Top ten analog engineers
in [Design]
|
From: a7yvm109gf5d1 on 22 Dec 2009 19:00 On Dec 22, 2:26 pm, qrk <SpamT...(a)spam.net> wrote: > Where's Harold Black? > Philo Farnsworth? Charles Proteus Steinmetz.
From: Bill Sloman on 22 Dec 2009 19:03 On Dec 22, 7:08 pm, Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-I...(a)My- Web-Site.com/Snicker> wrote: > On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 12:53:50 -0500, Phil Hobbs > > > > > > <pcdhSpamMeSensel...(a)electrooptical.net> wrote: > >On 12/22/2009 12:32 PM,Bill Slomanwrote: > >>http://www.analog-europe.com/212700488;jsessionid=2EYNK2XDSG2HZQE1GHO.... > > >> George Philbrick > >> Bernard Gordon > >> Jim Solomon > >> Barrie Gilbert > >> Bob J. Widlar > >> Bob Pease > >> Jim Williams > >> Dennis Monticelli > >> Tom Hornak > > >> pity about > > >> Alan Dower Blumlein > > >> apparently the fact that he never worked in the USA means that > >> inventing the first practical televison and stereo systems doesn't > >> count. He had 128 patents when he died when a bomber carring a > >> protoptye of the H2S radar crashed on landing in 1942. > > >> -- > >>Bill Sloman, Nijmegen > > >Don't forget Mitch Ratcliffe the radio guy, Robert Watson-Watt the radar > >guy, the unnamed heroes at Mullards who designed the Hanbury-Brown > >correlator, Fred Terman the network analysis guy, Edwin Armstrong the > >FM, superhet, and superregen guy, Thomas Edison the diode guy..... > > >Analog folks all. > > >Cheers > > >Phil Hobbs > > Jim Solomon... intellectual thief that I once worked for at Motorola. > > In a paper he claimed that he designed the multiplier (Gilbert's cell) > until the academic community descended on him. > > Now I note he claims creation of the BiFET OpAmp... my Master's thesis > was the first. Looks like he took my work to National with him and > claimed it as his own. > > Slowman is the same kind of thief. Jim-out-touch-with-reality-Thompson gives his imagination free run yet once more. It is interesting to wonder why he might think that I might have claimed credit for somebody else's work - it isn't as if he's got access to much of my work, and in the stuff that is available via scholar.google.org I was being particularly careful to cite my sources (as I was in the stuff I did in industry, but Jim won't have access to any of that). -- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
From: Joel Koltner on 23 Dec 2009 12:12 "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message news:yM6dnRkFd8E5ra_WnZ2dnUVZ_o1i4p2d(a)earthlink.com... > Typical of Bill. Where is the list ot ten worst analog engineers? > Is he afraid that his name would be the first, followed by Lucas, then > Madman Muntz? The difference is that I don't think Muntz ever claimed to be an engineer... just a salesguy who was willing to cheapen up equipment if he thought there'd still be a market for it!
From: John Fields on 22 Dec 2009 19:10 On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 17:47:30 -0600, "Tim Williams" <tmoranwms(a)charter.net> wrote: >"Jim Thompson" <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon(a)My-Web-Site.com/Snicker> >wrote in message news:rgf2j592j3fqg1625vircc4ik54ao2lf26(a)4ax.com... >>>> > How many OLD farts here even remember Eccles and Jordan? >>>> >>>> I do. I use their invention every day! >>> >>>Strictly speaking, isn't that digital? >> >> At a microscopic level EVERYTHING is ANALOG :-) --- Well... Since the charge carried by an electron is quantized at 1.602E-19 coulomb, we live in a world of grits rather than a world of Jello. ;) --- >Digital is a subset of analog, which is a subset of physics. --- If the charge carried by an electron is always the same, then the analog world, with its variable voltages and currents is just the illusion of a continuum and is, really, granular. --- >I have a major in all of them. ;-) Good for you! :-) JF
From: Jim Thompson on 22 Dec 2009 19:17
On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 18:10:56 -0600, John Fields <jfields(a)austininstruments.com> wrote: >On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 17:47:30 -0600, "Tim Williams" ><tmoranwms(a)charter.net> wrote: > >>"Jim Thompson" <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon(a)My-Web-Site.com/Snicker> >>wrote in message news:rgf2j592j3fqg1625vircc4ik54ao2lf26(a)4ax.com... >>>>> > How many OLD farts here even remember Eccles and Jordan? >>>>> >>>>> I do. I use their invention every day! >>>> >>>>Strictly speaking, isn't that digital? >>> >>> At a microscopic level EVERYTHING is ANALOG :-) > >--- >Well... > >Since the charge carried by an electron is quantized at 1.602E-19 >coulomb, we live in a world of grits rather than a world of Jello. ;) >--- > >>Digital is a subset of analog, which is a subset of physics. > >--- >If the charge carried by an electron is always the same, then the analog >world, with its variable voltages and currents is just the illusion of a >continuum and is, really, granular. >--- > >>I have a major in all of them. ;-) > >Good for you! :-) > >JF Corpuscular doesn't make analog into digital. You can't design digital circuits at the device level without analog concepts. It might be amusing to suggest a class (SED lurkers) problem... design (at the CMOS transistor level) a three-input NAND, so that delays to output from each input are identical. Can any of you out there (besides Hobbs) do that? ...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 | Help save the environment! Please dispose of socialism properly! |