TinselKoala,MarkE

I'm using trigger on channel A with Auto trigger. I don't understand what Normal trigger mode can do, mostly it looks the same as Auto one.And yes, I'm using ALT view to see both signals from Channel A and B so I can scroll one of them to bu upper and one lower and compare. I wish you know what I mean.So, should I change to Normal triggering mode and trigger only on channel A with scope connected to the output of microcontroller and scope on channel B connected to the coil end near the Source of mosfet ? Is that correct ?


P.S. Tinsel, Wow! Don't you think you react too emotionally ? Aaron is maybe a sneaky pal trying to get attention but this experiment with car coil is really cool and has a secret hidden ,maybe 
Do you REALLY wish to "fight to death" defending current scientific dogma
, even if the change is right behind the corner ?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-NhDeNGh7M&list=UUZjwwSkok_CxM1zRFx2EBLg&index=9

Forest, the difference between auto and normal triggering modes is that the auto mode triggers whether or not the signal meets the trigger criteria.  What you want the oscilloscope to do is paint each the A and B traces with the same timing relationship to some reference event.  In order to establish that relationship, you need to trigger against a signal that has as close to a constant relationship to both signals as possible.  Normal trigger mode fires if and only if the trigger signal meets the criteria set-up by the trigger controls:  source, rising or falling edge, coupling and level.  The shorter the rise or fall time of your reference timing signal the less uncertainty there will be in the trigger.  If you have a logic signal that has a cleaner rectangle waveform than both your A and B signals, then as TK suggests, connecting that signal to your external trigger input promises to give you the most stable timing.  If either the A or B signal has a clean signal with rise or fall time that is as good as or close to that of the most pristine signal that you have then you can use that channel:  A or B as your trigger source and the timing stability will be similar to what you can get using the external trigger input.

Auto trigger mode can give you a lot of trouble, particularly in alternate sweep mode because any given trigger can be either from the reference event or the oscilloscope's internal free running trigger.

So, start by triggering on the cleaner of your two waveforms in normal mode with DC trigger coupling.  You will have to adjust the trigger level until you get a stable waveform.  Do that for the A channel only.  When the display is stable, then you can turn the B channel on using either chopped or alternate sweep.  If you have stability issues due to a slowly changing or non-monotonic signal then use a third signal such as TK has suggested as an input to the oscilloscope's external trigger, select the external trigger as the trigger source and get channel A stabilized as before.  Then turn on the B channel.

TinselKoala,MarkE

I'm using trigger on channel A with Auto trigger. I don't understand what Normal trigger mode can do, mostly it looks the same as Auto one.And yes, I'm using ALT view to see both signals from Channel A and B so I can scroll one of them to bu upper and one lower and compare. I wish you know what I mean.So, should I change to Normal triggering mode and trigger only on channel A with scope connected to the output of microcontroller and scope on channel B connected to the coil end near the Source of mosfet ? Is that correct ?


P.S. Tinsel, Wow! Don't you think you react too emotionally ? Aaron is maybe a sneaky pal trying to get attention but this experiment with car coil is really cool and has a secret hidden ,maybe 
Do you REALLY wish to "fight to death" defending current scientific dogma
, even if the change is right behind the corner ?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-NhDeNGh7M&list=UUZjwwSkok_CxM1zRFx2EBLg&index=9

If you don't want to take my advice about using the external trigger capability of your scope that is of course entirely up to you. It's funny that you seem reluctant even to try it, though.

Generally, "Normal" trigger mode blanks the trace(s) when no signal that exceeds the manually set trigger voltage level is detected by the scope, so the screen goes dark. "Auto" trigger mode overrides this and will generally display the trace(s) regardless of sensed voltage, so you can display a flat line if you like or let the scope trigger on whatever p-p voltage it sees without you having to fiddle with the manual trigger level setting. You're welcome.


You have no idea about my history with Aaron Murakami, do you. Even though I have given you some references and I can back up everything I say, including the fact that he lied about me, about the Ainslie circuit and about his own "contributions" to that story. That's fine too, you can believe whatever you want to believe, and waste your time however you want to waste it.
We went around and around about the relationship between the Ainslie published 555 timer circuit and its duty cycle and the mosfet's response, Aaron accused me of errors and even fakery, and eventually he resorted to having to change many parts of the Ainslie published circuit so that it would finally do what HE said rather than what I said... and he never apologized or admitted he was wrong the whole time.  Even now there exists a PDF document that he and his cohort Ashtweth wrote, that lies about me and about the duty cycle issue. You can look at his early videos with his new oscilloscope from that time and see for yourself that he did not know how to use it, and displayed screen after screen of garbage, false triggering and meaningless combs that were impossible to interpret properly, claiming that they represented phenomena in the circuit.
Here is just one of a large handful of videos that I made during that time in an attempt to illustrate and explain the 555 duty cycle issue to Aaron and Ainslie.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhIDnjmPjW4
The argument even descended to this level, where I demonstrate a simple circuit that Aaron himself proposed, but never actually tested, he thinking it would support HIS point but actually as you can see it supports MY point instead. Do I sound angry in this video? Yes, I am indeed irate about having to do utterly remedial, eighth-grade level demonstrations to try to educate someone with as little integrity as Aaron Murakami.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rSFS99SaZTA


You think their "experiment" with the car coil is "really cool" with maybe a hidden secret, but you have nothing to say about my own demonstrations with the car coil?
I'm crushed, absolutely crushed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSMb69N39CQ

Nelson
Counting on your amps usage maybe also using 9V battery  but I understand you may have no reason to use it  and took negative comments.
It remains me some effect of an arrow when it sharply pierce into the hard wood.The arrow movement is abruptly stopped yet still there is energy flow which cannot dissipate and return back and form kind of very fast oscillations of the end part of arrow beatting against the air...

Hi Forest,
The only simple reason to use a 12v battery is because the car relay is 12v . How you  think i can use the 12v relay vibrate at 5kz with a 9v battery and maintain oscillation?If i want use 9v battery i have to find a 9v relay:) but for me it isn't important , because this piece of scrap (circuit) is only to study and observe.
Thanks

 


Im not worry about took negative comments because i learn with all information even failed tests.

Hi MarkE ,
I never say that work of Aron about this subject is 100% correct ! But what i try to say is that their work was important! Maybe Aron let himself get carried away, and could not understand some details, but can not say that his job was unsuccessful, because i learn with some details of their tests and from other people.
Even if Tim has proven to be right and in your personal dispute with Aaron , does not give the right to judge the purposes and intent of those who are interested in this type of study.What I saw happen was a bad advertisement for who is starting up in this forum.


Thanks

Nelson it is difficult for me to view Aaron's activities as research.  It is hard for me to find any factual contribution to knowledge made by Aaron. 

There are different folks with different skill levels in different areas.  And everyone makes mistakes sooner or later. The question is:  Do they look for mistakes and correct them when found?  With respect to the Ainslie claims Aaron fared very badly.  It's OK that he made some big mistakes. The problem was that he fought and fought and fought reality as initially gently pointed out by TK, and then with greater and greater force by TK.  I also agree with TK that there is something wrong with the idea of publishing three different books each purporting to teach the "complete secrets" of what is at its best a very complicated and large implementation of a lead acid battery desulphanator promoted by John Bedini, and at its worst are just false claims.

If you believe that you are learning something from Aaron, I would double check with other references.

Nelson it is difficult for me to view Aaron's activities as research.  It is hard for me to find any factual contribution to knowledge made by Aaron. 

There are different folks with different skill levels in different areas.  And everyone makes mistakes sooner or later. The question is:  Do they look for mistakes and correct them when found?  With respect to the Ainslie claims Aaron fared very badly.  It's OK that he made some big mistakes. The problem was that he fought and fought and fought reality as initially gently pointed out by TK, and then with greater and greater force by TK.  I also agree with TK that there is something wrong with the idea of publishing three different books each purporting to teach the "complete secrets" of what is at its best a very complicated and large implementation of a lead acid battery desulphanator promoted by John Bedini, and at its worst are just false claims.

If you believe that you are learning something from Aaron, I would double check with other references.

This should not be a local assessment judgments about people.
Only mentioned that some of the experiences that Aaron has published some videos about a particular subject  and  for me at least was advantageous. Never in question, the actions or purpose Aaron or anyone else. thats clear ?
I consider disrespectful making statements about people who are not here to defend these same charges.
I, like many people chose a path to follow.I learn even with mistakes of others, and not see it as a waste of time.
But everyone is different, and fortunately there is freedom, do not want to destroy the freedom of thinking of people.
The topic is Energy amplification right?
What we are discussing here?
If what show does not fit in the topic say! because it seems that I appear to bother some people with what I show in my rudimental tests.
For me will not be a problem to respect  opinion of people and I will remove me from this forum.

Thanks

Now it's to be stalking as well?  This is just getting sad Cap.

Quote from hypocritical troll:

" There are different folks with different skill levels in different areas.  And everyone makes mistakes sooner or later. The question is:  Do they look for mistakes and correct them when found?  With respect to the Ainslie claims Aaron fared very badly.  It's OK that he made some big mistakes. The problem was that he fought and fought and fought reality as initially gently pointed out... "


Cap's reply:

" I have to agree..for instance, I tried to point out the dangerous properties involved in the process of making stainless steel, as it relates to the human body.

But do you think that numbskull would listen ?

Not on your life...instead he went on like a common internet troll.

http://www.overunity.com/15125/let-the-speculation-begin/new/topicseen/#new


Words is chewy, and can be very hard to swallow.


Regards... "



Second quote from hypocritical troll:

" Now it's to be stalking as well?  This is just getting sad Cap. "



According to troll logic, there's no way i should have been looking at this thread.

Tell me, how could I pass by words rising to that level of hypocrisy ?

If I were to let that opportunity pass (low hanging fruit tho it may be) i would stand to lose the respect of my loyal readership.

If there's anything I dislike more than a troll. its a hypocritical troll.

I mean, with the internet literally polluted with information on the toxicity of stainless steel, how is it that this sanctimonious "expert on virtually EVERYTHING be totally unaware of its existence ?

He will be heretofore be dubbed the Stainless Steel Troll, and have this episode shoved in his face in all future incursions.

Tinsel Koala: Could you please comment on the attached pdf.
I enclose it because Tito once commented that you only need 3 wires.
Also Kapanadze told me his invention is "so simple - you'll laugh"