Hans Camenzind's (free, downloadable) Book

Thread:

[snip] [snip]

Keel haul the bastards!

-- Peter

Kevin:

[snip] [snip]

You'r just "sour" because no one will pay you to do Physics!

-- Peter

The money for doing physics really sucks.

Tim

--
Love is a travelator.

Or too early. It would be nice to do the finishing touches to an almost complete theory to actually produce an anti-gravity machine, thereby raising myself way above the crowd:-)

Kevin Aylward snipped-for-privacy@anasoft.co.uk

SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture, Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.

Well, I don't want to get into discussing specific individuals, but the Nobel Institute carries no weight with me whatsoever. Nobles are heavily political biased. There is certainly no correlation to real worth of an individule and a noble prize. For example, those cosmic background radiation discoverer dudes got a Noble simply for turning on their instruments and noting that there was unexplained noise. It was a total fluke. They though it was bird shit. It could have been *anyone*.

Kevin Aylward snipped-for-privacy@anasoft.co.uk

SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture, Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.

Ho hummm...

My emotions only have an indirect impact on my views. By and large, I am very calculating in how I live my life. I'm probably as near to a Vulcan as one can get. Once one really sees what life is *really* about (i.e. maximising the numbers of Replicators,

one can never look at life in that daft, naive way again. Like, duty, helping, love, hate, etc...Its all a mechanical, explainable process.

Kevin Aylward snipped-for-privacy@anasoft.co.uk

SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture, Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.

This is simply an irrelevant statement. I am making statements of fact. The fact that some can't handle facts, is not my problem. Whether something is negative or positive is completely arbitrary. I don't consider the fact that life is fundamentally pointless, a black cloud. I don't consider it a white one either. Its simply the way it is. Emotions about it are irrelevant.

I'd grant you that, yeah, 99.9999% of the

Ahmmm... again, with all due respect to Mr. Widlar, I just don't see any significant evidence of exceptionality.

I don't have an issue with this, never claimed otherwise. My point is not about being "happy" in what they/we do, its about believing that what they do has any major significance. I simple don't accept that most notable electronics dudes stand out, as pretty much *any* other competent electronic dude would have came up with the same ideas as such notable dudes. This is in contrast to many of the real physics "greats". Sure, some one else might have came up with GTR, but such individuals are few and far between. By claiming that electronics dudes are "great" gives disservice to those that that actually can be considered "great".

Other than possibly, people like Nyquist or Shannon, they aint no way you are goanna convince me that those that are involved in engineering electronics deserve such accolades as "great".

Kevin Aylward snipped-for-privacy@anasoft.co.uk

SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture, Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.

Perhaps the problem is that the language doesn't have enough words to indicate levels of 'greatness.' You've made a reasonable argument that Widlar et al. were just 'highly competent' engineers without coming close to the level of Einstein, but presumably you also realize that the number of people in the 'highly competent engineering' class is itself a miniscule chunk of the population.

I like Einstein's quote something to the effect that he was always intrigued thinking about how many people out there picking coffee beans for a living were just as clever as himself, yet they never had the opportunity for that genius to shine.

BTW, the guys who discovered the cosmic background noise temperature... presumably their 'genius' was that they recognized what was really going on, and _didn't_ just assume it was just some bird droppings on their horn antenna.

---Joel

So is the local vicinity crawling with little Aylwards? If not, then I guess you are a failure unless you view your role in life as a drone that makes the real breeders comfortable.

How does all this talk about electronics help the process? If it does at all, then how can your tendency to irritate people be useful? If it doesn't help support the best replicators, then why are you wasting time here instead of trying to get laid or helping someone else get laid?

I'm not totally discarding your treatise. I tend to lean way more toward science than religion or any other mystical definition, but maybe you have discarded some subtleties that seem irrelevant to you but really do perform useful functions.

Nope. They had no idea whatsoever. They had nothing to do with studing the universe. That's my point. At the same time a physics group were developing a cosmic background radiation experiment. They noticed the results and it was they that they knew what the explanation was.

You obviously don't know the story. They indeed assumed it was the bird droppings when the inspected the horn. They cleaned it up because of that assumption.

The dudes got a Noble, simply by being in the right place at the right time. They contributed nothing. Its that simple. The radiation would have been discovered by the dudes who were looking for it if they had not been so lucky. Even that would in way way "merit" a prize associated with 'genius'. All you need is a low noise receiver at point it into space. The Noble was given simply because the information itself was of such significance, i.e. evidence for the creation of the universe in a big bang. However, giving the postman a prize for delivering this message should hardly equates to more than a Christmas box. The Noble prize is essentially, meaningless in a technical sense, although I would certainly like one. It would although me to sell my soul to the advertisers.

Kevin Aylward snipped-for-privacy@anasoft.co.uk

SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture, Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.

With that kind of "due respect," I'd take a critic instead. It occurs to me you haven't read much of Widlar's best work, perhaps never subscribed to the Journal of Solid-State Circuits or went to an ISSCC meeting? One suggestion, read Hans' book for explicit stories of breakthroughs made by Widlar after many others had spent several years working on the very same thing, and felt perfection had been achieved. For example, Widlar's 200mV band-gap reference. The silicon extrapolated band gap voltage after all is 1220mV. That accomplishment by itself does not make Widlar great, but he had about 25 of the quality or better that I'm aware of, and we know from those who worked near him or who attended sessions at the local bar that his influence on them was considerable.

It was Peter who said he loved the way Hans weaved "the history" in with the technology in his book, and that we need to remember "the greats". Surely he meant, "we need to remember the greats of electronics." You cannot argue Widlar was not one of our greats.

And again I'll assert your use of the word great is conservative, and even a bit insulting to those for whom you reserve its use. By calling Feynman and Einstein merely "great," you are indeed damning with faint praise. They were much more than just great.

For example, even Tony the Tiger recognized that "Frosted Flakes ® Are more than good, They're Gr-r-reat! ®" I'm sure you don't want to restrict Feynman and Einstein to that class of accolade.

Win

Nope.

There is no such thing as "failure" in evolution, or success for that matter. Things replicate or do not replicate. We just are.

It is a general processes. Being popular, i.e. people know you (not like you) is a trait that is obviously desirable. People who don't talk or write are less likely to be popular, as obviously, others dont know about them if they dont say nought. People want to associate with popular traits, popular traits are ones that have a larger probability of replication success, simply because better replications, are by their nature, popular, i.e. numerous.

It makes one popular. There is no such thing as bad news (exception, child abuse). *Any* effect that is noticed, good or bad, will make you more popular., because, err... it gets noticed. people ant to associate with popular people as it will make them more popular.

It does.

There is no reason to maximise ourselves, so the question is irrelevent. It is just something that is observed. Those that don't, are simple not observed as much. That's all there is to it.

Ahmmm... Given that we *know*, *experimentally*, that the axioms are satisfied for humans, the overall approach *must* be correct. There is of course possibility for some of the details suggested to be in error. Without doing more specific work, it can be hard to determine which trait should propagate more than another, given a set of conditions.

Oh dear...you mean you have some doubt?

Religion is little more than going "dah.. I don't understand how I got here, so it must have been due to a man who knows everything, can be everywhere at once, and can do anything". Like get real dude. How anyone still believes this crap is beyond belief.

Not possible. The mene-gene machine theory is a global theory, much like conservation of energy. All systems obey the laws if they satisfy the axioms, but such laws does not uniquely describe all behaviour. The fine details need more information, but they are not discarded, only approximated to make solutions more tractable.

Kevin Aylward snipped-for-privacy@anasoft.co.uk

SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture, Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.

As one hardly ever sees the context in which a problem was originally solved, and the difficulties encountered while trying to solve it, it's surprisingly easy to mistake the simplicity of a truly elegant solution for simple-mindedness, particularly when the passage of time has dulled the context. Quite often, the only clue to the brilliance of a solution is its later ubiquity. By this standard, Widlar was a truly remarkable person.

Thomas Philips

I don't think Widlar was hung up on being a "theorist" and would not be the type suckered into using the popular phraseology of "robust", "elegant", or "productize"-or any of that other crap phraseology. He was primarily a *producer*- responsible for bringing something like 99.999% of the discrete applications into the integrated circuit domain- took many applications and made them manufacturable, reliable, stellar performers, and educated the engineering community in their proper, advantageous, and creative use through a prolific record of research reports, application notes, and contributions to popular books and articles. He could give a damn less what the likes of Aylward pretends to think, say, or do.

I like the Freudian slip "...ferment mind of Bob Widlar ".

ROTFLMAO!

...Jim Thompson

--
|  James E.Thompson, P.E.                           |    mens     |
|  Analog Innovations, Inc.                         |     et      |
|  Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems  |    manus    |
|  Phoenix, Arizona            Voice:(480)460-2350  |             |
|  E-mail Address at Website     Fax:(480)460-2142  |  Brass Rat  |
|       http://www.analog-innovations.com           |    1962     |
             
I love to cook with wine.      Sometimes I even put it in the food.

Nonsense.

This is simply crap. Not a chance in hell that one man done so much. Your dreaming.

took many applications and made them manufacturable,

You clearly have a need to hero worship someone. Get over it.

Most of those that are well known writers, are not very good at what they write about. However, I am not making any claims specifically about Widlar by this statement, only pointing out the actual facts in general.

Like wise to your own opinions.

Kevin Aylward snipped-for-privacy@anasoft.co.uk

SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture, Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.

I second Fred's assertions! Fortunately they'll never be a dimension named Aylward to annoy us ;-)

...Jim Thompson

--
|  James E.Thompson, P.E.                           |    mens     |
|  Analog Innovations, Inc.                         |     et      |
|  Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems  |    manus    |
|  Phoenix, Arizona            Voice:(480)460-2350  |             |
|  E-mail Address at Website     Fax:(480)460-2142  |  Brass Rat  |
|       http://www.analog-innovations.com           |    1962     |
             
I love to cook with wine.      Sometimes I even put it in the food.

I agree.

And you point would be? Like, I don't know this? Like I haven't been doing analogue design for around 30 years?

Look, as I have said. This is preaching to the converted. This still don't change the facts that the far majority of electronics is same shit, different day.

I just happen to have a good appreciation of what the background is for most/many electronic designs. I know what the bloody issues are. I also have a good background to many physics "designs (new equations)". I can tell you this, its a no contest. The stuff that physics dudes came up with is way above people pissing about with a few transistors that seem to think that they're great by doing so.

I can list loads of stuff that is, with hiinsight, is trivially simple.

Special Relativity Dirac equation Compton scattering de Broglie wavelength Black body radiation law

But shows truly shows "great" minds at work such that only a relative few would have came up such insights.

A "great electronics designer" is an oxymoron. There is no circuit that wouldn't have been designed by 1000's of other dudes if they were given that task at that point in time.

People need to face the real facts that electronics is essentially

*EASY*, *despite* the fact that it might well take a few months to come up with a solution. Been there. Done it, just never got around to writing the book. EE's measurements of difficulty means nothing. As I have already stated, a "difficult" electronics task is usually trivial compared to "difficult" tasks in physics.

Those EE's that think that what they, or others do is "great" are fooling themselves. Try coming up with a theory of quantum gravity then you'll understand what real greatness and difficulty is all about.

Kevin Aylward snipped-for-privacy@anasoft.co.uk

SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture, Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.

[snip] [snip] [snip]

OK, Kev. Please delight us all by providing an ACCURATE analysis of the MC4024 schematic I posted.

If you don't comply I think everyone should simply plonk you as a useless noise source ;-)

...Jim Thompson

--
|  James E.Thompson, P.E.                           |    mens     |
|  Analog Innovations, Inc.                         |     et      |
|  Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems  |    manus    |
|  Phoenix, Arizona            Voice:(480)460-2350  |             |
|  E-mail Address at Website     Fax:(480)460-2142  |  Brass Rat  |
|       http://www.analog-innovations.com           |    1962     |
             
I love to cook with wine.      Sometimes I even put it in the food.