Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register
Groups > sci.electronics.design > #740220
| From | Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | sci.electronics.design |
| Subject | Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 |
| Date | 2026-02-08 15:56 +1100 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <10m951g$1lari$5@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | (9 earlier) <10m7e04$11tf0$1@dont-email.me> <10m7j6l$15oh8$1@dont-email.me> <10m7m57$16lcn$2@dont-email.me> <10m7vco$1alev$1@dont-email.me> <ot1foklt4n0580bfq6ev26kanl79crc7h9@4ax.com> |
On 8/02/2026 5:51 am, john larkin wrote: > On Sat, 7 Feb 2026 19:13:43 +0100, Jeroen Belleman > <jeroen@nospam.please> wrote: > >> On 2/7/26 16:35, Bill Sloman wrote: >>> On 8/02/2026 1:45 am, Jeroen Belleman wrote: >>>> On 2/7/26 14:16, Bill Sloman wrote: >>>>> On 7/02/2026 9:37 pm, Gerhard Hoffmann wrote: >>>>>> Am 06.02.26 um 20:06 schrieb john larkin: >>>>>>> On Fri, 6 Feb 2026 17:47:52 +1100, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 6/02/2026 3:36 am, john larkin wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Thu, 5 Feb 2026 12:38:36 +0100, Gerhard Hoffmann <dk4xp@arcor.de> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Am 05.02.26 um 06:01 schrieb Bill Sloman: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Our XO is 25 MHz. We use a PLL inside the FPGA to multiply >>>>>>>>>>>> that to 250 >>>>>>>>>>>> MHz, which clocks the DDS phase accumulator and some other logic. >>>>>>>>>>>> That's free. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> In an ideal world, that costs 20 dB of phase noise for the f*10. >>>>>>>>>> The real world is usually worse. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The DDS and subsequent dividers buy back that noise. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Really? Do explain how. >>>>>> >>>>>> The DDS is a frequency divider, so the same jitter at a lower >>>>>> frequency is an improvement of the modulation index. >>>>>> >>>>>> In the real world, there is the ground bounce of 10000s of >>>>>> flipflops that adds to the generated clock, a shorted phase >>>>>> accumulator, a shorted sine table, a bad DAC, VCC noise, >>>>>> buffer amplifier etc, so I would not pin my hopes too high. >>>>> >>>>> By re-synchronising the outputs of the FPGA in an ECLinPs latch you >>>>> can get around the ground bounce (and rail noise) inside the FPGA. >>>>> >>>>> Setting up the clocks so that the ECLinPS latch picks up the FPGA >>>>> data when it is stable does take care, and if the propagation delays >>>>> inside the FPGA are allowed to get long enough it can be impossible, >>>>> but that would just be bad design. >>>>> >>>>>> The phase noise of the PLL VCO is probably nothing to write >>>>>> home about. Maybe a chain-of-inverters oscillator loaded by >>>>>> varicaps, no hi-Q structure that suppresses all noise more >>>>>> than a KHz away at 100 MHz. >>>>>> Improving the phase noise via 3V3 Vtune and the phase >>>>>> comparator / low pass is probably hopeless. >>>>> >>>>> Those certainly aren't routes that would lead to lower phase noise. >>>>> >>>>> A fast low-jitter external oscillator would be a better choice. >>>>> >>>>>> Remember, jitter is phase noise integrated over all frequencies. >>>>>> Quieting as much frequencies as possible is a good thing. >>>>> >>>>> But it doesn't address all the problems. >>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I think the ECOC2522 100 MHz oven is at quite a good price/ >>>>>>>>>> performance ratio >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> https://www.digikey.de/de/products/detail/ecs-inc/ECOC-2522-100-000-3FC/6578492 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> That's about the cost of all the parts on this product. And more >>>>>>>>> power >>>>>>>>> consumption. >>>>>> >>>>>> They have also >>>>>> < https://www.digikey.de/de/products/detail/taitien >>>>>> NA-100M-6911/9649712 > >>>>>> for €1150 each, but with impressive phase noise of -180 dBc/Hz >>>>>> a few KHz away @ 100 MHz. Not completely impossible, but close >>>>>> to the wall. >>>>>> See U. Rhode's and/or Rubiola's article on phase noise collapse >>>>>> in cross correlation measurements. >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> This will be the internal trigger option for a pulse generator. >>>>>>>>> Sub-ns >>>>>>>>> RMS jitter will be fine. >>>>>> >>>>>> Horses for courses. >>>>>> I'm more interested in high frequencies as in X-band. >>>>>> >>>>>>>> So it is cheap crap. You've just admitted it. >>>>>> >>>>>> Can't you abstain from these cheap poison shots? >>>>> > I mean, ALL OF YOU? >>>>> > It takes the fun out of s.e.d. >>>>> >>>>> John Larkin's signature line is >>>>> >>>>> "John Larkin >>>>> Highland Tech Glen Canyon Design Center >>>>> Lunatic Fringe Electronics" >>>>> >>>>> and he has also talked about doing "insanely good electronics" >>>>> without being all that convincing. If you post deceptive advertising, >>>>> you should expect to be called on it, which is part of the fun of s.e.d. >>>> >>>> Why do you keep squabbling? You haven't actually tested any >>>> of his products, so you're hardly in a position to criticize. >>> >>> He reveals enough of his detailed design to give plenty of opportunity >>> for criticism. Testing real hardware with proper test gear lets you do a >>> proper job, but few of us are lucky enough to have access to those kinds >>> of expensive toys. >>> >>>> You come across as someone bored stiff. It can't be very >>>> intellectually rewarding to always repeat the same mindless >>>> arguments, now can it? Haven't you got anything better to do? >>> >>> I'm not arguing with him - just jeering at his attempts to look clever. >>> I'm not bored stiff, but I don't have anything like enough to - I do >>> apply for jobs from time to time,and have got the occasional interview, >>> but 83-year-olds aren't attractive recruits. >>> >> >> Getting a job at 83 is a pipe dream. The only way would be to >> strike out on your own. If you have any ideas for designs that >> might evoke interest, we could have constructive conversations. >> As it stands, I see no point in continuing. >> >> Jeroen Belleman > > Attending maker events is a way to get consulting business. > > I attend events that allow 1-minute pitches. One could offer free > consulting/brainstorming and get some action going. > > I find a table near the food/beer and spread out some PCBs and > prototypes, and people ask about them. It's fun. > > There are tons of startups around here and many are weak on actual > electronics. > > Thursday night I heard a pitch for a company that's proposing to build > a fusion reactor that not only makes electricity, but does alchemy, > transmutes mercury to gold with the surplus neutrons. Hanging out with optimistic lunatics may be fun, but encouraging them is irresponsible. -- Bill Sloman, Sydney
Back to sci.electronics.design | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-02-02 04:38 -0700
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-02 07:37 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> - 2026-02-02 11:37 -0500
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-02 08:57 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-03 15:15 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-05 00:59 +1100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-04 08:52 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-05 16:37 +1100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-05 08:13 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-06 17:43 +1100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-02 10:05 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 bitrex <user@example.net> - 2026-02-02 13:47 -0500
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-02-02 12:07 -0700
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2026-02-02 14:33 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-02 17:29 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2026-02-02 19:37 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-02 20:47 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-03 16:08 +1100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2026-02-03 08:03 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-03 08:24 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-04 16:39 +1100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-04 03:37 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-04 23:50 +1100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-04 08:33 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-05 16:01 +1100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Gerhard Hoffmann <dk4xp@arcor.de> - 2026-02-05 12:38 +0100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-05 08:36 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-06 17:47 +1100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-06 11:06 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-07 15:32 +1100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-07 08:24 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-08 15:26 +1100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Gerhard Hoffmann <dk4xp@arcor.de> - 2026-02-07 11:37 +0100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-08 00:16 +1100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Jeroen Belleman <jeroen@nospam.please> - 2026-02-07 15:45 +0100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-08 02:35 +1100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid (Liz Tuddenham) - 2026-02-07 16:37 +0000
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-08 15:13 +1100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid (Liz Tuddenham) - 2026-02-08 12:38 +0000
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-09 00:59 +1100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-07 08:54 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-08 15:43 +1100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Jeroen Belleman <jeroen@nospam.please> - 2026-02-07 19:13 +0100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-07 10:51 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 wmartin <wwm@wwmartin.net> - 2026-02-07 15:06 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-08 15:56 +1100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-08 15:53 +1100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-07 08:38 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-08 15:58 +1100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-07 08:34 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-08 16:00 +1100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-05 08:29 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-06 17:56 +1100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-06 03:56 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-07 00:48 +1100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-06 09:06 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-07 15:44 +1100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> - 2026-02-04 10:52 -0500
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-04 08:47 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 bitrex <user@example.net> - 2026-02-02 14:11 -0500
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-02-02 12:24 -0700
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-02-07 06:51 -0700
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 "Edward Rawde" <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-02-02 19:31 -0500
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-02 19:33 -0800
csiph-web