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

User Menu

Google Search

Custom Search

Author Topic: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims  (Read 317860 times)

Offline Tseak

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 42
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #1020 on: April 16, 2014, 07:47:33 AM »
It looks like Ms. Ainslie can't suffer polite an reasonable people today.
Could it be influenced by the lunar phase?

This is the normal pattern. When she has been caught out and doesn't know what to say she gets abusive. TK has entirely demolished any vestige of reasonable argument by her. He has reproduced her results by deliberately using poor measurement technique then shown what should have been measured and lo and behold its very similar to the results in August with Steve Wier. All that's left to her is to refuse to acknowledge what is clearly there - we've also seen that before. So expect the feral mode.

Offline orbut 3000

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 247
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #1021 on: April 16, 2014, 08:03:52 AM »
Yes, but today she even used bolded, colored, uppercase to express her opinion. That's a pretty strong and almost irrefutable argument.

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #1022 on: April 16, 2014, 09:17:48 AM »
I mean, really. Ainslie has gone totally and completely nutso.  Now she's gone back to lying about the 5-mosfet circuit, which has nothing to do with the recent scopetraces she has posted. And she still persists in the ridiculous claims about current paths in that circuit. What an utter and complete idiot she is, and she compounds the problem by lying about what the demonstrations proved.

How is it possible for her to continue to make those crazy claims about the current path? How is it possible for her to continue to make the claims about the FABRICATED Figure 3 scopeshot, when it has been proven beyond any doubt that the shot, and the claims made around it, are utter LIES?

I'm flabbergasted by this idiot. WHERE ARE HER KEEPERS? The woman is dangerous in her delusions. There is no point in having any kind of discussion with her because she simply LIES and fabricates "evidence" and even denies the reality of demonstrations that explain everything in unequivocal terms. Even HER OWN DEMONSTRATIONS are lied about in her flailing attempts to save face! What a case study in ignorance she is!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RTTA80T0BU4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C72jwywsz3w

It even appears that the Great Scientist has forgotten the claimed schematics for the "Q-array" circuit, again.


Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #1023 on: April 16, 2014, 10:39:17 AM »
This is the normal pattern. When she has been caught out and doesn't know what to say she gets abusive. TK has entirely demolished any vestige of reasonable argument by her. He has reproduced her results by deliberately using poor measurement technique then shown what should have been measured and lo and behold its very similar to the results in August with Steve Wier. All that's left to her is to refuse to acknowledge what is clearly there - we've also seen that before. So expect the feral mode.

She's been full on feral for some time now.  Let's see if we can follow the pretzel dough:

1. During the June 29 tests it was shown that they could not reproduce the Figure 3 waveforms by configuring according to (almost) Figure 1.  The difference being that for the demonstration they connected the function generator black lead where they always connected it prior to August 11, at the circuit common, which connects through a long wire to Batt-.

2. During the June 29 tests it was shown that they could reproduce the Figure 3 waveforms by defeating the current sense resistors completely:  Connecting the scope probe to the low side of one CSR, and the probe ground lead to the circuit common.  IOW connect the probe across a piece of wire.

3. It has been shown in circuit theory and simulation that AC current during the "Q1 Off" phase does flow through four paths:
a. From Q1D to Q1G and into the function generator red lead through the function generator and out to the function generator black lead, due to Q1 Drain/Gate capacitance.
b. From Q1D to Q1S and into the current sense resistors and out to the circuit common, due to Q1 Drain/Source capacitance.
c. From each Q2D to each Q2S and into the function generator red lead through the function generator and out to the function generator black lead through the enhanced Q2 channels.
d. From Q2D to Q2G and into the current sense resistors and out to the circuit common, due to Q2 Drain/Gate capacitance.

TK's videos have shown that the amount of current through a. and b. is a minor fraction of the total.

4. It was demonstrated August 11, that current really does take the 3.c. path.

5. Review of the schematic and white breadboard wiring, along with review of the June 29th demonstration video experimentally confirms the 3.d. path.

6. Ms. Ainslie acknowledges the August 11 current and voltage measurements taken at the battery show net battery draw during the oscillations.  The battery voltage never reverses, and both the average current and average power are positive through the DUT.  The average power draw from the batteries was between 14W and 15W.

7. I understand from Steve that he has it on record that Ms. Ainslie agreed prior to the August 10 dry run, Ms. Ainslie agreed that in the event of a disagreement between the new current sense and voltage measurements at the batteries versus the measurements at the white peg board, that the measurements taken at the batteries would be considered the more reliable measure of battery:  voltage, current, and power.  I don't know if he means he has e-mail, or Skype recordings, or both.

8. Ms. Ainslie ended the August 11 demonstration without performing Phase 4 or Phase 5 tests because she concluded that the measured battery power drain was so high in relation to the anemic heating element output, that determining a more precise estimate of the output than between 2.4W and 3.4W was pointless.  Ms. Ainslie and Steve can be heard discussing the issue I believe around 58 or 59 minutes into the video.

9. The AC impedance of inductors increases linearly with frequency.  Inductance in series with any resistive current sense increases the measured voltage by 41% at f = R/(2piL) and asymptotically to G = 2*pi*f*L/R.

So what do we get now?  We get these insane rants from Ms. Ainslie that despite accepted circuit theory, and despite experimental confirmation that the oscillating currents through the circuit during the "Q1 Off" phase really do flow almost entirely through Q2's channel and parasitic drain/gate capacitance, Ms. Ainslie insists that is not so, and therefore if it cannot be so then the heating resistor must be crumbling while it powers itself in a loop with the battery from which she insists the heating resistor is isolated.  And why should we believe this?  She insists it is so on the basis of her measurements and intuition.  Never mind that out the other side of her mouth she discounts the measurements taken right at the batteries.

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #1024 on: April 16, 2014, 10:59:22 AM »
I mean, really. Ainslie has gone totally and completely nutso.  Now she's gone back to lying about the 5-mosfet circuit, which has nothing to do with the recent scopetraces she has posted. And she still persists in the ridiculous claims about current paths in that circuit. What an utter and complete idiot she is, and she compounds the problem by lying about what the demonstrations proved.

How is it possible for her to continue to make those crazy claims about the current path? How is it possible for her to continue to make the claims about the FABRICATED Figure 3 scopeshot, when it has been proven beyond any doubt that the shot, and the claims made around it, are utter LIES?

I'm flabbergasted by this idiot. WHERE ARE HER KEEPERS? The woman is dangerous in her delusions. There is no point in having any kind of discussion with her because she simply LIES and fabricates "evidence" and even denies the reality of demonstrations that explain everything in unequivocal terms. Even HER OWN DEMONSTRATIONS are lied about in her flailing attempts to save face! What a case study in ignorance she is!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RTTA80T0BU4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C72jwywsz3w

It even appears that the Great Scientist has forgotten the claimed schematics for the "Q-array" circuit, again.
To Rosemary Ainslie from concerned onlookers:  "Put down that scope probe!  You'll hurt yourself."

She doesn't like what she sees so she just pretends it's not there.

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #1025 on: April 16, 2014, 01:55:13 PM »
Oh, the problem is far deeper than that. Ainslie is psychotic. She not only refuses to see what IS there, but she hallucinates actively, claiming to see what is NOT there at all. I've demonstrated many times when what she _claims_ is directly opposite to the _visible evidence_. She sometimes blames her "eyesight".... I blame her psychosis.

It's perfectly OK with me that she continues to demonstrate her delusions, though. More grist for the mill! If anyone ever shows the slightest tendency to take her seriously.... when they see the endless compendium of errors, lies and utter delusions she emits, they'll back off promptly.


Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #1026 on: April 16, 2014, 02:58:35 PM »
Oh, the problem is far deeper than that. Ainslie is psychotic. She not only refuses to see what IS there, but she hallucinates actively, claiming to see what is NOT there at all. I've demonstrated many times when what she _claims_ is directly opposite to the _visible evidence_. She sometimes blames her "eyesight".... I blame her psychosis.

It's perfectly OK with me that she continues to demonstrate her delusions, though. More grist for the mill! If anyone ever shows the slightest tendency to take her seriously.... when they see the endless compendium of errors, lies and utter delusions she emits, they'll back off promptly.
I go from being aghast by her insane declarations to feeling some pity for an isolated, crazy, old person.  It's hard to maintain much sympathy when she winds herself up into her Tasmanian devil routine.

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #1027 on: April 17, 2014, 05:37:44 AM »
Ainslie has really outdone herself this time. She doesn't like MarkE's explanation.... or rather her misrepresentations of it..... so she erects Straw man after misrepresentation on top of lies dressing up more straw men. I really wonder what kind of DMM she thinks I am using to make all those scope displays and instantaneous power graphs. What a fool she is, to keep on stuffing her foot down her own lying throat! And she even has GMeast helping to do the stuffing. It's hilarious!

Then she talks about her commitment to "open source" and in the next breath says she'll be withholding everything. What a lying, insulting, arrogant hypocrite she is. In addition to being totally wrong!



Go ahead, Ainslie, GREAT SCIENTIST, or GMeast, weak kneed minion.... provide a data set that supports your claims, or refutes mine! YOU CANNOT!

And all those myriad spiders and spammers that check your site for vulnerabilities hourly.... Ainslie, they are laughing at you both.



Offline markdansie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1471
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #1028 on: April 17, 2014, 05:40:39 AM »
I think we need some humor here.
Totally off topic.


http://revolution-green.com/australian-coal-mining-policy-update-2014/


Mark

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #1029 on: April 17, 2014, 11:35:13 AM »
Ainslie has really outdone herself this time. She doesn't like MarkE's explanation.... or rather her misrepresentations of it..... so she erects Straw man after misrepresentation on top of lies dressing up more straw men. I really wonder what kind of DMM she thinks I am using to make all those scope displays and instantaneous power graphs. What a fool she is, to keep on stuffing her foot down her own lying throat! And she even has GMeast helping to do the stuffing. It's hilarious!

Then she talks about her commitment to "open source" and in the next breath says she'll be withholding everything. What a lying, insulting, arrogant hypocrite she is. In addition to being totally wrong!



Go ahead, Ainslie, GREAT SCIENTIST, or GMeast, weak kneed minion.... provide a data set that supports your claims, or refutes mine! YOU CANNOT!

And all those myriad spiders and spammers that check your site for vulnerabilities hourly.... Ainslie, they are laughing at you both.
We all know how limited her understanding of science in general  and electronics in particular is.  She is wailing into the wind.  She has declared that she will not be supplying any experiment data to support her non-physical claims.  She has closed the book on herself.

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #1030 on: April 17, 2014, 01:40:41 PM »
So where is the evidence for this "Excess Heat" that Ainslie and GMeast are always talking about? There is none in any of Ainslie's reported data, that's for sure, and I've never seen anything like a complete DC calibration, compared to a temperature-time graph, from GMeast either. They simply claim, and boast, and assert, but are apparently immune to any requirement to support their claims with coherent data.

Ainslie's Figure 3, which is the ONLY EVIDENCE she has ever presented that even _appears_ to show heat evolution without strong Q1 current flow.... has been PROVEN to be an utter fabrication. Ainslie has NEVER presented any data that indicates heat performance over and above the power delivered BY THE BATTERY TO THE CIRCUIT.... and now she has told us that she never will. But she will still make the claims!


Come ON, people. SHOW ME A DATA SET THAT SHOWS EXCESS HEAT.  Or stop making the claims that you have such data.

REFUTE MY WORK. I've put all of it up for criticism, repetition, whatever. COME ON, PEOPLE. LET'S SEE A DATA SET THAT SUPPORTS YOUR CLAIMS, without fabrications and lies like the Figure 3 bogus scopeshot.

But aren't we working now with the single mosfet, Quantum Magazine claims? WHERE IS THE DATA? Do you want to go back to discussing the "Q-Array" which was soundly proven to be very inefficient during the two "demonstrations" last summer? Fine---- PRESENT SOME NEW DATA THAT REFUTES THOSE PUBLICLY-GATHERED RESULTS. You cannot!

Because you have none, and you will never have any, that refutes my work, or that shows any excess heating from anything like the Quantum Magazine circuit, the Lost Grey Box circuit, or the 5-mosfet "Q-array" circuit.

PROVE ME WRONG!   You cannot. All you can do, Ainslie and GMeast, is to erect your straw man arguments and flail and moan about them.

THE MAJOR CURRENT PATH IN THE "Q-ARRAY" CIRCUIT IS NOT THROUGH THE GATE CAPACITANCE and nobody ever said it was. THE MAJOR CURRENT PATH IN THE CIRCUIT IS THE NORMAL DRAIN_SOURCE CHANNEL WHICH IS DRIVEN TO LINEAR CONDUCTANCE BY THE MOSFET OSCILLATIONS, and which goes THROUGH THE FG or other bias source, as my videos on the Common Gate Amplifier have PROVEN BEYOND ANY DOUBT.  And nobody, on "this side", has ever claimed otherwise.

Would you like to refute those demonstrations? I invite you to do so..... it will be fun to watch your flailing and failing.  The mosfet input capacitance of 2800 pF or so...> READ THE DATA SHEET GMEAST< acts just like any other capacitance in the circuit, it does contribute to the formation and sustaining of the oscillations. How could it not? Why is the capacitance even listed in the data sheet if it doesn't act as a capacitance, GMEAST? Your faulty and arrogant "understanding" is leading you astray, you are buying into Ainslie's straw-man argument.... to the detriment of your own credibility.



Your arguments are invalid, Ainslie and GMeast. And the more you squawk the more people see how silly and duplicitous you both are. Produce a data set that supports your claims.... OR STOP MAKING THEM.



And while you are at it, explain these "DMM" screenshots and spreadsheet graphs. Why do these parameters NOT produce the "excess heating" in the load? I know why...... and so do you, GMeast.






Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #1031 on: April 17, 2014, 01:56:13 PM »
Ms. Ainslie's flailing about really should cause more yawns than excitement.

Each of the four paths that I identified do pass AC current.  I am pretty sure that Steve put  a Q2 gate current sense in tht board you've got.  It would be interesting to see just how much current flows through that path with 1, 2, or four Q2 MOSFETs hooked up.  If you use the gate current booster in series with say a 10 Ohm resistor instead of the function generator you may see some really interesting stuff. You may need a beefier heat sink for the low side PNP transistor.

While Greg has some funny ideas including somewhat paranoid ones about people like us, he has in my view done a much better job than Ms. Ainslie of trying to set-up measurements that faithfully indicate what he wants to measure.  And unlike Ms. Ainslie he has performed at least some null experiments.  I am disappointed that he has rejected my suggestions for additional experiments out of hand.  I hope that he will eventually reconsider out of interest in finding out the truth.





Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #1032 on: April 17, 2014, 02:52:38 PM »
The Great Scientists don't do true experiments, though. They simply do "demonstrations", not experiments designed to _disprove_ an hypothesis.

However, I don't work that way.

The hypothesis that the Gate or input capacitance of a mosfet cannot pass significant current ... that is, the Ainslie-GMeast hypothesis.... is easily tested in an attempt to falsify it. Have they EVER tested that hypothesis? Not to my knowledge, but please correct me right away if I am wrong.

However, I have done so.

Take an IRFPG50 mosfet, completely disconnected from everything. Take a 14 volt light bulb, a GE161 for instance, and hook one side of it to the Function Generator BLACK output lead. Take the other end of the light bulb and hook it to the mosfet SOURCE only. Take the RED FG output lead and hook it to the mosfet GATE only. Set the FG for a positive square wave at the typical Ainslie operating frequency like 187 kHz as shown in her last released scopeshot.  Turn up the FG output amplitude, and observe the light bulb. What will happen? Now select a bipolar "AC" square wave. What will happen?

What is the prediction from Ainslie/GMEast's "theory" of mosfet operation-- READ THE DATA SHEET? What is "our" prediction? What does the real actual hardware do?

Is there ANYONE who can answer this question? Yes... .there is. I can answer it.


Can YOU, GMeast? I know Ainslie cannot do the experiment herself. But I believe YOU can do it.

(Let's pretend that the goalposts haven't been moved YET AGAIN..... Ainslie is suddenly talking about the 5-mosfet circuit, when she has claimed lately that they were testing the old Quantum Magazine single-mosfet circuit, and that circuit is what produced her latest scopeshots. But suddenly.... the Q-array is being discussed again. Fine.... I can test ANY of the 5 different circuits she has claimed for the "Q-Array" very easily, and produce a complete data set including CORRECT SCHEMATICS, CORRECT SCOPETRACES and PROPERLY GATHERED HEATING RATE DATA, along with spreadsheets and etc. in less than FOUR HOURS. Can you, GMEast or Ainslie? Why don't you DO IT, if you can? I know why.... and so do you: you cannot produce data that supports your claims. Where is ANY heating RATE data from Ainslie? Nowhere, that's where.... she has NEVER PRODUCED SUCH DATA, in spite of her claims that it is necessary. Please feel free to REFUTE ME. You cannot.)


Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #1033 on: April 17, 2014, 03:41:30 PM »
Here's a burr for your saddle-blanket, GMeast.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7Mcp390HyU

Ainslie said,
Quote
Guys - the wonder is how they get away with this APPALLING level of discussion on 'matters scientific'.  It beggars belief.  They can CERTAINLY assume that there are those readers who simply don't understand the points they raise.  But it's never ALL their readers.  But to claim that those IRFPG50's can discharge current from a battery or any supply source through the GATE of a MOSFET?  And then to say that they PROVED this?  For those of you who are NOT purists, trust me on this.  It is IMPOSSIBLE - unless that MOSFET has somehow degraded that it is ENTIRELY defunct.  That's just one of MANY absurdities.  The most of them have been discussed.  I put it to you that IF they're the 'experts' that they pretend - then LET THEM PUBLISH A PAPER ON THESE FINDINGS.  Because, of a truth - there would be a million or more aspiring power and electronic experts who would be MOST intrigued. 

And I laugh. More IMPOSSIBILITIES claimed by Ainslie, that I show to be perfectly POSSIBLE and in fact TRUE.

LET AINSLIE PERFORM EXPERIMENTS THAT REFUTE MY FINDINGS. She cannot, and neither can her faithful steed Gmeast, because my findings are TRUE and fully documented. All she can do is emit further bloviations, giving me more and more opportunities to REFUTE HER UTTERLY. The ignorant troll queen knows nothing about electronics in general or mosfets in particular and is happy to brag and display her ignorance in public for all to see! And she has suborned GMEast as well, which is sad, because he really should know better.

And LET AINSLIE PUBLISH A PAPER.... any paper! She cannot! Never has, and never will. Editors laugh at her, and summarily reject her submissions as the amateurish hodge-podge of error and mendacity that they are.







Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: Rosemary Ainslie Quantum Magazine Circuit COP > 17 Claims
« Reply #1034 on: April 17, 2014, 03:57:45 PM »
It is amazing, isn't it? Even the Straw Man argument constructed by Ainslie and Gmeast fails in the light of actual evidence. 

In the first place, THERE IS NO EXCESS HEAT to be accounted for. The mosfet undeniably does have some current passing through the Gate capacitance; this current has been measured time and time again, even by Ainslie herself (see the August 11 demonstration, last ten minutes) and might be contributing slightly to the load heating. But how can we be claiming that it accounts for the "excess heat" when THERE IS NO EXCESS HEAT?

They can't even get their criticisms right, since they are criticizing Ainslie's deluded misrepresentations, rather than the actual assertions and demonstrations coming from the actual experiments that I am performing.... and which neither Ainslie nor Gmeast have EVER refuted in the least degree.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qc7iAGFceF4

The FG acts as a POWER SOURCE IN SERIES with the main batteries during the Q2 oscillations. This pathway, where the FG ADDS POWER TO THE CIRCUIT, has nothing to do with the Gate capacitance passing current. Ainslie and GMeast are simply fabricating, confabulating, when they make their false StrawMan claims about the FG adding significant load heating power _through the gate capacitance_. Her refusal to believe that the FG is a power source in the "Q-array" circuit is legendary.... and remains utterly WRONG.