OT: transistor theory flaw
Locked
 
|
I just read this short article and thought many on the list might find
it interesting: http://eetimes.com/news/latest/showArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=NQXUQGBIEWGHCQSNDLRSKH0CJUNN2JVN?articleID=217600659 If that URL gets broken, here is a smaller url to the same: http://tinyurl.com/o4cwpj 73, Mike ab3ap ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html |
|
|
CONTENTS DELETED
The author has deleted this message.
|
|
|
This reminds me of Major Edwin Armstrong's "saying" he used so much,
especially when he was told by Crosby that "wideband FM would not be practical". Amstrong retorted to himself with "It's what we know that ain't always so!" (or something very close to that.) I have seen phenomena regarding grounding of marine transmitters and presence of RF in strange places where it should not be MANY TIMES. Also other things regarding feeders and antennas on ships that would not work as advrtised, or as the engineers claimed they would! I still have one occurnce of something that happened during trouble shooting of a 35' shipboard vertical with a "top hat" that occurred on the 425-515 Khz. band nobody yet has given me a valid explanation for. The "experts" are not always even close to right all the time! 73, Sandy W5TVW ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ron D'Eau Claire" <[hidden email]> To: "'Elecraft Group'" <[hidden email]> Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2009 10:00 PM Subject: Re: [Elecraft] OT: transistor theory flaw > Tnx Mike. > > It reminds me that vacuum tube theory wasn't understood for many years > after > they were developed. Shoot, here in the USA DeForest thought a vacuum tube > *needed* some gas to work properly (and his tubes all had abysmally low > gain > as a result). > > If what the learned "experts" knew was right, Marconi would never have > been > successful. For decades they had stated that electromagnetic (radio) waves > were useless for communications over any significant distance. > > "What everyone knows", including everything we learned in school, is > always > open to question. > > Ron AC7AC > > -----Original Message----- > I just read this short article and thought many on the list might find > it interesting: > > http://eetimes.com/news/latest/showArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=NQXUQGBIEWGHCQSN > DLRSKH0CJUNN2JVN?articleID=217600659 > > If that URL gets broken, here is a smaller url to the same: > > http://tinyurl.com/o4cwpj > > 73, > Mike ab3ap > > ______________________________________________________________ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:[hidden email] > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.339 / Virus Database: 270.12.43/2139 - Release Date: 05/28/09 08:10:00 ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html |
|
|
I disagree, the experts are always right, its just the people who are
claiming to be an 'expert' are not always so. I hear this in a commencement speach this year "keep a healthy disregard for the impossible" and all engineers should have this. This 'flaw' in transistor theory only presents itself in high density IC if you read the article, and I would suspect it has to do with no longer being able to follow partical theory, which is what works for discrete transistors, soon as things get small enough, wave theory takes over, and common conventions are no longer valid, however maxwells equations always apply to both... its just the terms you ignored in certain cases start to become significant. I would bet this follows the press release model found here: http://www.phdcomics.com/comics/archive.php?comicid=1174 and some liberties are being taken with interpretation. Matt W8ESE Former KD8DAO http://blog.MattIsKichigai.com On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 9:42 AM, Sandy<[hidden email]> wrote: > This reminds me of Major Edwin Armstrong's "saying" he used so much, > especially when he was told by Crosby that "wideband FM would not be > practical". > > Amstrong retorted to himself with "It's what we know that ain't always so!" > (or something very close to that.) > > I have seen phenomena regarding grounding of marine transmitters and > presence of RF in strange places where it should not be MANY TIMES. Also > other things regarding feeders and antennas on ships that would not work as > advrtised, or as the engineers claimed they would! > > I still have one occurnce of something that happened during trouble shooting > of a 35' shipboard vertical with a "top hat" that occurred on the 425-515 > Khz. band nobody yet has given me a valid explanation for. > > The "experts" are not always even close to right all the time! > > 73, > > Sandy W5TVW > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Ron D'Eau Claire" <[hidden email]> > To: "'Elecraft Group'" <[hidden email]> > Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2009 10:00 PM > Subject: Re: [Elecraft] OT: transistor theory flaw > > >> Tnx Mike. >> >> It reminds me that vacuum tube theory wasn't understood for many years >> after >> they were developed. Shoot, here in the USA DeForest thought a vacuum tube >> *needed* some gas to work properly (and his tubes all had abysmally low >> gain >> as a result). >> >> If what the learned "experts" knew was right, Marconi would never have >> been >> successful. For decades they had stated that electromagnetic (radio) waves >> were useless for communications over any significant distance. >> >> "What everyone knows", including everything we learned in school, is >> always >> open to question. >> >> Ron AC7AC >> >> -----Original Message----- >> I just read this short article and thought many on the list might find >> it interesting: >> >> http://eetimes.com/news/latest/showArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=NQXUQGBIEWGHCQSN >> DLRSKH0CJUNN2JVN?articleID=217600659 >> >> If that URL gets broken, here is a smaller url to the same: >> >> http://tinyurl.com/o4cwpj >> >> 73, >> Mike ab3ap >> >> ______________________________________________________________ >> Elecraft mailing list >> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft >> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm >> Post: mailto:[hidden email] >> >> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net >> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 8.5.339 / Virus Database: 270.12.43/2139 - Release Date: 05/28/09 > 08:10:00 > > ______________________________________________________________ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:[hidden email] > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html |
|
|
I have ALWAYS abhorred and loathed the title: "Expert".
I am always skeptical of people who use that "title". Reminds me of an old ancient saying: "The MORE we know....the more we find out we DON'T KNOW." Many of the "pop scientists" of our time hide behind the title "EXPERT" and their many degrees in order to avoid being "questioned" about their theoretical beliefs, thereby relieving them of being accused of making an "error". I do not trust such people at all. As a "field engineering type", I have been guilty of "thinking" I might know ALL the idiosyncrasies of a particular inanimate piece of electronic apparatus.....only to be surprised, eventually when that piece of gear "breaks" and all you have learned winds up being invalid, and you must dig deeper to find out what the problem is! (In other words, that piece of gear has made a "monkey" out of you, and humbles what knowledge you have collected until that incident!) My two penny's worth. 73, Sandy W5TVW ----- Original Message ----- From: "Matt Palmer" <[hidden email]> To: "Sandy" <[hidden email]> Cc: "Ron D'Eau Claire" <[hidden email]>; "Elecraft Group" <[hidden email]> Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2009 9:52 AM Subject: Re: [Elecraft] OT: transistor theory flaw I disagree, the experts are always right, its just the people who are claiming to be an 'expert' are not always so. I hear this in a commencement speach this year "keep a healthy disregard for the impossible" and all engineers should have this. This 'flaw' in transistor theory only presents itself in high density IC if you read the article, and I would suspect it has to do with no longer being able to follow partical theory, which is what works for discrete transistors, soon as things get small enough, wave theory takes over, and common conventions are no longer valid, however maxwells equations always apply to both... its just the terms you ignored in certain cases start to become significant. I would bet this follows the press release model found here: http://www.phdcomics.com/comics/archive.php?comicid=1174 and some liberties are being taken with interpretation. Matt W8ESE Former KD8DAO http://blog.MattIsKichigai.com On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 9:42 AM, Sandy<[hidden email]> wrote: > This reminds me of Major Edwin Armstrong's "saying" he used so much, > especially when he was told by Crosby that "wideband FM would not be > practical". > > Amstrong retorted to himself with "It's what we know that ain't always > so!" > (or something very close to that.) > > I have seen phenomena regarding grounding of marine transmitters and > presence of RF in strange places where it should not be MANY TIMES. Also > other things regarding feeders and antennas on ships that would not work > as > advrtised, or as the engineers claimed they would! > > I still have one occurnce of something that happened during trouble > shooting > of a 35' shipboard vertical with a "top hat" that occurred on the 425-515 > Khz. band nobody yet has given me a valid explanation for. > > The "experts" are not always even close to right all the time! > > 73, > > Sandy W5TVW > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Ron D'Eau Claire" <[hidden email]> > To: "'Elecraft Group'" <[hidden email]> > Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2009 10:00 PM > Subject: Re: [Elecraft] OT: transistor theory flaw > > >> Tnx Mike. >> >> It reminds me that vacuum tube theory wasn't understood for many years >> after >> they were developed. Shoot, here in the USA DeForest thought a vacuum >> tube >> *needed* some gas to work properly (and his tubes all had abysmally low >> gain >> as a result). >> >> If what the learned "experts" knew was right, Marconi would never have >> been >> successful. For decades they had stated that electromagnetic (radio) >> waves >> were useless for communications over any significant distance. >> >> "What everyone knows", including everything we learned in school, is >> always >> open to question. >> >> Ron AC7AC >> >> -----Original Message----- >> I just read this short article and thought many on the list might find >> it interesting: >> >> http://eetimes.com/news/latest/showArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=NQXUQGBIEWGHCQSN >> DLRSKH0CJUNN2JVN?articleID=217600659 >> >> If that URL gets broken, here is a smaller url to the same: >> >> http://tinyurl.com/o4cwpj >> >> 73, >> Mike ab3ap >> >> ______________________________________________________________ >> Elecraft mailing list >> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft >> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm >> Post: mailto:[hidden email] >> >> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net >> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 8.5.339 / Virus Database: 270.12.43/2139 - Release Date: 05/28/09 > 08:10:00 > > ______________________________________________________________ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:[hidden email] > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.339 / Virus Database: 270.12.43/2139 - Release Date: 05/28/09 08:10:00 ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html |
|
|
As I heard it described one time, you should break the word
"expert" down into two syllables. An "Ex" is a has-been, and a "spurt" is a drip under pressure"! Dave W7AQK ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sandy" <[hidden email]> To: "Matt Palmer" <[hidden email]> Cc: "Elecraft Group" <[hidden email]> Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2009 11:49 AM Subject: Re: [Elecraft] OT: transistor theory flaw >I have ALWAYS abhorred and loathed the title: "Expert". > > I am always skeptical of people who use that "title". ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html |
|
|
It's like the word 'specialist' over here. Every tradesman's vehicle it
seems to me, claims that it's owner is a 'specialist'. "John Smith, Drainage Specialist" for example- maybe he's specialising because he's incapable of doing anything else ! :-) 73 Stephen G4SJP On 29/05/2009 04:10, "David Yarnes" <[hidden email]> wrote: > > As I heard it described one time, you should break the word > "expert" down into two syllables. An "Ex" is a has-been, > and a "spurt" is a drip under pressure"! > > Dave W7AQK > ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html |
«
Return to Elecraft
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |