Hi Joe, May I ask if it is true that you actually understand electronics but intentionally talk in undefined, or maybe vaguely defined terminology in order to obfuscate your technology for business reasons? If so, I guess that would be understandable. If not, I have a very hard time understanding why you insist on not learning about things you really should know about.
Regarding the 'conservative thinking' counter move, reminds me a book by a fellow who pays some attention to human nature: Words That Work: It's Not What You Say, It's What People Hear: Frank I. Luntz: 9781401309299: Amazon.com: Books Did you ever read that one? If not, you would seem to have real talent in that area and could probably make more money, actually quite a lot, doing something with that talent.
The other thing I am reminded of is a quote by another fellow who studies human nature, Daniel Kahneman: 'Not all illusions are visual. There are illusions of thought, which we call cognitive illusions. As a graduate student, I attended some courses on the art and science of psychotherapy. During one of these lectures, our teacher imparted a morsel of clinical wisdom. This is what he told us: “You will from time to time meet a patient who shares a disturbing tale of multiple mistakes in his previous treatment. He has been seen by several clinicians, and all failed him. The patient can lucidly describe how his therapists misunderstood him, but he has quickly perceived that you are different. You share the same feeling, are convinced that you understand him, and will be able to help.” At this point my teacher raised his voice as he said, “Do not even think of taking on this patient! Throw him out of the office! He is most likely a psychopath and you will not be able to help him.”
Many years later I learned that the teacher had warned us against psychopathic charm, and the leading authority in the study of psychopathy confirmed that the teacher’s advice was sound.'
Of course we are not doctors, we are engineers, but what if someone came to us claiming not be be well understood, etc., etc. And the person appeared to be intelligent and actually rather clever, not only that but in addition exhibits some very skilled charm?
All I can say is it all seems very interesting to watch. I will not try to talk to you about engineering stuff, or try to help you, or be understanding of you in an engineering sense, but maybe I can learn a few things from you in another area, who knows? My guess would be you will not be able sway over this crowd. However, you will have earned my admiration and respect (in a very limited way, of course) if you can pull it off.
The other thing I am reminded of is a quote by another fellow who studies human nature, Daniel Kahneman: 'Not all illusions are visual. There are illusions of thought, which we call cognitive illusions. As a graduate student, I attended some courses on the art and science of psychotherapy. During one of these lectures, our teacher imparted a morsel of clinical wisdom. This is what he told us: “You will from time to time meet a patient who shares a disturbing tale of multiple mistakes in his previous treatment. He has been seen by several clinicians, and all failed him. The patient can lucidly describe how his therapists misunderstood him, but he has quickly perceived that you are different. You share the same feeling, are convinced that you understand him, and will be able to help.” At this point my teacher raised his voice as he said, “Do not even think of taking on this patient! Throw him out of the office! He is most likely a psychopath and you will not be able to help him.”
Many years later I learned that the teacher had warned us against psychopathic charm, and the leading authority in the study of psychopathy confirmed that the teacher’s advice was sound.'
Of course we are not doctors, we are engineers, but what if someone came to us claiming not be be well understood, etc., etc. And the person appeared to be intelligent and actually rather clever, not only that but in addition exhibits some very skilled charm?
All I can say is it all seems very interesting to watch. I will not try to talk to you about engineering stuff, or try to help you, or be understanding of you in an engineering sense, but maybe I can learn a few things from you in another area, who knows? My guess would be you will not be able sway over this crowd. However, you will have earned my admiration and respect (in a very limited way, of course) if you can pull it off.
Joe, my last recommendation to you was to dig in and study hard. Instead you dug up a one-liner most suitable for adolescent bedrooms.
Seems to me it would not matter what I say. As for bedrooms, I would rather not know. Have a nice day.
OK, if you current send to that impedance, what then? Is energy stored?
I mean, if my knowledge of Ohm's Law is questioned, should I not be allowed to ask questions back? Mind you, I would rather not be having such a discussion, and it wasn't me that initiated any discussion on Ohm's Law. That kind of discussion only happens when you make assumptions about the other person's worth and ability. Very nice.
Joe, If you think EE101 concepts of solving R, L, C circuits with Laplace transforms are dogma that will stymie your creativity you are certainly welcome to feel that way.
I have a question for you. Take two identical capacitors and charge one to 1V and then short them together, conservation of charge demands that the combination equilibrate at 1/2V but where has 1/2 the energy gone?
What an odd question. No energy lost at all, both caps are charged equally and the capacitance has doubled - the combined energy in the two caps is the same. Why are you even asking such a question? I have 45 years experience in electronics as a profession, did you think a question like that would trick me up? Maybe you did? Next, how about a question about inverse square law? That might trick me up real good. 😕
Have a nice day.
Have a nice day.
Full or half a box.
Sorry Joe wrong answer, if you know the formula for energy stored on a capacitor think about it a while. This is one of the oldest interview questions around.
Sorry Joe wrong answer, if you know the formula for energy stored on a capacitor think about it a while. This is one of the oldest interview questions around.
jn's answer would certainly involve that. Consider two superconducting capacitors for instance, there is actually a very recent AJP article on this.
Make mine butter, none of this sugary stuff. But really, do we need this? I don't.
But I now see a general pattern, bring up a question or an idea, and you get shown the way to read baby books. I don't get it. Why?
"In the beginning of the history of experimental observation or other kinds of observations on scientific things, it is intuition, which is really based on just experiences with everyday objects that suggests reasonable explanations for things. But as we try to widen and make more consistent our descriptions of what we see, as it gets wider and wider and we see a greater range of phenomena, the explanations become what we call 'laws' instead of simple explanations. But the one important odd characteristic is they often seem to become more and more unreasonable, and more and more intuitively far from obvious." Richard Feynman
- Status
- Not open for further replies.