"Mike Engelhardt has parted ways with Analog Devices"

Nearly all interesting systems are nonlinear, and analytic equations are hard or impossible for nonlinear systems.

So the math becomes guidance, suggestions or starting points for simulation or experiment.

--

John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc 

The cork popped merrily, and Lord Peter rose to his feet.  
"Bunter", he said, "I give you a toast. The triumph of Instinct over Reason"

analysis_final.pdf?

In the case of an op-amp driving a FET, at low currents the circuit will be slower, OK, but the pulse quickly moves past that to the high current. So making sure the loop is stable at high currents, and checking response is most of the game.

--
 Thanks, 
    - Win

Bill Sloman wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@googlegroups.com:

Good job of being too stupid to know that what I said was that it takes "A bit of both".

Yep. Math is for verifying an idea after the fact. Or sometimes predicting that a better idea is possible. But without the idea first, there's nothing to do the math on.

He was agreeing and elaborating, adding a current example.

Cheers, James Arthur

ube. I really liked the guys view on what the ltspice program is for which is so that the engineer can get better intuition as to how his circuits wor k. It is a piece of verification but should not be used is the sole purpose of verifying. I guess I like it because it resonated with my viewpoints ab out use of such a program

And to John's point, much of that steel came to us by Bessemer's fiddling not suggested to him by any equation unavailable to everyone else, but by sheer dogged empirical determination, then additions and refinements from later minds.

And why did Bessemer do it? Wiki says he was inspired by a conversation with Napoleon III to solve the high price of artillery. I.e., the need was to facilitate war.

Bessemer's motivation? Possibly profit. He made some astute business maneuvers suggesting so. And the innovation and the cheap steel that resulted certainly wouldn't have happened in a socialist country, without that profit motive. (And think of the loss to humanity, think of the world today without cheap steel...)

But personally, like some of us, I think Bessemer did it because he was having a blast.

Cheers, James Arthur

I am under no obligation to make sense, other than having my circuits work.

--

John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc 
picosecond timing   precision measurement  

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com 
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

There might be 1e7 solutions to your problem. You can't simulate them all. You can sleep on it and let your brain evaluate the 1e7 solutions and pick a few good ones to simulate.

But don't commit too soon. It's best to stay confused for a few days.

It's also very helpful to talk to someone else about a circuit concept. I just did that, and the results were good, if hard to draw.

--

John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc 
picosecond timing   precision measurement  

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com 
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

Yes. The circuits almost always work first try.

Read this:

--

John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc 
picosecond timing   precision measurement  

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com 
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

-----------------

** He did it again !!!

Wot a hoot.

I think it's true in computer programming too.

However I'd like to point out that a large part of this "intuition" actually uses our aesthetic sense. By experience, we learn to prefer solutions that have a certain simplicity, and to avoid things we've come to recognise as kluges. This is *learned* behaviour, not "natural intuition".

The aesthetic preference applies in mathematics too, of course.

CH

Yes. You should see the 70 volt pulses that I'm making.

Yup, great fun.

--

John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc 
picosecond timing   precision measurement  

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com 
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

The Gummel-Poon model of the transistor is non-linear - largely exponential - but it is extensively used. It might be hard, but it certainly isn't impossible.

Mathematical models are always over-simplifications of reality, but large chunks of reality are non-linear, and the guidance can be very useful.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

John Larkin's claim was " "Intuition is the most important part of engineering."

Engineering may include inventing new solutions, but that's only part of the business. Intuition is handy, but it's not under rational control, and it comes up with a lot of bad ideas.

The most important part of engineering is transforming ideas into stuff that works reliably.

Everybody has intuition.

points out that everybody has two modes of thought - the fast, quick and instinctive reactions that get labelled as intuitions - and the slower, more rational approach, that involves chains of reasoning.

Engineering is all about the second mode.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

** Not JL's claim at all. ** Nonsense.

Because Bill lacks insight and intuative thinking he is relying on a dictionary definition that is not appropriate

I predicted exactly this in an earlier post.

** Major red herring. ** Wrong definition.

Engineering "intuition" is a totally different thing. Already described by me as being informed by great insight born of experience and understanding.

Bill will never get it, since he will never admit being a dull autistic and rote learning thinker. Plus giant asshole.

..... Phil

Except that James Nasmyth had much the same idea - to the extent that Besse mer offered him a one third share in the patent.

Robert Forester Mushet did thousands of experiments at his Darkhill Ironwor ks to get the process to work right, and Bessemer ended up giving him an an

20 years; possibly with a view to keeping the Mushets from legal action.

He was an inventor from way back, with a long history of looking for better ways to provide a product for which there was a known market.

e high price of artillery. I.e., the need was to facilitate war.

It's not in this Wikipedia article - the reference is only to military ordn ance

Obviously profit.

James Arthur thinks that communist countries are the only socialist countri es. Democratic socialist countries - as in Scandinavia - are perfectly comforta ble with the profit motive.

Another one of James Arthur's concocted sound-bites.

If you fiddle intelligently, you can make sense of what you are doing, and it stops being intuitive. It's a slower process, but much less error-prone.

It's a lot quicker to exploit mathematical simulations - worked out by peop le who had thought about what they were doing - and they do produce more re liable results than intuition, but every mathematical model is a simplifica tion of reality. You've still got to solder something together and make sur e that it does what ltspice predicts it will.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

Or you can look at few of them and think about it, which gives your sleeping brain more to work with.

Talking to somebody about a circuit concept is central to engineering.

Lots of engineering thinking is non-verbal, and nailing the ideas down clearly enough to let you talk about them is a valuable exercise.

You've got to do it anyway when you document the design, but it really does pay to do it early.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

Sadly, John Larkin is no Feinman.

What worked for a card-carrying physics genius isn't a effective for people who don't know enough about science to realise that observational sciences are as reliable as experimental sciences.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

Actually, there is an implicit obligation to "make sense" so that your circuits keep on working in situations where you haven't explicitly tested them.

Not one that you are equipped to comprehend, but it's there anyway.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

So what was his claim? I cut and pasted that line from his post. Do give us your alternative.

Phil Allison makes a lot of "predictions".

I know why he claims that I lack insight and intuitions - it suits his argument. I wouldn't have my name on a couple of patents if this were true.

But Phil can't tell us why he thinks that this is a "red herring". He has seen the phrase used, but doesn't actually understand what it means.

So do tell us the "right" definition, wise one.

Twaddle.

Regular intuition with added extra self-delusion.

Right. I got a Ph.D. in Physical Chemistry, which involves rather more than rote learning, then branched off into electronic engineering. A dull and predictable choice.

Phil thinks that autism is a label he can hang on people he doesn't approve of. In fact it's a mental disorder (largely affecting social interactions) with an incidence of about 1.5%.

From Phil's point of view. He wants people to agree with his silly ideas and resents it when they don't. John Larkin wants to be flattered, and gets nasty (though not as nasty) when he doesn't get the praise he feels he deserves.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney