Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register

Groups > sci.electronics.design > #742862

Re: fast divider?

Show all headers | View raw

On Thu, 9 Apr 2026 19:07:54 +0100, John R Walliker
<jrwalliker@gmail.com> wrote:

>On 09/04/2026 18:34, john larkin wrote:
>> On Thu, 9 Apr 2026 10:55:56 -0400, Phil Hobbs
>> <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
>> 
>>> On 2026-04-02 14:20, john larkin wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 2 Apr 2026 13:17:33 -0400, Phil Hobbs
>>>> <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2026-04-02 10:53, john larkin wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, 2 Apr 2026 14:41:48 +1100, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2/04/2026 3:12 am, john larkin wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Thu, 2 Apr 2026 02:13:38 +1100, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 1/04/2026 7:06 pm, john larkin wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 1 Apr 2026 15:54:44 +1100, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/04/2026 2:14 am, john larkin wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 31 Mar 2026 22:30:44 +1100, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 31/03/2026 8:40 pm, john larkin wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 31 Mar 2026 16:35:49 +1100, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 31/03/2026 2:00 am, john larkin wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 30 Mar 2026 16:42:12 +1100, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 30/03/2026 2:18 am, john larkin wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 29 Mar 2026 15:52:53 +1100, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 29/03/2026 8:38 am, john larkin wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 28 Mar 2026 16:44:40 +1100, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 28/03/2026 5:39 am, john larkin wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 22 Mar 2026 03:00:16 +1100, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 22/03/2026 1:52 am, john larkin wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 21 Mar 2026 16:36:43 +1100, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 20/03/2026 4:05 am, john larkin wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 17 Mar 2026 22:30:01 +0000, someone
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <cffbf4deb9142bce48974efc0e64dede@example.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Invention is precisely running into - running toward - the unexpected.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> That's a bizarre way of looking at it. It's doing something in a way
>>>>>>>>> that hasn't been done before, but it is goal directed, and you wouldn't
>>>>>>>>> start the process if you didn't have a pretty clear idea of what you
>>>>>>>>> wanted to do, if not exactly how you were going to do it.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I strongly disagree; that is backwards. Sometimes we imagine products
>>>>>>>> or circuits that nobody ever wanted or expected. It just happens
>>>>>>>> sometimes at 2AM.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And very few of them look sensible after the sun has come up.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Most are obviously goofy. Many have already been invented and are on
>>>>>> the market. There are still lots that might become products.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So the next step is to research what's out there. Lately we hire a
>>>>>> bright college student to research the science, technology,
>>>>>> competitors, market. They deliver a report for $1000.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> One unstated benefit is that we get to evaluate the kids, even if the
>>>>>> technology idea was silly.  And it's fun.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have a folder full of ideas, most speculative and unexpected and
>>>>>>>> probably dumb.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If you knew a bit more, it would be a much thinner folder.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It would be thicker.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> We hire smart kids, college students, to explore them
>>>>>>>> and write up a report on the possible uses, competitors specs and
>>>>>>>> pricing, any interesting offshoots that occur to them. They get a
>>>>>>>> fixed fee when they turn in the report.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> An expensive self-indulgence.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Super cheap, compared to the alternates, like hiring a
>>>>>> usually-fatheaded marketing manager.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Sometimes that's accidental, but can be deliberately provoked.
>>>>>>>>>> Inventing needs the right skills and personality but improves with
>>>>>>>>>> practice in the right environment. Books have been written about that.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> None of them useful enough to have been touted at places that encouraged
>>>>>>>>> inventions and applying for patents. EMI Central Research was just such
>>>>>>>>> a place, and I worked there for three years without ever running into
>>>>>>>>> such a book. The histories of Bell Labs
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Idea_Factory
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have that one; good book.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Someone said that all the great inventions at Bell in those days were
>>>>>>>> done by people who ate lunch with Harry Nyquist.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> didn't mention any such book either. People will write books with the
>>>>>>>>> flimsiest of justifications if they think the product will sell.
>>>>>>>>> Teaching people how to make genuine inventions would be a very good
>>>>>>>>> thing if you could do it, and a lot of confidence tricksters claim that
>>>>>>>>> they can. The evidence supporting such claims doesn't seem to exist.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The real evidence is purchase orders.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> People don't give you purchase orders for patents. They buy products.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Exactly. Patents are "An expensive self-indulgence."
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> A good and patentable idea can be central to a product, but inept
>>>>>>> development can wreck the best of ideas. The Lintech electron beam
>>>>>>> tester was based on a patented idea of their boss, whose name was on the
>>>>>>> patent (which he'd got to own). He cheap-skated on the development to
>>>>>>> such an extent that one of his ex-engineers was able to build a pretty
>>>>>>> much identical machine which destroyed his business - nobody ordered a
>>>>>>> Lintech machine after the Schlumberger competitor hit the market, and
>>>>>>> after Lintech had delivered the last of the machine it had sold they
>>>>>>> went bankrupt. Mike Engelhart  - of LTSpice fame - worked on that project.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Some people invent things. Some intelligent and (over)educated people
>>>>>>>>>> actively resent invention, because they can't do it.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I can't say that I've met any of them. My father and two of my friends
>>>>>>>>> have each got their names onto about 25 patents and none of them ever
>>>>>>>>> talked about people resenting that work.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Given an enormous space of undiscovered ideas, one profits from a
>>>>>>>>>>>> method of exploring them in parallel with minimal filtering.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> At EMI Central Research we were encourage to submit patent queries. One
>>>>>>>>> of my colleagues put in a record number of patent queries - about fifty
>>>>>>>>> in one year - and was seen as having rather poor judgement. None of them
>>>>>>>>> turned into a patent. He would have benefited from better filtering.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The real evidence is purchase orders.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It seems to be the only evidence you can understand. You seem to have
>>>>>>> got your name on exactly one patent, taken out by a group you were
>>>>>>> working with, so your grasp of what constitutes a patentable idea and
>>>>>>> what you can do with it does seem to be second hand.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why the obsession with patents?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Only a small fraction of patents become commercial successes. Most are
>>>>>> abandoned in the expensive process before they are issued, and then
>>>>>> most issued patents are abandoned because of the maintenance fees.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Expensive vanity, mostly. OK if you are a big drug company maybe.
>>>>>
>>>>> We filed a provisional for the thermal Faraday shield, but that's our
>>>>> only one in the 17 years we've been in business.  We're hoping to
>>>>> interest folk like 3M--they could sell Scotch Isothermal Tape. :)
>>>>>
>>>>> In periods when there's venture money around (i.e. not the present
>>>>> time), patent protection is important for startups, because it's hard to
>>>>> get money without it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Plus, of course, we do a lot of patent litigation work.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> The only patent that I'm named on is for a kinda silly delay-line
>>>> imaging anode, to locate charge hits behind a microchannel plate. It
>>>> was just a suggestion on my part. But VCs had taken control of the
>>>> company, as they are wont to do, and they like to have a giant patent
>>>> portfolio for when they go public and cash out.
>>>
>>> Well, in your average startup you have two basic assets: your people and
>>> your IP.  The IP is easier to control.
>>>>
>>>> This was during the nanotech fad, which peaked and crashed before the
>>>> thing could go public.
>>>>
>>>> I have one of the anodes around here somewhere. It does look cool.
>>>
>>> Post a picture!
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>> Phil Hobbs
>> 
>> 
>> Oh, all right.
>> 
>> https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/bw07m6g9dio64khlvqlw2/AHe8Q9f7cOPsLgaKeyNYL6o?rlkey=eugoce4x6nrn6ebr9k5nnhuvp&dl=0
>> 
>> I think they actually went with a 3-axis wire array thing. One adjusts
>> the DC bias on each layer to properly share the electrons per plane.
>> 
>> This was for the ill-fated tomographic atom probe project in Madison.
>
>Why was it ill-fated?

Mainly because I put in a huge amount of work, with some folks in
Madison and in Oxford, and didn't get rich.

There was a nanotech boom/bust, sort of like the first internet bump
and AI now.


John Larkin
Highland Tech Glen Canyon Design Center
Lunatic Fringe Electronics

Back to sci.electronics.design | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar

Thread

Re: fast divider? john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-27 11:39 -0700
  Re: fast divider? Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-28 16:44 +1100
    Re: fast divider? john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-28 14:38 -0700
      Re: fast divider? Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-29 15:52 +1100
        Re: fast divider? john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-29 08:18 -0700
          Re: fast divider? Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-30 16:42 +1100
            Re: fast divider? john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-30 08:00 -0700
              Re: fast divider? Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-31 16:35 +1100
                Re: fast divider? john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-31 02:40 -0700
                Re: fast divider? Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-31 22:30 +1100
                Re: fast divider? john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-31 08:14 -0700
                Re: fast divider? Buzz McCool <buzz_mccool@yahoo.com> - 2026-03-31 10:41 -0700
                Re: fast divider? john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-31 10:57 -0700
                Re: fast divider? Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-31 14:25 -0700
                Re: fast divider? john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-31 15:16 -0700
                Re: fast divider? Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-04-01 16:17 +1100
                Re: fast divider? Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-04-01 16:05 +1100
                Re: fast divider? Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-04-01 02:04 -0700
                Re: fast divider? john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-04-01 07:25 -0700
                Re: fast divider? Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> - 2026-04-01 16:07 +0000
                Re: fast divider? Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-04-01 09:37 -0700
                Re: fast divider? Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-04-01 15:54 +1100
                Re: fast divider? john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-04-01 01:06 -0700
                Re: fast divider? Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-04-02 02:13 +1100
                Re: fast divider? john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-04-01 09:12 -0700
                Re: fast divider? Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-04-02 14:41 +1100
                Re: fast divider? john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-04-02 07:53 -0700
                Re: fast divider? Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-04-03 02:21 +1100
                Re: fast divider? john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-04-02 08:57 -0700
                Re: fast divider? Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-04-03 04:05 +1100
                Re: fast divider? Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> - 2026-04-02 13:17 -0400
                Re: fast divider? john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-04-02 11:20 -0700
                Re: fast divider? Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> - 2026-04-09 10:55 -0400
                Re: fast divider? john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-04-09 10:34 -0700
                Re: fast divider? Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> - 2026-04-09 13:43 -0400
                Re: fast divider? John R Walliker <jrwalliker@gmail.com> - 2026-04-09 19:07 +0100
                Re: fast divider? john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-04-09 13:47 -0700

csiph-web