Let's Take A Vote...
in [Design]
|
From: John Fields on 29 Jul 2010 12:01 On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 07:06:50 -0700, John Larkin <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 06:13:05 -0700 (PDT), George Herold ><gherold(a)teachspin.com> wrote: >>(I'm just tired of the snipping back and forth... I should have just >>kept my mouth shut and moved on.) >> >>George H. >>> >>> John- Hide quoted text - >>> >>> - Show quoted text - > >Just try injecting technical riffs - braininstorming in public - into >the hen-clucking OT personal rants. Not only does that steer us back >on topic, it annoys the hell out of some people who really deserve >being annoyed. --- Like this one?: I am so sick of grey, white, black, silver, and repulsive pearl-colored cars. You can drive for blocks around here and see nothing but asphalt-colored cars. When I saw that true-red Audi for sale, I had to have it. That Mercedes is a decent shade of red, sort of arterial blood color. I've started to see a few new cars on the street that are actual colors, not just midnight blue or mud red, but *colors*. Maybe things are turning around. Those Germans sure know how to make cars. 0-60 in 3.7 seconds isn't bad at all. That's 0.75 Gs, if I did the math right. John or this one?: Nobody is going to do anything serious about CO2. And maybe we shouldn't anyhow. This is serious http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/07/28/MN5H1EK6BV.DTL and we *can* do something about it. John
From: Richard Henry on 29 Jul 2010 12:21 On Jul 28, 10:53 pm, Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSensel...(a)electrooptical.net> wrote: > Robert Baer wrote: > > John Larkin wrote: > >> On Wed, 28 Jul 2010 00:52:53 -0700, Robert Baer > >> <robertb...(a)localnet.com> wrote: > > >>> John Fields wrote: > >>>> On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 07:01:58 -0700, John Larkin > >>>> <jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > > >>>>> On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 04:00:22 -0500, John Fields > >>>>> <jfie...(a)austininstruments.com> wrote: > > >>>>>>> It has to do with > >>>>>>> getting SI units right. Did you ever read the wiki piece on > >>>>>>> dimensional analysis? Do you think it is smoke and mirrors? > > >>>>>>> So, where did I say that charges can't generate forces? If you can't > >>>>>>> find such a statement, YOU are the one with emotions clouding your > >>>>>>> reason. > >>>>>> --- > >>>>>> Nonsense. > > >>>>>> All it means is that its location has slipped my mind, that the > >>>>>> message has been deleted or, who knows??? > >>>>> Who knows??? I know. You are deluded or just a liar. I would never say > >>>>> anything so silly. > >>>> --- > >>>> You would, you have, and you will again, so you're the liar. > > >>>> "Latching relays have infinite gain." is a pretty silly thing to say, > >>>> yes? > > >>>> JF > >>> I think i "made a case" that the "gain" was not too hot, using > >>> rough numbers for input power to switch states, and power handling > >>> capability. > >>> For an infinite "gain", either the power to switch states must be > >>> zero, and/or the power handling capability must be infinite. > >>> Clearly, NEITHER exists. > > >> Power gain is Pload/(Pcoil*DutyCycle), where Dutycycle is the fraction > >> of time that the coil is energized. In plain English, power gain is > >> averaged load power divided by averaged coil power. That has no upper > >> bound as duty cycle approaches zero. In, say, a home thermostat that > >> uses one AA battery, Dutycycle might be a few tens of PPM, which is > >> why the battery will last a year or two. Probably the clock/LCD run > >> the battery down more than the relay does. > > >> So the argument devolves to whether a number that is unboundedly large > >> can be referred to as "infinite." Go for it. > > >> John > > > By your own statement, you admit that the duty cycle IS NOT ZERO, and > > therefore there IS a bound. > > And "duty cycle" does not cut it; if so, one could take a very large > > (latching, if that "helps") relay and operate it *once* using its > > required 200KW of power, to control one microwatt of load - and > > "therefore" have an absurdly large "gain" based on the "duty cycle" of > > almost zero. > > The amount of bandwidth we've been wasting recently on exactifussitudes > like this makes arguing about angels dancing on the head of a pin seem > positively practical. > > Personally, I make an average of about six stupid mistakes before > breakfast, so I'm used to it by now. Fields has a private meaning for > the word 'force', and Larkin is using 'infinite' in a loose sense. > > As the cop said to Jack Nicholson in the last scene of the movie, > "Forget it, Jake--it's Chinatown." > > Cheers > > Phil Hobbs > > -- > Dr Philip C D Hobbs > Principal > ElectroOptical Innovations > 55 Orchard Rd > Briarcliff Manor NY 10510 > 845-480-2058 > hobbs at electrooptical dot nethttp://electrooptical.net Great chronoclastic infundibulum! I used that same quote last night in a discussion of Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings, which was embedded in a thread about dealing with Muslim governments the way Jefferson dealt with the Barbary pirates.
From: John Larkin on 29 Jul 2010 12:27 On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 11:01:24 -0500, John Fields <jfields(a)austininstruments.com> wrote: >On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 07:06:50 -0700, John Larkin ><jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > >>On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 06:13:05 -0700 (PDT), George Herold >><gherold(a)teachspin.com> wrote: > >>>(I'm just tired of the snipping back and forth... I should have just >>>kept my mouth shut and moved on.) >>> >>>George H. >>>> >>>> John- Hide quoted text - >>>> >>>> - Show quoted text - >> >>Just try injecting technical riffs - braininstorming in public - into >>the hen-clucking OT personal rants. Not only does that steer us back >>on topic, it annoys the hell out of some people who really deserve >>being annoyed. > >--- >Like this one?: > >I am so sick of grey, white, black, silver, and repulsive >pearl-colored cars. You can drive for blocks around here and see >nothing but asphalt-colored cars. When I saw that true-red Audi for >sale, I had to have it. > >That Mercedes is a decent shade of red, sort of arterial blood color. >I've started to see a few new cars on the street that are actual >colors, not just midnight blue or mud red, but *colors*. Maybe things >are turning around. > >Those Germans sure know how to make cars. 0-60 in 3.7 seconds isn't >bad at all. That's 0.75 Gs, if I did the math right. > >John > > >or this one?: > >Nobody is going to do anything serious about CO2. And maybe we >shouldn't anyhow. > >This is serious > >http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/07/28/MN5H1EK6BV.DTL > >and we *can* do something about it. > >John Absolutely. These are real-world objective issues, about *things*, likely of interest to many engineers, especially as diversions from the psychotic personality-issue cluckings of bizarre old farts. Things are more interesting than people, which is why I'm an engineer. John
From: John Fields on 29 Jul 2010 12:25 On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 07:08:58 -0700, John Larkin <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >On Wed, 28 Jul 2010 22:35:28 -0700, Robert Baer ><robertbaer(a)localnet.com> wrote: > >>John Larkin wrote: >>> On Wed, 28 Jul 2010 00:52:53 -0700, Robert Baer >>> <robertbaer(a)localnet.com> wrote: >>> >>>> John Fields wrote: >>>>> On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 07:01:58 -0700, John Larkin >>>>> <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 04:00:22 -0500, John Fields >>>>>> <jfields(a)austininstruments.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>> It has to do with >>>>>>>> getting SI units right. Did you ever read the wiki piece on >>>>>>>> dimensional analysis? Do you think it is smoke and mirrors? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> So, where did I say that charges can't generate forces? If you can't >>>>>>>> find such a statement, YOU are the one with emotions clouding your >>>>>>>> reason. >>>>>>> --- >>>>>>> Nonsense. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> All it means is that its location has slipped my mind, that the >>>>>>> message has been deleted or, who knows??? >>>>>> Who knows??? I know. You are deluded or just a liar. I would never say >>>>>> anything so silly. >>>>> --- >>>>> You would, you have, and you will again, so you're the liar. >>>>> >>>>> "Latching relays have infinite gain." is a pretty silly thing to say, >>>>> yes? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> JF >>>>> >>>> I think i "made a case" that the "gain" was not too hot, using rough >>>> numbers for input power to switch states, and power handling capability. >>>> For an infinite "gain", either the power to switch states must be >>>> zero, and/or the power handling capability must be infinite. >>>> Clearly, NEITHER exists. >>> >>> Power gain is Pload/(Pcoil*DutyCycle), where Dutycycle is the fraction >>> of time that the coil is energized. In plain English, power gain is >>> averaged load power divided by averaged coil power. That has no upper >>> bound as duty cycle approaches zero. In, say, a home thermostat that >>> uses one AA battery, Dutycycle might be a few tens of PPM, which is >>> why the battery will last a year or two. Probably the clock/LCD run >>> the battery down more than the relay does. >>> >>> So the argument devolves to whether a number that is unboundedly large >>> can be referred to as "infinite." Go for it. >>> >>> John >>> >>> >> By your own statement, you admit that the duty cycle IS NOT ZERO, and >>therefore there IS a bound. > >What's the bound of 1/x as x approaches zero? Name a number. --- There is no bound, but it'll never become infinite until x = 0 However, in the case of a form "A" latching relay, which is what we're talking about but which you keep trying to sidetrack, x can never become zero, so the gain of the relay will always be less than infinite. --- >> And "duty cycle" does not cut it; if so, one could take a very large >>(latching, if that "helps") relay and operate it *once* using its >>required 200KW of power, to control one microwatt of load > >Or one kilowatt > > - and >>"therefore" have an absurdly large "gain" based on the "duty cycle" of >>almost zero. > > >Thanks. Finally someone is beginning to see my point. --- You're really not making a point John, all you're trying to do is ameliorate an earlier erroneous statement by saying,: "Well, geez, as long as the duty cycle's pretty small the gain will be pretty close to infinite."
From: John Larkin on 29 Jul 2010 13:08
> >Hey, you could make your own cryo latching SSR with a PV coupler, a >PIN diode, and a couple of mosfets, using capacitive storage as the >memory mechanism. Drive it with LEDs, cold or fiber-coupled from room >temp. > >John Oops, never mind. The silicon won't work below about 20K. John |