Prev: John Larkin and low jitter clocks
Next: New Search Engine for Electronic Components
From: Winston on 29 May 2010 13:22
On 5/29/2010 7:48 AM, hamilton wrote:

(...)

> If anyone has actually read the text, is there any code in the EEPROM or
> just blank (all FFs) ?

Doesn't matter. Ideally one would start with all FFs, though 8K of garbage
data is not qualitatively different from any other 8K of garbage data.

> The OSC symbols are kind of wrong, they look like crystals or resonators.

Yes. In the 'multiple oscillator' version, they are not even powered. :)

--Winston
From: Don Lancaster on 29 May 2010 13:31
On 5/29/2010 6:04 AM, Baron wrote:
> ehsjr Inscribed thus:
>
>> Bob Gerber wrote:
>>> On Thu, 27 May 2010 15:25:37 -0700, Tim Wescott
>>> <tim(a)seemywebsite.now> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>> Can anyone please tell me exactly what this circuit is, in
>>>>> electronic terms, and how it could possibly function as described in
>>>>> the linked report below?
>>>
>>>
>>>> I hope this helps your understanding.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I respect your opinion, but given that you are an engineer can you
>>> please describe to us what this circuit actually is, and what
>>> function it performs, at least in conventional terms?
>>>
>>> http://tillerfoundation.com/White%20Paper%20II.pdf
>>>
>>> Scroll down to page three to see the ckts.
>>>
>>> Thank you,
>>>
>>> Bob Gerber
>>>
>>
>>
>> It's a multiplier. It creates a product (the white paper)
>> by multiplying the authors' thoughts times the
>> substance found at the south end of a north bound horse,
>> to create more of the same. Impossible to say precisely
>> how it operates, because, as others have mentioned, the
>> diagram is (intentionaly) unreadable.
>>
>> Ed
>
> In other words "Horseshit" !
>

Sometimes it is difficult to draw a distinction between useful adjuncts
towards porcine whole body cleanliness and total hogwash.

<http://www.tinaja.com/glib/bashpseu.pdf>

I'll go with "looks like a duck, quacks like a duck" on this one.

--
Many thanks,

Don Lancaster voice phone: (928)428-4073
Synergetics 3860 West First Street Box 809 Thatcher, AZ 85552
rss: http://www.tinaja.com/whtnu.xml email: don(a)tinaja.com

Please visit my GURU's LAIR web site at http://www.tinaja.com
From: Frank Buss on 29 May 2010 16:37
Winston wrote:

> 1) As hamilton mentioned, the EEPROM devices are likely
> to be Intel 2864. The Intersil X28HC64 would probably
> work as well, (as would just about any parallel static
> RAM, provided you had a continuous supply of Vdd).
>
> Select for low pin capacitance if you want a large
> range of 'imprinted' data values.
>
> Of course the contents of each of these devices
> exposed to the same 'imprinting' session will be
> a function of the time varying electrostatic
> field integrated into the capacitance of each of
> the pins. A roomful of IIEDs are likely to contain
> wildly differing data from the same 'imprinting'
> session. It's the nature of asynchronously recording
> chaotic noise in wildly misleading sequence.

It's not the data in the EEPROM, it is the "subtle energy". In
http://www.scientificexploration.org/journal/jse_13_2_dibble.pdf he writes
at PDF page 2:

| An alternative, and less passionate, test vehicle might be some type of
| electrical device to act as an intermediate between the human and the
| experiment. In such a case, the human energy field interaction would
| produce some subtle level effects in the device that are not
| distinguishable by any physical detectors presently available.

I think when reading this, you don't need to read the rest :-) Tiller has
the idea, that there is some enery which can't be measured and an EEPROM
can save something, so why not use it to save this energy? Of course, any
pebble would do it, because you can't measure it anyway. So using an EEPROM
is inrinsic illogical, even in the light of his absurd ideas, but cranks
are not logical.

--
Frank Buss, fb(a)frank-buss.de
http://www.frank-buss.de, http://www.it4-systems.de
From: Greegor on 29 May 2010 17:42
h > If anyone has actually read the text, is there
h > any code in the EEPROM or just blank (all FFs) ?

W > Doesn't matter. Ideally one would start with all
W > FFs, though 8K of garbage data is not
W > qualitatively different from any other 8K of garbage data.

h > The OSC symbols are kind of wrong, they look like crystals or
resonators.


W > Yes.  In the 'multiple oscillator' version, they are not even
powered. :)

Isn't that particular oversight almost a convention for some
designers?



Has this Intention Imprinting experiment been
written up in The Journal of Irreproducible Results?

http://www.jir.com/
From: hamilton on 29 May 2010 18:43
Hi again,

The osc is powered in the smaller schematic, the +V coming off C1 in
fugure 3 of jse_13_2_dibble.pdf.

The three EEPROM version is missing this wire.

You will need to give credit to the designer for not cut-n-pasting
correctly.

So squint your eyes a little and the wire will appear.


;-)

I do not think a RAM chip will work in this application.

If I remember correctly, didn't the Intel 28xxx family have an internal
Vpp generator in it ??

If this circuit is going to generate odd signals, won't the Vpp
generator be critical ??

I have google'd and still have not found an original Intel 2864 data
wheel to check out.
Does any one have a link to such a beast.



hamilton
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: John Larkin and low jitter clocks
Next: New Search Engine for Electronic Components