So I ask what you are ranting about - because it wasn't obvious - and you choose to be insulting? OK, that I understand. Having no good answer, insults are used instead.
Jim,
What I do at work involves objects that cost somewhere between 1 and 10 mega-bucks per copy. That in itself is of no meaning in this discussion.
Objects I have worked on in the last three decades, should they fail, cost 20 million dollars to repair. That again, is of no meaning in this discussion.
Within this forum, in this little thread... I have provided content I know from personal experience. Granted, some is well beyond anything others on this planet know or understand.... my real "issue" is passing knowledge on as I head towards retirement..
Your understanding of "physics" may be at some level, me, if I have a question, I simply ask nobel laureates what I need to know. That is my work environment (which I might add, is really cool).
Trying to make fun of how high energy physics people discuss order of magnitude issues is not productive. It surprised me that using "10e6" was such an insult to you, the high energy physicists around the world use this notation all the time..
I would prefer to include you in discussions, but I must admit you are making it difficult to consider you as a valued member in any discussion.
Please re-think how you engage.
John
Perceiving anything as insulting lies in the mind of the one who considers himself insulted, so please expand on your perception of what you consider a personal insult, so we have something solid to talk about.
I won´t even try to guess without your input.
That's pretty insulting to anyone outside of your head I would say. As powers of 10 are taught to children I don't see it as anything odd, silly or pompous and certainly not rediculous on a forum with a very high percentatage of members with degrees and a good spattering who have doctorates.
JMF himself says he has an engineering degree, followed with a management education.
So he should be able to understand...
But the person who wrote 10e6 could also have written the words or figures, easier for all to understand..
Storm in a teacup.
Both of you, please calm down.
So he should be able to understand...
But the person who wrote 10e6 could also have written the words or figures, easier for all to understand..
Storm in a teacup.
Both of you, please calm down.
I certainly could have used 1000000, or one million, or even one followed by 6 zeros.
Should we take offence whenever someone says kilo-ohm, or millivolt? Or heaven forbid, Kohm?
Everyone here understands scientific notation, and everyone understands what an exponent is.
To bash an individual over that is non productive.
jn
A google search, second hit: Honestly, it took longer to cut and paste than it did to find it.
https://www.mathsisfun.com/numbers/scientific-notation.html
scroll down to "other ways of writing it"
https://www.mathsisfun.com/numbers/scientific-notation.html
scroll down to "other ways of writing it"
Found the following here in the forum, "Output stage CFP to EF on LJM amp?" Didn't see any complaints about the use of jargon in case...
How about, "...VFA with high ULGF...?"
How about, "...VFA with high ULGF...?"
Last edited:
kohm, Mohm, uF...okay.
k$, M$...unusual, but valid, only I would personally would have to read it twice.
K/C/O PD, MI, HT translates to Known Case Of Parkinson's Disease, Myocardial Infarction, Hyper Tension.
Makes perfect sense to a doctor, but to others, it takes time to understand.
Jneu was just being comfortable using what he does daily, and we were a little slow to catch on.
JMF reaction was excessive, sort of "let's duke it out in the playground!"
k$, M$...unusual, but valid, only I would personally would have to read it twice.
K/C/O PD, MI, HT translates to Known Case Of Parkinson's Disease, Myocardial Infarction, Hyper Tension.
Makes perfect sense to a doctor, but to others, it takes time to understand.
Jneu was just being comfortable using what he does daily, and we were a little slow to catch on.
JMF reaction was excessive, sort of "let's duke it out in the playground!"
Yeah, you've included a reference, but if I am not completely mistaken (again 🙂 ) the reference was only a hidden one (means not disclosed to the participants).
So, it's just the same as before, 4 drinks that none of the testers had tried before; the hidden reference in principle is a good idea, but only if an additional open reference is provided - then it would have been close to an A/B/C-HR test protocol.
Actually, nobody was slow to catch on. Indeed, JMF knew from the jump what it was, yet decided to attack for reasons known only to him.
We are in complete agreement. There was no need for that reaction.
I think he believed I was looking down on others, so reacted that way. I cannot fault him for attacking me if that is what he believed.
However, his thinking in that regard was incorrect. If I were to choose to put others down, it would be quite obvious. And extremely rare, given that very little bothers me now.
Jn
$2E7 is odd, we are used to MKS rather than SI in engineering here.
So for me at least it was an additional task.
If you had written $20m, it is the same number of key strokes.
And possibly easier for everybody to understand.
The topic has taken the usual twists and turns, and the OP seems to have gone quiet.
Let us declare this thread closed, with the usual conclusion that wire quality does not make too much difference.
Until the next guy with a bug in his mind reads something on the net, and decides to share his new found knowledge.....
So for me at least it was an additional task.
If you had written $20m, it is the same number of key strokes.
And possibly easier for everybody to understand.
The topic has taken the usual twists and turns, and the OP seems to have gone quiet.
Let us declare this thread closed, with the usual conclusion that wire quality does not make too much difference.
Until the next guy with a bug in his mind reads something on the net, and decides to share his new found knowledge.....
Funny, you keep poking at the test try to make a hole, but you are poking at the strongest parts. All tests have weaknesses, but you keep banging on the strengths.
Here's a better whiskey analogy for you. People who are fans of single malt whiskey are given 4 glasses to taste. One glass contains whiskey straight from the bottle. One glass contains whiskey filtered thru a copper mesh. Another contains whiskey poured thru mashed potatoes, another thru mud. Only one person can accurately identify pure whiskey from copper filtered. One doesn't like the taste of the mud filtered whiskey. No one else can tell the difference. These are whiskey lovers, people with discerning tastes, or so it seems. But they can't tell pure from adulterated.
Like jneu confirmed, the wire quality does not affect the signal worth a damn.
Pano also says the same thing.
If it is properly rated, in audio use, and not wound as an inductor by sheer chance. And short enough not to load the amp with its added impedance...it is just a signal carrier.
Maybe we should have a link to these threads, and the next person who thinks this is a novel idea can be sent to them.
Pano also says the same thing.
If it is properly rated, in audio use, and not wound as an inductor by sheer chance. And short enough not to load the amp with its added impedance...it is just a signal carrier.
Maybe we should have a link to these threads, and the next person who thinks this is a novel idea can be sent to them.
Seems to be a misunderstanding, as I'm just "poking" at a conclusion that is (as every conclusion) not part of the test.
This part (aka "No one else can tell the difference") represents the problem I am "poking" at, because it is just your conclusion. 🙂
See for example the original whiskey and the copper-mesh filtered one; if you've never before tasted neither the original nor the copper-mesh filtered, how on earth should you know which one is the original one?
Even if the taste is very different, you still can't know about the original one and therefore it is quite easy to miss the correct identification, as it is of course just guessing.