Scott, I feel you know me nought at all. I use my own name here, so I can't hide when I say that I have a number of friends who are scientists. So I am not lying. But social media has brought on this war, looks like on both sides, but not among those I know face to face. Well, keep me out of it. I don't mind exchange of views, but with respect. I fear if I say anything beyond that, there will be those who take what I say out of context, pick on a word or phrase and then infer things I have never agreed with. They could ask first, but they attack first. Not nice folk at all.
But I think this is really about their egos, not science.
So do I and I can call a lot of scientists friends even at the top. I asked because recent scientific activity has created an even stronger, scarier, anti-science sentiment. I thought you might have come across them since they are not far from you. I posted a link to an article about the one woman crusade against the asteroid extinction theory, and I applaud her work just as much as some of the stuff going on in physics (incessant Einstein denial) appalls me. Just wondering what you mean by militant science, it goes both ways.
This is the lounge after all.
'Militant science' seems like it might refer to people who think the science we have today is absolute everlasting truth, rather than consisting of the best (often extremely good) models we have as of today. It seems like a kind of overconfidence bias, and a bias towards satisfying some internal need to know things with absolute certainty, whereas a pure scientist isn't supposed to biased one way or the other. For example, some physical models we have are capable of incredible of accuracy, but some people seem to think old hearing research carries the same level of certainty as the best of existing very basic low level physics. It does't, IMHO. I have seen people who insist the human range of hearing is absolutely exactly 20Hz to 20kHz, and that it is physically impossible for any human to hear 16Hz. I can see how someone might consider it militant or maybe crazy. At a minimum it looks to be a gross misunderstanding of science combined with a high level of overconfidence. Also, in a post some time ago maybe in another thread, I think Jakob2 may have mentioned his own description possibly along somewhat similar lines of an audio website with some members who may share some particular attitudes about science. Presumably Jakob2 can clarify his thoughts or not as he sees fit re such issues.
Last edited:
If they are just crazy, I just ignore them. But I bite my tongue even if this is the lounge. I can certainly go into topics and I think you might know what they are, like we have 70 fires here in the state of New South Wales and it is still winter, know what I mean? What is happening in your country, yeah, a lot of anti-science. We can't talk about things that should be talked about because it has become political when it should not be, and so on.
But it is the extreme suspiciousness that I really dislike, judging a person before they even know where they are coming from. Now I just walk away.
Oh yes, definitely both ways. But not in my circles, when face to face I don't get that. Social media has become poison.
I don't want to give examples, it is just too dangerous, both because of the policies enforced here and the dangers that I have already mentioned. But militant science here on these forums are the ones who are looking for a fight and when was DIY ever about that? Just look for their "attack modes" and you will know who I mean. Some don't even use their own name.
It is one thing that I can actually repeatably hear but I doubt my threshold is of much use to you (~10% IIRC)
yes
I asked when will two power amps be finished and ready to ship.... estimate is 2 months :-(
As long as it isnt a profitable product, yet, it takes back seat to others they need to replace and replenish first plus other new products already in play.
But, I have dimensions so I can start making a fitting place for them.
-Richard
Thx. What a long F-ing trip! Well, inductor hysteresis does seem to have audible consequences...…. like when used in speaker Xover. Thus, the preference for air core L.
Maybe next week end you an visit? I have ordered a probe cable.
-RM
And some photos from assembly line, I hope you'll show us.
quote[ Update: photo of PA assembly at factory wont upload.... file size too large]
BR Damir
It may not be hysteresis alone. In other words there is a B-H curve which is non-linear in curvature to begin with then there is hysteresis depending on the path taken to get to a particular point on the B-H curve. In any case, air core is much better for linearity.
If I have that problem I use Irfanview, a freeware image editing program to reduce the jpeg quality until the file is small enough to post.
Another option if resolution is important to preserve might be to chop up a big picture into a set of smaller pictures and then post those. Irfanview could do that too.
And, it is same as DA in caps
THx-RNMarsh
That's real 10% IM distortion not DA and its imaginary distortion.
KC R20 Near Field Probe kit | Deepace
Harmonics from fast rise digital signals allows tracing source. Suitable for shielding effectiveness and finding source of interference, noisy grounds etc. etc. These compliment other probes I have.
-RM
Last edited:
High DA in caps is a hysteresis also. Only polar types would get to 10% or more.
--------------------------
For all others ---- a good Wireless World tests of Caps. Also shows 2H as dominant from dielectric and 3H from construction (contacts). See fig.3 for polar model.
View attachment Bateman EW 12 2002 mar2003 1uF electrolytic or film.pdf
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
I know horrifying isn't it. How about the measurements with no or virtually no AC signal on the cap (it's known as design).
- Status
- Not open for further replies.