You asked, I didn't offer the explanation.
Under that circumstance, I don't think you have any right to characterize my explanation as 'eagar'. Moreover, I am not the least bit ashamed by my work or my son's condition.
I explained to you what I do and who I work for. My son.
You could ask for the applications power supply schematic, I have already offered to a few others.
The application is not a "secret audio device".
>> Well, Bob, I had already specified it's input (9 VAC) and its output (+/-
>> 15 VDC) and later described it as a "voltage doubling design", but Phil
>> was very adamant that what I was looking at COULD NOT BE a half wave
>> rectifier.
>>
>> Specifically, Phil did not SEEM to know that a voltage doubling design
>> CAN BE a variant of the simple half wave rectifier. (composed of two half
>> wave rectifiers).
>>
>> Of course I know that Phil was actually wrong about ME and that if he
>> thought about it, he would realise that a simple half wave rectifier can
>> be part of a voltage doubling design, BUT it was very SILLY of him to
>> assert otherwise.
>>
>> Phil could get out of it, simply by saying:
>>
>> a) I am sorry Mark, I was wrong about YOU. I knew that a half wave
>> rectifier can be part of a voltage doubling design.
>>
>> OR
>>
>> b) I wasn't wrong about YOU but I made a simple mistake in assuming that
>> what you were looking at COULD NOT BE a half wave rectifier.
>>
>> I.E. He was either WRONG about me or MISTAKEN about the possibility that
>> what I was looking at was indeed a half wave rectifier.
>>
>> But Phil will do neither, so he is stuck.
>>
>> Now, back to the main plot. Am I God or is Phil imperfect?
>
>
> The main plot is about some secret audio device which is malfunctioning
> after you messed around with most of its electrolytic capacitors.
> It's bizarre you're so secretive about an inanimate electronic device,
> but so eager to tell everyone about your difficult home situation.
> Doesn't that strike you as being strange?
>
>