Driver to drive?

[John Larkin]

On Thu, 1 May 2014 08:10:51 -0400, Douglas Beeson <c.difficile@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi all,

I did a search the other day on zero crossing detector circuits and came across this nice one by Jim Thompson:

http://www.analog-innovations.com/SED/Zero_Crossing.pdf

I think I have figured out how it works, except for capacitor C1. What does it do?

Thanks!

This one is kinda cute

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53724080/Circuits/ZCD_4.JPG

Simple, cheap, low power, tight and accurate window.

(Assuming you want an isolated AC line zcd, which you may not want)




--

John Larkin Highland Technology Inc
www.highlandtechnology.com jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com

Precision electronic instrumentation

 

[ehsjr]

On 5/1/2014 3:22 PM, Paul Hovnanian P.E. wrote:

ehsjr wrote:

[snip]
When the door is about 2 inches from fully open the copper pipes
on the T contact the hanging copper braid. Wires from the pipes
on the T connect to the LED modules mounted on two door panel
center framing members.

Microswitch?

Nope. The problem was to get 12V DC to the inside of the garage
door without wires connecting the inside of the door LEDs to the
supply throughout the travel of the door as it raised/lowered.
The door is steel, so energizing the tracks that the rollers ride
in is a non-starter - that would be a short circuit. The only time
that 12V needs to be there is when the door is fully open.

The hanging braid idea works perfectly. In addition, the voltage
drop across the limiting circuit is used to energize a relay which
transfers the 12V to the ceiling LEDs instead of the door LEDs when
the door goes down, so no microswitch is needed.

Ed

 

[Jim Thompson]

On Thu, 1 May 2014 08:10:51 -0400, Douglas Beeson
<c.difficile@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi all,

I did a search the other day on zero crossing detector circuits and came across this nice one by Jim Thompson:

http://www.analog-innovations.com/SED/Zero_Crossing.pdf

I think I have figured out how it works, except for capacitor C1. What does it do?

Thanks!

For those of you worried (unnecessarily) but such scare tactics as
"Most LM339s will do horrible goofy things", please see...

<http://www.analog-innovations.com/SED/Test_LM339_Input_Range.pdf>

Performed on a transistor-level netlist.

I had to go back and refresh my mind as to which input could give a
false logic output. As long as it's only the +IN input that goes
below ground, the LM339 won't output false logic. The -IN going below
ground will, IF < -Vbe. (Current _will_ be drawn thru the ESD, just
limit it with an input resistor.)

I'll give the emperor-with-no-clothes the benefit of the doubt with
his statement, "Most LM339s will do horrible goofy things", and chalk
it up to old age forgetfulness... only if you take both inputs closer
to POSITIVE rail than ~1.4V will you choke off the (common-biased)
current mirrors and "... horrible goofy things" will happen. This
applies also to the LM324 and all devices in that same structure
class.

All of these "anomalies" can easily be understood simply by studying
the current mirror structures and what bias "starvations" happen below
-RAIL or close to +RAIL.

Any other questions, simply ask The Master >:-} ...

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson | mens |
| Analog Innovations | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| San Tan Valley, AZ 85142 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

 

[John Larkin]

On Sun, 04 May 2014 11:50:20 -0700, Jim Thompson
<To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

On Thu, 1 May 2014 08:10:51 -0400, Douglas Beeson
c.difficile@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi all,

I did a search the other day on zero crossing detector circuits and came across this nice one by Jim Thompson:

http://www.analog-innovations.com/SED/Zero_Crossing.pdf

I think I have figured out how it works, except for capacitor C1. What does it do?

Thanks!

For those of you worried (unnecessarily) but such scare tactics as
"Most LM339s will do horrible goofy things", please see...

http://www.analog-innovations.com/SED/Test_LM339_Input_Range.pdf

Performed on a transistor-level netlist.

I had to go back and refresh my mind as to which input could give a
false logic output. As long as it's only the +IN input that goes
below ground, the LM339 won't output false logic. The -IN going below
ground will, IF < -Vbe. (Current _will_ be drawn thru the ESD, just
limit it with an input resistor.)

I'll give the emperor-with-no-clothes the benefit of the doubt with
his statement, "Most LM339s will do horrible goofy things", and chalk
it up to old age forgetfulness... only if you take both inputs closer
to POSITIVE rail than ~1.4V will you choke off the (common-biased)
current mirrors and "... horrible goofy things" will happen. This
applies also to the LM324 and all devices in that same structure
class.

All of these "anomalies" can easily be understood simply by studying
the current mirror structures and what bias "starvations" happen below
-RAIL or close to +RAIL.

It's a substrate diode problem, not obvious on the comparator "schematic."

Any other questions, simply ask The Master >:-} ...

What a fathead! Especially so, since you're quite wrong.

...Jim Thompson

I'd rather trust my actual experience with these parts, and the four or five
warnings on the National data sheet.

A note from the current online LM339 TI data sheet:

(3) The voltage at EITHER input or common-mode should not be allowed to go
negative by more than 0.3 V. The upper end of the commonmode voltage range is V
CC+ – 1.5 V; however, one input can exceed VCC, and the comparator will provide
a proper output state as long as the other input remains in the common-mode
range. Either or both inputs can go to 30 V without damage


That seems to be the TI part, probably different silicon from the "National"
part, a little tricky since TI acquired National. Whose silicon do they ship?

The 2004 National data sheet has three footnotes that include the same warning.
This is one of them:

Note 3: This input current will only exist when the voltage at ANY of the input
leads is driven negative. It is due to the collector-base junction of the input
PNP transistors becoming forward biased and thereby acting as input diode
clamps. In addition to this diode action, there is also lateral NPN parasitic
transistor action on the IC chip. This transistor action can cause the output
voltages of the comparators to go to the V+ voltage level (or to ground for a
large overdrive) for the time duration that an input is driven negative. This is
not destructive and normal output states will re-establish when the input
voltage, which was negative, again returns to a value greater than -0.3 VDC(at
25°)C


Note the double foldover as the input is driven progressively below ground.

Note "ANY of the input leads."

As I recall, on the National 339 and 324, pulling one input below ground can
trash all four outputs. On the 324, slaming one opamp rail-to-rail will glitch
the other three sections.

I once saved a design by replacing the LM339 with an LF347 opamp, which actually
makes a nice medium-speed comparator.

Of course, if you don't connect to the Vcc pin, and only simulate, you won't
have any problems.


"The Master"! What a fathead!


--

John Larkin Highland Technology Inc
www.highlandtechnology.com jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com

Precision electronic instrumentation

 

[Jim Thompson]

On Sun, 04 May 2014 12:29:05 -0700, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sun, 04 May 2014 11:50:20 -0700, Jim Thompson
To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

[snip]
For those of you worried (unnecessarily) but such scare tactics as
"Most LM339s will do horrible goofy things", please see...

http://www.analog-innovations.com/SED/Test_LM339_Input_Range.pdf

Performed on a transistor-level netlist.

I had to go back and refresh my mind as to which input could give a
false logic output. As long as it's only the +IN input that goes
below ground, the LM339 won't output false logic. The -IN going below
ground will, IF < -Vbe. (Current _will_ be drawn thru the ESD, just
limit it with an input resistor.)

I'll give the emperor-with-no-clothes the benefit of the doubt with
his statement, "Most LM339s will do horrible goofy things", and chalk
it up to old age forgetfulness... only if you take both inputs closer
to POSITIVE rail than ~1.4V will you choke off the (common-biased)
current mirrors and "... horrible goofy things" will happen. This
applies also to the LM324 and all devices in that same structure
class.

All of these "anomalies" can easily be understood simply by studying
the current mirror structures and what bias "starvations" happen below
-RAIL or close to +RAIL.

It's a substrate diode problem, not obvious on the comparator "schematic."

Duh! Those of us versed in I/C design have models for _each_ of those
transistors and its parasitic substrate diode (well).

Now there may exist versions of these parts that take liberties to
save Silicon area, and thus do bad things. For instance all 741's are
not the same. But 70's version of 339 and 324 did nothing bad below
ground except for that phase inversion I pointed out (when driving
-IN). Of course a 324, if fed-back, will lock up.

Any other questions, simply ask The Master >:-} ...

What a fathead! Especially so, since you're quite wrong.


...Jim Thompson

I'd rather trust my actual experience with these parts, and the four or five
warnings on the National data sheet.

I'm quite sure I have more hands-on experience with 339's and 324's
since I used them extensively in the design of GenRad portable testers
between 1977 and 1987.

A note from the current online LM339 TI data sheet:

(3) The voltage at EITHER input or common-mode should not be allowed to go
negative by more than 0.3 V.

That's standard datasheet cover-your-ass.

The upper end of the commonmode voltage range is V
CC+ – 1.5 V; however, one input can exceed VCC, and the comparator will provide
a proper output state as long as the other input remains in the common-mode
range.

Yep. That's why I mentioned BOTH inputs going high will produce
chaos.

>Either or both inputs can go to 30 V without damage

DAMAGE id the key word.

That seems to be the TI part, probably different silicon from the "National"
part, a little tricky since TI acquired National. Whose silicon do they ship?

The 2004 National data sheet has three footnotes that include the same warning.
This is one of them:

Note 3: This input current will only exist when the voltage at ANY of the input
leads is driven negative. It is due to the collector-base junction of the input
PNP transistors becoming forward biased and thereby acting as input diode
clamps. In addition to this diode action, there is also lateral NPN parasitic
transistor action on the IC chip. This transistor action can cause the output
voltages of the comparators to go to the V+ voltage level (or to ground for a
large overdrive) for the time duration that an input is driven negative. This is
not destructive and normal output states will re-establish when the input
voltage, which was negative, again returns to a value greater than -0.3 VDC(at
25°)C

That's the -IN effect I showed.

Note the double foldover as the input is driven progressively below ground.

Note "ANY of the input leads."

As I recall, on the National 339 and 324, pulling one input below ground can
trash all four outputs. On the 324, slaming one opamp rail-to-rail will glitch
the other three sections.

I once saved a design by replacing the LM339 with an LF347 opamp, which actually
makes a nice medium-speed comparator.

Of course, if you don't connect to the Vcc pin, and only simulate, you won't
have any problems.


"The Master"! What a fathead!

I remain The Master >:-}

Bye ;-)

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson | mens |
| Analog Innovations | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| San Tan Valley, AZ 85142 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

 

[John Larkin]

On Sun, 04 May 2014 12:42:56 -0700, Jim Thompson
<To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

On Sun, 04 May 2014 12:29:05 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sun, 04 May 2014 11:50:20 -0700, Jim Thompson
To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

[snip]
For those of you worried (unnecessarily) but such scare tactics as
"Most LM339s will do horrible goofy things", please see...

http://www.analog-innovations.com/SED/Test_LM339_Input_Range.pdf

Performed on a transistor-level netlist.

I had to go back and refresh my mind as to which input could give a
false logic output. As long as it's only the +IN input that goes
below ground, the LM339 won't output false logic. The -IN going below
ground will, IF < -Vbe. (Current _will_ be drawn thru the ESD, just
limit it with an input resistor.)

I'll give the emperor-with-no-clothes the benefit of the doubt with
his statement, "Most LM339s will do horrible goofy things", and chalk
it up to old age forgetfulness... only if you take both inputs closer
to POSITIVE rail than ~1.4V will you choke off the (common-biased)
current mirrors and "... horrible goofy things" will happen. This
applies also to the LM324 and all devices in that same structure
class.

All of these "anomalies" can easily be understood simply by studying
the current mirror structures and what bias "starvations" happen below
-RAIL or close to +RAIL.

It's a substrate diode problem, not obvious on the comparator "schematic."

Duh! Those of us versed in I/C design have models for _each_ of those
transistors and its parasitic substrate diode (well).

Now there may exist versions of these parts that take liberties to
save Silicon area, and thus do bad things. For instance all 741's are
not the same. But 70's version of 339 and 324 did nothing bad below
ground except for that phase inversion I pointed out (when driving
-IN). Of course a 324, if fed-back, will lock up.

Let the weaseling begin!

And a 324, as an inverter or a follower, will NOT latch up. You might be
thinking about the uA709 or something. The 709 could zener a diff-pair BE
junction and lock up. 339 and 324 have high-voltage PNP inputs.

Any other questions, simply ask The Master >:-} ...

What a fathead! Especially so, since you're quite wrong.


...Jim Thompson

I'd rather trust my actual experience with these parts, and the four or five
warnings on the National data sheet.

I'm quite sure I have more hands-on experience with 339's and 324's
since I used them extensively in the design of GenRad portable testers
between 1977 and 1987.


A note from the current online LM339 TI data sheet:

(3) The voltage at EITHER input or common-mode should not be allowed to go
negative by more than 0.3 V.

That's standard datasheet cover-your-ass.

The upper end of the commonmode voltage range is V
CC+ – 1.5 V; however, one input can exceed VCC, and the comparator will provide
a proper output state as long as the other input remains in the common-mode
range.

Yep. That's why I mentioned BOTH inputs going high will produce
chaos.

WTF is wrong with you? We're talking about EITHER input going BELOW GROUND!

Either or both inputs can go to 30 V without damage

DAMAGE id the key word.



That seems to be the TI part, probably different silicon from the "National"
part, a little tricky since TI acquired National. Whose silicon do they ship?

The 2004 National data sheet has three footnotes that include the same warning.
This is one of them:

Note 3: This input current will only exist when the voltage at ANY of the input
leads is driven negative. It is due to the collector-base junction of the input
PNP transistors becoming forward biased and thereby acting as input diode
clamps. In addition to this diode action, there is also lateral NPN parasitic
transistor action on the IC chip. This transistor action can cause the output
voltages of the comparators to go to the V+ voltage level (or to ground for a
large overdrive) for the time duration that an input is driven negative. This is
not destructive and normal output states will re-establish when the input
voltage, which was negative, again returns to a value greater than -0.3 VDC(at
25°)C

That's the -IN effect I showed.

Wrong. Wrong. EITHER input.

Note the double foldover as the input is driven progressively below ground.

Note "ANY of the input leads."

As I recall, on the National 339 and 324, pulling one input below ground can
trash all four outputs. On the 324, slaming one opamp rail-to-rail will glitch
the other three sections.

I once saved a design by replacing the LM339 with an LF347 opamp, which actually
makes a nice medium-speed comparator.

Of course, if you don't connect to the Vcc pin, and only simulate, you won't
have any problems.


"The Master"! What a fathead!

I remain The Master >:-}

Bye ;-)

...Jim Thompson

Gonna killfile me yet again? Gonna go and hide for a while?

You need JF to give you mea culpa lessons.


--

John Larkin Highland Technology Inc
www.highlandtechnology.com jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com

Precision electronic instrumentation

 

[John Fields]

On Sun, 04 May 2014 12:57:22 -0700, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

Gonna killfile me yet again? Gonna go and hide for a while?

You need JF to give you mea culpa lessons.

---
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uI7ni7zL8qU

John Fields

 

On Thursday, December 30, 1999 1:30:00 PM UTC+5:30, Harsh Mehta wrote:

Hi friends,

I am looking for Datasheet for LE9148 IC (PLCC 44 Pin Pkg.).


Thanks & Best Regards,
Harsh Mehta

Dear Sir,

i am also looking for same, its a PWM IC. Please let me know, where i can buy it, i need 50 nos,
Thanks and BR
S S Jamesh

 

[RobertMacy]

On Fri, 30 May 2014 20:20:52 -0700, Neon John <no@never.com> wrote:

jgd@neon-john.com

John

Thanks John.

I'll contact you shortly!

Uh, are you sure you didn't need to munge your email address here?

 

[Neon John]

jgd@neon-john.com

John

On Fri, 30 May 2014 12:54:46 -0700, RobertMacy
<robert.a.macy@gmail.com> wrote:

John DeArmond, aka Neon-John

Can't get the email links to work,

John, I've got to reach you regarding radiation and electronics
interactions.

Please send me an email with an address that can reach you.

Regards,
Robert

John DeArmond
http://www.neon-john.com
http://www.fluxeon.com
Tellico Plains, Occupied TN
See website for email address

 

>"Computers are for computing. DVD players are for playing ;-) "

Times they are a changing. For years I've had VGA to NTSC adapters and found that what you can get for free on the internet is sometimes better than cable. A dish bill will run you like $70 for two recievers and that's with almost nothing. On the other hand, how much is Netflix ?

If you're into music videos there's always youtube and a downloader. Even for music itself, things you'll never find in a record store. And half the time youtub quality is better than people need. Audiophiles can buy the music cheap in FLAC format and if they have a dcent sound card will sound just fine.

All becauase of computers, TV and radio stations, cable and dish, and especially any printed media sources are having alot of trouble. One of the problems is the consolidation od all these formerly independents has resulted in ofter the same material being presented n all channels or stations, or in print. With the net, at least there is some divvrsity.

As far as news sources, the TV is useless. Whne they run a movie on a pay channel it is repeated all month. Radio stations have all the music programmed by companies not even affilitayd with them, but rahter the record producers who obvious have their favorite people to push, based on their selections.

It used to be different. News was local, even certain TV shows. SOme of those were syndicated. Soem were't. Local bands sent in demo tapes to their favorite local DJ who played what he wanted to play. Very few get to do that now and even those that can, won't play a demo tape because of possible copyright problems. The whole industry sucks.

And some wonder why there is such the scramble for money, i.e. in sell what was once in public domain and relicensing it, as well as making the copyright laws as tight as possible. The industry is not making the money it used to, and in my opinion it is because their product sucks. That's why music frm the 1960s and 1970s is no longe rin public domain. People are buying it instead of the junk out today.

Same with TV shows and movies. I simply cannot stand them. The sound effects are asa annoying as a laughtrack, the camerawork looks amatuerish, and plot has been replaced by special effects.

The industry has shot itself in the foot and is now looking for a disability check. There are too many sources on the net now. Things are on demand. you can pause it. You can record it in perfect quality.

Actually DVDs are passe and obsolete. I haven't stuck a disk in a computer for probably a year, except yup, I found one in a drawer and wanted to see what was on it.

If I had unlimited money, my whoe DVD collectiuon ight have ten disks and they would all pretty be old stuff. Stuff that came out before DVDs even existed.

But still, better to have it and not need it. It is a slap in the face to buy a brand hew Windows PC and not have it play DVDs. Linux and MAC would never pull that.

 

[Joerg]

Paul Hovnanian P.E. wrote:

I was trying to help a friend out who was attempting to watch a DVD on
Windows 8 (not the Pro version). Evidently, this function has been deleted
from Windows Media Player.

She searched and found a "Windows Media Center" in the Microsoft App store
for $1.99 and purchased it. But it doesn't do sh*t. And after looking some
more, it doesn't look like the official "Windows Media Center" you get by
upgrading to Pro. And its splash screen screen said "written by ...." and
a couple of Indian/Pakistani/whatever names (which I neglected to write
down).

We ended up installing VLC, which works.

But my question is: Has anyone run across this scam before? And Why is
Microsoft allowing something called "Windows Media Center" which looks like
an MS product but isn't, in their store?

I sure hope she demanded a full refund of the $1.99 from this app store.

But my question is: Why would anyone accept an "operating system" such
as Windows 8? I'd have returned the computer for refund because a
computer not being able to play DVD material can hardly be considered an
up to par product these days. Or 10 years ago.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

 

[Jim Thompson]

On Thu, 05 Jun 2014 07:50:06 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid>
wrote:

Paul Hovnanian P.E. wrote:
I was trying to help a friend out who was attempting to watch a DVD on
Windows 8 (not the Pro version). Evidently, this function has been deleted
from Windows Media Player.

She searched and found a "Windows Media Center" in the Microsoft App store
for $1.99 and purchased it. But it doesn't do sh*t. And after looking some
more, it doesn't look like the official "Windows Media Center" you get by
upgrading to Pro. And its splash screen screen said "written by ...." and
a couple of Indian/Pakistani/whatever names (which I neglected to write
down).

We ended up installing VLC, which works.

But my question is: Has anyone run across this scam before? And Why is
Microsoft allowing something called "Windows Media Center" which looks like
an MS product but isn't, in their store?


I sure hope she demanded a full refund of the $1.99 from this app store.

But my question is: Why would anyone accept an "operating system" such
as Windows 8? I'd have returned the computer for refund because a
computer not being able to play DVD material can hardly be considered an
up to par product these days. Or 10 years ago.

Computers are for computing. DVD players are for playing ;-)

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson | mens |
| Analog Innovations | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| San Tan Valley, AZ 85142 Skype: skypeanalog | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

 

[Sylvia Else]

On 7/06/2014 8:08 AM, John Larkin wrote:

> How did people build the pyramids?

They used whips.

Sylvia.

 

[Joerg]

John Larkin wrote:

On Fri, 06 Jun 2014 20:57:21 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote:

On 6/6/2014 6:08 PM, John Larkin wrote:
The mainframe, on its pallet, weighs about 8000
pounds.
What's a mainframe?

We won't know until it's unwrapped. But it weighs about 7500 pounds. To place
milligram parts.

Hopefully the ground will be stable enough for that in your area. Once
when I was stuck on the freeway very close to your building I felt it
moving, even though all cars were at a standstill.

Will you operate it on the ground floor? I can't imagine the
water-powered elevator to be able to get it up there.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

 

On Sat, 07 Jun 2014 17:11:00 +1000, Sylvia Else
<sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote:

On 7/06/2014 8:08 AM, John Larkin wrote:

How did people build the pyramids?

They used whips.

Food.

 

[John Larkin]

On Sat, 07 Jun 2014 07:31:12 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:

John Larkin wrote:
On Fri, 06 Jun 2014 20:57:21 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote:

On 6/6/2014 6:08 PM, John Larkin wrote:
The mainframe, on its pallet, weighs about 8000
pounds.
What's a mainframe?

We won't know until it's unwrapped. But it weighs about 7500 pounds. To place
milligram parts.


Hopefully the ground will be stable enough for that in your area. Once
when I was stuck on the freeway very close to your building I felt it
moving, even though all cars were at a standstill.

Yes. Ground floor.

The elevated freeway wiggles perceptably, but the building seems quiet, between
earthquakes. The Universal machines are built like battleships, so should be
dimensionally stable.

Will you operate it on the ground floor? I can't imagine the
water-powered elevator to be able to get it up there.

The elevator is good for 2000 pounds. I woulddn't dream of putting that monster
on the second floor.

We got a deal on a demo PnP and it turned out to be a 2-head machine. So we'll
use it a half hour a day, instead of an hour a day. The dual-head might be why
it's so heavy.




--

John Larkin Highland Technology Inc
www.highlandtechnology.com jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com

Precision electronic instrumentation

 

[John Larkin]

On Sat, 07 Jun 2014 17:11:00 +1000, Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address>
wrote:

On 7/06/2014 8:08 AM, John Larkin wrote:

How did people build the pyramids?

They used whips.

Sylvia.

Cool. I'll try that.

http://tinyurl.com/m95apbx

or maybe

http://tinyurl.com/qfekagd

for the smaller employees.




--

John Larkin Highland Technology Inc
www.highlandtechnology.com jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com

Precision electronic instrumentation

 

On Sat, 07 Jun 2014 08:59:07 -0700, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sat, 07 Jun 2014 17:11:00 +1000, Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address
wrote:

On 7/06/2014 8:08 AM, John Larkin wrote:

How did people build the pyramids?

They used whips.

Sylvia.

Cool. I'll try that.

http://tinyurl.com/m95apbx

or maybe

http://tinyurl.com/qfekagd

for the smaller employees.

Well, it is San Francisco, so they might like it.

 

[Glenn]

On 07/06/14 00.08, John Larkin wrote:
....
mainframe
....

How did people build the pyramids? The thingies on Easter Island?
....

Hello John

Some have argued that some of the stones have been moulded:

Chapter 1 can be downloaded (pdf):
ftp://ftp2.geopolymer.org/geopolyme/pyramid_chapt1.pdf
Quote: "...The proof is there. The samples given to me by the
Egyptologist Jean-Philippe Lauer in 1982 are indeed fragments og
geopolymers (see chapter 8), confirming my own X-ray analysis in
1982-84...A geologist not informed of geopolymer chemistry will assert
with good faith that the stones are natural...",

Main page: The book: They Have Built The Pyramids ISBN 2-86553-157-0
(french), ISBN 0-88029-555-4 (english?):
https://web.archive.org/web/20070927135712/http://www.davidovits.info/29/the-book-they-have-built-the-pyramids
Quote: "...Joseph Davidovits has found hieroglyphic texts describing the
construction of these gigantic monuments! You will understand that all
problems and paradoxes connected to the construction of the Egyptian
pyramids are solved...We can dismiss from our minds the scenario of
numerous thousands of workers crowded onto the work site at Giza
shoulder to shoulder..."

-

The Easter Island thingies walked in place - mystery solved

See for yourself:

Easter Island moai 'walked':
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yvvES47OdmY

June 07, 2013, Easter Island's 'Walking' Stone Heads Stir Debate:
http://www.livescience.com/37277-easter-island-statues-walked-there.html
Quote: "...
The statue moved easily.
"It goes from something you can't imagine moving at all, to kind of
dancing down the road," Lipo told LiveScience.
...."

-

Maybe you can "mould" or "walk" the mainframe where it should be?

Go figure

Glenn