P
Paul
Guest
Hi,
I'm having a discussion about placing two noise sources in parallel
such as Johnson noise. I would appreciate it if a EE would please tell
us who is correct? Here is the conversation -->
I wrote:
++++++
Any EE knows that parallel noise sources decreases.
Here is a Spice noise analysis on one single 1N914 diode, full
bandwidth -->
32.324 uV rms
Here is a Spice noise analysis on two 1N914 diodes in parallel, full
bandwidth -->
22.856 uV rms
22.856 uV / 32.324 uV = 0.70709
And here's the noise source of two 1N914 diodes in *series* -->
45.713 ľV rms
45.713 ľV / 32.324 uV = 1.4142
As stated, two noise source in *series* is relative to sqrt
.
The net noise from noise sources in parallel decreases. The net noise
from noise sources in series increases.
++++++
The other person wrote:
------
if you base your existence on simulation software rather than reality
no wonder you are chasing a stupid idea. Noise does not negate because
of increased samples you moron.
I spent 6 years as a senior geophysicist for Exxon and I know my stuff
when it comes to noise. Seismic data is all about signal and noise and
it is universal in information theory.
Prove it to yourself fool by simply generating random numbers in a
basic program and see that it is impossible to get a noise peak of 100
or -100 if the random number is between 0 and 1 with a -0.5 bias, that
is just so obvious, then run it accumulating a million loops and look
at the highest responses, there will be some greater than 1, some
greater than 10 etc etc.
If there is a coherent signal bias then the signal adds directly to
the n samples but the noise adds to the sqrt of n samples x rms noise.
So PL when you start attacking peoples knowledge you want to do so
with a bit more justification than your 2 sample spice data.
You are the most arrogant and stupid pseudo scientist I have ever
read.
There are a lot of people here that are real scientists that have
given you a hearing and you have proved to be the proverbial
Whackadoo.
Grow up Paul, get a life and do something you can achieve, you will
never qualify as a scientist!!!!
BTW read my original post on noise and see that it mentions the issue
of increased load, that is the real issue!
A spice model if run properly will reflect that the load increases
with resistors in parallel, so too did I. So in my post I said that
diode arrays would not work and so do you. Also in my post I pointed
out your stupidity for if not in parallel then what use is pA currents
for the real World. MORON.
PL F off!!
------
I wrote:
++++++
Resistance decreases when paralleling. I'm recalling when you tried to
show some math on calculating power where you even forgot to write the
voltage, LOL.
I already explained your error, as you forget to include phase angle.
When you include phase angle in addition to amplitude you will clearly
see your error. That is why the Johnson noise equation clearly shows I
am correct -->
Vn = sqrt(4 k T R BW)
R is resistance. When you place two resistors in parallel you get half
the resistance. Do the math, will you.
++++++
The other person wrote:
------
You really are showing yourself to be so stupid.
The issue of noise is an issue of measured noise across a load.
Noise itself does not decrease but measured noise decreases because
the load increases.
If you are going to quote a formula do us the service of understanding
it yourself first.
You argue for me not against me.
read again moron!
I said load increases with resistors in parallel!!.
You laugh when you cannot read or understand apparently.
Paul I know you have never held a science post in your life and that
seems to have come from an incomplete education experience, perhaps
you flunked science. It is fair to say that you have been ridiculed by
many in your life which is why you stupidly attack people.
I can only suggest that you start listening a bit more and go back to
college if you can afford to do so.
------
I'm having a discussion about placing two noise sources in parallel
such as Johnson noise. I would appreciate it if a EE would please tell
us who is correct? Here is the conversation -->
I wrote:
++++++
Any EE knows that parallel noise sources decreases.
Here is a Spice noise analysis on one single 1N914 diode, full
bandwidth -->
32.324 uV rms
Here is a Spice noise analysis on two 1N914 diodes in parallel, full
bandwidth -->
22.856 uV rms
22.856 uV / 32.324 uV = 0.70709
And here's the noise source of two 1N914 diodes in *series* -->
45.713 ľV rms
45.713 ľV / 32.324 uV = 1.4142
As stated, two noise source in *series* is relative to sqrt
.The net noise from noise sources in parallel decreases. The net noise
from noise sources in series increases.
++++++
The other person wrote:
------
if you base your existence on simulation software rather than reality
no wonder you are chasing a stupid idea. Noise does not negate because
of increased samples you moron.
I spent 6 years as a senior geophysicist for Exxon and I know my stuff
when it comes to noise. Seismic data is all about signal and noise and
it is universal in information theory.
Prove it to yourself fool by simply generating random numbers in a
basic program and see that it is impossible to get a noise peak of 100
or -100 if the random number is between 0 and 1 with a -0.5 bias, that
is just so obvious, then run it accumulating a million loops and look
at the highest responses, there will be some greater than 1, some
greater than 10 etc etc.
If there is a coherent signal bias then the signal adds directly to
the n samples but the noise adds to the sqrt of n samples x rms noise.
So PL when you start attacking peoples knowledge you want to do so
with a bit more justification than your 2 sample spice data.
You are the most arrogant and stupid pseudo scientist I have ever
read.
There are a lot of people here that are real scientists that have
given you a hearing and you have proved to be the proverbial
Whackadoo.
Grow up Paul, get a life and do something you can achieve, you will
never qualify as a scientist!!!!
BTW read my original post on noise and see that it mentions the issue
of increased load, that is the real issue!
A spice model if run properly will reflect that the load increases
with resistors in parallel, so too did I. So in my post I said that
diode arrays would not work and so do you. Also in my post I pointed
out your stupidity for if not in parallel then what use is pA currents
for the real World. MORON.
PL F off!!
------
I wrote:
++++++
Resistance decreases when paralleling. I'm recalling when you tried to
show some math on calculating power where you even forgot to write the
voltage, LOL.
I already explained your error, as you forget to include phase angle.
When you include phase angle in addition to amplitude you will clearly
see your error. That is why the Johnson noise equation clearly shows I
am correct -->
Vn = sqrt(4 k T R BW)
R is resistance. When you place two resistors in parallel you get half
the resistance. Do the math, will you.
++++++
The other person wrote:
------
You really are showing yourself to be so stupid.
The issue of noise is an issue of measured noise across a load.
Noise itself does not decrease but measured noise decreases because
the load increases.
If you are going to quote a formula do us the service of understanding
it yourself first.
You argue for me not against me.
read again moron!
I said load increases with resistors in parallel!!.
You laugh when you cannot read or understand apparently.
Paul I know you have never held a science post in your life and that
seems to have come from an incomplete education experience, perhaps
you flunked science. It is fair to say that you have been ridiculed by
many in your life which is why you stupidly attack people.
I can only suggest that you start listening a bit more and go back to
college if you can afford to do so.
------