Re: Explanation of Amps

From: John Fields (jfields_at_austininstruments.com)
Date: 01/18/05 

Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 17:17:42 -0600

On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 21:36:14 GMT, Miles Harris <mazzer@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 09:38:16 -0600, John Fields
><jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 14:41:26 GMT, Miles Harris <mazzer@yahoo.com>
>>wrote:
>
>>>I'm talking about a _perfect_ current source, Junior. Surely even
>>>*you* must have worked that out.
>>
>>---
>>Well, maroon, in the context of the thread, everybody knows there's no
>>perfect current source, so when you don't explicitly state that that's
>>what you're talking about, the default becomes real current sources
>>which, like lead-acid batteries and diodes, we can add to the
>>inventory of devices you've demonstrated you know little about.
>>---
>
>Wrong again, Junior. It was John Popelish that introduced the current
>source in his first response on this thread. It was clear that he was
>also talking about a perfect current source:
>
>JP:
>>If you have a current source (that provides as many volts as it takes
>>to push a fixed current through a resistance), then, yes. 

---
As far as I can tell, JP was expounding on the _concept_ of a current
source, which does assume ideal conditions, much like the 
impossible-to-find massless lever, weightless string, and frictionless
air.
Moreover, John clearly defined his terms in order to, ostensibly,
remove any ambiguity from his argument, so his meaning was perfectly
clear.
You, on the other hand, with your sloppy:  
"However, it's confusing to introduce a newbie to the concept of the
current source. It doesn't exist in the real world as we know."  
Are claiming that the current source (any current source) doesn't
exist in the real world.  You seem to be reasonably adept with the
language, and if you had meant otherwise I find it difficult to
believe that you would have deliberately omitted the 'perfect' from: 
"However, it's confusing to introduce a newbie to the concept of the
perfect current source." 
and in the process botched what you claim your intent was so
perfectly.  But perhaps it was only an oversight?   
-- 
John Fields

Relevant Pages

  • Re: 3.840 was a riot earty this morning!
    ... newbie, the comments in code had me in stitches... ... I haven't dropped in on arts' little corner in quite awhile, ... John ...
    (rec.radio.amateur.policy)
  • Re: Slight O/T - In response to JOS leaving,,
    ... Despite John's comments that the ratio of newbie to professional has ... John is something that happens to most long time usenet posters at one ... idiot trolls has increased, thus leading to a reactive spiral. ...
    (alt.guitar.bass)
  • Re: Bible Query
    ... Thanks, John, but as I mentioned I am an extreme newbie, ... >some name OTHER THAN Concatenate). ... > 'Dim rs As DAO.Recordset ...
    (microsoft.public.access.queries)
  • Re: Problems with dates
    ... As John points out elsewhere in this thread, you must use mm/dd/yyyy format ... when using the # delimiters. ... If you think this might be confusing, ...
    (microsoft.public.access.queries)
  • Re: Totally [OT] Re: Opium
    ... >> a newbie is nonsense. ...
    (Debian-User)