I agree. It's something designers just do because that's how they've always done it and that's how it's done in the example circuits they've seen. I once tested a card which accidentally had all the 100nF per chip decoupling capacitors left off. It worked fine.
I'm hostile to bad ideas, not to the people who have them, though when people get wedded to bad ideas it can lead to some personal animosity.
You may think that this is a logical extrapolation. Few would share that point of view.
Absolutely never. But I have have seen your reactions to my designs which have included ferrite beads/chips.
But not everybody reacts as if they do.
They knew they needed to learn more. If you praise them enough for what they have learned, they can survive being told that they haven't learned all the obscure facts that they needed to.
Part of the job of a supervising engineer is getting the junior engineers to talk about what they are doing, and that tends to include what their lecturers had told them. The education can move both ways, though some lecturers weren't up to much.
It's easy after the event. At the time it's a judgement call.
I didn't enjoy being rude, but it turned out to be only way to get the message across.
It wasn't a brain scanner, but a scheme to combine measurements taken lots of ultrasound beams crossing the body in different directions, in much the same way the brain-scanner combines results obtained by measuring the absorbtion of lots of X-ray beams crossing the brain in different directions. Ultrasound beams get deflected by structures in the human body in a way that X-rays don't - think lenses and mirrors - and that wasn't taken into account. There was a scheme in another lab that sort of worked - it didn't turn out to be useful - which mapped the local speed of sound in breast tissue so you could work out how the ultrasound beams were being bent
Edwarde Rawde isn't big on logic.
Spice voltage sources can have an output impedance, and op amp models should reflect the device power supply rejection as function of frequency. It can be a perfectly reasonable thing to do.
People who have so few ideas that they feel the need to get defensive about even the bad ones do say things like that.
...
You're also reminding me of an article I remember reading centuries ago. Let me see if I can find it. Ah yes here it is. Amazing what putting "rhubarb" in the search request can do.
There was an interesting response to that in March.
...
I prefer facts. Logic can lead to contradictions, just ask Russell.
It was not intended to be a logical extrapolation. Just a statement that you can't possibly know whether I like bananas or not.
My reaction was to remove them all and resimulate. Same result. So there was no way to know from the simulation whether they were doing anything useful or not.
See the reference to the article I posted. Most of what I knew and needed to know when I started work didn't come from lecturers. I'm not saying the lectures weren't useful but I haven't used Cauchy's Integral Formula since.
But you select your facts, and ignore the inconvenient ones.
Hofstadter has suggested that Russell never understood Gödel's incompleteness theorem.
But I do know that you don't like ferrite bead/chips.
They clearly weren't doing anything useful in the simulation, but they equally clearly didn't mess it up.
I don't have any formal academic training in electronics, so I can probably make the same claim. I did learn a lot from electronics textbooks, and you may have done so too.
There was only one occasion when I had to learn about Gibb's oscillations. Academic knowledge tends to stay academic until the real world rubs your nose in it.
The UK trained a lot of it's electronic engineers via the apprenticeship system. One of my bosses had done his training under Peter Baxandall at the Royal Radar Establishment. I got on fine with him despite the contrast with my own academic training as a Ph.D. chemist.
When I moved to Cambridge Instruments in Cambridge the new graduates tended to be more mathematically sophisticated, though the personnel department were reluctant to invited them in to be interviewed, and did invite a whole lot of even less suitable candidates.
The English class system did get satirised quite a lot. English companies were tolerably pragmatic, and survived.
Most people do to varying extents. It's mostly explained in these two articles.
But this isn't alt.psychology and arguing with you about it would be a waste of time so I won't be doing so any further.
He should probably have watched this:
You seem to the be at the Dunning-Kruger end of the spectrum. Most people do better.
I never got around to doing measurements on them. They mostly got put into circuits where the power supply rails were noisy, and we needed to keep the op amps outputs as clean as possible. The one time I had to get a unit through EMC compliance, the mains socket was the weak point, and we solved the problem by buying a better one.
With your rhetorical skills, your attempts at arguing with other people are mostly going to be a waste of time. You aren't all that good at it.
Nobody should watch U-tube - it seems to be designed to let people sound off at length when they don't have anything to say.
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required