Thank you for the link, but your "correction" is irrelevant when you speak about DF of a capacitor with infinite capacitance. And thank you for the reminder, I will be as accurate as can in the future. Except when I discuss something with somebody who understands what we are talking about.
There are good reasons to believe Wavebourn. The main one is that he is often right! Not always, but often enough to be taken seriously.
The main danger for 'innocents' reading this thread is that they might not appreciate when we are discussing nuances of detail, and when we are correcting gross errors of fact.
The main danger for 'innocents' reading this thread is that they might not appreciate when we are discussing nuances of detail, and when we are correcting gross errors of fact.
The problem is some innocent viewers are going to believe
wavebourn and
Yes. It is the big problem when somebody believes in something without understanding. I don't want you to believe me, or DF96, or somebody else. Definitions and basic information are not beliefs, they are things that people discussing something have to agree on, and to know about. But when you argue with people because you don't know definitions, it is not a matter of belief. It is a matter of honesty.
Last edited:
Yes, I sense the nuances but I am often
at times so I just make notes to come back later when I understand these things a bit better. Fortunately I took Diff Eq 'way back when' so math does not give me fright. I just have to slug through this again. My nephew needed to pass calculus last year to earn his degree and it was giving him fits. I was able to get him through it after not having touched it in ohhhh 25 years!
I disagree with you and your post that attempts to suggests some conflict between John Curl and education. I know John Curl personally, he is well educated designer. I believe his success as electronics designer is based on the fact that he studied physics. Even when he tells you that knowledge of physics of electronics is not needed for successful design, he can't deny that the process of studying of the physics teaches some discipline of freedom of thinking, taste of experiments, and may be something else that is essential for successful designer.
[snip] Fortunately I took Diff Eq 'way back when' so math does not give me fright. I just have to slug through this again. My nephew needed to pass calculus last year to earn his degree and it was giving him fits. I was able to get him through it after not having touched it in ohhhh 25 years!
That's truly wonderful. Having minimal anxiety about maths is extremely helpful.
I have known, over the past forty-odd years, several fine engineers who could have gone so much further had they not suffered from inadequacies in mathematics, and as well, anxieties.
There is a "danger", however, that the mathematics will become so interesting, in and of itself, that one may forget that it is a tool.
Attention: Moderators, etc.
Richard Marsh is having some trouble logging on, and he doesn't know what to do about it. He has tried the 'front door' but the computer thinks he is someone else. Please contact him at
email address removed to protect against spam as soon as possible, if you can help.
Richard Marsh is having some trouble logging on, and he doesn't know what to do about it. He has tried the 'front door' but the computer thinks he is someone else. Please contact him at
email address removed to protect against spam as soon as possible, if you can help.
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes, I took an extra math course or two above the requirement when I was in EE at the U of Texas. But at this juncture, my focus is in using the equations to understand what so many of you discuss in this thread and the articles I bookmark. Topics such as complex math didn't give me too many headaches. So with some elbow grease and some patience, I'll get a foothold. I won't forget that the math is a tool.
Here is one more Wikipedia link worth mentioning: Polar coordinate system - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Attention: Moderators, etc.
Richard Marsh is having some trouble logging on, and he doesn't know what to do about it. He has tried the 'front door' but the computer thinks he is someone else. Please contact him at
Hi John, I've reported to the helpdesk. here is a link for what to do with a forgotten password diyAudio | What do I do if I forgot my password?
General support info is available at diyAudio | Portal
Tony.
Well, what happened to everybody?
I might mention a general comment that RNMarsh made to me just last night. People may know that he was many decades at LLL or Lawrence Livermore Labs.
He said that they had maybe 500 engineers, yet only maybe 5 of them ever used CALCULUS on a regular basis.
I also found this true when I worked at Friden-Singer, and Ampex, as well.
I did find a VP at Humphrey Instruments with a whole page of Vector Algebra in front of him that was mighty impressive. But then, I was being interviewed for a job, maybe it was a prop? '-) That's reality for all you tech's who never got a chance to learn calculus, when it comes to circuit design, so don't get intimidated by some PhD lording over you, implying that you will never get anywhere with audio circuit design.
I might mention a general comment that RNMarsh made to me just last night. People may know that he was many decades at LLL or Lawrence Livermore Labs.
He said that they had maybe 500 engineers, yet only maybe 5 of them ever used CALCULUS on a regular basis.
I also found this true when I worked at Friden-Singer, and Ampex, as well.
I did find a VP at Humphrey Instruments with a whole page of Vector Algebra in front of him that was mighty impressive. But then, I was being interviewed for a job, maybe it was a prop? '-) That's reality for all you tech's who never got a chance to learn calculus, when it comes to circuit design, so don't get intimidated by some PhD lording over you, implying that you will never get anywhere with audio circuit design.
This is the encouraging underlying truth which still holds with “hard” sciences.
Not necessarily the case with other brunches of studies. See your electronic signature and how it fits to applied macroeconomics/politics. There the mantra of Feynman (drop/modify theory if testing through experiment provides questionable results) faces a hard time.
Thanks. This one:
Is “transit time” real i.e. very small but measurable (how exactly? Impulse input?).
Is it a vague term expressing only a mathematical construct i.e. the (continuous) time equivalent of the out/in phase delay in a (continuous) frequency spectrum?
Should such a theoretical time equivalent be deprived of a physical-real identity when a certain signal frequency is specified? On what grounds?
George
Last edited:
Nice, it even includes vector calc. My buddies thought I was nuts because in the summer I would sit down and whip out ways of using calc in daily life. I even enjoyed vector calc class.
John, I must be one of those weird guys.
You may be confusing two different issues. One is the use of mathematics to understand something. The other is the use of mathematics to calculate something useful.john curl said:
To calculate the time constant of a CR network requires a formula and the ability to do arithmetic, perhaps aided by a calculator. To understand where the time constant comes from and know about the exponential decay curve requires calculus, in particular knowing how to solve a simple first order differential equation. Almost all engineers can do the former; good engineers can do the latter too.
To give a trivial example of when the theory is more useful than just the formula, consider a 555 timer but with added diodes to change the mark-space ratio.
OK, please produce text with this explanation of feedback. "Passes go by?", you're not serious you're a troll baiting us.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.