And the worst one of all, the eternal "And I" mistake. Seems that so few people in America can get that one right that it's going to have to change. Stupid, but that's the way it is. It seems we have a generation or two of English teachers that has failed us.
"And I" or "And me" - how hard can it be?
SMS´s
I believe that a bad source to degrade a language are the SMS´s. The last week I saw a girl here in Buenos Aires messaging with who knows who, writing:
avia
This would be "había" (the past of "haber", there is/are in English). So 1) omit the initial H, 2) the accent, and 3) replace a B with a V. 3 errors in a single word !!!
I believe that a bad source to degrade a language are the SMS´s. The last week I saw a girl here in Buenos Aires messaging with who knows who, writing:
avia
This would be "había" (the past of "haber", there is/are in English). So 1) omit the initial H, 2) the accent, and 3) replace a B with a V. 3 errors in a single word !!!
Last edited:
It's "who knows whom"
Texas Instruments has a mistake on their LM317 datasheet. I've pointed it out twice. They've acknowledged the error but haven't changed the info.
One of my friends is a partner in a major NY law firm. One of the first things they do with the new associates is learn them the difference between (among?) THAT and WHICH.
Yo estudié Inglés en el cole, a veces ando mas perdido que caballo arriba del techo.
I studied English at high school, sometimes I'm more lost than horse above the roof.
Vivo en Traslasierra, Córdoba.
I live in Traslasierra, Córdoba.
CBS240, I see you've slipped in some deliberate mistakes!
lose/loose
I once read a technical paper by a well-known and respected Ph.D. who posts often on these forums and he didn't seem to know that a loose cite was not the same as to lose sight.
John
Last edited:
What I find more problematic than small linguistic errors is the fact that electronics terms often get redefined, and then have contradictory meanings.
For example, according to the original definition, a linear circuit/system has output signals that are directly proportional to its input signals. But then what's the use of a linear voltage regulator?
For example, according to the original definition, a linear circuit/system has output signals that are directly proportional to its input signals. But then what's the use of a linear voltage regulator?
It is the case when the same word in different contexts has different meanings. Like, "linear system" VS "linear voltage regulator". Not the same term, but the same word.
Most confusing is "current feedback" when feedback by voltage applied to emitter instead of base causing relatively higher current through feedback resistor. Somebody invented this ugly term, now it lives confusing novices.
Most confusing is "current feedback" when feedback by voltage applied to emitter instead of base causing relatively higher current through feedback resistor. Somebody invented this ugly term, now it lives confusing novices.
Last edited:
No contradiction at all. Linearity does not necessarily imply large output, and it does not necessarily require simple proportionality as a constant bias can be involved too. All linearity, in the context of a PSU, means is that if raising the input from 20V to 25V raises the output by 0.5mV (from 12V to 12.0005V) then raising the input to 30V means that the output goes up 1mV to 12.001V.
I think it was your mistaken introduction of 'proportional' which led you astray.
I think it was your mistaken introduction of 'proportional' which led you astray.
No, you are confusing linear with affine. When there is a constant bias involved, the system does not comply with the superposition theorem anymore and it is therefore not linear. At least that's what I've been thought at the Delft University of Technology.
Current feedback has at least three different meanings nowadays:
-In the oldest literature that I've read, it meant series feedback at the output, no matter what happens at the input.
-In the book/PhD thesis of Ernst Nordholt it means series feedback at the output and shunt feedback at the input, resulting in an accurate current to current transfer.
-In the context of current feedback op-amps it applies to the exact same feedback configuration as normal voltage feedback (shunt at the output, series at the input), but with an op-amp having a low open-loop input impedance at its negative input.
Current feedback has at least three different meanings nowadays:
-In the oldest literature that I've read, it meant series feedback at the output, no matter what happens at the input.
-In the book/PhD thesis of Ernst Nordholt it means series feedback at the output and shunt feedback at the input, resulting in an accurate current to current transfer.
-In the context of current feedback op-amps it applies to the exact same feedback configuration as normal voltage feedback (shunt at the output, series at the input), but with an op-amp having a low open-loop input impedance at its negative input.
Linear voltage regulator is opposed to the one that uses PWM. But who is well known vendor of chips for PWM regulators? A company with "Linear" in their name.
And what if I use a quadratic device like a FET or tube? It has some proportionality, but not necessarily linear (equal output measure per equal input measure)
It is not analytical ethymologicaly speaking.
"Positive feedback loop" is the right term and it s quite remotely
linked to "bootstrap".
Possibly. I think UK EEs generally extend 'linear' to include 'affine', as 'affine' is not a word which crops up often on EE courses here. 'Linear' is taken to mean 'no new frequency components in the output'.MarceldvG said:
Interestingly, the strict definition of linear excludes all sources (e.g. DC PSU, AC oscillators) so may be mathematically correct but perhaps unhelpful?
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.