Mike, look up "Occam's Razor."
http://royalsociety.org/page.asp?id=6002
You need to get some better history books.
http://royalsociety.org/page.asp?id=6002
You need to get some better history books.
Yeah, I didn't quite see the point you were trying to make. But whatever is was, getting the buttressing facts right is important. The Kelvin story is actually an interesting one, it's not quite the way you said it was, but it's not exactly relevant to audio design.
Of course it is. I have faith in his quote. He also screwed up Darwin, Heaviside, and who knows who else. It comes from a closed view of reality.
SY said:
Thanks.
"when you have two competing theories which make exactly the same predictions, the one that is simpler is the better."
From one of the links.
Mike.
Further research gives a 'slight' alteration to Kelvin's quote. Instead of: "X-rays are a hoax" , it might well be: "X-rays will prove to be a hoax" Wow, what a difference, and we wil strive to be as correct as possible in our quotations, in future. 
The guy even had own his hand x-rayed and he still didn't believe it.
The guy even had own his hand x-rayed and he still didn't believe it.
One of my favorite quotes relating to this subject is from Carl Sagan, and goes like this:
"But the fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown. "
"But the fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown. "
janneman said:
The simplified schematic is in the data sheet. It doesn't show the 1 kohm resistors on the current mirrors, the 10 kohm resistors to the null pin, or even the null pins themselves for that matter. That is why I was asking a few additional clarifying questions.
Scott has designed enough IC's that he can tell the schematic simply by looking at the wafer (also pictured in the data sheet). He can estimate the resistor values simply by measuring their dimensions.
If you take the correspondence I posted and combine it with the data sheet, you know just as much as Scott and I do. Barrie Gilbert, on the other hand knows considerably more -- he designed it, but that was in the early '90s and he has probably forgotten many of the details. There are definitely a few quirks still hiding in there. The ones I have seen are mostly centered around the biasing circuit. If you find them, you will have to figure out some work-arounds. If you don't then they aren't a problem in your application. (I use them in a way that they were never intended for.)
"when you have two competing theories which make exactly the same predictions, the one that is simpler is the better."
Finemond (sp)? says something like that.
" nature will take the simplest path "
Finemond (sp)? says something like that.
" nature will take the simplest path "
john curl said:
But John, as far as I know, quantum mechanics' unique accurate
predictions are not duplicated by other theories, so there is no
competing qualified theory.
Bohm's "pilot wave" apparently covers some of the conceptual
territory, but I don't believe it enjoys the predictive accuracy of
Feynman (et al) in electrodynamics.
Also, the quote about Occam's razor includes the word "generally".
Scott, what you said previously is important, and it makes a further point. Many engineers and physicists can readily accept very new ideas, ONCE they are given tacit approval by the scientific community.
For example, have you read the latest research on GRAPHENE? It behaves much like what Jack Bybee has been implying on his website for the last 10 years. Now, exotic electron flow at room temperature is OK, but Jack Bybee has been impugned by many, sometimes on this website, for many years. (spin drives me crazy too!)
When Jack and I talk together, we discuss graphene, entanglement, and ultra low temperatures helped by laser manipulation (isn't that neat?). Yes, we saw the same program on TV. I might recommend a book to you that I have here and read a few years ago called 'Entanglement' by Amir D. Aczel (no relation to Peter, I hope).
You see, we are not completely in the dark, only trying to peddle our wares to unsuspecting rich guys. We have other interests.
For example, have you read the latest research on GRAPHENE? It behaves much like what Jack Bybee has been implying on his website for the last 10 years. Now, exotic electron flow at room temperature is OK, but Jack Bybee has been impugned by many, sometimes on this website, for many years. (spin drives me crazy too!)
When Jack and I talk together, we discuss graphene, entanglement, and ultra low temperatures helped by laser manipulation (isn't that neat?). Yes, we saw the same program on TV. I might recommend a book to you that I have here and read a few years ago called 'Entanglement' by Amir D. Aczel (no relation to Peter, I hope).
You see, we are not completely in the dark, only trying to peddle our wares to unsuspecting rich guys. We have other interests.
Charles Hansen said:
Charles, I thought you were talking about the AD844, but obviously not as that one doesn't have null pins.
Charles Hansen said:
Which opamp would that be?
Jan Didden
scott wurcer said:
But if you can separate people from their money, without becoming fooled as well, you'll do very well for yourself.
Scott, you FELL for that ambiguity 'only trying to peddle our wares to rich guys' that I left in deliberately, because that is what YOU believe about us. IT is YOUR prejudice regarding hi end audio.
We don't care to make anything that does not give people pleasure from what it actually does. Just because people might believe that it does something and sometimes people fool themselves, is NOT what we care about or even seek.
Jack Bybee is independently wealthy, and 78 years old. He is going on a round the world tour this very week. He has been to mainland China, on vacation several times in the last few years. He drives a big fast car, owns his own home, and a patient wife. He has NEVER made any significant money from audio. He made much of his money from RECHIPPING automobiles for better performance and he sold his company, 20 years ago. He just does audio, because he likes it, and he likes to help others get better sound quality. He works out of his garage, not some fancy facility, and gets very impatient with building too many of anything, so he, like me, concentrates on the 'best of the best' NOT what can he get away with. The cost of some of his stuff is too high for my budget, but it is absorbed by grateful audiophiles, who know what a record can sound like (typically they have 1000's of them) and a comparable multi 10,000 collection of digital played back with the finest reproduction equipment that they can buy or have made for them. They are rich, this is THEIR hobby, and they throw money at it. So what?
We don't care to make anything that does not give people pleasure from what it actually does. Just because people might believe that it does something and sometimes people fool themselves, is NOT what we care about or even seek.
Jack Bybee is independently wealthy, and 78 years old. He is going on a round the world tour this very week. He has been to mainland China, on vacation several times in the last few years. He drives a big fast car, owns his own home, and a patient wife. He has NEVER made any significant money from audio. He made much of his money from RECHIPPING automobiles for better performance and he sold his company, 20 years ago. He just does audio, because he likes it, and he likes to help others get better sound quality. He works out of his garage, not some fancy facility, and gets very impatient with building too many of anything, so he, like me, concentrates on the 'best of the best' NOT what can he get away with. The cost of some of his stuff is too high for my budget, but it is absorbed by grateful audiophiles, who know what a record can sound like (typically they have 1000's of them) and a comparable multi 10,000 collection of digital played back with the finest reproduction equipment that they can buy or have made for them. They are rich, this is THEIR hobby, and they throw money at it. So what?
Calm down John I've made millions from my stock options, I does not make me a better person than anyone else, period.
Scott, I am glad that you are rich. I am not, however, I am happy enough to do what I do best, which is to make extra quality audio products. It doesn't pay well, but it gives me personal satisfaction.(actually I have MUCH less mark-up on my designs, than ADI does on yours) What saddens me is that people perceive me 'rich' or at least trying to 'make a buck' by misleading people. You are included in this mischaracterization of my associates and me, in particular. The problem is that it slows progress in getting better audio quality, even from cheaper approaches, when one doesn't really believe in it, or in the people at the vanguard of progress in this area.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.