OT: What Really Happened

You won't find this in the WaPo:

formatting link

Reply to
Cursitor Doom
Loading thread data ...

Infowars being the right-wing misinformation site that it is, you won't fin d the kind of nonsense that they peddle on the pages of the Washington Post or any other media organisation that serves up real news.

Cursitor Doo resents this. He thinks that every news bulletin should be ful l of the kind of deluded right-wing nonsense that he likes. If he were addi cted to true romance he'd have access to endless supplies of the kind of fa tuous nonsense that he find satisfying, but he's addicted to more dangerous nonsense.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply to
Bill Sloman

There are people who enjoy violence as their prime amusement. They might randomly pick a political perspective to justify it, and to form a tribe with people to build bombs and start fires with, but the violence is the fun part for them.

Engineers like to build things and some people like to destroy things. Destroying is easier.

--
John Larkin      Highland Technology, Inc 

The best designs are necessarily accidental.
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
jlarkin

I wonder if Bill's actually built anything recently - or even contributed constructively to the building of anything? I'm guessing not.

Reply to
Cursitor Doom

To hear his stories from olden days, the stuff that he did design was mostly failures. Apparently failed at chemistry too. No wonder he's a bitter old git.

People need to find what they are actually good at, and do it. That can be hard. Imagine getting a PhD and discovering that you are no good at that subject, but are an excellent bicycle mechanic. (I knew the guy in that case.)

--
John Larkin      Highland Technology, Inc 

The best designs are necessarily accidental.
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
jlarkin

30% of new product developments succeed. The stuff I designed did work, but a lot the gear I designed it for didn't end up in volume production

I got a Ph.D. in physical chemistry. That's not a failure. I moved over into electronics because I was even better at that than I was in chemistry

John Larkin doesn't like what I say about him. That doesn't make me a bitter old git.

good at that subject, but are an excellent bicycle mechanic. (I knew the guy in that case.)

Not the situation here. I was an excellent chemist, but an even better electronic engineer - I wouldn't have got to work at EMI Central Research (which is the closest thing the UK had to Bell Labs ) if I wasn't.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply to
Bill Sloman

constructively to the building of anything?

Cursitor Doom pinching one of John Larkin's favourite put downs

Curistor Doom doesn't know much about electronics, so of course he is guess ing.

I put up this link a few months ago.

formatting link

The original circuit was developed as a retrofit to excite a linear variab le differential transformer used to measure the progressively increasing ma ss of a single crystal of gallium arsenide (GaAs) being grown in the Metals Research GaAs Liquid-Encapsulated Czochralski (LEC) crystal puller. The ci rcuit it replaced had been developed a decade earlier and used components t hat had become obsolete in 1986. The new circuit replaced it in new machine s and was retrofitted to some older machines.

What I've posted isn't the 1986 circuit, or anything much like it - the 198

6 circuit used +/15V rails - but it does lay out same basic idea. Cursitor Doom won't have a clue what that is.

I'm thinking about a version where you could teak the frequency electronica lly (within narrow limits). I've got simulations that work for a Wein Brid ge, but that does waste a lot of current.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply to
Bill Sloman

m
.

ostly failures.

ut a lot the gear I designed it for didn't end up in volume production

nto electronics because I was even better at that than I was in chemistry

That's actually a pretty big accomplishment. I remember seeing bumper stic kers that said, "Honk if you passed P-chem". I know I had some trouble wit h first semester. I had never been exposed to thermo before. There were s ome chem engineering students in the class who had no trouble with it at a ll because they had seen it before. I also had the really bad professor o f the two who taught it. He wrote his own book which was terrible but of c ourse that was the one he used. I repeated the first semester to improve m y grade thinking that was a useful thing. The other professor made it all so much more clear and I did get an A, but that wasn't worth doing really.

ter old git.

be hard. Imagine getting a PhD and discovering that you are no

guy in that case.)

ectronic engineer - I wouldn't have got to work at EMI Central Research (wh ich is the closest thing the UK had to Bell Labs ) if I wasn't.

I worked as an chemist for a year or so with a BS. That meant I was qualif ied to assemble lab equipment. Based on my amateur experience I got a job in EE at the same pay and never looked back. My next degree was a masters in EE which has served me very, very well.

--
Rick C. 

+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging 
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Rick C

But how do we know you didn't bullshit your way into EMI, Bill? Perhaps you only lasted 5 minutes with them when they worked out what you're all about (a narcissistic blowhard delustional about his own abilities)

Reply to
Cursitor Doom

lectronic engineer - I wouldn't have got to work at EMI Central Research (w hich is the closest thing the UK had to Bell Labs ) if I wasn't.

It wasn't a place that tolerated bullshit.

I got my name on two patents when I was there. This is one of them.

U.K. patent 2028503 "Improvements in or relating to ultrasonic apparatus"; assigned to EMI Ltd in 1978.

u're all about (a narcissistic blowhard delustional about his own abilitie s).

I stayed there for three years, then my wife put the hard word on me - it w as easier for me to find a job than it was for her, so I got one where she lived and worked (then had to get another one in Cambridge when she got her self a job there a couple of years later) . It was something of a sacrifice , but EMI went bust shortly thereafter, and got taken over by Thorn, so it may have been a good move.

You may like to think that I'm a narcissitic blowhard with delusions about my own abilities (I do know how to spell delusional, even if you don't se em to), but then again I'm still waiting from your comments about my curren t mirror variation on the Baxandall Class-D oscillator. You probably don't even know who Peter Baxandall was - audio freaks mostly do, but you don't s eem to be one.

Surprise me.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply to
Bill Sloman

It's curious how many of the companies you worked for went bust shortly afterwards, Bill. Could there be a nexus there somewhere?

Sorry, no can do. I'm an RF guy.

Reply to
Cursitor Doom

r electronic engineer - I wouldn't have got to work at EMI Central Research (which is the closest thing the UK had to Bell Labs ) if I wasn't.

"; assigned to EMI Ltd in 1978.

you're all about (a narcissistic blowhard delustional about his own abiliti es).

t was easier for me to find a job than it was for her, so I got one where s he lived and worked (then had to get another one in Cambridge when she got herself a job there a couple of years later) . It was something of a sacrif ice, but EMI went bust shortly thereafter, and got taken over by Thorn, so it may have been a good move.

fterwards, Bill. Could there be a nexus there somewhere?

Probably not. EMI is the only one that I can recall. EMI went bust because they built a lot of body scanners before they'd got around to writing the software that allowed US physicians to bill their patients for running the m through the scanners. I was hardware, rather than software, and ultrasoun d rather than X-ray tomography - I did get to talk to the body scanner peop le at my job interview, but the ultra-sound crew liked me better. Of course the body-scanner problems would have been survivable if the music business hadn't gone quiet at the same time, so it would have to be really odd nexu s.

ut my own abilities (I do know how to spell delusional, even if you don't s eem to), but then again I'm still waiting from your comments about my curre nt mirror variation on the Baxandall Class-D oscillator. You probably don't even know who Peter Baxandall was - audio freaks mostly do, but you don't seem to be one.

Not exactly. You are a pig-ignorant hobbyist with an interest in RF, and wh at you know about that could be written in large letters on the head of a p in. I know quite a lot more about RF than you do - if a whole lot less than people like Jeorg - and quite enough to know that you haven't got a clue a bout it.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply to
Bill Sloman

Baxandall did RF too. He invented the RF condenser microphone technique that Sennheiser ran with and made high quality transistorized mics possible before electret was discovered. Baxandall is best known for his bass and treble cut-and-boost tone controls that nearly every hifi/stereo unit built in the past 65+ years has had. You will have surely used Baxandall tone controls many times.

piglet

Reply to
piglet

:

er electronic engineer - I wouldn't have got to work at EMI Central Researc h (which is the closest thing the UK had to Bell Labs ) if I wasn't.

us"; assigned to EMI Ltd in 1978.

you're all about (a narcissistic blowhard delustional about his own abilit ies).

it was easier for me to find a job than it was for her, so I got one where she lived and worked (then had to get another one in Cambridge when >she g ot herself a job there a couple of years later) . It was something of a sac rifice, but EMI went bust shortly thereafter, and got taken over by Thorn, so it may have been a good move.

bout my own abilities (I do know how to spell delusional, even if you don't seem to), but then again I'm still waiting from your comments about my cur rent mirror variation on the Baxandall Class-D oscillator. You probably don 't even know who Peter Baxandall was - audio freaks mostly do, but you don' t seem to be one.

Invented might be too strong a word. it sounds as if he used a stretched me talised diaphragm in the microphone as the centre electrode in an AC -excit ed capacitor bridge.

Finding a cheap circuit to deliver that functionality is just the sort of i ngenuity I'd expect him to have delivered, but it might have been hard to g et a patent on it.

And you wouldn't needed to get up to RF to do - that kind of circuit tended to pinch 455kHz resonators from AM radio's. 10.7MHz got popular once FM re ceivers got cheap.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply to
Bill Sloman

...but not more than Trump.....

formatting link

I suggest you take the hint before you look as foolish and delusional......

-- Kevin Aylward

formatting link
- SuperSpice
formatting link

Reply to
Kevin Aylward

Twaddle.

-- Kevin Aylward

formatting link
- SuperSpice
formatting link

Reply to
Kevin Aylward

Nerd fight!

Reply to
bitrex

I do know some stuff about RF, which puts me ahead of Trump and Cursitor Doom. It's not an extravagant claim - in the 2+2=4 class.

Kevin Aylward looks foolish and delusional quite often enough to make him an unreliable authority in this context.

formatting link

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply to
Bill Sloman

Envy. I got to talk to Bill Percival (of Percival's distributed amplifier). Beat that.

formatting link

Hounsfield (and C.A.G. LeMay) from the brain-scanner were around too - but were less impressive.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply to
Bill Sloman

Well, thanks for advertising my paper.

I guess you are unacquainted with well understood aspects of SR. Indeed, that particular paper simply explains what the conventional interpretation of SR is and how it differs from the media pop accounts. To wit: in standard SR clocks do not slow down yet popular media accounts claim they do. In Sr clocks incurr differeing readings due to differing paths in space-time", not because clacks slow down. Unfortunately, such an interpretation has implications.

To wit: as Roger Penrose in "The Emperor's New Mind" p.393 discusses:

"...There can be no uncertain future. The whole of space-time must be fixed, without any scope for uncertainty. Indeed, this seems to have been Einstein's own conclusion (cf. Paris 1982 p.444). Moreover there is no flow of time at all. We have just "space-time" - and no scope at all for a future whose domain is being inexorably encroached upon by a determined past...! (The reader may be wondering what is the role of the uncertainties of quantum Mechanics in all of this. I will return to the questions raised by Quantum Mechanics later in the next chapter..."

Thus as stated in the paper, either standard QM is wrong or SR is wrong. A point ignored, despite being stated by many.

Thus the paper is inherently accurate, and the only foolishness is your inability to understand some rather simple concepts, apparently, such as:

"Time is what a good clock reads" "Clocks measure time, not space-time" "Time represents the system state of all the objects in the universe"

All pretty mundane stuff. I daresay, even Trump might grasp it.

...and to be clear.... the axioms of SR may well be false without the end result changing in the relevant context.

-- Kevin Aylward

formatting link
- SuperSpice
formatting link

Reply to
Kevin Aylward

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.