Driver to drive?

[Fred Bloggs]

Clarence wrote:

"Winfield Hill" <Winfield_member@newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:ckm0t10ghd@drn.newsguy.com...

Fred Bloggs wrote...

Once again- another HUGE group, instrumental in government policy
making, warns America to oust Bush:


October, 2004

An Open Letter to the American People:

We, a nonpartisan group of foreign affairs specialists [ snip ]



Now it's "Non-Partisan!

Like anyone cares what a bunch of partisans say.

Hehe- well if you can't see that they are more than a "bunch" then you
are a hopeless example of just how far the Bush campaign will go to
preserve their incarnation of divine providence. Why don't you just fall
back on God- you have nothing else left.

 

[Fred Bloggs]

S. hashem Aref wrote:

John Popelish <jpopelish@rica.net> wrote in message news:<416D26A9.F3BA2999@rica.net>...

John Popelish <jpopelish@rica.net> wrote in message


If you really have 1.5 mw of 1550 falling on the APD, you should have
about a milliamp of photo current, without any gain multiplication
from the APD. This current should produce about 100 millivolts across
the load resistor. I have no explanation for your small current. Is
it possible that the illumination is not actually what you are
expecting? Do you have any other known source of illumination to test
the detector, or another way to measure your illumination power?

I measured the laser power with calibrated power meter and I saw power
is about 1600uW.
Is above bias good for APD? I used a PIN diode reverse bias cicuit for
APD!
I did a diode test for APD beween anode and cathode and it was good.

Your diode is rated for almost 1 A/W at 1310nm- why didn't you measure
its response at 1550nm?

 

[John S. Dyson]

In article <cka3er02vdn@drn.newsguy.com>,
Winfield Hill <Winfield_member@newsguy.com> writes:

Spehro Pefhany wrote...

Winfield wrote:

John S. Dyson wrote...

Hateful rants are all too common in this group.
Winfred (sic) seems to be ignore his own nonsense.

sic = spelling in copy. Makes no sense.

Actually, it's apparently from Latin sic: "thus, so, in that manner".

In editing circles, newspaper articles, etc., it's used to indicate the
mispelling is in the original source, and is left in place for accuracy.
(Hence my statement, as no such mispelling is in the original.)

Well, Watford, why are you so worried about being silly, when leftists

and Bush haters have so many truly out-of-control emotional problems?

Just got back from the UK, watching flickery TV sets (well, the 100Hz
units are okay), eating heinous food, but having a great time with fun
and intellectually entertaining people. Luckily, my hotel did have
100Hz TV sets, so I got to watch and review some UK TV. One big
disappointment from my previous long term stay in the UK -- roundabouts
and other places seem to have many more traffic lights than in the deep
past -- I used to love the driving without nearly as much impediment.
However, seeing the effects relative leftism like being on CCTV
everywhere (big brother) has been edifying. Just one very true indicator
of the lack of respect for civil liberty and privacy by the left. Perhaps
the cameras everywhere are a prelude to a universal reality show scheme? .

Even trying to associate Sky News editorial control with Fox is ludicrous...
Nearly the same time as someone in NYC, I was watching Dan Rathernot on Sky at
midnight at UK time. It is odd that Sky had selected the lowest rated
traditional network news broadcast, with the craziest anchor. BBC (or
someone else -- I did see Peter somewhere) used (AFAIR) leftist Canadian
Peter Jennings television show for the debates. It is good that Peter
eventually has shown some initiative for his publicity about citizenship.
After being on ABC as an anchor since the middle 1960s, Peter has made
the citizenship move when US/Canadian feelings are now fairly sensitive.

All in all, I did have a great time on my short business trip, and it
is interesting that "UK leftists" and I seem to get along just fine .
Much of our personal conversation was "politics", but I didn't strongly
indicate any bias, but seemed to open some minds about Bush, yet also
remove some rose colored propaganda from Kerry's favor. At most, I only
helped to mitigate some bias, but wouldn't have likely have affected
a world election, even at the individual level .

John

 

[John S. Dyson]

In article <ckb02g02e91@drn.newsguy.com>,
Winfield Hill <Winfield_member@newsguy.com> writes:

Rich Grise wrote...

But that explanation would require that John S. Dyson has a
sense of humor and subtlety, neither of which we've seen much
sign of heretofore. He's one extremely serious dude.

Silly little nitwit, Witbred -- you obviously don't have a sense

of humor yourself. You have NO idea of reality -- but I do sometimes
reflect true hatred onto the perpetrators for their useful educational
experience.

Really -- any threat to the hatred thing against Bush does elicit
a reflexive response.

Your hatred will consume your soul if you don't work to mitigate it
soon.

John

 

[Glenn Elmore]

Looks to me like a pretty bad homework problem if that's what it is. It
seems to be overspecified.

A source of 1 volt which develops 0.25V across a resistor connected to
any ideal capacitor can not yield an 80 degree phase shift. The current
is common to the two and the angle between Vr and Vc has to be 90
degrees, by definition. Unless I scribbled wrong, that means that |Vc| =
..968V and the angle = arctan (.25/.968)=14.5 degrees. The remaining
angle is the complement of this, 75.5 degrees.

I don't know where theta1 came from, but no angle in this situation is
80 deg. If you force the phase shift across the capacitor to be 80
degrees, you don't get 0.25V across the resistor. It takes a resistance
significantly higher in value than the reactance of the capacitor to
achieve this much phase shift. Such a resistor will have the bulk of the
voltage drop and much more than .25V across it.

I'll leave the details of that for a homework excercise.

Glenn

Gibbo wrote:

You could have at least made an attempt to pretend it wasn't your homework.



I have calculated the following network using the cosine law.
___SIGGEN (Vs)_
Ś Ś
Ś--/\/\/\/\-----Ś Ś----Ś
Ś Vs Vc
Ś
---
GND

Vs^2=Vr^2+Vc^2 - 2VrVc Cos(theta1)
theta1=80deg
Vs=1v
Vr=0.25v


I am being dumb... but how do I get this into complex format e.g. a+jb.
Please give an example using my data.

Thanks

 

[Robert Monsen]

Jim Yanik wrote:

Robert Monsen <rcsurname@comcast.net> wrote in
news:FI2cd.479138$8_6.450724@attbi_s04:


Julie wrote:

Robert Monsen wrote:


Ah, Cincinatus, the great dictator who saved Rome in 16 days, then
returned to his plow. Hardly. His stupid, arrogant, vanity war in
Iraq has cost far more lives than it could have possibly saved, while
weakening us both internally, in the form of our economy, and
externally, in the form of fear of our military.


Just out of personal curiosity, excluding Bush, US policy, UN policy,
etc. for the moment, what do you think of Saddam and his established
genocidal behavior?

a) Not my problem
b) Not anyone's problem except Iraqi's
c) Someone else's problem
d) Out of sight, out of mind
e) Arab's problem
f) Israel's problem
g) Other (describe: _____)

b) bad guy, but not a threat to anybody outside Iraq. The UN sanctions
were killing far more people in Iraq than he was, by at least 1000x.
He had no weapons,


Then what did he use to kill all those people in Halabja(by poison gas)?.


no plans for weapons,


IIRC,the UN report said otherwise.They said he had plans to restart his
nuclear and biochem programs once the sanctions withered enough.



and was apparently writing
romance novels. UN sanctions would never have been lifted while he or
his boys were in power. We have veto power in the UN.



Actually,Saddam was confident that sanctions were rotting away,becoming
more and more ineffective as time went on.



In other words, he was contained, not a friend to terrorists,


The HELL he wasn't.He harbored many of them,he paid homicide bombers
families,he had ties to Al-Queda.


and
isolated from the world community.


Well,it turned out he was NOT so "isolated" after all.


He had no possible way to hurt the
US. He was actually deterring Iran for us with his silly 'find the
WMD' game.



His WMD materiel was likely transferred to Syria.

You know nothing. You are either making things up, or sticking to
arguments that have been refuted time and again, and in fact have now
been retracted by the administration. Again, you know nothing.

Saddam was NO THREAT to the United States, or anybody else. This has
been shown time and time again. He had NO weapons of mass destrution.
This has been shown by the hordes of inspectors GeeDubya has had in Iraq
for 18 months. Bush didn't like the results of Kay, so he sent in
Duelfer, who also came up empty handed. The attempt to say he was a
threat is either misinformed, or a baldfaced *lie*.

The invasion and conquering of Iraq was a hideous mistake. It was either
the neocons falling for Chalabi's con game, or a plot by the neocons to
'prove their strategy' of free markets. Its going to go down as one of
the stupidest foreign policy blunders in the history of the united
states. After this, I don't believe even Kerry can recover our position
as leader of the free world.

So, we end up with no moral capital in the world, our economy in
shambles, our military overextended, and our nation divided. For what?
To take out an aging romance novelist. Good work, GeeDubya.

--
Regards,
Robert Monsen

"Your Highness, I have no need of this hypothesis."
- Pierre Laplace (1749-1827), to Napoleon,
on why his works on celestial mechanics make no mention of God.

 

[Frank Bemelman]

"Robert Monsen" <rcsurname@comcast.net> schreef in bericht
news:Xzecd.376828$mD.361109@attbi_s02...

Saddam was NO THREAT to the United States, or anybody else. This has
been shown time and time again. He had NO weapons of mass destrution.
This has been shown by the hordes of inspectors GeeDubya has had in Iraq
for 18 months. Bush didn't like the results of Kay, so he sent in
Duelfer, who also came up empty handed. The attempt to say he was a
threat is either misinformed, or a baldfaced *lie*.

The invasion and conquering of Iraq was a hideous mistake. It was either
the neocons falling for Chalabi's con game, or a plot by the neocons to
'prove their strategy' of free markets. Its going to go down as one of
the stupidest foreign policy blunders in the history of the united
states. After this, I don't believe even Kerry can recover our position
as leader of the free world.

So, we end up with no moral capital in the world, our economy in
shambles, our military overextended, and our nation divided. For what?
To take out an aging romance novelist. Good work, GeeDubya.

Exactly what I think, but you say it better.

--
Thanks, Frank.
(remove 'x' and 'invalid' when replying by email)

 

[Rich Grise]

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 18:54:38 +0000, John S. Dyson wrote:

In article <OT9ad.2875$ua2.1641@trnddc09>,
Rich Grise <null@example.net> writes:
....
Well, yeah, serious like a 2 1/2-year-old throwing a tantrum. ;-)

Just got back from a week in UK -- actually, you'd find me to be
very entertaining in a positive and constructive way. However, your
own overly serious hatred against the center and right might make
you feel uncomfortable. My very mild challenge against the leftist
orthodoxy does sometimes elicit a reflex similar to reactions
by other religious zealots about other issues.

So, you're saying that, when you look at me, you see hate?

Thanks,
Rich

 

[Rich Grise]

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 19:19:15 +0000, John S. Dyson wrote:

In article <ckb02g02e91@drn.newsguy.com>,
Winfield Hill <Winfield_member@newsguy.com> writes:
Rich Grise wrote...

But that explanation would require that John S. Dyson has a
sense of humor and subtlety, neither of which we've seen much
sign of heretofore. He's one extremely serious dude.

Silly little nitwit, Witbred -- you obviously don't have a sense
of humor yourself. You have NO idea of reality -- but I do sometimes
reflect true hatred onto the perpetrators for their useful educational
experience.

Really -- any threat to the hatred thing against Bush does elicit
a reflexive response.

Your hatred will consume your soul if you don't work to mitigate it
soon.

So, I see that Mr. Hill, whose name you seem to have some difficulty

spelling, is mirroring you as well?

Thanks,
Rich

 

[Rich Grise]

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 19:14:56 +0000, John S. Dyson wrote:

of the lack of respect for civil liberty and privacy by the left.

The power of the mind for self-deception never ceases to amaze me.
Big brother must be happy - this guy's been turned. He sees those damn
five fingers.

Sigh.
Rich

 

[John S. Dyson]

In article <Xzecd.376828$mD.361109@attbi_s02>,
Robert Monsen <rcsurname@comcast.net> writes:

Jim Yanik wrote:

Saddam was NO THREAT to the United States, or anybody else.

That isn't what the international intelligence agencies thought

(or provided their leaders) before the liberation of Iraq started.
Putin even admitted to warning Bush about Saddam's attack plans
against the US (obviously, not meant to 'liberate' the US, but
for terrorist objectives.)

This DEFINITELY clarifies (in hindsight) the folly of the Clinton
administration weakening of human intelligence in the middle 1990s.
Actually, if in the intelligence field, it would have been clear,
with the growing/strengthening international terror organizations,
that human intelligence and Arabic speakers should have been higher
priority. Why was Clinton's destructive behavior allowed to proceed?
The answer is that the intelligence community is not totally isolated
from politics on the left (the CIA is well known to be a little
overly politically correct because of cultural issues with newhires
and infestation of the 1960's type flower-people who are still learning
to make contact with reality.)

By far, the biggest, most destructive Bush behavior before 9/11
was to essentially accept and maintain the Clinton terror law
enforcement regime. Well, Bush wasn't that bad, in that he didn't
fully trust the Clinton admin people, but we were probably all lulled
into a sense of safety because of being so very blind to human
intelligence info.

John

 

[Mike Monett]

Phil wrote:

A good limiter produces flat-topped pulses of uniform height, with
slightly sloping sides. This produces a histogram that has two
huge peaks at the positive and negative clip levels, plus a low,
flattish region in between corresponding to the nearly-straight
sloping sides.

- ^ ^
/ \ | | | |
_______/ \_____ vs ______| +--------+ |_______

Not very close at all.

If you stick the clipped noise through a narrow bandpass filter,
it will get more Gaussian-looking, and (IIRC) it will become
Gaussian as the bandwidth goes to zero.

Cheers,

Phil Hobbs

Hi Phil,

You are describing a clipper, which is a limiter with offset. If you
set the offset to zero, you get transitions with random timings
between one and zero. This is from a main property of Gaussian
noise, where it spends 50% of the time on one side or the other of
the mean. Basically a square wave with random periods and zero avg.

John uses this property to provide picosecond-level timing in his
Model V880 System Timing Module:

http://tinyurl.com/5l3e7

and I use it to capture noisy waveforms orders of magnitude faster
than conventional samplers with averaging:

http://www3.sympatico.ca/add.automation/sampler/intro.htm

Regards,

Mike Monett

 

[Rich Grise]

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 02:49:09 -0700, Winfield Hill wrote:

Several stories of specific failures, mostly crack and corrosion based,
and their fixes, here, http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/systems/b-52h.htm

An interesting B-52H procurement factoid, "The 102 B-52Hs accepted by the
Air Force, like the B-52Gs, were built in Wichita. The Air Force accepted
20 B-52Hs in FY 61 (from March through June 1961); 68 in FY 62 (between
July 1961 and June 1962); and 14 in FY 63 (the last 5 during October
1962). Cost per aircraft was: $9.28 million: Airframe, $6,076,157; engines
(installed), $1,640,373; electronics, $61,020; ordnance, $6,804; armament
(and others), $1,501,422." Well under $10 million, a real bargain.

Yeah, in 1963 dollars. When gas was $0.299 and a house was $39,900.00. ;-)

Thanks!
Rich

 

[Rich Grise]

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 17:24:50 +0000, Clarence wrote:

Oh, aren't those the one's who take all the credit for your work?
^

Well, I'll take credit for charging you two demerits for improper
use of the apostrophe, in this and another post. There is no apostrophe
in the plural "ones".

Rich Grise, Self-Appointed Chief,
Apostrophe Police

 

[Rich Grise]

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 17:00:51 +0000, Fred Bloggs wrote:

Julie wrote:


Just out of personal curiosity, excluding Bush, US policy, UN policy, etc. for
the moment, what do you think of Saddam and his established genocidal behavior?


You ought to be able to understand by now that the Middle East is a very
violent place. Saddam could care less about killing Kurds and Iranians
unless they become a threat to his existence.

WTF? I thought somebody had Saddam in a cage somewhere. What did he do?
Escape? Did they turn him loose and send him home?

What gives here?

Thanks,
Rich

 

[John S. Dyson]

In article <pan.2004.10.16.20.03.55.738346@example.net>,
Rich Grise <rich@example.net> writes:

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 19:14:56 +0000, John S. Dyson wrote:

of the lack of respect for civil liberty and privacy by the left.

The power of the mind for self-deception never ceases to amaze me.

Big brother is much better deployed in the relatively more leftist nation

(but not horribly so), rather than the US. I was amazed that the
cameras were even deployed in small towns (not just London, Bristol,
etc.)

This trading safety for freedom is apparently a human flaw, but
there are many fewer cameras in the US in a relative sense. Maybe,
we'll have an opportunity to catch up and surpass, if Kerry wins.

When a system (by default) allows exposure of everyone, with remote
controlled, gimbaled cameras, instead of
selective collection or access of information, then there is
a much more serious problem. Most of the time, at least, warrants
need to be obtained from the 'secret court' and the numer of warrants
is certainly accounted for. Traffic intersections and public areas
in UK don't seem alot different from the cameras as depicted on the TV
show 'Las Vegas' in the casino.

On the other hand, the default exposure of people on CCTV for various
reasons such as 'personal security' and/or 'traffic safety and enforcement'
shows the acceptance of 'assumed guilty' and/or 'big brother' mentality.
At least, the exposure of 'snapshots' of people violating the law in
the US result from violating speed or red-light. We do have SOME CCTV,
but not quite to the level of UK yet. There is talk about a few cities
in the US, but not to the level of the prototypical Simpson's 'Springfield.'

John

 

[Frank Bemelman]

"Rich Grise" <rich@example.net> schreef in bericht
newsan.2004.10.16.20.47.14.910102@example.net...

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 17:00:51 +0000, Fred Bloggs wrote:



Julie wrote:


Just out of personal curiosity, excluding Bush, US policy, UN policy,
etc. for
the moment, what do you think of Saddam and his established genocidal
behavior?


You ought to be able to understand by now that the Middle East is a very
violent place. Saddam could care less about killing Kurds and Iranians
unless they become a threat to his existence.

WTF? I thought somebody had Saddam in a cage somewhere. What did he do?
Escape? Did they turn him loose and send him home?

What gives here?

Fred talks about the situation in Iraq *before* the invasion.

--
Thanks, Frank.
(remove 'x' and 'invalid' when replying by email)

 

[John Popelish]

"S. hashem Aref" wrote:

John Popelish <jpopelish@rica.net> wrote in message news:<416D26A9.F3BA2999@rica.net>...
John Popelish <jpopelish@rica.net> wrote in message

If you really have 1.5 mw of 1550 falling on the APD, you should have
about a milliamp of photo current, without any gain multiplication
from the APD. This current should produce about 100 millivolts across
the load resistor. I have no explanation for your small current. Is
it possible that the illumination is not actually what you are
expecting? Do you have any other known source of illumination to test
the detector, or another way to measure your illumination power?
I measured the laser power with calibrated power meter and I saw power
is about 1600uW.
Is above bias good for APD? I used a PIN diode reverse bias cicuit for
APD!
I did a diode test for APD beween anode and cathode and it was good.

Your circuit should work fine to operate your APD as a PIN diode. Are
you sure your APD is sensitive to 1550 nm radiation?
--
John Popelish

 

[Terry Pinnell]

c_bielek@hotmail.com (classd101) wrote:

Terry Pinnell <terrypinDELETE@THESEdial.pipex.com> wrote in message news:<niikm09j6046ac27bsfip4052kms8agbpq@4ax.com>...
davexnet02 <davexnetzerotwo@hooya!.com> wrote:

snip

"System" is the partition where XP initially loads and where the
NTLDR, ntdetect.com and boot.ini live, while "boot" is the partition
you're in once up and running.


Talk about counter intuitive

My feelings exactly - small wonder I can't get my mind around it!

I wouldn't care, but sadly I think I was premature in reporting the
issue resolved. Here's the deal...

I've booted to XP Home Edition, the 'first' of my multi-boot options.
This is what my system looks like according to XP Disk Management:
http://www.terrypin.dial.pipex.com/Misc/Sep12-XP.gif

So, from that, can someone please tell me definitively what partition
I am running in? That's in the sense of Dave's phrase "...the
partition you're in once up and running."

My interpretation is that I'm plainly 'in' E, instead of C where I
want to be. That's based on that 'Active' annotation XP shows against
E.

Why do I care? I want to be back in *exactly* the same state I've been
in for the last 2 years. C was exclusively my system and boot
partition. No E involved at all. E was just sitting patiently on my
2nd HD until some emergency (or experiment) prompted me to boot to it
instead. So, as I didn't normally use the files on F either, only my
first HD would actually be being accessed. The second HD (XP calls it
Disk 1!) would just be spinning passively. That's a mental picture
with which I'm comfortable. And I want it back. Can anyone help me do
so - PLEASE!

BTW, aren't PCs wonderful?

--
Terry Pinnell
Hobbyist, West Sussex, UK

 

[Paul Burridge]

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 16:25:53 GMT, Fred Bloggs <nospam@nospam.com>
wrote:

Paul Burridge wrote:


Yeah, but they're still a great site to see in flight. It must be
*amazing* being bombed by one!

This is the one you don't want to see coming your way:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/russia/tu-22m.htm

Hmmm. It looks more like a fighter than a bomber, but it's hard to get
any idea of scale from those pictures. I think I'd still prefer to be
blown to Kingdom Come by a '52. It has more 'presence.'

--

"What is now proved was once only imagin'd." - William Blake, 1793.