Inverse Marx generator
in [Design]
|
Prev: New Product Idea
Next: SCHOLARLY TESTIMONIAL VIDEO : Joseph Moshe (MOSSAD Microbiologist) Swine flu vaccine 1
From: krw on 9 Jul 2010 18:26 On Fri, 09 Jul 2010 07:56:02 -0700, Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon(a)On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote: >On Fri, 09 Jul 2010 04:16:27 -0700, >"JosephKK"<quiettechblue(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >>On Thu, 08 Jul 2010 08:32:12 -0700, John Larkin >><jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >> >>> >>>What path? Understanding bog simple circuits? Stuff like this should >>>be second nature to any electronics designer. It sure shouldn't need >>>to involve cranking up Spice. You use Spice when you *don't* >>>understand how a circuit works. >>> >>>John >>> >>That sounds like a sure fire recipe for getting screwed by SPICE. I have >>watched it happen so very many times. > >The only people who get "screwed" by Spice are those amateurs who >don't understand what .OPTIONS settings, particularly "time-step" >values can do to you. The *only* people? How about those who think their model is real, even at the fringes and beyond? How about those who don't believe in real components? How many FTL circuits have we seen here? >Then there are those who avoid showing a Spice result for their >abortion... to avoid embarrassment ;-) Seems thin.
From: Jim Thompson on 9 Jul 2010 19:10 On Thu, 08 Jul 2010 19:51:42 -0700, Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon(a)On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote: >On Wed, 07 Jul 2010 08:50:50 -0700, John Larkin ><jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > >>On Wed, 07 Jul 2010 08:18:12 +1000, Adrian Jansen <adrian(a)qq.vv.net> >>wrote: >> >>> >>>Jim Thompson wrote: >>>> On Tue, 06 Jul 2010 12:59:35 -0700, John Larkin >>>> <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Tue, 6 Jul 2010 12:46:20 -0700 (PDT), whit3rd <whit3rd(a)gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Jul 6, 6:53 am, John Larkin >>>>>> <jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >>>>>>> On Mon, 5 Jul 2010 22:28:44 -0700 (PDT), whit3rd <whit...(a)gmail.com> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Jul 5, 9:41 pm, John Larkin >>>>>>>> <jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> You can have two caps, C1 charged and C2 not, and transfer all the >>>>>>>>> charge from C1 to C2, without loss. In fact, you can slosh the charge >>>>>>>>> between them, back and forth, forever. Just don't use resistors. >>>>>>>> It has to be identical size capacitors, otherwise 'all the charge' >>>>>>>> can't be transferred without adding/losing energy... >>>>>>> Not so. >>>>>> Put a microcoulomb of charge on a 1 uF capacitor. Transfer it all to >>>>>> a 2 uF capacitor. The first state of the system holds twice the >>>>>> energy of the second. >>>>> >>>>> Well, depends on words now. I can transfer "all the charge that's in >>>>> C1 to C2" (ie, wind up with C1 at zero volts, and no energy lost) but >>>>> the numerical amount of coulombs must change if the cap values are >>>>> different, to conserve energy. I can move the charge back into C1, and >>>>> return the system to its original state. >>>>> >>>>> My point was that you can move charge between caps, without losing >>>>> energy, but not by using resistors. >>>>> >>>>> John >>>>> >>>> >>>> Depends on the definition of "depends" :-) >>>> >>>> "Charge" IS conserved. So if you transfer Q from C1 to C2 >>> >>>> >>>> C1*V1 == C2*V2 >>>> >>>> ...Jim Thompson >>>If you conserve energy, then you must have >>> >>>C1*V1^2 = C2*V2^2 >> >>Right. If you dump all the energy from one charged cap into another, >>discharged, cap of a different value, and do it efficiently, charge is >>not conserved. >> >>John >> >> > >Would you care to prove that for us John? Mathematically, that is. No >hand-waving. After all you do claim trivial EE101 :-) > > ...Jim Thompson Newbies will take note that Larkin has NOT responded to this request. Would someone out there like to mathematically prove that charge is NOT conserved in Larkin's folly (and yet energy is ?:-) ...Jim Thompson -- | James E.Thompson, CTO | mens | | Analog Innovations, Inc. | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | | | Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat | | E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 | Obama isn't going to raise your taxes...it's Bush' fault: Not re- newing the Bush tax cuts will increase the bottom tier rate by 50%
From: John Larkin on 9 Jul 2010 19:19 On Fri, 09 Jul 2010 17:26:33 -0500, "krw(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz" <krw(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote: >On Fri, 09 Jul 2010 07:56:02 -0700, Jim Thompson ><To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon(a)On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote: > >>On Fri, 09 Jul 2010 04:16:27 -0700, >>"JosephKK"<quiettechblue(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >> >>>On Thu, 08 Jul 2010 08:32:12 -0700, John Larkin >>><jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>>What path? Understanding bog simple circuits? Stuff like this should >>>>be second nature to any electronics designer. It sure shouldn't need >>>>to involve cranking up Spice. You use Spice when you *don't* >>>>understand how a circuit works. >>>> >>>>John >>>> >>>That sounds like a sure fire recipe for getting screwed by SPICE. I have >>>watched it happen so very many times. >> >>The only people who get "screwed" by Spice are those amateurs who >>don't understand what .OPTIONS settings, particularly "time-step" >>values can do to you. > >The *only* people? How about those who think their model is real, even at the >fringes and beyond? How about those who don't believe in real components? How >many FTL circuits have we seen here? How about people who simulate a circuit and don't understand what it's actually doing? John
From: Jim Thompson on 9 Jul 2010 19:41 On Fri, 09 Jul 2010 16:19:57 -0700, John Larkin <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >On Fri, 09 Jul 2010 17:26:33 -0500, "krw(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz" ><krw(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote: > >>On Fri, 09 Jul 2010 07:56:02 -0700, Jim Thompson >><To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon(a)On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote: >> >>>On Fri, 09 Jul 2010 04:16:27 -0700, >>>"JosephKK"<quiettechblue(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >>> >>>>On Thu, 08 Jul 2010 08:32:12 -0700, John Larkin >>>><jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>>What path? Understanding bog simple circuits? Stuff like this should >>>>>be second nature to any electronics designer. It sure shouldn't need >>>>>to involve cranking up Spice. You use Spice when you *don't* >>>>>understand how a circuit works. >>>>> >>>>>John >>>>> >>>>That sounds like a sure fire recipe for getting screwed by SPICE. I have >>>>watched it happen so very many times. >>> >>>The only people who get "screwed" by Spice are those amateurs who >>>don't understand what .OPTIONS settings, particularly "time-step" >>>values can do to you. >> >>The *only* people? How about those who think their model is real, even at the >>fringes and beyond? How about those who don't believe in real components? How >>many FTL circuits have we seen here? > >How about people who simulate a circuit and don't understand what it's >actually doing? > >John OK, John, Where's your mathematical analysis? ...Jim Thompson -- | James E.Thompson, CTO | mens | | Analog Innovations, Inc. | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | | | Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat | | E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 | Obama isn't going to raise your taxes...it's Bush' fault: Not re- newing the Bush tax cuts will increase the bottom tier rate by 50%
From: Jim Thompson on 9 Jul 2010 19:45
On Fri, 09 Jul 2010 17:26:33 -0500, "krw(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz" <krw(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote: >On Fri, 09 Jul 2010 07:56:02 -0700, Jim Thompson ><To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon(a)On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote: > >>On Fri, 09 Jul 2010 04:16:27 -0700, >>"JosephKK"<quiettechblue(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >> >>>On Thu, 08 Jul 2010 08:32:12 -0700, John Larkin >>><jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>>What path? Understanding bog simple circuits? Stuff like this should >>>>be second nature to any electronics designer. It sure shouldn't need >>>>to involve cranking up Spice. You use Spice when you *don't* >>>>understand how a circuit works. >>>> >>>>John >>>> >>>That sounds like a sure fire recipe for getting screwed by SPICE. I have >>>watched it happen so very many times. >> >>The only people who get "screwed" by Spice are those amateurs who >>don't understand what .OPTIONS settings, particularly "time-step" >>values can do to you. > >The *only* people? How about those who think their model is real, even at the >fringes and beyond? How about those who don't believe in real components? How >many FTL circuits have we seen here? I DID say "amateurs". I have also recited here my admonishing a former employee about applying common sense to Spice results. "FTL"?? We have lots of those ;-) > >>Then there are those who avoid showing a Spice result for their >>abortion... to avoid embarrassment ;-) > >Seems thin. Thin? What is thin, other than Larkin's BS ?:-) ...Jim Thompson -- | James E.Thompson, CTO | mens | | Analog Innovations, Inc. | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | | | Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat | | E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 | Obama isn't going to raise your taxes...it's Bush' fault: Not re- newing the Bush tax cuts will increase the bottom tier rate by 50% |