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

Custom Search

Author Topic: Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie  (Read 643716 times)

WilbyInebriated

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3141
Re: Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie
« Reply #210 on: July 08, 2009, 01:20:30 AM »
"send me your address and i will send you the part, you worthless bum"

You know, the more I think about this, the more pissed off I'm getting. You made a challenge and a promise, and I took you up on it by sending you a good address to use. Now you are reneging, and I have no idea what you will try to do with that address. I feel betrayed, because I trusted you, to a certain extent. But now I am thinking that I was right about you that other time: You are a troll, a stalker, and you do not care about truth, you care about getting a rise out of someone. Well, you've gotten a rise from me now.

Either send me the part or STFU and get off this thread. We are trying to do some serious work here and your posts are not constructive and in fact are disruptive.

no you're not. you mocking someone who has, from page one asked you when you are going to do it right.
all you have to show, up to this very point, is an untested hypothesis...  serious work, you are funny.

ramset

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8073
Re: Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie
« Reply #211 on: July 08, 2009, 01:20:48 AM »
OOOOHHHHH......
A bet
parcel post or next day?

TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
Re: Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie
« Reply #212 on: July 08, 2009, 01:22:31 AM »
you're a betting man, i bet you $1000 US that you can't keep your mouth shut until it arrives...  ;)

The difference between my bets and this bogus one is that mine are sincere and directed towards making people provide evidence for their outrageous claims. Your "offer" is clearly cynical, not in earnest, and it appears that you do not intend to send me the part after all, even though you said,

"send me your address and i will send you the part, you worthless bum"

So, like I said before, STFU and go away, STALKER, TROLL.

TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
Re: Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie
« Reply #213 on: July 08, 2009, 01:25:11 AM »
no you're not. you mocking someone who has, from page one asked you when you are going to do it right.
all you have to show, up to this very point, is an untested hypothesis...  serious work, you are funny.

Wrong again.
I notice there aren't a lot of people jumping in to support your point.
I made an hypothesis, well specified, and I tested it and reported results. You've just been trolling and obfuscating the real issue, which has nothing at all to do with the mosfet, which you promised to send me.

"send me your address and i will send you the part, you worthless bum"

WilbyInebriated

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3141
Re: Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie
« Reply #214 on: July 08, 2009, 01:25:22 AM »
The difference between my bets and this bogus one is that mine are sincere and directed towards making people provide evidence for their outrageous claims. Your "offer" is clearly cynical, not in earnest, and it appears that you do not intend to send me the part after all, even though you said,

"send me your address and i will send you the part, you worthless bum"

So, like I said before, STFU and go away, STALKER, TROLL.

nice work on the misdirection, you must be sweating with all that jumping around.
do it right or shut up. test your hypothesis, i'm betting you won't, that's how your "science" flys.

TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
Re: Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie
« Reply #215 on: July 08, 2009, 01:27:19 AM »
OOOOHHHHH......
A bet
parcel post or next day?

Of course he doesn't mean it, and he's said that he won't send me the mosfet anyway, so it's a cynical attempt to silence me.

He's probably never even seen that much cash in one place. I'm talking about the 4 dollars for the mosfet from ebay...

TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
Re: Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie
« Reply #216 on: July 08, 2009, 01:27:58 AM »
nice work on the misdirection, you must be sweating with all that jumping around.
do it right or shut up. test your hypothesis, i'm betting you won't, that's how your "science" flys.

"send me your address and i will send you the part, you worthless bum"

I'm betting you won't, because you are a liar and a troll and a stalker.

WilbyInebriated

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3141
Re: Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie
« Reply #217 on: July 08, 2009, 01:30:23 AM »
I made an hypothesis, well specified, and I tested it and reported results. You've just been trolling and obfuscating the real issue, which has nothing at all to do with the mosfet, which you promised to send me.

"send me your address and i will send you the part, you worthless bum"
you  tested this one?
My hypothesis for future research is that the "proper" IRFPG40 mosfet will not perform substantially differently in this experiment. BUT--in fact the 2sk1548 has a guaranteed +-30 volt gate-to-source voltage max, while the IRF unit only specifies +- 20 volts max--so it is indeed possible that the mosfet used in Ainslie's work was being overdriven. She has made statements about blowing mosfets...
i didn't think so. that's how your "science" flys.

the real issue is, you never did it (your original "replication") properly, and have been avoiding that fact with all sorts of asinine reasons. i didn't promise anything, but nice try on the misdirection again. let us know when you test that hypothesis...
« Last Edit: July 08, 2009, 03:03:37 AM by WilbyInebriated »

ramset

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8073
Re: Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie
« Reply #218 on: July 08, 2009, 01:31:27 AM »
OOOHHHH.....


 "" I'm betting you won't, because you are a liar and a troll and a stalker."""

The 1 2 3 combo
better than a triple dog dare

WilbyInebriated

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3141
Re: Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie
« Reply #219 on: July 08, 2009, 01:32:35 AM »
"send me your address and i will send you the part, you worthless bum"

I'm betting you won't, because you are a liar and a troll and a stalker.

back to "serious" work i see...

TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
Re: Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie
« Reply #220 on: July 08, 2009, 01:55:58 AM »
you  tested this one?i didn't think so. that's how your "science" flys.

the real issue is, you never did it properly, and have been avoiding that fact with all sorts of asinine reasons. i didn't promise anything, but nice try on the misdirection again. let us know when you test that hypothesis...

How could I test that hypothesis, since I just made it today and I don't have the parts? That's why it's a hypothesis, not a demonstrated fact. And I could swear I see "future experimentation" there in that post you quote. Of course I could just be making that part up too...

"send me your address and i will send you the part, you worthless bum"

Yeah, that's not a promise, it's a threat.


WilbyInebriated

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3141
Re: Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie
« Reply #221 on: July 08, 2009, 01:59:04 AM »
How could I test that hypothesis, since I just made it today and I don't have the parts? That's why it's a hypothesis, not a demonstrated fact.

"send me your address and i will send you the part, you worthless bum"

Yeah, that's not a promise, it's a threat.
you never did your "replication" properly, and are still avoiding that fact with asinine responses. as far as you testing your "hypothesis for future research", i think that's what you labeled it? correct me if i'm wrong counselor. i doubt that will ever happen, even though it's what you should have done first, but that's what you call "science"...   ::)

nice misdirection attempt, again.

TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
Re: Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie
« Reply #222 on: July 08, 2009, 02:11:40 AM »
you never did the replication properly. as far as you testing your "hypothesis for future research", i think that's what you labeled it? correct me if i'm wrong counselor. i doubt that will ever happen, even though it's what you should have done first, but that's what you call "science"...

nice misdirection attempt, again.

You are starting to sound really weak there.  You're grasping at straw men now--attacking research that I haven't even done yet and just proposed this morning. Yet you already know how I'm going to do it and how it will turn out. Sad. Maybe you should take a break, go get a milkshake if you're old enough to go to the store by yourself.


By the way, your heroine has moved the goalposts yet again. If you compare her present description of the "control" test--which she now says depleted the batteries--with the report of the control test in the EIT paper, you will see that she doesn't even seem to understand what she herself is reporting. The batteries in the control test are nowhere near depleted, if you can trust her figures at all at any time. Take a look for yourself and see.

Now, once again, why are you attacking me, Wilby, when Ainslie is so much a better target? Is it because I will play and she won't? Well, I'm getting tired and I hear Mom calling, so I better go home, it's almost dark.

WilbyInebriated

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3141
Re: Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie
« Reply #223 on: July 08, 2009, 02:14:31 AM »
You are starting to sound really weak there.  You're grasping at straw men now--attacking research that I haven't even done yet and just proposed this morning. Yet you already know how I'm going to do it and how it will turn out. Sad. Maybe you should take a break, go get a milkshake if you're old enough to go to the store by yourself.


By the way, your heroine has moved the goalposts yet again. If you compare her present description of the "control" test--which she now says depleted the batteries--with the report of the control test in the EIT paper, you will see that she doesn't even seem to understand what she herself is reporting. The batteries in the control test are nowhere near depleted, if you can trust her figures at all at any time. Take a look for yourself and see.

Now, once again, why are you attacking me, Wilby, when Ainslie is so much a better target? Is it because I will play and she won't? Well, I'm getting tired and I hear Mom calling, so I better go home, it's almost dark.

ok, bye now. say hi to mom for me. let us know if you do get around to testing the "future research" hypothesis. i'll grab a chair, i'm sure it will be classic.

i don't care what RMA is doing. we are talking about your circuit. the one that still doesn't have the specified fet. nice try on the misdirection though. you do that every time, such stamina...
« Last Edit: July 08, 2009, 03:05:23 AM by WilbyInebriated »

TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
Re: Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie
« Reply #224 on: July 08, 2009, 02:19:48 AM »
"send me your address and i will send you the part, you worthless bum"

Oh, I just remembered:

Here's a good way to tell if someone is feeding you science, or bullshit. Is their claimed result repeatable, by anyone, at any time?

Mine is.

Hers isn't.

And yours--well, we just don't know, do we.