Transformer insulateing tape?
in [Design]
|
Prev: Capacitor discharge probes
Next: makes no sense to me
From: DrParnassus on 23 Jun 2010 11:19 On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 00:52:29 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman <bill.sloman(a)ieee.org> wrote: > I seem to have missed >the posts where you put this expertise on display. From what I have seen in the group, you fail to read 99% of the posts, and incorrectly respond to those threads you do interlope into.
From: John Fields on 23 Jun 2010 13:27 On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 03:27:58 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman <bill.sloman(a)ieee.org> wrote: >On Jun 23, 1:56�am, DrParnassus <DrParnas...(a)hereforlongtime.org> >wrote: >> On Tue, 22 Jun 2010 15:58:50 -0700 (PDT),Bill Sloman >> >> <bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: >> >The rest of the world doesn't use mils >> >> �ANY part of the world that uses inches, uses mils. >> >> � It is a direct division of an inch. >> >> �YOU are the idiot. > >Get a clue. The rest of the world doesn't use inches any more. --- I believe the UK still uses miles, which is 63,360 inches.
From: John Fields on 23 Jun 2010 13:58 On Tue, 22 Jun 2010 16:11:03 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman <bill.sloman(a)ieee.org> wrote: > The 555 may still be used >- by people who haven't yet learned that there are now better ways of >tackling the kind of job that it was developed to look after - but it >is still totally obsolete. --- With millions of pieces in stock, in all imaginable packages, all around the world, and with no manufacturer offering "lifetime buys" or notices of discontinuance, it seems your claims of obsolescence haven't been heard at high enough levels to matter. As far as "better ways" goes, how would you know? The last time you put anything on paper, here, for a 555 substitute was an expensive analog monstrosity which, If I recall correctly, was truly obsolete at the time and, as far as replacing the device with a microcontroller goes, you don't have any first-hand experience with modern microcontrollers and are just parrotting the currently popular party line.
From: John Fields on 24 Jun 2010 13:07 On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 01:02:27 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman <bill.sloman(a)ieee.org> wrote: .. .. .. >So you can't point to any goal post that I've actually moved. --- He may not be able to, but I certainly can, case in point being the thread where you didn't realize that a solenoid wrapped around a conductor carrying AC current won't act as a transformer, remember? Instead of leaving the goalposts where they were and admitting to your ignorance, heaven forbid, you moved them by trying to make it seem like the OP was joking and that you knew it all along, when clearly he wasn't and you didn't, cheater.
From: Bill Sloman on 24 Jun 2010 22:41
On Jun 24, 7:07 pm, John Fields <jfie...(a)austininstruments.com> wrote: > On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 01:02:27 -0700 (PDT),Bill Sloman > > <bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: > > . > . > . > > >So you can't point to any goal post that I've actually moved. > > --- > He may not be able to, but I certainly can, case in point being the > thread where you didn't realize that a solenoid wrapped around a > conductor carrying AC current won't act as a transformer, remember? That is what you remember. It is pity that you never did understand what I actually said. > Instead of leaving the goalposts where they were and admitting to your > ignorance, heaven forbid, you moved them by trying to make it seem > like the OP was joking and that you knew it all along, when clearly he > wasn't and you didn't, cheater. You do seem to need to "understand" reality in a way that lets you preserve your self-image as someone who knows what they are talking about. Pity about that. -- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen |