Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #240651

Re: The low road versus the high road

From Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com>
Newsgroups comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject Re: The low road versus the high road
Date 2014-04-28 18:32 +0200
Organization gnu
Message-ID <87fvkxpg8j.fsf@gmail.com> (permalink)
References (8 earlier) <87oazpqdg9.fsf@gmail.com> <bs75a9FthqaU1@mid.individual.net> <ljloab$kte$1@dont-email.me> <kdqsl91nr1254tru1jovh0rc49nrtff97j@4ax.com> <bs7cv6FmjfU1@mid.individual.net>

Show all headers | View raw

Ian Hilliard <nospam@nospam.org> writes:

> On 28/04/14 17:08, chrisv wrote:
>> Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>
>>> Ian Hilliard wrote:
>>>>
>>>> If you are doing your job correctly, requirement collection and
>>>> implementation is platform independent. Testing is done on multiple
>>>> platforms. It is common that the development is done on Windows, but the
>>>> preferred OS is only used for deployment, if testing proves that it is
>>>> suitable. It is really quite simple.
>>>
>>> Apparently "Hadron" and Flounder know a lot more about engineering than
>>> you do, Ian.  :-D
>>
>> LOL.  Sure.  Like when Flathead claimed that negative feedback is
>> added into the amplifier circuitry "in order to maintain stability"
>> and that the amp "will go unstable" if there's not enough negative
>> feedback.  Both flat-out *wrong* statements, that I corrected.

You#re a fucking idiot TRYING to play with words. Negative feedback
loops ARE introduced into circuits to provide stability and also to
provide noise reduction.

>
> Such a statement is only wrong because of its incompleteness. Negative feedback
> reduces the overall gain of an amplifying circuit and compensates for distortion
> by cancelling out some of the input signal. If an amplifier circuit
> through

Wrong. It doesnt "cancel out the input signal" whatsoever : it or a
directly attenuated multiple/fraction of it is subtracted from the
input. This is in no way cancelling anything - rather
modifying. consider a +/- sine wave sitting on top of a 5 v "carrier" or
bias. The negative feeback might only remove the carrier/bias or a portion of
it - the actual signal component modulated onto the carrier is in no way
affected.

> design or implementation problems has end to end positive feedback, it can
> become unstable without negative feedback.

You're being too nice. turdv is a fucking idiot that denied negative
feedback is used to stabilise systems. "Just the opposite in fact" is
his quote.

>
> Negative feedback can only have a moderating effect if there is positive
> feedback in intermediate circuits within the amplifier chain. Under these
> circumstances it is not uncommon for the instability to move outside of the
> normal operating range. In audio amplifiers, this usually then manifests itself
> as distortion, because the amplifier is being fully driven producing
> RF.

*garble* No surprise there.

>
> Saying that negative feedback stabilises an amplifier is half an
> answer. The

Of course but IT IS an answer as to why its used in most places.

> problem with half answers is that they can be more dangerous than no answer,
> because they can lull one into the belief that they have the answer.

Stop being such a pretentious dick. negative feedback stabilising
systems is in NO WAY A HALF ANSWER. The fact that it "might be used for
something else" is immaterial.


>
> Ian
>

-- 
"I have a BSEE.... Negative feedback has many benefits, but "maintaining stability" is not one of them. Just the opposite, in fact." 
The turdv/chrisv idiot and his pretend BSEE degree.
PLEASE VISIT OUR HALL OF LINUX IDIOTS
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: Help for all the unemployed MSCEs posting in COLA Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2014-04-25 14:00 +0200
  Re: Help for all the unemployed MSCEs posting in COLA Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2014-04-25 14:41 +0200
    Re: Help for all the unemployed MSCEs posting in COLA chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-25 07:55 -0500
      Re: Help for all the unemployed MSCEs posting in COLA Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2014-04-25 09:25 -0400
        Re: Help for all the unemployed MSCEs posting in COLA chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-25 08:40 -0500
          Re: Help for all the unemployed MSCEs posting in COLA 	flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2014-04-25 09:55 -0400
            Re: Help for all the unemployed MSCEs posting in COLA Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2014-04-25 16:03 +0200
          Re: Help for all the unemployed MSCEs posting in COLA Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2014-04-25 14:21 +0000
          Re: Help for all the unemployed MSCEs posting in COLA GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2014-04-25 11:41 -0600
    "Hadron" basically admits Windows is "lowest common denominator" Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2014-04-25 09:24 -0400
      Re: "Hadron" basically admits Windows is "lowest common denominator" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-04-25 08:54 -0700
      Re: Help for all the unemployed MSCEs posting in COLA DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2014-04-29 19:47 -0400
        Re: Help for all the unemployed MSCEs posting in COLA 	flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2014-04-30 08:39 -0400
          Re: Help for all the unemployed MSCEs posting in COLA Silver Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2014-04-30 10:13 -0400
            Re: Help for all the unemployed MSCEs posting in COLA 	flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2014-04-30 10:19 -0400
              Re: Help for all the unemployed MSCEs posting in COLA Silver Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2014-04-30 10:31 -0400
                Re: Help for all the unemployed MSCEs posting in COLA 	flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2014-04-30 10:34 -0400
                Re: Help for all the unemployed MSCEs posting in COLA Silver Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2014-04-30 12:31 -0400
                Re: Help for all the unemployed MSCEs posting in COLA Steve Carroll <fretwizzen@gmail.com> - 2014-04-30 17:04 -0700
  Re: Help for all the unemployed MSCEs posting in COLA Ian Hilliard <nospam@nospam.org> - 2014-04-25 17:44 +0200
    Re: Help for all the unemployed MSCEs posting in COLA chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-25 11:01 -0500
      Re: Help for all the unemployed MSCEs posting in COLA DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2014-04-29 19:33 -0400
        Re: Help for all the unemployed MSCEs posting in COLA 	flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2014-04-30 08:00 -0400
          Re: Help for all the unemployed MSCEs posting in COLA DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2014-04-30 09:12 -0400
            Re: Help for all the unemployed MSCEs posting in COLA 	flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2014-04-30 10:05 -0400
    Re: Help for all the unemployed MSCEs posting in COLA Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2014-04-25 14:07 -0400
      Re: Help for all the unemployed MSCEs posting in COLA 	flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2014-04-25 14:22 -0400
        Re: Help for all the unemployed MSCEs posting in COLA Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2014-04-25 23:57 +0200
          Re: Help for all the unemployed MSCEs posting in COLA Ian Hilliard <nospam@nospam.org> - 2014-04-28 16:01 +0200
            The low road versus the high road Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2014-04-28 10:24 -0400
              Re: The low road versus the high road 	flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2014-04-28 10:54 -0400
              Re: The low road versus the high road chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-28 10:08 -0500
                Re: The low road versus the high road Ian Hilliard <nospam@nospam.org> - 2014-04-28 18:12 +0200
                Re: The low road versus the high road Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2014-04-28 18:26 +0200
                Re: The low road versus the high road chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-28 12:02 -0500
                Re: The low road versus the high road Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2014-04-28 18:32 +0200
                Re: The low road versus the high road Ian Hilliard <nospam@nospam.org> - 2014-04-28 18:44 +0200
                Re: The low road versus the high road chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-28 12:09 -0500
                Re: The low road versus the high road Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2014-04-28 18:47 +0200
                Re: The low road versus the high road Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2014-04-28 12:53 -0400
                Re: The low road versus the high road Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2014-04-28 19:10 +0200
                Re: The low road versus the high road Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2014-04-28 20:00 +0200
                Re: The low road versus the high road chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-28 13:11 -0500
                Re: The low road versus the high road chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-28 13:32 -0500
                Re: The low road versus the high road chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-28 13:46 -0500
                Re: The low road versus the high road DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2014-04-29 19:28 -0400
                Re: The low road versus the high road 	flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> - 2014-04-30 07:58 -0400
                Re: The low road versus the high road chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-28 12:11 -0500
                Re: The low road versus the high road Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2014-04-28 14:12 -0400
                Re: The low road versus the high road Silver Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2014-04-28 13:04 -0400
                Re: The low road versus the high road GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2014-04-28 11:19 -0600
                Re: The low road versus the high road chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-28 12:03 -0500
                Re: The low road versus the high road GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2014-04-28 11:17 -0600
                Re: The low road versus the high road Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2014-04-28 19:21 +0200
                Re: The low road versus the high road GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2014-04-28 12:06 -0600
                Re: The low road versus the high road chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-28 11:53 -0500
    Re: Help for all the unemployed MSCEs posting in COLA DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2014-04-28 19:23 -0400
      Re: Help for all the unemployed MSCEs posting in COLA Silver Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2014-04-28 19:57 -0400
  Re: Help for all the unemployed MSCEs posting in COLA Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2014-04-26 01:08 -0500
    Re: Help for all the unemployed MSCEs posting in COLA William Poaster <wp@induh-vidual.net> - 2014-04-26 10:48 +0100
      Re: Help for all the unemployed MSCEs posting in COLA Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2014-04-26 08:24 -0500
      Re: Help for all the unemployed MSCEs posting in COLA DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2014-04-27 17:39 -0400
        Re: Help for all the unemployed MSCEs posting in COLA Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2014-04-27 14:41 -0700
        Re: Help for all the unemployed MSCEs posting in COLA Hadron<hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2014-04-28 15:53 +0200
          Re: Help for all the unemployed MSCEs posting in COLA DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2014-04-28 13:21 -0400

csiph-web