Maximum Power Point Tracking: Optimizing Solar Panels 58 Comments by: Maya Posch...

[Jan Panteltje]

On a sunny day (Tue, 3 Jan 2023 04:28:41 -0800 (PST)) it happened Anthony
William Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
<9ed26dc7-3876-45e9-8b23-1a7132a17ac7n@googlegroups.com>:

As if Jan Panteltje had anything to teach - or at least anything to teach that
was worth learning. He does seem to have swallowed the climate change denial
twaddle, hook line and sinker, and now wants to spread the misleading
message, rather like a Jehovah\'s Witness.

Well, for starters you could learn some \'tronix
One thing I have learned is to evaluate things and make my own conclusions
You were brain formed to accept whatever they poured into your ears and eyes.

But it\'s OK, just boring to read you citing the polar bear climate fear script that was given to you.
;-)

 

[Martin Brown]

On 05/01/2023 16:30, bitrex wrote:

On 1/5/2023 10:30 AM, Phil Hobbs wrote:
bitrex wrote:
On 1/4/2023 12:04 PM, Phil Hobbs wrote:
bitrex wrote:
On 1/4/2023 9:52 AM, bitrex wrote:
On 1/3/2023 7:30 PM, Phil Hobbs wrote:
RichD wrote:
On January 1,  John Larkin wrote:
https://www.theregister.com/2022/07/18/electrical_engineers_extinction/?td=rt-9cp
I\'ve been thinking for some time now that EE schools don\'t turn
out
people who like electricity, but maker culture might.

I advise younguns against an engineering degree, it\'s
over-specialized,
and obsolete in 5 years.

Only if you get sucked into spending all your time on the flavor
of the month.  People who spend their time in school learning
fundamental things that are hard to master on your own (math,
mostly) and then pick up the other stuff as they go along don\'t
get obsolete.  That\'s not difficult to do in your average EE
program even today, AFAICT. Signals and systems, electrodynamics,
solid state theory, and a bit of quantum are all good things to
know.

Spending all your time in school programming in Javascript or
VHDL or memorizing compliance requirements is not a good career
move for an EE.

I tell them to get a physics education.  Study hard.  Then you
have the
tools to do anything you want.

Physicists turn up everywhere, it\'s true.  Folks with bachelor\'s
degrees in physics can do most kinds of engineering, provided
they\'re willing to bone up on the specifics.  Of course there are
some who assume they know everything and just bull ahead till
they fail, but, well, human beings are everyplace.   Thing is,
the basic professional qualification for a physicist is a
doctorate, whereas in engineering it\'s a BSEE.

That is, first the academics, then the vocational training.

I agree that knowing the fundamentals cold is very important.
However, (a) physics isn\'t for everyone, by a long chalk; and (b)
there\'s a glorious intellectual heritage in engineering, so
calling it \'vocational training\' is pejorative.

Cheers

Phil \"Intermediate energy state\" Hobbs


Advanced engineering mathematics:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/194964206310

Which is pretty advanced, I don\'t know how many BS-type EEs know
about the orthogonality of Bessel functions, or regularly use
contour integration for anything.

But not as advanced as \"Advanced Mathematical Methods for
Scientists & Engineers\", which is largely about perturbation
methods, boundary layer theory, and WKB approximations. Sounds fun
I guess, I just got a used copy from Amazon for $8

I would expect stuff like the WKB approximation is regularly used
more in optics design than in circuit design, though.

WKB is common in approximate quantum theory, e.g. solid state.



I see, in a \"we can solve the hydrogen atom exactly & that\'s it\" sense.

No, the hydrogen atom is analytically solvable in the nonrelativistic
picture. You don\'t need asymptotic methods for that.  (I expect that
they don\'t put art majors through all the higher math classes.)


That\'s what I mean, it\'s one of the few that is.

The math for introductory QM isn\'t horrible, I took AP calculus and was
exposed to at least some amount of differential equations in high school
y\'know. Compared to classical EM it seems easier really - does anyone
really _enjoy_ vector calculus?

I did although it was a bit of a culture shock at the time.

My physics course was extremely mathematical and it was taught in first
term maths for scientists. It doesn\'t seem so bad looking back. Grad and
Div were easy enough and had some nice physical interpretations Curl was
a bit of a handful. Ricci Tensor calculus can still be a bit hairy.

I never did get the hang of Green\'s function. I suspect it was the
lecturer\'s fault. I could understand what it was and how it was supposed
to work but I never found a problem where using it made any sense.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

 

[Martin Brown]

On 05/01/2023 16:30, bitrex wrote:

On 1/5/2023 10:30 AM, Phil Hobbs wrote:
bitrex wrote:
On 1/4/2023 12:04 PM, Phil Hobbs wrote:
bitrex wrote:
On 1/4/2023 9:52 AM, bitrex wrote:
On 1/3/2023 7:30 PM, Phil Hobbs wrote:
RichD wrote:
On January 1,  John Larkin wrote:
https://www.theregister.com/2022/07/18/electrical_engineers_extinction/?td=rt-9cp
I\'ve been thinking for some time now that EE schools don\'t turn
out
people who like electricity, but maker culture might.

I advise younguns against an engineering degree, it\'s
over-specialized,
and obsolete in 5 years.

Only if you get sucked into spending all your time on the flavor
of the month.  People who spend their time in school learning
fundamental things that are hard to master on your own (math,
mostly) and then pick up the other stuff as they go along don\'t
get obsolete.  That\'s not difficult to do in your average EE
program even today, AFAICT. Signals and systems, electrodynamics,
solid state theory, and a bit of quantum are all good things to
know.

Spending all your time in school programming in Javascript or
VHDL or memorizing compliance requirements is not a good career
move for an EE.

I tell them to get a physics education.  Study hard.  Then you
have the
tools to do anything you want.

Physicists turn up everywhere, it\'s true.  Folks with bachelor\'s
degrees in physics can do most kinds of engineering, provided
they\'re willing to bone up on the specifics.  Of course there are
some who assume they know everything and just bull ahead till
they fail, but, well, human beings are everyplace.   Thing is,
the basic professional qualification for a physicist is a
doctorate, whereas in engineering it\'s a BSEE.

That is, first the academics, then the vocational training.

I agree that knowing the fundamentals cold is very important.
However, (a) physics isn\'t for everyone, by a long chalk; and (b)
there\'s a glorious intellectual heritage in engineering, so
calling it \'vocational training\' is pejorative.

Cheers

Phil \"Intermediate energy state\" Hobbs


Advanced engineering mathematics:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/194964206310

Which is pretty advanced, I don\'t know how many BS-type EEs know
about the orthogonality of Bessel functions, or regularly use
contour integration for anything.

But not as advanced as \"Advanced Mathematical Methods for
Scientists & Engineers\", which is largely about perturbation
methods, boundary layer theory, and WKB approximations. Sounds fun
I guess, I just got a used copy from Amazon for $8

I would expect stuff like the WKB approximation is regularly used
more in optics design than in circuit design, though.

WKB is common in approximate quantum theory, e.g. solid state.



I see, in a \"we can solve the hydrogen atom exactly & that\'s it\" sense.

No, the hydrogen atom is analytically solvable in the nonrelativistic
picture. You don\'t need asymptotic methods for that.  (I expect that
they don\'t put art majors through all the higher math classes.)


That\'s what I mean, it\'s one of the few that is.

The math for introductory QM isn\'t horrible, I took AP calculus and was
exposed to at least some amount of differential equations in high school
y\'know. Compared to classical EM it seems easier really - does anyone
really _enjoy_ vector calculus?

I did although it was a bit of a culture shock at the time.

My physics course was extremely mathematical and it was taught in first
term maths for scientists. It doesn\'t seem so bad looking back. Grad and
Div were easy enough and had some nice physical interpretations Curl was
a bit of a handful. Ricci Tensor calculus can still be a bit hairy.

I never did get the hang of Green\'s function. I suspect it was the
lecturer\'s fault. I could understand what it was and how it was supposed
to work but I never found a problem where using it made any sense.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

 

[Martin Brown]

On 05/01/2023 16:30, bitrex wrote:

On 1/5/2023 10:30 AM, Phil Hobbs wrote:
bitrex wrote:
On 1/4/2023 12:04 PM, Phil Hobbs wrote:
bitrex wrote:
On 1/4/2023 9:52 AM, bitrex wrote:
On 1/3/2023 7:30 PM, Phil Hobbs wrote:
RichD wrote:
On January 1,  John Larkin wrote:
https://www.theregister.com/2022/07/18/electrical_engineers_extinction/?td=rt-9cp
I\'ve been thinking for some time now that EE schools don\'t turn
out
people who like electricity, but maker culture might.

I advise younguns against an engineering degree, it\'s
over-specialized,
and obsolete in 5 years.

Only if you get sucked into spending all your time on the flavor
of the month.  People who spend their time in school learning
fundamental things that are hard to master on your own (math,
mostly) and then pick up the other stuff as they go along don\'t
get obsolete.  That\'s not difficult to do in your average EE
program even today, AFAICT. Signals and systems, electrodynamics,
solid state theory, and a bit of quantum are all good things to
know.

Spending all your time in school programming in Javascript or
VHDL or memorizing compliance requirements is not a good career
move for an EE.

I tell them to get a physics education.  Study hard.  Then you
have the
tools to do anything you want.

Physicists turn up everywhere, it\'s true.  Folks with bachelor\'s
degrees in physics can do most kinds of engineering, provided
they\'re willing to bone up on the specifics.  Of course there are
some who assume they know everything and just bull ahead till
they fail, but, well, human beings are everyplace.   Thing is,
the basic professional qualification for a physicist is a
doctorate, whereas in engineering it\'s a BSEE.

That is, first the academics, then the vocational training.

I agree that knowing the fundamentals cold is very important.
However, (a) physics isn\'t for everyone, by a long chalk; and (b)
there\'s a glorious intellectual heritage in engineering, so
calling it \'vocational training\' is pejorative.

Cheers

Phil \"Intermediate energy state\" Hobbs


Advanced engineering mathematics:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/194964206310

Which is pretty advanced, I don\'t know how many BS-type EEs know
about the orthogonality of Bessel functions, or regularly use
contour integration for anything.

But not as advanced as \"Advanced Mathematical Methods for
Scientists & Engineers\", which is largely about perturbation
methods, boundary layer theory, and WKB approximations. Sounds fun
I guess, I just got a used copy from Amazon for $8

I would expect stuff like the WKB approximation is regularly used
more in optics design than in circuit design, though.

WKB is common in approximate quantum theory, e.g. solid state.



I see, in a \"we can solve the hydrogen atom exactly & that\'s it\" sense.

No, the hydrogen atom is analytically solvable in the nonrelativistic
picture. You don\'t need asymptotic methods for that.  (I expect that
they don\'t put art majors through all the higher math classes.)


That\'s what I mean, it\'s one of the few that is.

The math for introductory QM isn\'t horrible, I took AP calculus and was
exposed to at least some amount of differential equations in high school
y\'know. Compared to classical EM it seems easier really - does anyone
really _enjoy_ vector calculus?

I did although it was a bit of a culture shock at the time.

My physics course was extremely mathematical and it was taught in first
term maths for scientists. It doesn\'t seem so bad looking back. Grad and
Div were easy enough and had some nice physical interpretations Curl was
a bit of a handful. Ricci Tensor calculus can still be a bit hairy.

I never did get the hang of Green\'s function. I suspect it was the
lecturer\'s fault. I could understand what it was and how it was supposed
to work but I never found a problem where using it made any sense.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

 

[Jan Panteltje]

On a sunny day (Thu, 5 Jan 2023 13:41:11 -0800) it happened Joerg
<news@analogconsultants.com> wrote in <k1oufnFg8mmU1@mid.individual.net>:

On 1/4/23 11:03 PM, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Wed, 4 Jan 2023 10:43:20 -0800) it happened Joerg
news@analogconsultants.com> wrote in <k1lvmaF2dmeU1@mid.individual.net>:

On 1/3/23 8:07 AM, John Larkin wrote:
On Tue, 03 Jan 2023 06:30:16 GMT, Jan Panteltje
pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote:


[...]


Indeed, like analog video 1 Vpp
You lose your black level...
OTOH a diode after the RC will fix that for video (clamp the negative sync pulse at some fixed level).
It all depends...


Forgot the name of it but National Semiconductor made a nice clamp IC to
avoid black level droop. There were als Japanese ones but I never used
them in product designs because availability was iffy and many clients
were married to certain local distributors for reasons I\'ll never
understand. Those usually didn\'t stock the Asian black level clamp chips.

Broadcasting studios cameras clamping on the black (not bottom sync)


Yeah, clamping on the sync was a really bad habit of some \"engineers\".


hundreds if not thousands of those circuits, in my time with tubes
and then transistors.
We had equipment / modules from Fernsehn GmbH in those days, Philips plumbicon color cameras.
Ampex video recorders...

Analog video was fun.


It sure was, while it lasted. My masters project at university was
creating a CCD camera with a Philips CCD sensor. Because their own
version wasn\'t very good and it could not be used for serious
measurement stuff.


I did this project to get my digital hands on up to date, for hardware and software:
http://panteltje.com/panteltje/raspberry_pi_dvb-s_transmitter/

Now we have DVB-S2 via satellite and DVB-T2 terrestrial here..
New standard every few years, everybody had to buy a new DVB-T2 box... few years back..

Wonder what\'s next
DVB-S2 is close to the Shannon limit, but I did get surprised again today:
https://www.asus.com/content/asus-spatial-vision-technology/


What\'s next for TV? Nothing, IMHO. It had it\'s day and the world is
moving on. Other than the evening news the last time I really watched TV
was ... well ... heck, it\'s so many years ago that I can\'t even remember.

Oh no!
I have a steerable satellite dish and get a thousand or so free to air channels
So many satellites I can point to (see top page) here:
https://kingofsat.net/
News and opinions from all over the world, movies in HD... science (NASA TV for example)
many great info channels in German (ZDF-info, Kabeleins-info, N24docu etc
It is good to see the viewpoints from other countries to get a grip on the truth
pity EU killed the Russian channels on Astra satellite
US brainwash not missing: CNN, financial...
There is also internet via satellite...

And of course as ham we have QO100 here... DVB-S2, SSB, clear as glass all over Europe and middle east etc
https://amsat-dl.org/en/international-qo-100-emergency-frequency/

I still have a PC with an old DVB-S card, wrote the positioner software too:
http://panteltje.com/panteltje/satellite/

Not very active as ham these days, dish high up against the wall here, bad weather..
but maybe when its summer again could climb the ladder..

A decent sat receiver box that can also drive a dish positioner costs about 30 $.
You can build your own transmitter stuff ..

The switch to digital pretty much killed it for where I live because it
became unreliable. The topper was when some stations gave up precious
VHF channels for UHF. That was not smart at all.

Digital terrestrial seems to work here OK now even with a simple indoor antenna.

If I ever want to watch something interesting it is on the Internet or a
DVD from the library. However, now that I re-started ham radio I haven\'t
seen any movie in months. No time.

I just check these in the morning:
https://www.tvdirekt.de/tv-programm-auf-einen-blick/tv-programm-online.html?hours=4&typeID=-1&typeName=free
https://www.tvguide.co.uk/?catcolor=&systemid=79&gridspan=09:00
If anything seems interesting then I program a timer (good movies for example)
Box records to a 64 GB USB stick in HD....

Analog? You mean wallwart noise on RF shortwave? brrrrrrrrr
I do have a HF transceiver, and a Baofeng of course....
Maybe when WW3 is in progress to say bye bye world?
Or listen where there is still life?

 

[Jan Panteltje]

On a sunny day (Thu, 5 Jan 2023 13:41:11 -0800) it happened Joerg
<news@analogconsultants.com> wrote in <k1oufnFg8mmU1@mid.individual.net>:

On 1/4/23 11:03 PM, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Wed, 4 Jan 2023 10:43:20 -0800) it happened Joerg
news@analogconsultants.com> wrote in <k1lvmaF2dmeU1@mid.individual.net>:

On 1/3/23 8:07 AM, John Larkin wrote:
On Tue, 03 Jan 2023 06:30:16 GMT, Jan Panteltje
pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote:


[...]


Indeed, like analog video 1 Vpp
You lose your black level...
OTOH a diode after the RC will fix that for video (clamp the negative sync pulse at some fixed level).
It all depends...


Forgot the name of it but National Semiconductor made a nice clamp IC to
avoid black level droop. There were als Japanese ones but I never used
them in product designs because availability was iffy and many clients
were married to certain local distributors for reasons I\'ll never
understand. Those usually didn\'t stock the Asian black level clamp chips.

Broadcasting studios cameras clamping on the black (not bottom sync)


Yeah, clamping on the sync was a really bad habit of some \"engineers\".


hundreds if not thousands of those circuits, in my time with tubes
and then transistors.
We had equipment / modules from Fernsehn GmbH in those days, Philips plumbicon color cameras.
Ampex video recorders...

Analog video was fun.


It sure was, while it lasted. My masters project at university was
creating a CCD camera with a Philips CCD sensor. Because their own
version wasn\'t very good and it could not be used for serious
measurement stuff.


I did this project to get my digital hands on up to date, for hardware and software:
http://panteltje.com/panteltje/raspberry_pi_dvb-s_transmitter/

Now we have DVB-S2 via satellite and DVB-T2 terrestrial here..
New standard every few years, everybody had to buy a new DVB-T2 box... few years back..

Wonder what\'s next
DVB-S2 is close to the Shannon limit, but I did get surprised again today:
https://www.asus.com/content/asus-spatial-vision-technology/


What\'s next for TV? Nothing, IMHO. It had it\'s day and the world is
moving on. Other than the evening news the last time I really watched TV
was ... well ... heck, it\'s so many years ago that I can\'t even remember.

Oh no!
I have a steerable satellite dish and get a thousand or so free to air channels
So many satellites I can point to (see top page) here:
https://kingofsat.net/
News and opinions from all over the world, movies in HD... science (NASA TV for example)
many great info channels in German (ZDF-info, Kabeleins-info, N24docu etc
It is good to see the viewpoints from other countries to get a grip on the truth
pity EU killed the Russian channels on Astra satellite
US brainwash not missing: CNN, financial...
There is also internet via satellite...

And of course as ham we have QO100 here... DVB-S2, SSB, clear as glass all over Europe and middle east etc
https://amsat-dl.org/en/international-qo-100-emergency-frequency/

I still have a PC with an old DVB-S card, wrote the positioner software too:
http://panteltje.com/panteltje/satellite/

Not very active as ham these days, dish high up against the wall here, bad weather..
but maybe when its summer again could climb the ladder..

A decent sat receiver box that can also drive a dish positioner costs about 30 $.
You can build your own transmitter stuff ..

The switch to digital pretty much killed it for where I live because it
became unreliable. The topper was when some stations gave up precious
VHF channels for UHF. That was not smart at all.

Digital terrestrial seems to work here OK now even with a simple indoor antenna.

If I ever want to watch something interesting it is on the Internet or a
DVD from the library. However, now that I re-started ham radio I haven\'t
seen any movie in months. No time.

I just check these in the morning:
https://www.tvdirekt.de/tv-programm-auf-einen-blick/tv-programm-online.html?hours=4&typeID=-1&typeName=free
https://www.tvguide.co.uk/?catcolor=&systemid=79&gridspan=09:00
If anything seems interesting then I program a timer (good movies for example)
Box records to a 64 GB USB stick in HD....

Analog? You mean wallwart noise on RF shortwave? brrrrrrrrr
I do have a HF transceiver, and a Baofeng of course....
Maybe when WW3 is in progress to say bye bye world?
Or listen where there is still life?

 

[Jan Panteltje]

On a sunny day (Thu, 5 Jan 2023 13:41:11 -0800) it happened Joerg
<news@analogconsultants.com> wrote in <k1oufnFg8mmU1@mid.individual.net>:

On 1/4/23 11:03 PM, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Wed, 4 Jan 2023 10:43:20 -0800) it happened Joerg
news@analogconsultants.com> wrote in <k1lvmaF2dmeU1@mid.individual.net>:

On 1/3/23 8:07 AM, John Larkin wrote:
On Tue, 03 Jan 2023 06:30:16 GMT, Jan Panteltje
pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote:


[...]


Indeed, like analog video 1 Vpp
You lose your black level...
OTOH a diode after the RC will fix that for video (clamp the negative sync pulse at some fixed level).
It all depends...


Forgot the name of it but National Semiconductor made a nice clamp IC to
avoid black level droop. There were als Japanese ones but I never used
them in product designs because availability was iffy and many clients
were married to certain local distributors for reasons I\'ll never
understand. Those usually didn\'t stock the Asian black level clamp chips.

Broadcasting studios cameras clamping on the black (not bottom sync)


Yeah, clamping on the sync was a really bad habit of some \"engineers\".


hundreds if not thousands of those circuits, in my time with tubes
and then transistors.
We had equipment / modules from Fernsehn GmbH in those days, Philips plumbicon color cameras.
Ampex video recorders...

Analog video was fun.


It sure was, while it lasted. My masters project at university was
creating a CCD camera with a Philips CCD sensor. Because their own
version wasn\'t very good and it could not be used for serious
measurement stuff.


I did this project to get my digital hands on up to date, for hardware and software:
http://panteltje.com/panteltje/raspberry_pi_dvb-s_transmitter/

Now we have DVB-S2 via satellite and DVB-T2 terrestrial here..
New standard every few years, everybody had to buy a new DVB-T2 box... few years back..

Wonder what\'s next
DVB-S2 is close to the Shannon limit, but I did get surprised again today:
https://www.asus.com/content/asus-spatial-vision-technology/


What\'s next for TV? Nothing, IMHO. It had it\'s day and the world is
moving on. Other than the evening news the last time I really watched TV
was ... well ... heck, it\'s so many years ago that I can\'t even remember.

Oh no!
I have a steerable satellite dish and get a thousand or so free to air channels
So many satellites I can point to (see top page) here:
https://kingofsat.net/
News and opinions from all over the world, movies in HD... science (NASA TV for example)
many great info channels in German (ZDF-info, Kabeleins-info, N24docu etc
It is good to see the viewpoints from other countries to get a grip on the truth
pity EU killed the Russian channels on Astra satellite
US brainwash not missing: CNN, financial...
There is also internet via satellite...

And of course as ham we have QO100 here... DVB-S2, SSB, clear as glass all over Europe and middle east etc
https://amsat-dl.org/en/international-qo-100-emergency-frequency/

I still have a PC with an old DVB-S card, wrote the positioner software too:
http://panteltje.com/panteltje/satellite/

Not very active as ham these days, dish high up against the wall here, bad weather..
but maybe when its summer again could climb the ladder..

A decent sat receiver box that can also drive a dish positioner costs about 30 $.
You can build your own transmitter stuff ..

The switch to digital pretty much killed it for where I live because it
became unreliable. The topper was when some stations gave up precious
VHF channels for UHF. That was not smart at all.

Digital terrestrial seems to work here OK now even with a simple indoor antenna.

If I ever want to watch something interesting it is on the Internet or a
DVD from the library. However, now that I re-started ham radio I haven\'t
seen any movie in months. No time.

I just check these in the morning:
https://www.tvdirekt.de/tv-programm-auf-einen-blick/tv-programm-online.html?hours=4&typeID=-1&typeName=free
https://www.tvguide.co.uk/?catcolor=&systemid=79&gridspan=09:00
If anything seems interesting then I program a timer (good movies for example)
Box records to a 64 GB USB stick in HD....

Analog? You mean wallwart noise on RF shortwave? brrrrrrrrr
I do have a HF transceiver, and a Baofeng of course....
Maybe when WW3 is in progress to say bye bye world?
Or listen where there is still life?

 

[Phil Hobbs]

bitrex wrote:

On 1/4/2023 9:52 AM, bitrex wrote:
On 1/3/2023 7:30 PM, Phil Hobbs wrote:
RichD wrote:
On January 1,  John Larkin wrote:
https://www.theregister.com/2022/07/18/electrical_engineers_extinction/?td=rt-9cp

I\'ve been thinking for some time now that EE schools don\'t turn out
people who like electricity, but maker culture might.

I advise younguns against an engineering degree, it\'s over-specialized,
and obsolete in 5 years.

Only if you get sucked into spending all your time on the flavor of
the month.  People who spend their time in school learning
fundamental things that are hard to master on your own (math, mostly)
and then pick up the other stuff as they go along don\'t get
obsolete.  That\'s not difficult to do in your average EE program even
today, AFAICT. Signals and systems, electrodynamics, solid state
theory, and a bit of quantum are all good things to know.

Spending all your time in school programming in Javascript or VHDL or
memorizing compliance requirements is not a good career move for an EE.

I tell them to get a physics education.  Study hard.  Then you have the
tools to do anything you want.

Physicists turn up everywhere, it\'s true.  Folks with bachelor\'s
degrees in physics can do most kinds of engineering, provided they\'re
willing to bone up on the specifics.  Of course there are some who
assume they know everything and just bull ahead till they fail, but,
well, human beings are everyplace.   Thing is, the basic
professional qualification for a physicist is a doctorate, whereas in
engineering it\'s a BSEE.

That is, first the academics, then the vocational training.

I agree that knowing the fundamentals cold is very important.
However, (a) physics isn\'t for everyone, by a long chalk; and (b)
there\'s a glorious intellectual heritage in engineering, so calling
it \'vocational training\' is pejorative.

Cheers

Phil \"Intermediate energy state\" Hobbs


Advanced engineering mathematics:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/194964206310

Which is pretty advanced, I don\'t know how many BS-type EEs know about
the orthogonality of Bessel functions, or regularly use contour
integration for anything.

But not as advanced as \"Advanced Mathematical Methods for Scientists &
Engineers\", which is largely about perturbation methods, boundary
layer theory, and WKB approximations. Sounds fun I guess, I just got a
used copy from Amazon for $8

I would expect stuff like the WKB approximation is regularly used more
in optics design than in circuit design, though.

WKB is common in approximate quantum theory, e.g. solid state.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com

 

[Phil Hobbs]

bitrex wrote:

On 1/4/2023 9:52 AM, bitrex wrote:
On 1/3/2023 7:30 PM, Phil Hobbs wrote:
RichD wrote:
On January 1,  John Larkin wrote:
https://www.theregister.com/2022/07/18/electrical_engineers_extinction/?td=rt-9cp

I\'ve been thinking for some time now that EE schools don\'t turn out
people who like electricity, but maker culture might.

I advise younguns against an engineering degree, it\'s over-specialized,
and obsolete in 5 years.

Only if you get sucked into spending all your time on the flavor of
the month.  People who spend their time in school learning
fundamental things that are hard to master on your own (math, mostly)
and then pick up the other stuff as they go along don\'t get
obsolete.  That\'s not difficult to do in your average EE program even
today, AFAICT. Signals and systems, electrodynamics, solid state
theory, and a bit of quantum are all good things to know.

Spending all your time in school programming in Javascript or VHDL or
memorizing compliance requirements is not a good career move for an EE.

I tell them to get a physics education.  Study hard.  Then you have the
tools to do anything you want.

Physicists turn up everywhere, it\'s true.  Folks with bachelor\'s
degrees in physics can do most kinds of engineering, provided they\'re
willing to bone up on the specifics.  Of course there are some who
assume they know everything and just bull ahead till they fail, but,
well, human beings are everyplace.   Thing is, the basic
professional qualification for a physicist is a doctorate, whereas in
engineering it\'s a BSEE.

That is, first the academics, then the vocational training.

I agree that knowing the fundamentals cold is very important.
However, (a) physics isn\'t for everyone, by a long chalk; and (b)
there\'s a glorious intellectual heritage in engineering, so calling
it \'vocational training\' is pejorative.

Cheers

Phil \"Intermediate energy state\" Hobbs


Advanced engineering mathematics:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/194964206310

Which is pretty advanced, I don\'t know how many BS-type EEs know about
the orthogonality of Bessel functions, or regularly use contour
integration for anything.

But not as advanced as \"Advanced Mathematical Methods for Scientists &
Engineers\", which is largely about perturbation methods, boundary
layer theory, and WKB approximations. Sounds fun I guess, I just got a
used copy from Amazon for $8

I would expect stuff like the WKB approximation is regularly used more
in optics design than in circuit design, though.

WKB is common in approximate quantum theory, e.g. solid state.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com

 

[Phil Hobbs]

bitrex wrote:

On 1/4/2023 9:52 AM, bitrex wrote:
On 1/3/2023 7:30 PM, Phil Hobbs wrote:
RichD wrote:
On January 1,  John Larkin wrote:
https://www.theregister.com/2022/07/18/electrical_engineers_extinction/?td=rt-9cp

I\'ve been thinking for some time now that EE schools don\'t turn out
people who like electricity, but maker culture might.

I advise younguns against an engineering degree, it\'s over-specialized,
and obsolete in 5 years.

Only if you get sucked into spending all your time on the flavor of
the month.  People who spend their time in school learning
fundamental things that are hard to master on your own (math, mostly)
and then pick up the other stuff as they go along don\'t get
obsolete.  That\'s not difficult to do in your average EE program even
today, AFAICT. Signals and systems, electrodynamics, solid state
theory, and a bit of quantum are all good things to know.

Spending all your time in school programming in Javascript or VHDL or
memorizing compliance requirements is not a good career move for an EE.

I tell them to get a physics education.  Study hard.  Then you have the
tools to do anything you want.

Physicists turn up everywhere, it\'s true.  Folks with bachelor\'s
degrees in physics can do most kinds of engineering, provided they\'re
willing to bone up on the specifics.  Of course there are some who
assume they know everything and just bull ahead till they fail, but,
well, human beings are everyplace.   Thing is, the basic
professional qualification for a physicist is a doctorate, whereas in
engineering it\'s a BSEE.

That is, first the academics, then the vocational training.

I agree that knowing the fundamentals cold is very important.
However, (a) physics isn\'t for everyone, by a long chalk; and (b)
there\'s a glorious intellectual heritage in engineering, so calling
it \'vocational training\' is pejorative.

Cheers

Phil \"Intermediate energy state\" Hobbs


Advanced engineering mathematics:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/194964206310

Which is pretty advanced, I don\'t know how many BS-type EEs know about
the orthogonality of Bessel functions, or regularly use contour
integration for anything.

But not as advanced as \"Advanced Mathematical Methods for Scientists &
Engineers\", which is largely about perturbation methods, boundary
layer theory, and WKB approximations. Sounds fun I guess, I just got a
used copy from Amazon for $8

I would expect stuff like the WKB approximation is regularly used more
in optics design than in circuit design, though.

WKB is common in approximate quantum theory, e.g. solid state.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com

 

[Dan Purgert]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

On 2023-01-04, Phil Hobbs wrote:

Dan Purgert wrote:
[...]
For the time being I can make do with leaded ICs. Helps that I\'m not
into things that are super fancy (and am kind of \"going backwards\" in
the sense that I\'m trying to wrap my head around doing things with
analog ... )

Leaded ICs are a win, but some of them also have power pads. QFNs are
really fun in high-vibration environments.

Yeah, they do. But I can (for now) still avoid them. Maybe once I get
the plate and hotair thing ...

For now, no \"high vibration\" in my tinkering. Maybe one day a plotter
or 3d printer (etc) --- but \"vibration\" is usually bad in those.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=9jEJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
|_|O|_|
|_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert
|O|O|O| PGP: DDAB 23FB 19FA 7D85 1CC1 E067 6D65 70E5 4CE7 2860

 

[Dan Purgert]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

On 2023-01-04, Phil Hobbs wrote:

Dan Purgert wrote:
[...]
For the time being I can make do with leaded ICs. Helps that I\'m not
into things that are super fancy (and am kind of \"going backwards\" in
the sense that I\'m trying to wrap my head around doing things with
analog ... )

Leaded ICs are a win, but some of them also have power pads. QFNs are
really fun in high-vibration environments.

Yeah, they do. But I can (for now) still avoid them. Maybe once I get
the plate and hotair thing ...

For now, no \"high vibration\" in my tinkering. Maybe one day a plotter
or 3d printer (etc) --- but \"vibration\" is usually bad in those.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=9jEJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
|_|O|_|
|_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert
|O|O|O| PGP: DDAB 23FB 19FA 7D85 1CC1 E067 6D65 70E5 4CE7 2860

 

[Dan Purgert]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

On 2023-01-04, Phil Hobbs wrote:

Dan Purgert wrote:
[...]
For the time being I can make do with leaded ICs. Helps that I\'m not
into things that are super fancy (and am kind of \"going backwards\" in
the sense that I\'m trying to wrap my head around doing things with
analog ... )

Leaded ICs are a win, but some of them also have power pads. QFNs are
really fun in high-vibration environments.

Yeah, they do. But I can (for now) still avoid them. Maybe once I get
the plate and hotair thing ...

For now, no \"high vibration\" in my tinkering. Maybe one day a plotter
or 3d printer (etc) --- but \"vibration\" is usually bad in those.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=9jEJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
|_|O|_|
|_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert
|O|O|O| PGP: DDAB 23FB 19FA 7D85 1CC1 E067 6D65 70E5 4CE7 2860

 

[John Larkin]

On Wed, 11 Jan 2023 05:14:40 -0500, Phil Hobbs
<pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

Joerg wrote:
On 1/10/23 8:22 AM, Phil Hobbs wrote:
Phil Hobbs wrote:
Joerg wrote:
On 1/2/23 5:57 PM, Phil Hobbs wrote:
John Larkin wrote:
On Mon, 2 Jan 2023 11:00:52 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com
wrote:

On 1/1/23 11:08 PM, Jan Panteltje wrote:

[...]

In the EE school I was in it was known that only \'hobbyists\'
would pass the final exams. The dropout in the first year was
very very very high.


At my university the drop-out rate (start to degree) was at times
83%.

Too many kids selected an EE degree based on some high school
counselor\'s advice, or dreams of a tidy income. Too late.

I dunno.  Washing out of a hard program isn\'t the worst thing that can
happen to a young person.  It\'s not nearly as bad as hanging on by the
skin of your teeth and then failing over a decade or so in the
industry.

The old saying, \"C\'s get degrees\" has caused a lot of misery of
that sort.


I had pretty bad grades because I worked a lot on the side, did
\"pre-degree consulting\" and stuff like that. Bad grades are ok.

In an honest system, bad grades mean that the student either didn\'t
do the work, or was unable or unwilling to do it well.  There can be
lots of reasons for that, such as being unavoidably too busy, but
that\'s not the usual case.

The result is wasted time and money, and usually a skill set that\'s
full of holes and harder to build on later.  It sounds like you were
sort of making up your own enrichment curriculum as you went on,
which is a bit different, of course.


I really lost interest in attending university lectures after a few
things were taught by professors that were profoundly wrong. The first
one was that RF transmitters must have an output impedance equal to the
impedance of the connected load or cable. The week after I brought in
the schematic of a then-modern transistorized ham radio transceiver and
pointed out the final amplifier. The professor didn\'t really know what
to say.

Number two: The same guy said that grounded gate circuits in RF stages
make no sense at all. Huh? I did one of those during my very first job
assignment when the ink on my degree was barely dry. And lots before as
a hobbyist.

Number three: Another professor said that we only need to learn all this
transistor-level stuff for the exam. Once we graduated this would all be
obsoleted by integrated circuits. That one took the cake. Still, it
seemed I was the only one who didn\'t believe such nonsense. However, it
provided me with the epiphany \"Ha! This is my niche!\". And that\'s what
it became. Never looked back.

This was at a European ivy league place which made it even more
disappointing.

Well, I\'ve never taken a circuits class, so I may have dodged a bullet
or two of that sort. (*)

I don\'t recall ever being told what would or would not be important in
my future career, but maybe I just didn\'t listen.

My EE profs occasionally referred to some mysterious thing called
\"industry.\"

 

[John Larkin]

On Wed, 11 Jan 2023 05:14:40 -0500, Phil Hobbs
<pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

Joerg wrote:
On 1/10/23 8:22 AM, Phil Hobbs wrote:
Phil Hobbs wrote:
Joerg wrote:
On 1/2/23 5:57 PM, Phil Hobbs wrote:
John Larkin wrote:
On Mon, 2 Jan 2023 11:00:52 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com
wrote:

On 1/1/23 11:08 PM, Jan Panteltje wrote:

[...]

In the EE school I was in it was known that only \'hobbyists\'
would pass the final exams. The dropout in the first year was
very very very high.


At my university the drop-out rate (start to degree) was at times
83%.

Too many kids selected an EE degree based on some high school
counselor\'s advice, or dreams of a tidy income. Too late.

I dunno.  Washing out of a hard program isn\'t the worst thing that can
happen to a young person.  It\'s not nearly as bad as hanging on by the
skin of your teeth and then failing over a decade or so in the
industry.

The old saying, \"C\'s get degrees\" has caused a lot of misery of
that sort.


I had pretty bad grades because I worked a lot on the side, did
\"pre-degree consulting\" and stuff like that. Bad grades are ok.

In an honest system, bad grades mean that the student either didn\'t
do the work, or was unable or unwilling to do it well.  There can be
lots of reasons for that, such as being unavoidably too busy, but
that\'s not the usual case.

The result is wasted time and money, and usually a skill set that\'s
full of holes and harder to build on later.  It sounds like you were
sort of making up your own enrichment curriculum as you went on,
which is a bit different, of course.


I really lost interest in attending university lectures after a few
things were taught by professors that were profoundly wrong. The first
one was that RF transmitters must have an output impedance equal to the
impedance of the connected load or cable. The week after I brought in
the schematic of a then-modern transistorized ham radio transceiver and
pointed out the final amplifier. The professor didn\'t really know what
to say.

Number two: The same guy said that grounded gate circuits in RF stages
make no sense at all. Huh? I did one of those during my very first job
assignment when the ink on my degree was barely dry. And lots before as
a hobbyist.

Number three: Another professor said that we only need to learn all this
transistor-level stuff for the exam. Once we graduated this would all be
obsoleted by integrated circuits. That one took the cake. Still, it
seemed I was the only one who didn\'t believe such nonsense. However, it
provided me with the epiphany \"Ha! This is my niche!\". And that\'s what
it became. Never looked back.

This was at a European ivy league place which made it even more
disappointing.

Well, I\'ve never taken a circuits class, so I may have dodged a bullet
or two of that sort. (*)

I don\'t recall ever being told what would or would not be important in
my future career, but maybe I just didn\'t listen.

My EE profs occasionally referred to some mysterious thing called
\"industry.\"

 

[John Larkin]

On Wed, 11 Jan 2023 05:14:40 -0500, Phil Hobbs
<pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

Joerg wrote:
On 1/10/23 8:22 AM, Phil Hobbs wrote:
Phil Hobbs wrote:
Joerg wrote:
On 1/2/23 5:57 PM, Phil Hobbs wrote:
John Larkin wrote:
On Mon, 2 Jan 2023 11:00:52 -0800, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com
wrote:

On 1/1/23 11:08 PM, Jan Panteltje wrote:

[...]

In the EE school I was in it was known that only \'hobbyists\'
would pass the final exams. The dropout in the first year was
very very very high.


At my university the drop-out rate (start to degree) was at times
83%.

Too many kids selected an EE degree based on some high school
counselor\'s advice, or dreams of a tidy income. Too late.

I dunno.  Washing out of a hard program isn\'t the worst thing that can
happen to a young person.  It\'s not nearly as bad as hanging on by the
skin of your teeth and then failing over a decade or so in the
industry.

The old saying, \"C\'s get degrees\" has caused a lot of misery of
that sort.


I had pretty bad grades because I worked a lot on the side, did
\"pre-degree consulting\" and stuff like that. Bad grades are ok.

In an honest system, bad grades mean that the student either didn\'t
do the work, or was unable or unwilling to do it well.  There can be
lots of reasons for that, such as being unavoidably too busy, but
that\'s not the usual case.

The result is wasted time and money, and usually a skill set that\'s
full of holes and harder to build on later.  It sounds like you were
sort of making up your own enrichment curriculum as you went on,
which is a bit different, of course.


I really lost interest in attending university lectures after a few
things were taught by professors that were profoundly wrong. The first
one was that RF transmitters must have an output impedance equal to the
impedance of the connected load or cable. The week after I brought in
the schematic of a then-modern transistorized ham radio transceiver and
pointed out the final amplifier. The professor didn\'t really know what
to say.

Number two: The same guy said that grounded gate circuits in RF stages
make no sense at all. Huh? I did one of those during my very first job
assignment when the ink on my degree was barely dry. And lots before as
a hobbyist.

Number three: Another professor said that we only need to learn all this
transistor-level stuff for the exam. Once we graduated this would all be
obsoleted by integrated circuits. That one took the cake. Still, it
seemed I was the only one who didn\'t believe such nonsense. However, it
provided me with the epiphany \"Ha! This is my niche!\". And that\'s what
it became. Never looked back.

This was at a European ivy league place which made it even more
disappointing.

Well, I\'ve never taken a circuits class, so I may have dodged a bullet
or two of that sort. (*)

I don\'t recall ever being told what would or would not be important in
my future career, but maybe I just didn\'t listen.

My EE profs occasionally referred to some mysterious thing called
\"industry.\"

 

[Don Y]

On 1/11/2023 3:03 AM, Gerhard Hoffmann wrote:

Am 11.01.23 um 05:21 schrieb Don Y:
On 1/10/2023 9:05 PM, Three Jeeps wrote:
On the third point, I don\'t think he was wrong, just very narrow minded.  In
one of my digital logic design courses various methods of gate minimization\'
were beat into us (K-maps, prime implicates, etc).  Thought it was foolish,
after all, IC gates were cheap, fast, plentiful.  Twenty years later I
remember doing gate minimization for PALs....

The same techniques are applicable to software -- where \"gates\"
are NOT plentiful.  Building a DFA with redundant states is
likely NOT to be recognized as optimizable by the compiler.
So, having the skillset to do the minimization is an asset.

\"Programmers\" likely never learn this technology.

I have made a VHDL triple module redundancy library that looks
much like std_logic, std_logic_vector, un/signed and has mostly
all error detection / correction hidden under the hood.

But, how does the \"user\" (design) know that this is happening?
Presumably, one would want to know when ECC was actively at work
to give you a head\'s up to possible deteriorating conditions.

It was really hard to convince the VHDL compiler not to optimize
away badly needed parts of the circuit. A possible factor 5
reduction in CLBs spawns endless efforts.

Put it in different modules/subcircuits. A common problem in compiler
optimizations is opaque objects that don\'t let the compiler see
what\'s going on (so it can\'t know what optimizations are \"safe\")

A naive programmer could invoke different actions for similar
conditions at different points in the parse. If those are not
visible to the compiler, it can\'t know that they are identical
and a possible candidate for optimization.

Present state of the art (in compilers) requires the programmer
to be aware of what the compiler can deduce and make efforts
to expose as much (but no more!!) as possible to let it work
its magic.

Or, to recognize patterns in the algorithm and act on that
similarity, instead of treating them as orthogonal.

Sometimes, it took the use of inputs where only me, myself & I
knew the value of.

But then it is wonderful to see that you inject multiple SEU
errors per clock into a counter and it continues completely
unimpressed, in Terminator style 

My house master built a model of a squid (?) neuron
and then demonstrated how much you could cripple it
while it would still perform its nominal function.

[Of course, no idea if the virtual injuries were
truly representative of BIOLOGICAL injuries!]

 

[Don Y]

On 1/11/2023 3:03 AM, Gerhard Hoffmann wrote:

Am 11.01.23 um 05:21 schrieb Don Y:
On 1/10/2023 9:05 PM, Three Jeeps wrote:
On the third point, I don\'t think he was wrong, just very narrow minded.  In
one of my digital logic design courses various methods of gate minimization\'
were beat into us (K-maps, prime implicates, etc).  Thought it was foolish,
after all, IC gates were cheap, fast, plentiful.  Twenty years later I
remember doing gate minimization for PALs....

The same techniques are applicable to software -- where \"gates\"
are NOT plentiful.  Building a DFA with redundant states is
likely NOT to be recognized as optimizable by the compiler.
So, having the skillset to do the minimization is an asset.

\"Programmers\" likely never learn this technology.

I have made a VHDL triple module redundancy library that looks
much like std_logic, std_logic_vector, un/signed and has mostly
all error detection / correction hidden under the hood.

But, how does the \"user\" (design) know that this is happening?
Presumably, one would want to know when ECC was actively at work
to give you a head\'s up to possible deteriorating conditions.

It was really hard to convince the VHDL compiler not to optimize
away badly needed parts of the circuit. A possible factor 5
reduction in CLBs spawns endless efforts.

Put it in different modules/subcircuits. A common problem in compiler
optimizations is opaque objects that don\'t let the compiler see
what\'s going on (so it can\'t know what optimizations are \"safe\")

A naive programmer could invoke different actions for similar
conditions at different points in the parse. If those are not
visible to the compiler, it can\'t know that they are identical
and a possible candidate for optimization.

Present state of the art (in compilers) requires the programmer
to be aware of what the compiler can deduce and make efforts
to expose as much (but no more!!) as possible to let it work
its magic.

Or, to recognize patterns in the algorithm and act on that
similarity, instead of treating them as orthogonal.

Sometimes, it took the use of inputs where only me, myself & I
knew the value of.

But then it is wonderful to see that you inject multiple SEU
errors per clock into a counter and it continues completely
unimpressed, in Terminator style 

My house master built a model of a squid (?) neuron
and then demonstrated how much you could cripple it
while it would still perform its nominal function.

[Of course, no idea if the virtual injuries were
truly representative of BIOLOGICAL injuries!]

 

[Don Y]

On 1/11/2023 3:03 AM, Gerhard Hoffmann wrote:

Am 11.01.23 um 05:21 schrieb Don Y:
On 1/10/2023 9:05 PM, Three Jeeps wrote:
On the third point, I don\'t think he was wrong, just very narrow minded.  In
one of my digital logic design courses various methods of gate minimization\'
were beat into us (K-maps, prime implicates, etc).  Thought it was foolish,
after all, IC gates were cheap, fast, plentiful.  Twenty years later I
remember doing gate minimization for PALs....

The same techniques are applicable to software -- where \"gates\"
are NOT plentiful.  Building a DFA with redundant states is
likely NOT to be recognized as optimizable by the compiler.
So, having the skillset to do the minimization is an asset.

\"Programmers\" likely never learn this technology.

I have made a VHDL triple module redundancy library that looks
much like std_logic, std_logic_vector, un/signed and has mostly
all error detection / correction hidden under the hood.

But, how does the \"user\" (design) know that this is happening?
Presumably, one would want to know when ECC was actively at work
to give you a head\'s up to possible deteriorating conditions.

It was really hard to convince the VHDL compiler not to optimize
away badly needed parts of the circuit. A possible factor 5
reduction in CLBs spawns endless efforts.

Put it in different modules/subcircuits. A common problem in compiler
optimizations is opaque objects that don\'t let the compiler see
what\'s going on (so it can\'t know what optimizations are \"safe\")

A naive programmer could invoke different actions for similar
conditions at different points in the parse. If those are not
visible to the compiler, it can\'t know that they are identical
and a possible candidate for optimization.

Present state of the art (in compilers) requires the programmer
to be aware of what the compiler can deduce and make efforts
to expose as much (but no more!!) as possible to let it work
its magic.

Or, to recognize patterns in the algorithm and act on that
similarity, instead of treating them as orthogonal.

Sometimes, it took the use of inputs where only me, myself & I
knew the value of.

But then it is wonderful to see that you inject multiple SEU
errors per clock into a counter and it continues completely
unimpressed, in Terminator style 

My house master built a model of a squid (?) neuron
and then demonstrated how much you could cripple it
while it would still perform its nominal function.

[Of course, no idea if the virtual injuries were
truly representative of BIOLOGICAL injuries!]

 

[Jan Panteltje]

On a sunny day (Wed, 4 Jan 2023 09:20:44 +0000) it happened Martin Brown
<\'\'\'newspam\'\'\'@nonad.co.uk> wrote in <tp3gdi$1ra1$1@gioia.aioe.org>:

On 02/01/2023 19:21, Jan Panteltje wrote:
My website hosting company \"Godaddy.com\" moved to Microsoft for my email.
What a lot of crap that is!! The old pop-email no longer works,
pop-email took a second here for incoming to add to my email system that goes back to 1998.

Are you sure about that?
Is it a very recent thing (as in failed 27/12/22 by any chance?)

POP worked fine on MS Office 365/Outlook with the server settings here:

https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/office/pop-imap-and-smtp-settings-8361e398-8af4-4e97-b147-6c6c4ac95353

interesting
but godddy has done more things wrong, this was the limit
1) they would re-encode my JPG pictures so it would take less space on their server
but then people could not read my circuit diagrams..
Was fixed after me complaining..
2) they randomly move servers and last time changed all time marks to the same date.
(cp -p would have preserved those)
I have backup locally here... for the next site.
3) They forced me into outlook and \'root\' as a catch-all address no longer works
Looks like they want to charge me extra for that microsore too..
What a bunch of creeps and idiots.

I take the website away from them, never mind the domain name,
panteltje.com, panteltje.net panteltje.org panteltje,eu etc etc what difference does it make to me?
It is all open source stuff and some things I showed here.

I have now set an other free pop email account I have as primary and everybody that matters has that now.
I vote with my purse (is the expression); godaddy lost a customer.
I cannot tell them as their phone helpdesk does not even work,
so setting auto-renewal to zero was my vote.

And I do not like microsore reading my email, might as well sent those to the seeeyeaa!
Imagine they find out I have that old USSR submarine and am testing those air-mail tubes..



It is all about FREEDOM, microsore is just like a kraken with tentacles pulling you in.
There is NOTHING they give that does not exists for free AND better!!!!