Chip with simple program for Toy

[Sjouke Burry]

Magnetic wrote:

On Apr 2, 5:28 pm, jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv@aol> wrote:
Uncle Al wrote:
"Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr." wrote:
On Mar 31, 11:52 pm, Magnetic <magnetic.t...@yandex.ua> wrote:
[snip crap]
No, 9 month is much more probable than 1000 months.
The Earth can already be pregnant now.
Why 9 months? Is Earth's pregnancy the same as human pregnancy?
Cow, 285 days (vs. human 280 days) - LHC refugee East Indian post-docs
have it rigged to blow Lakshmi.
The coast-to-coast radio show last night will give magnetic
something else to worry about. Estimated time to destruction
given in that show is 2-3 years.

/BAH

Now, after the crime was committed, all criminal physicist will
widespread the scare ideas about the drastic change of Solar behavior;
meteorite attack; Nesemida; crossing of Galaxy’s plane; the end of
Mayan calendar and other rubbish, in order to foolish the ordinary
people and in order to hide the real cause of the future global
catastrophe, which is in fact, the LHC operation.

Idiot. Again changing predictions after new facts I see.

 

[Magnetic]

On Apr 2, 5:28 pm, jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv@aol> wrote:

Uncle Al wrote:
"Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr." wrote:
On Mar 31, 11:52 pm, Magnetic <magnetic.t...@yandex.ua> wrote:
[snip crap]

No, 9 month is much more probable than 1000 months.

The Earth can already be pregnant now.
Why 9 months? Is Earth's pregnancy the same as human pregnancy?

Cow, 285 days (vs. human 280 days) - LHC refugee East Indian post-docs
have it rigged to blow Lakshmi.  

The coast-to-coast radio show last night will give magnetic
something else to worry about.  Estimated time to destruction
given in that show is 2-3 years.

/BAH

Now, after the crime was committed, all criminal physicist will
widespread the scare ideas about the drastic change of Solar behavior;
meteorite attack; Nesemida; crossing of Galaxy’s plane; the end of
Mayan calendar and other rubbish, in order to foolish the ordinary
people and in order to hide the real cause of the future global
catastrophe, which is in fact, the LHC operation.

 

[Gc]

On 12 maalis, 22:29, PD <thedraperfam...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Mar 12, 1:14 pm, Vladimir Vassilevsky <nos...@nowhere.com> wrote:



PD wrote:
On Mar 12, 1:00 pm, Vladimir Vassilevsky <nos...@nowhere.com> wrote:

Tim Wescott wrote:

Magnetic wrote:

I’m scared, but can not do anything, - all ways lead to catastrophe.

http://www.cyriak.co.uk/lhc/lhc-webcams.html

No, not like this. LHC is a special kind of black hole which attracts
money. Just another monstrous project doomed to accomplish nothing.

VLV

That depends on what you mean by "accomplish nothing." Do you consider
fundamental research that is done purely for knowledge and without an
eye to application to be accomplishing nothing?

No new knowledge.

On the contrary, we KNOW the Standard Model of particle interactions
has to break down at the energy scale probed by the LHC.

Why?

There are
many possibilities here, some of them more likely than others.
Whichever of these outcomes turns out to be right, or if something
else entirely shows itself, we are *guaranteed* a dramatic revision of
our understanding of nature. This is about as sure a bet as you can
have, in terms of new knowledge.

Why It couldn`t happen that LHC finds Higgs and no trace of anything
else? Then there will be no next bigger collider for a long time. I do
not claim any expertise, but I`ve read the problem is that the
fermilab collider should have seen something beyond standard model if
it was not very unlucky or the energies of the new particles are in
some quite thin interval, simple because it has run so long time.

Or don't you consider new knowledge about fundamental particle
interactions new knowledge?

I consider nothing more important, but I think you can`t know a priori
if some project is a true success.

 

[Don Klipstein]

In <55c40922-425d-4bb7-92c6-ea9e0dcd10c8@z3g2000yqz.googlegroups.com>,
"Magnetic" wrote:

On Apr 2, 5:28=A0pm, jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv@aol> wrote:
Uncle Al wrote:
"Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr." wrote:
On Mar 31, 11:52 pm, Magnetic <magnetic.t...@yandex.ua> wrote:
[snip crap]

No, 9 month is much more probable than 1000 months.

The Earth can already be pregnant now.
Why 9 months? Is Earth's pregnancy the same as human pregnancy?

Cow, 285 days (vs. human 280 days) - LHC refugee East Indian post-docs
have it rigged to blow Lakshmi.

The coast-to-coast radio show last night will give magnetic
something else to worry about. Estimated time to destruction
given in that show is 2-3 years.

Now, after the crime was committed, all criminal physicist will
widespread the scare ideas about the drastic change of Solar behavior;
meteorite attack; Nesemida; crossing of Galaxy's plane; the end of
Mayan calendar and other rubbish, in order to foolish the ordinary
people and in order to hide the real cause of the future global
catastrophe, which is in fact, the LHC operation.

What will you be saying a day or two or three after Mayan calendar
ending of winter solstice in December 2012?

- Don Klipstein (Jr) (don@misty.com)

 

[Bret Cahill]

Hopefully everyone got your cards sent out in time. Of course everyone knew
exactly how long we had to do it.

Only nerds worry about being off by a few orders of magnitude.


Bret Cahill

 

[Bret Cahill]

This is kind of the reverse of cold fusion where they were having
trouble detecting the temperature of something they were claiming
might provide useful amounts of mechanical shaft work:

21" OD riser would have a fluid velocity of 1.07 mph at 50,000 bbl/day
leakage (the consistent real world value).  

You cannot even swim that fast yet you think it would be difficult to
detect 200 lb mass/sec?

Are you this stoopid in real life or are you just pulling our legs?

The janitor who can clean the poop you just smeared all over yourself
does not exist.


Bret Cahill

 

[Bret Cahill]

21" OD riser would have a fluid velocity of 1.07 mph at 50,000 bbl/day
leakage (the consistent real world value).  

http://www.gesensing.com/products/resources/brochures/xmt868.pdf

Clamp on available (non invasive)

< 0.13 mph resolution (0.5% error; full scale = 40 ft/sec)

Good to 3000 psi or 6100 feet below sea level

Hydrocarbon fluids

Ain't no janitor can clean up the poop the idiot above smeared all
over himself.

Of course, we already knew his response was stoopid because he cannot
even swim 1 mph yet he thinks that speed would be difficult to
measure.



Bret Cahill

 

[pamela]

Bret Cahill wrote:

21" OD riser would have a fluid velocity of 1.07 mph at 50,000 bbl/day
leakage (the consistent real world value).

http://www.gesensing.com/products/resources/brochures/xmt868.pdf

Clamp on available (non invasive)

0.13 mph resolution (0.5% error; full scale = 40 ft/sec)

Good to 3000 psi or 6100 feet below sea level

Hydrocarbon fluids

Ain't no janitor can clean up the poop the idiot above smeared all
over himself.

Of course, we already knew his response was stoopid because he cannot
even swim 1 mph yet he thinks that speed would be difficult to
measure.



Bret Cahill

Stupid ? ? ?

This is the pot calling the kettle black.

 

[spudnik]

I'd like to hear more about Halliburton's engineering;
is this really a Dark Art?... following, about a popular and
superefficient use of oil.

Dear Editor;
The staff report on plastic bags, given when SM considered a ban,
before, refused to list the actual fraction of a penny, paid for them
by bulk users like grocers & farmers at markets. Any rational EIR
would show that, at a fraction of a gram of "fossilized fuel (TM)"
per bag, a)
they require far less energy & materiel than a paper bag, and b)
that recycling them is impractical & unsanitary, beyond reusing the
clean
ones for carrying & garbage. (Alas, the fundy Greenies say that
the bags are not biodegradeable, but everyday observation shows,
they certainly don't last very long.)

As I stated at that meeting, perhaps coastal communities *should* ban
them -- except at farmers' markets -- because they are such efficient
examples of "tensional integrity," that they can clog stormdrains by
catching all sorts of leaves, twigs & paper. But, a statewide ban is
just too much of an environmental & economic burden.

--Stop British Petroleum's capNtrade rip-off;
tell your legislators, a tiny tax on carbon could achieve the result,
instead of "let the arbitrageurs/hedgies/daytrippers make
as much money as they can on CO2 credits!"
http://wlym.com

 

[krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz]

On Thu, 03 Jun 2010 09:32:14 -0500, pamela <bicycleguy123@gmail.com> wrote:

Bret Cahill wrote:
21" OD riser would have a fluid velocity of 1.07 mph at 50,000 bbl/day
leakage (the consistent real world value).

http://www.gesensing.com/products/resources/brochures/xmt868.pdf

Clamp on available (non invasive)

0.13 mph resolution (0.5% error; full scale = 40 ft/sec)

Good to 3000 psi or 6100 feet below sea level

Hydrocarbon fluids

Ain't no janitor can clean up the poop the idiot above smeared all
over himself.

Of course, we already knew his response was stoopid because he cannot
even swim 1 mph yet he thinks that speed would be difficult to
measure.



Bret Cahill


Stupid ? ? ?

This is the pot calling the kettle black.

Truer words have never been spoken.

 

[Ron M.]

On Jun 4, 12:57 pm, kajol <texaspes...@gmail.com> wrote:

Simple hack to get $500 to your home athttp://dailyupdatesonly.tk

Due to high security risks,i have hidden the cheque link in an
image.  in that website on left side below search box, click on image
and enter your name and address where you want to receive your
cheque.please dont tell to anyone.

And you actually think someone will be stupid enough to visit that
magic link. RIGHT!!!

 

[Ron M.]

On Jun 8, 12:37 am, money mania <ukpoun...@gmail.com> wrote:

Simple hack to get $800 to your home at  http://latestnewsupdate.tk

Due to high security risks,i have hidden the cheque link in an
image.  in that website on left side below search box, click on image
and enter your name and address where you want to receive your
cheque.please dont tell to anyone.

Right!!! Tokelau. Yep! We really wanna click that link.

 

[Hammy]

On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 14:59:01 -0400, Spehro Pefhany
<speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote:

On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 10:57:20 -0700 (PDT), panfilero
panfilero@gmail.com> wrote:

Thanks for the responses... what I'm trying to do is power an
accelerometer.... I'm trying to re-create the "Constant Current
Signal Conditioner" side of the circuit shown in Fig. 7 of this link

http://www.pcb.com/techsupport/tech_signal.php

but in that circuit they use a "Current Regulating Diode" I don't have
one of these, but I do have an electronics store down the street, so
basically that's what I'm trying to re-create, and for the
accelerometer I have, the current would have to be regulated to 4mA...

thanks

If you want to follow the example circuit, you could use a 1N5313 for
a couple of dollars from Mouser.

You could also create this with something like a TL431 reference, an
op-amp, a PNP transistor or small p-channel MOSFET and a few passives
and get higher output impedance at low frequencies.

I was going to suggest the TL431. They are cheap and as common as
dirt. The Electronics store by you probaly even stocks them.

Look in the data sheet for CCS. Examples are there for sink or source.

http://www.fairchildsemi.com/ds/TL%2FTL431.pdf

Texas instruments TL431 Data sheet has lots of application examples
for the tl431 its big though if your on dial-up.

http://focus.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/tl431a.pdf

 

[Tim Wescott]

On 07/06/2010 11:56 AM, Paul Hovnanian P.E. wrote:

Daku wrote:

[snip]
Also, I am aware that S-parameter methods are not appropriate at these
low frequencies.

Why not? Actual L/C component values might be a bit larger than most people
here deal with, but the math is still the same.

It's not so much that S-parameter methods won't work, though (they will,
just fine). It's just that S-parameter methods are designed to really
be useful where lumped-circuit approximations don't hold. At 1GHz, that
happens if the circuit spans a good portion of your hand -- but at 60Hz,
that doesn't happen until the circuit spans a good portion of the continent.

Unless you've totally forgotten how, use lumped-circuit analysis and
it'll work just fine.

--

Tim Wescott
Wescott Design Services
http://www.wescottdesign.com

Do you need to implement control loops in software?
"Applied Control Theory for Embedded Systems" was written for you.
See details at http://www.wescottdesign.com/actfes/actfes.html

 

[W. eWatson]

Somewhere I came across a setup for a simple "itty bitty" radio
telescope a number of years ago. Its purpose is educational. Basically,
it consists of a discarded 18" dish, power supply, and a satellite
signal finder. I happen to have a Channel Master 1004ifd finder, but it
gets its power from the LNB, which apparently gets it from a satellite
rcvr. I have no rcvr. I'm looking for a way to power it.

WEll, lucky me. A small amount of Googling got me to
<http://www.aoc.nrao.edu/epo/teachers/ittybitty/procedure.html>
I'm not sure our local The Shack has a choke. I may have one. My LNB is
different than the one in the pic. It's a Eagle Aspen DTV32+. I'm sure I
have a battery clip and 8 battery holder. This might do it. I didn't
notice the Rx connector on my CM1004, but that is where the power goes.
I may be set.

I constructed the battery pack in the link above, but w/o the coil. I
plugged it into the 1004ifd and immediately got something of a single
note noise from the device. This seems wrong. Any ideas? I did not
connect to the LNB and disk.

 

[Grant]

On Tue, 06 Jul 2010 11:56:19 -0700, "Paul Hovnanian P.E." <paul@hovnanian.com> wrote:

Daku wrote:

[snip]
Also, I am aware that S-parameter methods are not appropriate at these
low frequencies.

Why not? Actual L/C component values might be a bit larger than most people
here deal with, but the math is still the same.

Gyrator for the L?

Grant.

 

[Tim Wescott]

On 07/06/2010 03:49 PM, Grant wrote:

On Tue, 06 Jul 2010 11:56:19 -0700, "Paul Hovnanian P.E."<paul@hovnanian.com> wrote:

Daku wrote:

[snip]
Also, I am aware that S-parameter methods are not appropriate at these
low frequencies.

Why not? Actual L/C component values might be a bit larger than most people
here deal with, but the math is still the same.

Gyrator for the L?

Way noisy. You may as well use a Wien bridge oscillator.

Basically the phase noise of an LC oscillator is closely related to the
noise of the amplifier divided by the loaded Q of the tank circuit. In
the case of an RC oscillator (i.e. anything that doesn't use a real
resonant component) the 'loaded Q' is less than unity, which makes
achieving that -100dBc phase noise spec difficult.

(Why so low, by the way?).

--

Tim Wescott
Wescott Design Services
http://www.wescottdesign.com

Do you need to implement control loops in software?
"Applied Control Theory for Embedded Systems" was written for you.
See details at http://www.wescottdesign.com/actfes/actfes.html

 

[Jasen Betts]

On 2010-07-06, W. eWatson <wolftracks@invalid.com> wrote:

Somewhere I came across a setup for a simple "itty bitty" radio
telescope a number of years ago. Its purpose is educational. Basically,
it consists of a discarded 18" dish, power supply, and a satellite
signal finder. I happen to have a Channel Master 1004ifd finder, but it
gets its power from the LNB, which apparently gets it from a satellite
rcvr. I have no rcvr. I'm looking for a way to power it.

13VDC up the coax, center positive.

WEll, lucky me. A small amount of Googling got me to
http://www.aoc.nrao.edu/epo/teachers/ittybitty/procedure.html
I'm not sure our local The Shack has a choke. I may have one. My LNB is
different than the one in the pic. It's a Eagle Aspen DTV32+. I'm sure I
have a battery clip and 8 battery holder. This might do it. I didn't
notice the Rx connector on my CM1004, but that is where the power goes.
I may be set.

yeah, 12V may be enough, the connector is probably 'F'

I constructed the battery pack in the link above, but w/o the coil. I
plugged it into the 1004ifd and immediately got something of a single
note noise from the device. This seems wrong. Any ideas? I did not
connect to the LNB and disk.

with the input open circuit unloaded and the output shorted it could be oscilating,
or that could be the base level tone.


--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net ---

 

[lockmaven]

On Jul 6, 3:25 am, money mania <maaind...@gmail.com> wrote:

Simple Hack To Get $2000 To Your PayPal  Account.
At  http://ukcitygirls.co.cc

Due to high security risks, i have hidden the PayPal Form link in an
image.  in that website On search box Top Side, click on image
and enter your  PayPal  id And Your name.  please don,t tell to
anyone.

------------------------------

My paypal id is, ??, shucks, I can't remember my id, !!

Does this mean that I don't get the money??

 

[W. eWatson]

On 7/7/2010 4:59 AM, Jasen Betts wrote:

On 2010-07-06, W. eWatson<wolftracks@invalid.com> wrote:

Somewhere I came across a setup for a simple "itty bitty" radio
telescope a number of years ago. Its purpose is educational. Basically,
it consists of a discarded 18" dish, power supply, and a satellite
signal finder. I happen to have a Channel Master 1004ifd finder, but it
gets its power from the LNB, which apparently gets it from a satellite
rcvr. I have no rcvr. I'm looking for a way to power it.

13VDC up the coax, center positive.

WEll, lucky me. A small amount of Googling got me to
http://www.aoc.nrao.edu/epo/teachers/ittybitty/procedure.html
I'm not sure our local The Shack has a choke. I may have one. My LNB is
different than the one in the pic. It's a Eagle Aspen DTV32+. I'm sure I
have a battery clip and 8 battery holder. This might do it. I didn't
notice the Rx connector on my CM1004, but that is where the power goes.
I may be set.

yeah, 12V may be enough, the connector is probably 'F'

I constructed the battery pack in the link above, but w/o the coil. I
plugged it into the 1004ifd and immediately got something of a single
note noise from the device. This seems wrong. Any ideas? I did not
connect to the LNB and disk.

with the input open circuit unloaded and the output shorted it could be oscilating,
or that could be the base level tone.


--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net ---

Thanks. So I should put the choke in and connect the LNB? Yes, F.