Ohm's Law Problem
in [Design]
|
Prev: A novel way to measure magnetic fields, and DC current withouta shunt?
Next: 240V AC power switch - based on current drawn from outlet
From: Joerg on 17 Feb 2010 14:07 Jon Kirwan wrote: > On Wed, 17 Feb 2010 10:14:41 -0800, Joerg > <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: > >> Jon Kirwan wrote: >> [...] >>> P.S. There is a great book on knowledge; IMHO very easily >>> grasped and extremely very well argued in six separate >>> lectures. The author is Jacob Bronowski and the book is >>> called, "The Origins of Knowledge and Imagination," 1979. >>> Copies are available for very little money (only a few >>> dollars) via abebooks or alibris. I consider it to be an >>> excellent primer, enjoyably told, and I gladly recommend it >>> to anyone. No matter how you come down on anything I write, >>> I think you'll enjoy his lectures -- they were given to very >>> young students and are very easy to follow, while >>> simultaneously engaging, too. >> I hope some day I'll have more time to devote to the more philosophical >> books. Right now I work in so many new fields that I have to constantly >> study (mostly ME stuff). > > Hehe. Me, too. However, I think that book is extremely > readable and enjoyable in each and every paragraph. You'll > find it no trouble at all. And cheap, besides. Why not > expose yourself to something merely on a lark once in a > while. Might expand a horizon and find something fun you > didn't realize was in you. ;) > Ok, but we spend the evenings with bible reading, card games and (full confession here) lately some TV. We discovered a secondary digital channel which carries "THIS-TV". Tons of documentaries, old movies, westerns and so on. -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ "gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam. Use another domain or send PM.
From: Joerg on 17 Feb 2010 14:21 Ban wrote: > Joerg wrote: >> I grew up in medical ultrasound. Back in the 80's a lot of stuff >> around PZT-based transducers was not understood. Yet the front end >> parts and transducers of the old machines are not that much different >> in performance from the ones today, where we have oodles of computer >> horsepower to simulate and calculate just about anything. If we had >> said "Oh shoot, we don't understand the theory so let's not build but >> keep studying until we do" a lot of people in hospitals would have >> needlessly died. > > What a pathetic story. But as always just your limited experience. I also > worked for a company(Krautkraemer) in the 80s and those guys from the > transducer department were called "the Phds" in the company. They knew what > they were doing. The whole principle of operation was actually > found/invented by 2 brother professors in the 40s who later founded the > company, hardly any "Neandertals". > ciao Ban > Krautkraemer was located pretty close to us, I used to work in Solingen. But it seems you do not know much about medical ultrasound. It's a heck of a lot more complicated than NDT and the competition is very fierce. Did you ever design parts of something like this? http://www.volcanocorp.com/files/pdf/datasheet-eagleeye.pdf I did. Actually I ran the imaging division when it was EndoSonics and they don't let you do that with a limited experience :-) Hint: There are 64 transducer elements in the tip, plus five integrated circuits. Oh, and the machine that goes with it has full color flow capabilities despite the fact that the blood flow is perpendicular to the beam direction. Many groups tried but we never had any competition in electronic IVUS, they still don't. Oh, and HP threw in the towel and shut down their IVUS business. That should give you a taste of how difficult this stuff is. -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ "gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam. Use another domain or send PM.
From: Jon Kirwan on 17 Feb 2010 15:04 On Wed, 17 Feb 2010 11:07:36 -0800, Joerg <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: >Jon Kirwan wrote: >> On Wed, 17 Feb 2010 10:14:41 -0800, Joerg >> <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: >> >>> Jon Kirwan wrote: >>> > >[...] > >>>> P.S. There is a great book on knowledge; IMHO very easily >>>> grasped and extremely very well argued in six separate >>>> lectures. The author is Jacob Bronowski and the book is >>>> called, "The Origins of Knowledge and Imagination," 1979. >>>> Copies are available for very little money (only a few >>>> dollars) via abebooks or alibris. I consider it to be an >>>> excellent primer, enjoyably told, and I gladly recommend it >>>> to anyone. No matter how you come down on anything I write, >>>> I think you'll enjoy his lectures -- they were given to very >>>> young students and are very easy to follow, while >>>> simultaneously engaging, too. >>> I hope some day I'll have more time to devote to the more philosophical >>> books. Right now I work in so many new fields that I have to constantly >>> study (mostly ME stuff). >> >> Hehe. Me, too. However, I think that book is extremely >> readable and enjoyable in each and every paragraph. You'll >> find it no trouble at all. And cheap, besides. Why not >> expose yourself to something merely on a lark once in a >> while. Might expand a horizon and find something fun you >> didn't realize was in you. ;) >> > >Ok, but we spend the evenings with bible reading, card games and (full >confession here) lately some TV. We discovered a secondary digital >channel which carries "THIS-TV". Tons of documentaries, old movies, >westerns and so on. Oh, my, J�rg! Cut a TV show or two!! The book requires maybe three hours. It's not a bible, or something. By the way, I've spent many thousands of hours reading the bible -- and even doing my own translations of parts of it, from source materials and references. I keep shelves full of various books and parallels (you might know what these are, don't know), as well. A couple of years of university level theology training does that to one, I suppose. What I'm asking is _nothing_ like that! It's easy reading. And card games appeared to also be the usual fare for us Swedish family types, though I've long since dropped most of that habit. ;) But every evening doing bible reading??!!?! if you are spending that kind of time, I highly highly recommend taking some serious, high quality, university level coursework. You really need to be able to know where to go to get the raw materials and do some of your own work in finding out exactly what source materials exist (fragments only, in many cases, if you use the earliest stuff), how they vary each from another (and they do, in some cases a lot), and gain some knowledge about _how_ people wrote and thought about things back then so you can place what you see into some cultural context, as well. Cripes, if you are working that hard, you should get a leg up on the more academic side of this. You've obviously got the energy and interest for it. Jon
From: Joerg on 17 Feb 2010 15:37 Jon Kirwan wrote: > On Wed, 17 Feb 2010 11:07:36 -0800, Joerg > <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: > >> Jon Kirwan wrote: >>> On Wed, 17 Feb 2010 10:14:41 -0800, Joerg >>> <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: >>> >>>> Jon Kirwan wrote: >>>> >> [...] >> >>>>> P.S. There is a great book on knowledge; IMHO very easily >>>>> grasped and extremely very well argued in six separate >>>>> lectures. The author is Jacob Bronowski and the book is >>>>> called, "The Origins of Knowledge and Imagination," 1979. >>>>> Copies are available for very little money (only a few >>>>> dollars) via abebooks or alibris. I consider it to be an >>>>> excellent primer, enjoyably told, and I gladly recommend it >>>>> to anyone. No matter how you come down on anything I write, >>>>> I think you'll enjoy his lectures -- they were given to very >>>>> young students and are very easy to follow, while >>>>> simultaneously engaging, too. >>>> I hope some day I'll have more time to devote to the more philosophical >>>> books. Right now I work in so many new fields that I have to constantly >>>> study (mostly ME stuff). >>> Hehe. Me, too. However, I think that book is extremely >>> readable and enjoyable in each and every paragraph. You'll >>> find it no trouble at all. And cheap, besides. Why not >>> expose yourself to something merely on a lark once in a >>> while. Might expand a horizon and find something fun you >>> didn't realize was in you. ;) >>> >> Ok, but we spend the evenings with bible reading, card games and (full >> confession here) lately some TV. We discovered a secondary digital >> channel which carries "THIS-TV". Tons of documentaries, old movies, >> westerns and so on. > > Oh, my, J�rg! Cut a TV show or two!! The book requires > maybe three hours. It's not a bible, or something. > But it's hard to forego a great western :-) > By the way, I've spent many thousands of hours reading the > bible -- and even doing my own translations of parts of it, > from source materials and references. I keep shelves full of > various books and parallels (you might know what these are, > don't know), as well. A couple of years of university level > theology training does that to one, I suppose. What I'm > asking is _nothing_ like that! It's easy reading. > Well, I got to be honest here. I don't have all that much fun reading the more philosophical texts. The theology training I do not have, sometimes I wish I did. But got to retire first ;-) > And card games appeared to also be the usual fare for us > Swedish family types, though I've long since dropped most of > that habit. ;) > One of our house rules: We never play for money, with anyone. Just for fun. In the same way we never visit casinos. > But every evening doing bible reading??!!?! if you are > spending that kind of time, I highly highly recommend taking > some serious, high quality, university level coursework. You > really need to be able to know where to go to get the raw > materials and do some of your own work in finding out exactly > what source materials exist (fragments only, in many cases, > if you use the earliest stuff), how they vary each from > another (and they do, in some cases a lot), and gain some > knowledge about _how_ people wrote and thought about things > back then so you can place what you see into some cultural > context, as well. Cripes, if you are working that hard, you > should get a leg up on the more academic side of this. You've > obviously got the energy and interest for it. > Interest, yes, but not sure about the energy. The author of "40 Days of Purpose" wrote something that kept ringing in my mind: "You can do the umpteenth bible study but at some point you've got to take what you know and get out there with it, and do stuff", or something like that. -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ "gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam. Use another domain or send PM.
From: Tauno Voipio on 17 Feb 2010 15:40
Joerg wrote: > Tauno Voipio wrote: >> Joerg wrote: >>>> >>> >>> That is because you were not a ham radio operator on a tight budget. >>> We had glass turning mildly liquid, being sucked in and ending up >>> snug on the plates. That was the time to turn off the rig. A few >>> seconds more in transmit and there'd be a loud bang. >>> >> >> >> The Haig Dimple whisky bottle looks like a 6146 or an EL 500 >> after a contest. >> >> Been there, tried that. >> > > Wow, I've never made a 6146 suck in its glass. I had the well past > cherry-red though. > Remember the old OH2AM team in many contests decades ago? I have seen the phenomenon with 807, 813, 6146, EL 500, EL 509 and some TV line output tubes with US markings (6LQ6 & co). -- Tauno Voipio tauno voipio (at) iki fi |