This LC parallel resonant oscillator uses the PI (shaped) filter (as you know) with an equiv value of two series caps with Ceq= 1/2C when both C's are equal. The phase is inverted 180deg twice ( once by 2nd order filter and once by inverting amplifier (CMOS logic)) making a positive feedback loop also with excess gain to square up sine feedback input..
Describing how the circuit works does not prove that the capacitors are in series. In a different topology, using different equations, the capacitors can be thought of a being in parallel. For instance, in a "T" circuit of cap----inductor----cap of a power supply, the caps are thought of as being in parallel even though they are connected together at ground.
All Logic IC's have analog properties in this discussion, so we do NOT refer to them as "switches" as you have done, which might be relevant for a more logical discussion on logic.
Not physical switches, no. But the buildup of voltage of the opposite polarity at the input of the inverter causes the inverter to switch and introduces nonlinearity into the circuit.
Your mention of this as a Switched Oscillator is illogical.
It is descriptive.
It reminds me of an old TV guy who once had 500m$ in public stock on his company Del Secur based on his "analogic" understanding of electronics and 2D fingerprints. When I reviewed his design and theory, I found it fundamentally flawed. Within a year his company stock was worthless as stock traders discovered the same thing that his pretense was incorrect and he had no un-hackable security solution. there is no such thing as "analogic" as he used it.
That is arguing by analogy, which is a fallacious tactic. It does not prove I am wrong.
**broken link removed**
Why argue against fundamental oscillator theory when you know your are wrong by deflecting the issue with irrelevant info . this is fallacious.
Who is doing that? Certainly not I.
e.g. in 106 you said
/QUOTE] I don't think it is either a series or parallel resonant circuit. It looks more like an electronic multi-vibrator to me, which is not a linear oscillator.
In some equipment, like power supplies, there are many capacitors connected to ground. You would not say those capacitors are in series, would you?
Which I corrected in posts #112 and iterated that correction in post#116. Did you forget about that?
You should know better to be contrary to any text book and wiki page.
I am not in disagreement with those materials with respect to how the circuit works. In fact, you have not cited any references to that particular circuit. The question is whether the caps are in series or parallel. Expounding on how the circuit works does not resolve the issue.
( and never back your math with proof or any examples in this case as I have done countless times also confirmed by others.)
No you haven't. You have not submitted any math showing how the circuit works, only a descriptive. Others have only showed that the circuit does work. That was never in doubt. What math you did submit pertained to measuring L by the OP. If I have time and inclination, maybe I will do some math.
Your repeated contradictions e
.g. of my true statements without your proof only reflects poorly on you.
Not so. No one should swallow anything that comes along.
If you wish to continue this thread in private with someone else , in private conversation, please do so. I have no interest.
To each his own.
Ratch