pile of stinking mendacity that it's hard to imagine how anyone will ever be able to fall into it again. Her "papers" themselves are lies!



Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #4898 on: September 28, 2012, 10:36:14 AM »
Ainslie has failed to deliver anything that she's promised over the last two threads. Ever since her posting of her video demo EIGHTEEN MONTHS ago, she has promised to do many things. Repeated testing, battery draw down tests, transcripts and critiques of all my videos, revisions and corrections of her daft manuscripts, proof of other collaborators endorsing her work.... nothing that she's promised has been performed. Not even the big revelation of the mysterious real identities of her "trolls". Nothing, nada, zip, zero. Ainslie has managed to avoid doing ANYTHING that she promised to do.

And now her sole replicator has gone "private" with his error-filled work. All that remains of the great Ainslie affair is a handful of insulting doggerel... and she can't even spell that right.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #4898 on: September 28, 2012, 10:36:14 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline poynt99

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 3585
Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #4899 on: September 29, 2012, 03:49:11 PM »
And now her sole replicator has gone "private" with his error-filled work. All that remains of the great Ainslie affair is a handful of insulting doggerel... and she can't even spell that right.
I doubt they've figured out how to make a thread or board "private", and if they did, who would be posting/reading there anyway?

I guess it does however only take two to have a 'discussion'.  ;)

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #4900 on: September 30, 2012, 12:12:50 AM »
Capacitive inductance again.... and MORE BLOWN MOSFETS..... somehow "degraded".  But she's reproduced her constant errors Yet Again, as anyone can who cares to.

Too bad there is no more reality checking. It was getting amusing there, watching her squirm when presented with facts. But now, she's entirely living in her own fantasy world and can say whatever she likes without the inconvenient requirement to provide any evidence.

We've never seen a part number for her "noninductive shunt". We know that the expensive motor-start capacitor she purchased while ignoring .99's suggestions is not appropriate for the measurements that need to be made. We know for certain that she doesn't understand impedance or the contributions of inductive and capacitive reactance to total impedance. We are quite certain that an attempt to reproduce the long periods and the 72 volts input will result in the Q1 mosfet overheating and failing..... and we know that is the only way that the scopeshots we have questioned can be produced. And we do NOT know just what circuit schematic she is using, since she herself doesn't even know, or realise the difference. And we'll not be seeing any real data from these idiots.

She's reduced to the position of essentially saying "look, if you hold everything just right, you can see a tiny sparkle in this glass, therefore it is the Hope Diamond".... when everybody can see that it is only a lump of glass.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #4900 on: September 30, 2012, 12:12:50 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline mrsean2k

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 173
Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #4901 on: September 30, 2012, 10:24:23 PM »
And, without the burden of experts to disagree with him, he's back:

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #4902 on: September 30, 2012, 11:01:21 PM »
It's laughable indeed. Perhaps it's suitable punishment for them, simply to be allowed to travel down their dead-end carnival path, wasting time and effort, but never being able to do what their numbers tell them they should be able to do.

I can't see the scope traces. It is possible that gmeast is also making the Fundamental Mosfet Error of thinking that when his drain voltage is HIGH it means the mosfet is ON and conducting? 

And I sure would like to see the equipment he uses, to measure electrical power to the hundredth of a milliWatt. There is only one conclusion to be drawn from the citing of numbers with that kind of false precision: they are wrong. How far wrong may be up to debate in some quarters, but unless corroboration can be given for the accuracy of that hundredth of a milliWatt precision claim...... they are undeniably wrong.


Offline mrsean2k

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 173
Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #4903 on: September 30, 2012, 11:45:48 PM »
Well he's told you there's "no doubt" (p < 0.000000019997) that the gate is off, so that's an end to it.


And cheesenyt is systematically cracking the other conspiracies as a bonus.


But has he, in the course of the thread, given enough information to calculate the true input power on the assumption he's currently calculating with an inverted duty cycle? I couldn't see it, but I doubt I'd recognise it (and who's to say how consistent any of it is?)

Offline mrsean2k

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 173
Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #4904 on: September 30, 2012, 11:53:05 PM »
Quote
If the voltage falls below that value, I can not get the desired results.


Why would the voltage fall below that value (25.1V)?


As he's producing excess energy, he can keep the battery topped up, as RA at least has claimed to have done for some time, and heat using the excess only.

 

OneLink