Hi SY,
It may be possible that copious amounts of wine are required in order that the effects can be discerned without normal inhibitions.
So what would go with these? A red, or are we talking Thunderbird here?
Hi Ed,
(On a serious note)
Are you talking about decoupling a scope probe with about 100 ohms or so a the probe tip, or is it something else entirely? I've seen probe capacitance (even active probes) sometimes upset a circuit. But what you are describing almost seems to be small bursts of oscillation.
I'm just trying to understand this better.
Thank you, Chris
It may be possible that copious amounts of wine are required in order that the effects can be discerned without normal inhibitions.
So what would go with these? A red, or are we talking Thunderbird here?
Hi Ed,
(On a serious note)
Are you talking about decoupling a scope probe with about 100 ohms or so a the probe tip, or is it something else entirely? I've seen probe capacitance (even active probes) sometimes upset a circuit. But what you are describing almost seems to be small bursts of oscillation.
I'm just trying to understand this better.
Thank you, Chris
Chris,
If you mean me, I noticed sudden output spikes on a fussy high gain low noise circuit when cars or trucks drove by outside my building. Something provided a trigger to the amplifier to either oscillate or the vehicles had some specific RF frequency to trigger them into oscillation. I use the term squeeging for this oscillatory burst.
From prior experience I did not try to scope this. My standard 10X probe has enough capacitance that it would disturb a circuit this critical.
I also have a circuit to turn on my dust collector when the saw is turned on. It false trips when some semi-trucks go by. It is discrete transistors... attached The input is from a small current sense transformer. I will eventually add a C-B capacitor to the input transistor.
I still stand by my opinion that an unbiased but skilled tester was the appropriate person to volunteer for the job. I would have been no better a choice to do the testing for the same reason of bias. Please explain how a result that can be questioned because of that bias is merely "inconvenient". It goes to the most basic principle of logic and fairness when deciding a question that involves two different views. Is this not a basic premise of jurisprudence down under?
Yes I do and have. It was not an unsubtle improvement. And no, (to panomaniac) a .025 ohm resistance could not have caused it. I stand by my statement that lack of bias or emotional need for a certain result is essential in all testing. If that isn't obvious then there's no hope for you pano. I will say no more and if this is enough for you or a cohort to ban me then it is worth it. Sometimes one has to take a stand for what is right, regardless of the cost.
As I said to pano, if it isn't obvious after the discussion throughout this thread there is no hope in just repeating the arguments. I really think it is futile to put something obvious in front of someone like you who willingly blinds themselves. I've done it before. I'm not going to do it again. Go back and read what I've said before if you are interested. I just wanted everyone to be reminded that there remains a profound smell to the circumstances of this investigation of the Bybees.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.