Cold Heat from Canada, a documentary.

[TimFox]

As I said I never had such an application but I sure had problems with a source follower driving a difficult load. I was using an early mosfet(IRF720 if I remember correctly) in source follower mode to drive the screen grids of two pairs of EL519 valves(tubes) in a Doherty AM  system. Random failures with the transistors going source-drain s/c putting full rail voltage on the screens was causing meltdowns. Never got to solve this as the project was cancelled.

Follower stability:
A simpler way to visualize the oscillation problem with a follower (emitter, cathode, or source) driving a capacitive load  is to look at the base-emitter capacitance and the load capacitance (emitter-ground) and realize that that looks like a standard grounded-collector Colpitts oscillator, when an inductor to ground is added at the base.  There are ways to "spoil" the oscillation, usually with series resistors.

[paul cotter]

Yep, that is exactly like the split capacitance in a Colpitts.

[Chet]

Chet

But since he was probably telling us what we already knew to hide what he had in mind (whatever that was), we have to assume that his patent attorney properly advised Fogal on how to write a patent by sequestering the good stuff.
So, anything imaginable is fair game so long as it produces results which are not commonly held among the collective working knowledge of engineers.
In other words, your objection, although well-intended, is ill-founded. Otherwise, I'd have to ask for a refund from whomever that patent attorney was (whom Fogal hired to assist Fogal) if I were in Fogal's shoes.

We need to be very careful about what we think were seeing in patents, imo.

For example, I have seen some patents which show a picture of a resistance in the patent circuit but the actual component shown in a photo was a 24" coil having some resistance. It's weird, we see a transistor with a resistor drawn next to it and we falsely assume it's a tiny carbon resistor but were only guessing. As well, a circuit diagram only shows the circuit layout not the actual component size, geometry or placement relative to other components. In many cases they showed two resistors parallel to one another in the circuit and the component was actually a transformer.

In this respect the patent attorney was doing his job. A good patent lawyer would let the observers own imagination and assumptions lead them in the wrong direction to protect their clients interests. I would do the same thing.

That is precisely what I imagine the patent attorney had in mind if the resistor in Bill's diagram is replacing an inductor since an inductor is exactly what I thought belongs there instead of a simple resistor. Both are conductors. Both carry simple resistance. The extra information of inductance is, what I considered to be, optional information the patent attorney elected to drop.

#22 in figure 1:



I could see how someone could argue that that squiggly line is not definitively a resistor, after all, but is a coil or is a resistor according to context (whatever that means).

[TimFox]

Fig. 1 is labeled “Prior Art” and is merely a textbook bias circuit (not very good) for a NPN amplifier.
It is not claimed by the patent.

[Chet]

Fig. 1 is labeled “Prior Art” and is merely a textbook bias circuit (not very good) for a NPN amplifier.
It is not claimed by the patent.

That's called misdirection, as in: "don't bother paying any attention to the man behind the curtain". So, don't focus on that if that's your fancy. But you'd be taking orders from the patent which never vowed honesty.

The backstory is that he invented a customized electrolytic capacitor which implies that nothing which is prior could possibly be of any interest to us unless we are to assume the hint of an electrical equivalency -- not an exact duplicate. Our imagination is at stake, here, to make up the difference.

[paul cotter]

Chet, you still do not get it. A patent can only protect that which is clearly disclosed. If you discover some new product/process and patent it without full disclosure then your patent is not worth the paper it is written on. Another entity who makes the same discovery independently will not be constrained by the patent. Anyways, this is all irrelevant as the Fogal stuff makes no sense whatsoever. Again, I tell you that you are wasting what is left of your life rummaging through old useless patent and sciency sounding mumbo-jumbo.

[Electrodynamic]

Chet

The backstory is that he invented a customized electrolytic capacitor which implies that nothing which is prior could possibly be of any interest to us unless we are to assume the hint of an electrical equivalency -- not an exact duplicate. Our imagination is at stake, here, to make up the difference.

I read the patent again and realized I have seen similar effects which Fogal describes.

Normally we charge a capacitor and the energy stored relates to the work we put in. The voltage(pressure) x current(flow) and we see this as similar to filling a bucket with water. This is the most common generalized lump sum perspective.

However I noticed that HV discharges with a very small time period produced physical oscillations in capacitors. Think of it this way, normally we charge a capacitor like pouring water in a bucket. However what if we dropped small slugs or packets of water into the bucket instead?. The water in the bucket can start oscillating at it's own resonant frequency as a pressure wave.

Of course, my experiments took this concept to the extreme and not only did the capacitor oscillate at it's own resonant frequency but started ejecting physical material from the surface. The concept is easy, we normally charge capacitors like pushing on a diaphragm or drum skin where this effect is like a quick strike on a snare drum skin producing oscillations.

[paul cotter]

Chet, how does a transistor suddenly become an electrolytic capacitor?? 

[Chet]

Chet, how does a transistor suddenly become an electrolytic capacitor?? 

Good question.

A transistor becomes an electrolytic capacitor when a transistor inverts the polarity of current in an inductor.

But Bill Fogal doesn't call it this. He calls it: a "charged barrier" since an inversion of current serves as a barrier to the normal direction of current flow.

Clever wording hides his intentions for what he intended to protect. This is word salad to us, though, since he never intended to be forthright in his declaration.

By shorting out each pair of terminals of a transistor with an inductor, and by magnetically coupling all three inductive shorts to each other using a negative coupling coefficient above 50%, and by feeding this arrangement with a sine wave of a mild frequency of half a million cycles per second at an amplitude of one-thousandth of a volt stretched across (and in parallel to) the collector and the emitter, then the inversion of the inductors' current occurs.



And with an additional set of three wire shorts, connected in parallel to the three inductive shorts, whose magnetic coupling is raised to as high a value (as close to unity; 100%) as is possible, then the feedback which ensues can be slowed down so as to extend how long it takes for this arrangement of components to destroy itself if not "managed".

[Xena E]

🐂💩

[paul cotter]

Chet, NO. There is however one correct sentence here: "this is word salad to us".

[IanB]

I think that Chet shall hereinafter be known as "The Word Salad Chat Bot"

[Chet]

Chet, NO. There is however one correct sentence here: "this is word salad to us".

Paul, yes.

[Electrodynamic]

Back on topic...

This is a neat site.
https://pentagonufofiles.io/?utm_source=google&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIkdripZzVlAMVfxStBh00Hz3_EAMYASAAEgJxgvD_BwE&campaign_id=23830673177&campaign={campaignname}&adgroup_id=203107916104&adgroup={adgroupname}&ad_id=808174827826&keyword=ufo%20disclosure&matchtype=b&gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=23830673177

The "warlock triple" video is interesting. It looks like a military sensor platform picked up a weird shaped object moving at high speed for around 4 minutes.
My take away is there seems to be large numbers of spherical or disk shaped craft moving at very high speed which are aerodynamically impossible by our measures.

The "Toxic burn" video from 2020 is also interesting because we can see the scale and velocity involved. The bright circular craft seems to be covering a quarter section of land in two seconds or near 900 mph. So we have an object detected by a military sensor platform giving it a great deal of credibility. We can also confirm it's not a civilian craft because it appears spherical and is moving at near 900 mph. We can also see it's not losing altitude which discounts falling objects or natural phenomena. It's also interesting to note the video was taken with military grade thermal cameras and the objects in question left no heat trail like a jet.

These two video's in themselves would seem to discount all the nonsense most of the critics are pitching imo.

[Electrodynamic]

https://pentagonufofiles.io/?campaign_id=23830673177&campaign={campaignname}&adgroup_id=203107916104&adgroup={adgroupname}&ad_id=808174827826&keyword=ufo%20disclosure&matchtype=b&gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=23830673177#case-101

Syrian UAP instant acceleration

This is also an interesting video because of the context. We can see the object being tracked and moving at high velocity against a stationary background. It then makes a sweeping turn reversing course with respect to the background terrain essentially ruling out a camera artifact imo. 

This is the first video I have seen, having some credibility, which shows near instant acceleration. This is similar to what myself and another person observed. Many people claimed some craft just disappeared but I suspect they can accelerate so fast they appear to disappear into thin air.

So we have a crazy amount of unknowns here...
1)Non aerodynamic forms like a sphere moving and making coordinated turns at high velocity.
2)No heat trail seen by thermal cameras ruling out combustion based propulsion.
3)Obscene accelerations well beyond any technology we know of.

[paul cotter]

Little green men(ok, ok, grey).

[SteveThackery]

The noise in the picture is absolutely terrible - for saying it's supposed to be state-of-the-art, an awful lot of military footage looks like this: a formless white blob in a sea of noise.

Whatever: it is still fascinating and intriguing.

[Xena E]

[Electrodynamic]

The noise in the picture is absolutely terrible - for saying it's supposed to be state-of-the-art, an awful lot of military footage looks like this: a formless white blob in a sea of noise.

Whatever: it is still fascinating and intriguing.

I would agree most of the video's are as you suggest, a formless white blob in a sea of noise.

The video's in my posts were ones which I felt had some credibility showing an object moving relative to the ground terrain. More interesting is what we don't see imo. In several of the video's we see boats or drones which leave a large heat trail behind them that is easy to identify. The IC or jet engines from conventional craft are emitting large amounts of heat which is easy to spot with thermal cameras where the craft in question have no heat trail.

I have to say at first I thought the Pentagon declassifying UFO files was going to be more bs but I was wrong. The three video's I posted, Syrian UAP instant acceleration, Warlock Triple and Toxic Burn are the most compelling I have seen to date. We have a credible source, non aerodynamic forms like a sphere moving or making coordinated turns at high velocity over ground terrain which leave no heat trail.

My thinking is more in line with what most in the defense industry claim. Anyone who thinks foreign craft moving freely around our country isn't a problem needs their head examined.

[Electrodynamic]

Little green men(ok, ok, grey).

I see it a little differently. Imagine a craft with the following characteristics only it had Russian or Chinese markings.

1)Non aerodynamic forms like a sphere moving and making coordinated turns at high velocity.
2)No heat trail seen by thermal cameras ruling out combustion based propulsion.
3)Obscene accelerations well beyond any technology we know of.

Now the notion of "little green men" seems very naive if not completely absurd imo. Most would probably have a complete melt down if someone was hovering a drone over their yard watching them. Yet a foreign craft entering our air space and the military being powerless to prevent it isn't a problem?. Just little green men?. Thankfully the government/military agencies are much more responsible and see the threat to national security for what it is.

So let me get this straight, a foreign fighter jet entering our air space is an imminent threat and act of war. However much more advanced foreign craft routinely entering our air space is just little green men. You do understand how completely absurd this sounds don't you?.

[paul cotter]

As I have said before and I will repeat now, I accept that UAP, ie unidentified aerial phenomena, certainly occur. What they are, I have no idea and until one is retrieved and examined speculation is utterly pointless and my suggestion of little green men(sorry Xena, GREY) is as valid as any other wild ass speculation.

[Xena E]

What they are, I have no idea and until one is retrieved and examined speculation is utterly pointless and my suggestion of little green men(sorry Xena, GREY) is as valid as any other wild ass speculation.

Paul. All joking aside, I think the assumption that the little green (or grey) 'men' (brothers) piloting these  'craft' are extraterrestrial beings, is a misunderstanding.

If a Canadian, Russian or Chinese pilot, whomever the hyper intelligent group are having designed these devices, even wearing the very best G suit, were actually piloting such a fast and agile machine, and they didn't pass out, then sure as hell they'd be turning green or grey if not actually barfing their breakfast all over the dashboard. 😀👍

Of course,  the next nutter claim will be the anti G or anti gravitational generator that allows operation outside the reference of the space/time continuum or some such shit.

If these sightings are machines for covert surveillance and not ET and his mates buzzing a few drunk hicks, I'd put money on them being unmanned...

[Electrodynamic]

There are a few possibilities imo.
1)The U.S. government/Pentagon captured video with military grade thermal cameras of unknown craft within controlled airspace. The craft moved at a relatively high velocity making coordinated turns and appeared to have no heat trail.
2)The U.S. government/Pentagon faked the videos to mislead the public.

The video labelled "Orb over Iraqi City" seems relevant and these are not large objects which implies they are unmanned. So no little green men or aliens are required or implied. I see no need to devolve the conversation to absurdities just because we see something we cannot understand. There must be a rational scientific explanation and I would like to understand whats going on.

In any case, we now have proof by a credible source these craft do exist. If you don't like it take it up with the U.S. military and the Pentagon. I'm sure they would get a kick out of some crank telling them how misguided they are.

[Xena E]

Basically the suggestion by members here that the cause is little green men, lizzard people, grey brothers, or ghosts from the future, is just a further example of the real cranks being trolled for their ridiculous assertions, and gravitas of the subject in hand.

The phenomena of strange lights in the night sky have been reported for centuries and what has been the negative impact? Fuck all... that's what. So a group of private sensationalist nutjobs trying to stir up fear into the popular imagination of the hoy paloy is little better that the story of the marauding Heffalumps... the Internet is full of these twats who have some axe to grind, UFOs, free energy, bizarre claims of conspiracies to name a few.

In any case, we now have proof by a credible source these craft do exist. If you don't like it take it up with the U.S. military and the Pentagon. I'm sure they would get a kick out of some crank telling them how misguided they are.

No we don't have proof that these craft exist,  that's all in your mind, there have been some sightings, blurry photography, and radar hits, of some phenomenon. What they are isn't proven, those that have been proven are no longer any interest to the sensationalism of popular culture. Sane people however don't give a shit about any of it because they don't worry about things they can't change.

Why would we believe that the US military is a credible source? Firstly if they have a new generation of stealth aircraft flying about they're not telling you! The only things they will tell you are the 'low threat unexplained' category. It is in the interest though to give the taxpayers a reason to be fearful to justify their own existence, "we got your back Jack".

As for the "some crank" comment, the US military don't need that I agree... I'm sure they have their own breed of top quality cranks, as evidenced by the late great Tom Bearden, a premium five star nutter, once a member of their ranks it's claimed.

Anyway. Here's my grainy photo, if anyone cares to speculate on an identification. (It's not a mystery)...

[paul cotter]

I know exactly what that is: it is the rogue planet Nibiru heading our way, we are all going to die!  Sorry Xena, I could not pass up such an opportunity. You have done a thoroughly excellent summation of the situation with these UAP and I hope my comment does not put me in the bad books.