Let's Take A Vote...
in [Design]
|
From: John Larkin on 30 Jul 2010 11:47 On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 10:47:07 -0400, Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless(a)electrooptical.net> wrote: >George Herold wrote: >> On Jul 29, 11:59 pm, Phil Hobbs >> <pcdhSpamMeSensel...(a)electrooptical.net> wrote: >>> George Herold wrote: >>>> On Jul 29, 11:46 am, Phil Hobbs >>>> <pcdhSpamMeSensel...(a)electrooptical.net> wrote: >>>>> John Larkin wrote: >>>>>> On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 15:10:41 +0100, John Devereux >>>>>> <j...(a)devereux.me.uk> wrote: >>>>>>> John Larkin <jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> writes: >>>>>>>> On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 13:38:51 +0300 (EEST), Okkim Atnarivik >>>>>>>> <Okkim.Atnari...(a)twentyfout.fi.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>>>> John Larkin <jjlar...(a)highnotlandthistechnologypart.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> : Do thermals matter to you? Latching relays are fabulous. As analog >>>>>>>>> : switches, no semiconductor comes close. We recently measured the wiper >>>>>>>>> Interestingly, in the LHe temperature OptoMOS switches can be closed >>>>>>>>> but not opened. Switch-off relies on the charge leaking away from the >>>>>>>>> MOSFET gate, and this leak obviously freezes. >>>>>>>> Maybe you're just not waiting long enough. A 2N7002 will keep itself >>>>>>>> on or off, gate floating, for days. A cryo temps, that might extend to >>>>>>>> a few million years. I'm impressed that they work at all. >>>>>>>> Possibly they use a silicon resisor for the pulldown, and the >>>>>>>> resistance goes way, way up when it's cold. So it might turn off in a >>>>>>>> few weeks. >>>>>>>> Optomos SSRs are great signal switches too. I recently blew up a bunch >>>>>>>> of Clare parts, to find their voltage:current destruct limits. The >>>>>>>> datasheets are horrible about that. >>>>>>> Yes, pathetic for something clearly intended as an I/O component. I got >>>>>>> no answer from them either about it. >>>>>>> [...] >>>>>> I have some crude point-of-destruction SOAR graphs if you're >>>>>> interested, on their CPC1008N part. After blowing a bunch up, I >>>>>> learned that you can look at waveforms and pretty accurately >>>>>> anticipate second breakdown (or whatever makes them fail) just before >>>>>> it happens. Plotting graphs is much faster when you don't have to >>>>>> replace the part every data point, like the civil engineering students >>>>>> breaking concrete beams. >>>>>> John >>>>> It's amazing that they remain civil--I mean, War between the States, sorry. >>>>> Cheers >>>>> Phil Hobbs >>>>> (Recently saw the Confederate Correct-orrr episode of Rocky & Bullwinkle >>>>> again. Brilliant.) >>>> What? Phil I thought your nose was always in a book, not pointed at >>>> the TV? >>>> George H. >>> I don't watch TV or movies normally, but I'm not ideological about it. >>> (Of course the last movie I watched was in 1987, but that's because >>> there haven't been any good ones lately.) >> >> If I were going to pick one movie to see from your 20+ year hiatus it >> would be Peter Jackson�s �Lord of the Rings�. (Assuming you have read >> the books.) Quite a work of love for many involved, and made for a >> BIG screen. > >Thanks. I've read The Hobbit, TLOTR, and the Silmarillion many times--I >got TLOTR in one big thick volume for Christmas when I was 16, and >proceeded to read it all the way through, straight, twice. Love at >first sight, and I've never wavered. > >I'm a big fan of fairy stories in general--good ones, that is, ones that >follow the rules of the genre and take the story seriously, *as a >story*, and not merely a medium for politics, or artistic theory, or >score-settling. > >Tolkien's essays ]Mythopoeia' and 'On Fairy Stories' are a good way in, >for people who don't know the difference between a fairy story and a >straightforward fantasy on one hand, and a parody on the other. >[Hint: Spenser, Lord Dunsany, Charles Williams, Tolkien, Lewis, and >Peake, good, Marion Zimmer Bradley and Evangeline Walton, bad, Lloyd >Alexander, somewhere in between. I enjoyed some of Bradley's other >stuff back in the day, but her Arthuriad is a disaster--full of >gender-feminist axe-grinding and with no sense for the story whatsoever. > >#1 daughter went to Washington College, and her Tolkien professor there >has a web site with a bunch of canned lectures and stuff--it's called >TheTolkienProfessor.com, strange to tell. Good stuff if you're >interested in that sort of thing--very engaging and fun. > > I also like Homer, Virgil, and especially Dante, who is as good a >theologian as he is a poet, and is therefore very widely misunderstood. > Lots of folks only read the Inferno for the thrill, whereas the heart >of the Commedia is the Purgatorio and Paradiso. At one time I also >liked Norse sagas, but they kind of palled when I was 20 or so. It's >one of my life's regrets that I quit taking Latin in grade 9, and never >learned any Greek or Italian at all. I've been gradually learning >Middle English (one day I hope to be able to actually write it), and am >picking away at a little bit of Anglo-Saxon, though nothing serious. I >have a number of AS texts printed with the original on the left-hand >pages and a translation on the right. Plus I have all this fun >technical stuff to do, that I usually talk about here. So I rarely get >bored--except when watching moving pictures for longer than about 15 >minutes, which will do it every time. > >Cheers > >Phil Hobbs If you like LoTR, you'd probably like the Lyoness trilogy by Jack Vance. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyonesse_Trilogy In addition to being a ripping yarn, his writing is superb. This is worth re-reading every few years. Speaking of that, try P.G. Wodehouse's "A Damsel in Distress", possibly the most perfectly written novel in the English language. Good stuff too: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merovingen_Nights John
From: Phil Hobbs on 30 Jul 2010 12:27 John Larkin wrote: > On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 10:47:07 -0400, Phil Hobbs > <pcdhSpamMeSenseless(a)electrooptical.net> wrote: > >> George Herold wrote: >>> On Jul 29, 11:59 pm, Phil Hobbs >>> <pcdhSpamMeSensel...(a)electrooptical.net> wrote: >>>> George Herold wrote: >>>>> On Jul 29, 11:46 am, Phil Hobbs >>>>> <pcdhSpamMeSensel...(a)electrooptical.net> wrote: >>>>>> John Larkin wrote: >>>>>>> On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 15:10:41 +0100, John Devereux >>>>>>> <j...(a)devereux.me.uk> wrote: >>>>>>>> John Larkin <jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> writes: >>>>>>>>> On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 13:38:51 +0300 (EEST), Okkim Atnarivik >>>>>>>>> <Okkim.Atnari...(a)twentyfout.fi.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> John Larkin <jjlar...(a)highnotlandthistechnologypart.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> : Do thermals matter to you? Latching relays are fabulous. As analog >>>>>>>>>> : switches, no semiconductor comes close. We recently measured the wiper >>>>>>>>>> Interestingly, in the LHe temperature OptoMOS switches can be closed >>>>>>>>>> but not opened. Switch-off relies on the charge leaking away from the >>>>>>>>>> MOSFET gate, and this leak obviously freezes. >>>>>>>>> Maybe you're just not waiting long enough. A 2N7002 will keep itself >>>>>>>>> on or off, gate floating, for days. A cryo temps, that might extend to >>>>>>>>> a few million years. I'm impressed that they work at all. >>>>>>>>> Possibly they use a silicon resisor for the pulldown, and the >>>>>>>>> resistance goes way, way up when it's cold. So it might turn off in a >>>>>>>>> few weeks. >>>>>>>>> Optomos SSRs are great signal switches too. I recently blew up a bunch >>>>>>>>> of Clare parts, to find their voltage:current destruct limits. The >>>>>>>>> datasheets are horrible about that. >>>>>>>> Yes, pathetic for something clearly intended as an I/O component. I got >>>>>>>> no answer from them either about it. >>>>>>>> [...] >>>>>>> I have some crude point-of-destruction SOAR graphs if you're >>>>>>> interested, on their CPC1008N part. After blowing a bunch up, I >>>>>>> learned that you can look at waveforms and pretty accurately >>>>>>> anticipate second breakdown (or whatever makes them fail) just before >>>>>>> it happens. Plotting graphs is much faster when you don't have to >>>>>>> replace the part every data point, like the civil engineering students >>>>>>> breaking concrete beams. >>>>>>> John >>>>>> It's amazing that they remain civil--I mean, War between the States, sorry. >>>>>> Cheers >>>>>> Phil Hobbs >>>>>> (Recently saw the Confederate Correct-orrr episode of Rocky & Bullwinkle >>>>>> again. Brilliant.) >>>>> What? Phil I thought your nose was always in a book, not pointed at >>>>> the TV? >>>>> George H. >>>> I don't watch TV or movies normally, but I'm not ideological about it. >>>> (Of course the last movie I watched was in 1987, but that's because >>>> there haven't been any good ones lately.) >>> If I were going to pick one movie to see from your 20+ year hiatus it >>> would be Peter Jackson�s �Lord of the Rings�. (Assuming you have read >>> the books.) Quite a work of love for many involved, and made for a >>> BIG screen. >> Thanks. I've read The Hobbit, TLOTR, and the Silmarillion many times--I >> got TLOTR in one big thick volume for Christmas when I was 16, and >> proceeded to read it all the way through, straight, twice. Love at >> first sight, and I've never wavered. >> >> I'm a big fan of fairy stories in general--good ones, that is, ones that >> follow the rules of the genre and take the story seriously, *as a >> story*, and not merely a medium for politics, or artistic theory, or >> score-settling. >> >> Tolkien's essays ]Mythopoeia' and 'On Fairy Stories' are a good way in, >> for people who don't know the difference between a fairy story and a >> straightforward fantasy on one hand, and a parody on the other. >> [Hint: Spenser, Lord Dunsany, Charles Williams, Tolkien, Lewis, and >> Peake, good, Marion Zimmer Bradley and Evangeline Walton, bad, Lloyd >> Alexander, somewhere in between. I enjoyed some of Bradley's other >> stuff back in the day, but her Arthuriad is a disaster--full of >> gender-feminist axe-grinding and with no sense for the story whatsoever. >> >> #1 daughter went to Washington College, and her Tolkien professor there >> has a web site with a bunch of canned lectures and stuff--it's called >> TheTolkienProfessor.com, strange to tell. Good stuff if you're >> interested in that sort of thing--very engaging and fun. >> >> I also like Homer, Virgil, and especially Dante, who is as good a >> theologian as he is a poet, and is therefore very widely misunderstood. >> Lots of folks only read the Inferno for the thrill, whereas the heart >> of the Commedia is the Purgatorio and Paradiso. At one time I also >> liked Norse sagas, but they kind of palled when I was 20 or so. It's >> one of my life's regrets that I quit taking Latin in grade 9, and never >> learned any Greek or Italian at all. I've been gradually learning >> Middle English (one day I hope to be able to actually write it), and am >> picking away at a little bit of Anglo-Saxon, though nothing serious. I >> have a number of AS texts printed with the original on the left-hand >> pages and a translation on the right. Plus I have all this fun >> technical stuff to do, that I usually talk about here. So I rarely get >> bored--except when watching moving pictures for longer than about 15 >> minutes, which will do it every time. >> >> Cheers >> >> Phil Hobbs > > If you like LoTR, you'd probably like the Lyoness trilogy by Jack > Vance. > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyonesse_Trilogy > > In addition to being a ripping yarn, his writing is superb. This is > worth re-reading every few years. > > Speaking of that, try P.G. Wodehouse's "A Damsel in Distress", > possibly the most perfectly written novel in the English language. > > Good stuff too: > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merovingen_Nights > > John > I know Wodehouse well--one of my favourite W. quotes is "she's not the kind of breathtaker that takes the breath." I'll look at the others, thanks. I read a bunch of Vance's SF when I was young, but nothing of his in the last 25 years or so. 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 net http://electrooptical.net
From: John Larkin on 30 Jul 2010 15:05 On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 07:57:16 -0700 (PDT), Richard Henry <pomerado(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >On Jul 30, 6:35�am, George Herold <gher...(a)teachspin.com> wrote: >> On Jul 29, 11:59�pm, Phil Hobbs >> >> >> >> <pcdhSpamMeSensel...(a)electrooptical.net> wrote: >> > George Herold wrote: >> > > On Jul 29, 11:46 am, Phil Hobbs >> > > <pcdhSpamMeSensel...(a)electrooptical.net> wrote: >> > >> John Larkin wrote: >> > >>> On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 15:10:41 +0100, John Devereux >> > >>> <j...(a)devereux.me.uk> wrote: >> > >>>> John Larkin <jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> writes: >> > >>>>> On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 13:38:51 +0300 (EEST), Okkim Atnarivik >> > >>>>> <Okkim.Atnari...(a)twentyfout.fi.invalid> wrote: >> > >>>>>> John Larkin <jjlar...(a)highnotlandthistechnologypart.com> wrote: >> > >>>>>> : Do thermals matter to you? Latching relays are fabulous. As analog >> > >>>>>> : switches, no semiconductor comes close. We recently measured the wiper >> > >>>>>> �Interestingly, in the LHe temperature OptoMOS switches can be closed >> > >>>>>> but not opened. Switch-off relies on the charge leaking away from the >> > >>>>>> MOSFET gate, and this leak obviously freezes. >> > >>>>> Maybe you're just not waiting long enough. A 2N7002 will keep itself >> > >>>>> on or off, gate floating, for days. A cryo temps, that might extend to >> > >>>>> a few million years. I'm impressed that they work at all. >> > >>>>> Possibly they use a silicon resisor for the pulldown, and the >> > >>>>> resistance goes way, way up when it's cold. So it might turn off in a >> > >>>>> few weeks. >> > >>>>> Optomos SSRs are great signal switches too. I recently blew up a bunch >> > >>>>> of Clare parts, to find their voltage:current destruct limits. The >> > >>>>> datasheets are horrible about that. >> > >>>> Yes, pathetic for something clearly intended as an I/O component. I got >> > >>>> no answer from them either about it. >> > >>>> [...] >> > >>> I have some crude point-of-destruction SOAR graphs if you're >> > >>> interested, on their CPC1008N part. After blowing a bunch up, I >> > >>> learned that you can look at waveforms and pretty accurately >> > >>> anticipate second breakdown (or whatever makes them fail) just before >> > >>> it happens. Plotting graphs is much faster when you don't have to >> > >>> replace the part every data point, like the civil engineering students >> > >>> breaking concrete beams. >> > >>> John >> > >> It's amazing that they remain civil--I mean, War between the States, sorry. >> >> > >> Cheers >> >> > >> Phil Hobbs >> >> > >> (Recently saw the Confederate Correct-orrr episode of Rocky & Bullwinkle >> > >> again. �Brilliant.) >> >> > > What? �Phil I thought your nose was always in a book, not pointed at >> > > the TV? >> >> > > George H. >> >> > I don't watch TV or movies normally, but I'm not ideological about it. >> > (Of course the last movie I watched was in 1987, but that's because >> > there haven't been any good ones lately.) >> >> If I were going to pick one movie to see from your 20+ year hiatus it >> would be Peter Jackson�s �Lord of the Rings�. �(Assuming you have read >> the books.) �Quite a work of love for many involved, and made for a >> BIG screen. >> >I fell asleep in all three. > >Beautiful Mind, Schindler's List, Unforgiven, Million Dollar Baby all >won Academy Awards in that period and are on my must-see list. Interesting how tastes differ. Those are real-world, here-and-now dramas. The other stuff is spaceships, wizards, distant fantasy. John
From: John Larkin on 30 Jul 2010 15:08 On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 23:00:52 -0700, "JosephKK"<quiettechblue(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >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 > >Given the well known issues with getting realistic data from SPICE >which has well calibrated and tested models, do you really want to >trust anybody making climate predictions with models whose very theory >is suspect as well? Particularly when there is no track record of >model testability or calibratability? Particulates aren't "climate predictions." They are soot that is real, can be measured, causes health problems, and melts ice. And could be reduced a lot, soon, if diesels, coal fired power plants, and things like aluminum smelters were cleaned up. John
From: John Larkin on 30 Jul 2010 16:24
On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 23:23:24 -0700, "JosephKK"<quiettechblue(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 07:14:56 -0700, John Larkin ><jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > >>On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 01:53:29 -0400, Phil Hobbs >><pcdhSpamMeSenseless(a)electrooptical.net> wrote: >> >>>Robert Baer 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. >>>> 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 working engineers, we use a lot of terms in a loose sense. Like >>charge, average, infinite, heat, "Gaussian", power factor, Q, >>impedance, noise, exponential, "final", linear, all sorts of stuff >>that's mathematically imprecise. Because it's good enough to make >>things work. Somebody accused me here of not being a good scientist: >>guilty! >> >>John > >It is nice to hear, but no one else here abuses that difference to the >extent you do, not do many others claim to be so scientific in >approach as you do. Explain "abuses." We are rigid about using SI units and keeping our dimensions straight. Coulombs are not a measure of force. >Grow up some, Mr. Businessman, and acknowledge what you have become >really good at: the regular manufacture of test equipment at >reasonable prices. Sorry, I'm a design engineer, and I leave all the money, marketing, sales, and management to others. And our products ate *not* reasonably priced. Of all the nerve! John |