Re: relays

On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 14:31:56 -0600, John Fields
<jfields@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 10:35:55 -0800, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 12:25:03 -0600, John Fields
<jfields@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 07:03:27 -0800, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 06:29:40 -0600, John Fields
<jfields@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Sun, 30 Nov 2008 18:59:23 -0800, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Thu, 27 Nov 2008 16:03:29 -0800, John Larkin
<jjSNIPlarkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


Even for the simple relay case, both you and GM refused to do simple
arithmetic. JF gave it a shot, or several shots, and got it right on
his third try.



OMG! I have finally made a mistake. I admit it.

---
No, you don't.

As usual, you're just being a troublemaking, sardonic ass who doesn't
know when to quit.
---

JF got it *close* on his *fourth* try.

---
Practice makes perfect! :-)
---

I am sorry, truly humbled. Imagine confusing 3 with 4.

---
More crap.

What you _should_ be truly sorry about is having posted:

news:qoloh4drt6irvotgerj072fp1hp551lgj1@xxxxxxx

A truly colossal error for which you've refused to take responsibility,
showing you up for the bourgeois coward you really are.


JF


Remember this?

jearh4h663ht5prod4gk6nq4uqo034npbk@xxxxxxx

Are you suggesting that the math is wrong, as GM and JKK seem to feel,
or do you want to quibble over whether an unboundedly large real
number can be called "infinite"?

---
It's hardly quibbling when you flat-out refuse to admit that a latching
relay _can't_ have infinite gain regardless of how large the numerator
becomes or how small the denominator becomes, since, by definition, it's
a mathematical impossibility.

If the word is meaningless, I confiscate it and use it, in daily work,
to mean "big and unbounded." It's my definition.

---
In you find a properly defined word meaningless, then that's your
failing, and if you want to redefine it in a peculiar way and use it in
daily work, then that's fine.

But this isn't your daily work, and using your peculiar definitions
where people are used to the rather more rigorous formal definition can
only result in hostility, particularly if you keep insisting that your
definition is better.
---

You, who claims to be _so_ mathematically astute, should respect that
and stop the little: "Well, it's real big number so it's infinite to me"
song and dance.

I never claimed to be mathematically astute. I do calim that I check
my arithmetic and ususlly wind up with meaningful, correct-units,
engineering-accuracy results. Not because I'm smart, but because I'm
careful.

---
And when you don't, you don't simply admit to having made an error, you
do your little song and dance, and make excuses, and try to change the
subject, all for the purpose of derailing the argument.
---

If the former, correct it.

If the latter, get a life.

---
Piss off, Bozo.

_You're_ the one who needs a life where he can admit to making a mistake
instead of using every device imaginable to keep from having to own up
to it.
---

The "coward" claim is absurd, desperate even. If you have any guts,
try to keep your cool and stick to facts... and check your work before
you post. Good engineers do that.

---
Good engineers also admit their errors and learn from them.

They also learn to read data sheets properly and acknowledge that they
can also be flawed.
---

But "bourgeois"?

---
Yes, "bourgeois":

From Merriam - Webster's Online Dictionary:

1 : of, relating to, or characteristic of the townsman or of the social
middle class

2 : marked by a concern for material interests and respectability and a
tendency toward mediocrity

3 : dominated by commercial and industrial interests : capitalistic


Otherwise, why would you be so afraid to admit to having made a mistake?

Because I see no mistake.

---
Of course you don't; for the same reason you can't see that it's a
mistake to claim that latching relays have infinite gain.
---

Especially on this newsgroup, where you've certainly made it clear
enough much contempt you have for those who disagree with you.

Facts are facts.

---
Yeah, and the fact _is_ that you've made a few blunders in this thread
that you don't want to own up to.
---

wish the innumerates here would get over their fear
of math; everybody would be happier.

---
Non-sequitur, but I think the same thing might be accomplished if you
learned to deal with your hamartophobia.
---

So, "bourgeois coward" seems to me to be apropos.


JF


What a heap of words, cut-and-paste dictionary silliness, all to avoid
a little arithmetic. Again, if you don't agree with my math, correct
it.

---
When I cite a source, for accuracy, it's silly, but when you redefine
'infinite' because its meaning admittedly eludes you, that isn't?

Same old Larkinese double-standard bullshit, eh?

As for correcting your math, I already did, several times, but since you
don't make mistakes you're in denial and you've already put it out of
your mind.

JF

You calculated the gain of a simple non-latching relay as 78, 280,
1418, and finally 2836. But you haven't disputed my calculation of the
power gain of a latching relay, much less tackled this simple math
yourself.

Quit yapping and do some math.

John

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: relays
    ... I have finally made a mistake. ... It's hardly quibbling when you flat-out refuse to admit that a latching ... If the word is meaningless, I confiscate it and use it, in daily work, ... Facts are facts. ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Re: relays
    ... I have finally made a mistake. ... It's hardly quibbling when you flat-out refuse to admit that a latching ... If the word is meaningless, I confiscate it and use it, in daily work, ... Facts are facts. ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Re: relays
    ... JF gave it a shot, or several shots, and got it right on ... I have finally made a mistake. ... It's hardly quibbling when you flat-out refuse to admit that a latching ... Facts are facts. ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Re: OT -- Teenager Kills Man
    ... unsubstantiated assumptions being offered as facts. ... to do is admit your mistake. ... Popeye said you would not be man enough to do ...
    (rec.scuba)
  • Re: JSH: Too much energy, defense
    ... even though he won't admit to it. ... > I know I am asking this in vain, but please don't feed the TROLL. ... failing to persuade anyone that his math is correct. ... like it is a no-win proposition to argue with a dedicated crank.). ...
    (sci.math)