Strictly speaking, if there is no DC at the input but there is DC at the output, you have a new frequency component namely 0 Hz.
Anyway, an affine circuit can usually be split into a linear circuit and a bunch of independent sources. Superposition applies to the linear circuit, so you can turn on each independent source in turn and add the resulting output signals. I don't see what's the problem with that.
IMHO this captures very poorly one fundamental property of CF op-amps, the closed loop BW to the first order does not change with gain. If the closed loop equations are rearranged to isolate the current into the inverting input things are very clear by considering that that current as what is fed back.
Hi Scott,
I'm not denying that having a low open-loop input impedance at the negative input can have practical advantages, such as the one you just explained. All I'm saying is that three totally different feedback configurations are all referred to as "current feedback" because the term has been redefined at least twice. That doesn't make it any easier to understand what is meant.
Best regards,
Marcel
I'm not denying that having a low open-loop input impedance at the negative input can have practical advantages, such as the one you just explained. All I'm saying is that three totally different feedback configurations are all referred to as "current feedback" because the term has been redefined at least twice. That doesn't make it any easier to understand what is meant.
Best regards,
Marcel
I read a book, possibly by the same phd, that reversed form and from so many times that it made your head spin.
There's a serious problem here.
When was the Streptomycin invented?
The patent given is on streptothricin not streptomycin.
When was the Streptomycin invented?
The patent given is on streptothricin not streptomycin.
Wehn you quickly raed mispyted txet olny frist and last lettres mettar. That's why ancient people used hieroglyphs to communicate meanings instead of sounds.
Last edited:
Let's explore that. When do you use the one or the other? I do believe that we have been taught to use "and I" at all costs.
The way I figure it out is use whatever you would have used had the other person(s) not been included.
Jack and I went to the shop. (I went to the shop)
The shopkeeper stared at Jack and me. (The shopkeeper stared at me)
Not Quickly he handed the goods to Jack and I. (Quickly he handed the goods to I)
Also, I've never been told this or read it anywhere (that I'm aware of), but I believe the correct form is to refer to yourself last (not "me and Jack").
A couple of often misused words:
Refute does not mean "deny".
Peruse does not mean "skim over". You cannot "quickly peruse" or do a "quick perusal".
Refute does not mean "deny".
Peruse does not mean "skim over". You cannot "quickly peruse" or do a "quick perusal".
Yes, politicians (and dodgy businessman) are fond of saying that they refute something, when in fact it is clear that they are not refuting it but merely asserting the opposite. To refute something is to demonstrate that it is false, not just say that it is false.
Does a web dictionary refute those definitions?
refute: to deny the truth or accuracy of
Synonyms: rebut - confute - disprove - deny - negative - contradict
peruse: To read or examine, typically with great care
Synonyms: read
refute: to deny the truth or accuracy of
Synonyms: rebut - confute - disprove - deny - negative - contradict
peruse: To read or examine, typically with great care
Synonyms: read
Don't believe everything you read on the web. The Collins English Dictionary (2nd ed, 1986) says
"refute: to prove (a statement, theory, charge etc.) of (a person) to be false or incorrect; disprove.
"Usage: Refute is often used incorrectly as a synonym of Deny. In careful usage, however, to deny something is to state that it is untrue; to refute something is to assemble evidence in order to prove it untrue: 'all he could do was deny the allegations since he was unable to refute them'. "
"refute: to prove (a statement, theory, charge etc.) of (a person) to be false or incorrect; disprove.
"Usage: Refute is often used incorrectly as a synonym of Deny. In careful usage, however, to deny something is to state that it is untrue; to refute something is to assemble evidence in order to prove it untrue: 'all he could do was deny the allegations since he was unable to refute them'. "
Good advice.
It had occurred to me that there may be subtleties of context with those words, and search hits seemed to back that up. But it's been refuted.
It had occurred to me that there may be subtleties of context with those words, and search hits seemed to back that up. But it's been refuted.
I had an argument with one of the reporters from Dow Jones news service -- over 30 years ago -- for the use of the term "disbar" in a press release regarding a US Justice Dept. probe of National Semi. In strict usage, you can only disbar a lawyer. Legal usage is always and everywhere strict usage.
I suppose you could extrapolate the meaning to cover other regulated professions. This is how language often evolves. Legitimate extrapolation or creative analogy is a better method than the crass ignorance sometimes exhibited by journalists; that merely degrades language by obliterating fine distinctions.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.