Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!gegeweb.org!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!mit.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Hadron Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy Subject: Re: The low road versus the high road Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2014 18:32:12 +0200 Organization: gnu Lines: 79 Message-ID: <87fvkxpg8j.fsf@gmail.com> References: <8761lzvus6.fsf@gmail.com> <87tx9h4o1a.fsf@gmail.com> <87oazpqdg9.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: mit.eternal-september.org; posting-host="07eb11d006e4bc5020972c87fef4388d"; logging-data="14223"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18hGAnvYWHVRUfBp5hNILAIwrBuh8BJyoQ=" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) X-Face: 2h#||Cd#d%F*NCm59[_6/{1a@jy%;|j>{D~4^gKg(^i%7j0IK?+,/GmW&:CD5fEKb_! Cancel-Lock: sha1:VKuYgV6YSa7Qcfsnu7e97TMfOKo= sha1:v7Rpc9oOVhrLs39Kx5G1oudBl9M= Xref: csiph.com comp.os.linux.advocacy:240651 Ian Hilliard 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/