Harry/Dave: Andrew is borderline pathological skeptic. when challenged by Dave to do a Spice model so they could compare them to see if they get the same results, and if not, why, what does Andrew do? He starts with the insults and name calling. Typical for a pathoskep who is called out on the carpet and has no place to hide, so he attacks the opponent personally. tries to propagate the perception that his opponent is not competent. Fortunately, postings on this forum cannot be deleted/edited, and forum members can make up their own minds as to who is right/wrong; as will history.
-Mark Iverson From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 11:06 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Spice model explains eCat non-exponential waveform, supports David Roberson's linear-response theory OK Harry, perhaps I took his comment the wrong way. I value your ideas and hope that you keep spreading them my direction. There is no place on this list for personal insults. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Harry Veeder <hveeder...@gmail.com> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> Sent: Wed, May 29, 2013 1:46 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:Spice model explains eCat non-exponential waveform, supports David Roberson's linear-response theory dave, I am not offended. I find his reaction kinda funny. On this list we are allowed to think outside our respective disciplines... or self-disciplines ;-) harry On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 1:29 AM, David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com> wrote: Harry, please do not be offended by that guy. Remember, I was not able to teach him elementary electronic theory. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Harry Veeder <hveeder...@gmail.com> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> Sent: Wed, May 29, 2013 1:19 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:Spice model explains eCat non-exponential waveform, supports David Roberson's linear-response theory Please read what I write. I drew an analogy between the two types of circuits diagrams. Harry On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 1:13 AM, Andrew <andrew...@att.net> wrote: I think you are ridiculously irrational. Look at the circuit diagram. What precisely is wrong with you? That you are not an EE and cannot interpret the "funny symbols"? Good grief. There sure are some ripe steamers on this list. Roberson was bad enough. Then there's ...ah fergeddit. Andrew ----- Original Message ----- From: Harry Veeder <mailto:hveeder...@gmail.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 10:08 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Spice model explains eCat non-exponential waveform, supports David Roberson's linear-response theory I think you are bluffing. harry On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 12:59 AM, Andrew <andrew...@att.net> wrote: It's a capacitor in parallel with a resistor. I am underwhelmed. Andrew ----- Original Message ----- From: Harry Veeder <mailto:hveeder...@gmail.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 9:55 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Spice model explains eCat non-exponential waveform, supports David Roberson's linear-response theory The diagram reminds me of constructions consisting of springs and dashpots in series and parallel which are used to model viscoelastic materials. see e.g. http://gertrude-old.case.edu/276/materials/5.fig/05.htm6.gif http://ars.els-cdn.com/content/image/1-s2.0-S0023643808000790-gr1.jpg His circuit diagram could be considered an electric model of force interaction at the atomic scale within the Ecat's fuel. harry On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 9:09 PM, Andrew <andrew...@att.net> wrote: Let's make sure I understand these 4 plots. I understand your diagram thus: The blue square wave goes through your toy model and emerges as the green double exponential. The blue triangular wave goes through your toy model and emerges as the green curve that looks very like the power curve in the report. The toy model describes a thermal simulation which translates electrical input to the device to radiant power output. OK so far? Assuming yes, here's what I think you've shown. The control box consumes power as a square wave (which is what the report measures on the input side), and outputs a triangular wave to the device. The device's output power profile (radiant heat) comes out as per the report. Bazinga. The only problem is that the cable between the control box and the device contains "secrets". That's your next reverse-engineering mission :) Andrew ----- Original Message ----- From: "Alan Fletcher" <a...@well.com> To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 5:37 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Spice model explains eCat non-exponential waveform, supports David Roberson's linear-response theory >> From: "Andrew" <andrew...@att.net> >> Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 4:53:45 PM >> That's a nice piece of reverse engineering - Kudos. My only issue >> with it is >> the plot in the report, which definitely shows square waves. Mind >> you, these >> were measured on the input side of the control box. So it's possible >> you've uncovered a secret about the actual drive waveform. > > The square waves are the INPUT stimulus. The wavy line (eg plot 8) is the OUTPUT power. > > But the general shape will be similar. > > (I displayed voltage ... equivalent to temperature. I still have lots to do. >
