John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part II

[PMA]

There are some articles by that author here:
index

Quite horrible collection, at least to me.

 

[dadod]

Justcallmedad and dadod, I like both of your designs and am glad to see some here really putting out interesting schematics. Your circuits are very similar to what Charles Hansen and I put out for hi end audio products. Both of you are on the right track, and we ALL have differences in design preference, and that is what makes it interesting!

Thank you John for your opinion. I use that preamp more than four years with great satisfaction.
Damir

 

[dadod]

This is improved version, constant (almost) power on input jfets.

 

[waltzingbear]

Ed,

sure! I'd like to buy a bridge! What do I get?

Cheers
Alan

 

[DPH]

Most of the people "came to the conclusion", that thay should blindly belive in what official science authorities tell them, so they belive that the monkeys are their distant relatives ,they also belive in big bang and other insane stories...
It's not all about, physics,measurements and science (censored and closed as it is now).

It always warms my dark, shriveled heart to see people rant and rave about science on an international, engineering- and technology-centric (ostensibly, at least), forum that's predicated on billions of man-hours in pursuit of the very technologies and science that made the infrastructure necessary for such a rant to even be possible.

I just feed off such irony.

 

[rayma]

Problem is with your statement is that most scientists don't 'believe', they accept the model
that currently best fits the available data. As Feyman always drilled into his students,
you can never prove a theory, only disprove it.

From the horse's mouth. http://strangebeautiful.com/other-texts/popper-logic-scientific-discovery.pdf

 

[scott wurcer]

I am considering opening to investors an opportunity to privitize a bridge linking Manhattan to one of the boroughs. It will be a fine opportunity to raise tolls and provide a public improvement.

I think I will be able to find investors here.

The Madman of Chaillot?

 

[billshurv]

From the horse's mouth. http://strangebeautiful.com/other-texts/popper-logic-scientific-discovery.pdf

Thank you. I needed a copy of that.

 

[scott wurcer]

and other insane stories...

...like carbon dating is off by 5 orders of magnitude, Brown's gas, unlimited free energy from the zero point...

 

[john curl]

It is interesting how people operate throughout the decades. It is almost always the same. Did most of you know that experts in the USA maintained that jet engines were impossible, even as the Germans and the British were making them? We like to bury our mistakes in opinion, but the same problem still goes on. Many people are comfortable with what they learned in college, and are open to little more. Oh well.

 

[scott wurcer]

Did most of you know that experts in the USA maintained that jet engines were impossible, even as the Germans and the British were making them?

There are experts with vested interests on both sides of any issue. Considering British jets were patented (not secrets) with working models you would need to provide some reference as to what experts (probably had a lot to lose).

 

[Mike Gergen]

Jim Winey was told the same thing by engineers at 3M where he worked at the time.

He was told his Magnepans wouldn't work, while they played in the lab in front of the guys who were saying they wouldn't work. Never forget him telling that story.

 

[DPH]

It's fun to ride the line of Clarke's 3 laws, but we're also wont to only remember the times when the experts are shown wrong. And oftentimes they're proven "wrong" years later as technology evolves.

That said, with audio it seems more people are hoping for their subjective pet theories to be true in the face of information that outmodes them...

 

[john curl]

There is no specific 'subjective pet theory' as far as I am concerned. I just follow the evidence.

 

[rayma]

Thank you. I needed a copy of that.

The LSD should be required reading for all engineering and science students (and others as well),
so they can understand what science really is, and is not. More of his related works:
http://www.rosenfels.org/Popper.pdf
http://www.univpgri-palembang.ac.id...r/6374113-Karl-Popper-Objective-Knowledge.pdf

 

[nezbleu]

Kuhn's "Structure of Scientific Revolutions" is also insightful.

 

[billshurv]

Rayma: I'll drink to that!

 

[scott wurcer]

That said, with audio it seems more people are hoping for their subjective pet theories to be true in the face of information that outmodes them...

The stubbornness around not revisiting "the low open loop BW" theories "proven" with tests using primitive, flawed for audio, op-amps is as closed minded as anything I see here.

 

[rayma]

Rayma: I'll drink to that!

In my freshman Philosophy of Science course, I was asked to write a philosophical paper
on continental drift. Even back then it was considered to be a scientific fact. To this day,
I still have no idea what the point was supposed to be. On the other hand, economics was
taught as a science, and I didn't get that either. https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/robert-j--shilleron-whether-he-is-a-scientist

 

[scottjoplin]

I went to grammar school...prep for oxbridge...economics was taught together with politics...does that make more sense?