Re: 12 LED resistance circuit help


"John Fields" <jfields@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:4run61185tuf10b6o6rvuo10bhh6fqf7ia@xxxxxxxxxx
> On Sun, 24 Apr 2005 18:12:30 GMT, "Anthony Fremont"
> <spam@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> >
> >"John Fields" <jfields@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> >
> >> Sure, I made a trypo, which is clearly evident from the context of
the
> >
> >Clearly evident, are you trying to be funny? There is nothing
"clearly
> >evident" about 0.6mA REALLY meaning 600mA.
>
> ---
> Well, had you noticed that earlier on in the article I referred to
> being able to run a relay with a 100mA coil, and had you noticed that
> that relay was in series with the collector-to-emitter junction of the
> transistor, it should have been obvious that, in the absence of
> current-hogging, that 100mA also had to pass through the transistor's
> collector-to-emitter junction in order to cause the relay to function.
> Also, I don't think there are any commonly available mechanical relays
> with will operate with coil currents on the order of 60µA, so it
> should have been more or less obvious that it was a trypo. Especially
> when you consider that just removing the mu fixes everything.

It was obvious to me for all the reasons you mention, that's why I went
and looked at the data*** yesterday to see. However, it might not
have been obvious to the OP (and it likely wasn't) given his post and
his nym. I didn't feel the need to jump in and make a scene though. I
figured you'd catch it or someone else would. No biggy. Certainly not
like the sacrilege of misappropriating the word "current" in S.E.B, I
see.

> >> article. Big fucking deal.
> >
> >As a matter of fact, it is a BFD now. You wrongly cussed me out, now
> >you should apologize. Or do you think you are above that?
>
> ---
> What I think is that you're trying to mitigate your error by saying,
> "See, everybody makes the same kinds of mistakes I do.", and there's
> no reason for me to apologize to you for flaming you about that.

I don't want an apology for pointing out my mistakes, I want one for
cussing me out after I pointed out your mistake. I admit my mistake yet
again, when will it be enough for you?

> >> You, on the other hand, are bobbing and weaving and ducking around
> >> saying that what you meant by current hogging (a commonly accepted
> >> technical term) was "power hogging", or some such other nonsense
and
> >> trying to excuse your error by saying that I'm in the same boat
that
> >> you're in, LOL.
> >
> >I admitted that current was the wrong word, WTF do you want me to do?
>
> ---
> I dont care _what_ you do.

I guess that's only as long as I don't say "current" when I really mean
"power".

> >Do you really think that I don't know the difference between current
and
> >power, or that the current thru all components in a series circuit is
> >the same?
>
> ---
> You do now...

I think I knew it 25 or 30 years ago.

> >I really didn't expect the pedant police to jump all over it.
>
> ---
> *** happens...
> ---
>
> >Next time I'll be more careful.
>
> ---
> Good.

whatever

> >The simple fact remains that one LED WILL DISIPATE MORE POWER THAN
THE
> >OTHER DUE TO DIFFERING Vf's. RIGHT???
>
> ---
> Right.
> ---

At least we can agree on something.

> >THE END RESULT IS EXACTLY THE
> >SAME AS IF ONE DEVICE HOGGED MORE CURRENT, RIGHT???
>
> ---
> Wrong. That's the same as saying that getting from point A to point B
> via a road that doesn't exist is the same as getting from point A to
> point B via road that does exist.

Your falacious analogy aside, the end result is a smoked part. The same
as when you put too much current thru it. I defy you to tell the
difference in a post-mortem exam.

> >I have admitted my
> >error numerous times now. Now, what is your problem?
>
> ---
> I have no problem.
> ---

Other than your inability to apologize for cussing someone out and
calling them names.

> >I'm not saying that you're in the same boat as me, I am saying that
you
> >make mistakes too. What I'd like to know is:
> >
> >Would you rather have someone point it out nicely, or would you
rather
> >them try to trip you up so that you can dig yourself in deeper? Let
me
> >know so that I may properly appease you in the future.
>
> ---
> Neither my appeasement nor your sarcasm is necessary. Besides, I
> don't know why you're so offended by what you thought was a trick
> question since, trick question or not, it certainly woke you up
> quickly enough!
> ---

Too bad you didn't "wake up" to your "trypo" until after cussing me out.

> >BTW, I feel that a microcontroller would be a simpler, cheaper, more
> >reliable (iow better) solution to the problem of resetting the
network
> >appliances on a regular basis. What do you think?
>
> ---
> Is that a trick question?

no

.