Op amps problem Gain Calculation

[John Fields]

On Fri, 5 Aug 2005 16:56:57 +0200, "Alexander"
<electricdummy@hotmail.com> wrote:

"DBLEXPOSURE" <celstuff@hotmail.com> schreef in bericht
news:9-6dncZtvblZK2_fRVn-jw@rapidnet.com...

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:5tc5f1tcb2vd5l2kvu56o3lbhg4ro4jhh6@4ax.com...
On Thu, 4 Aug 2005 19:20:16 -0500, "DBLEXPOSURE"
celstuff@hotmail.com> wrote:


"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:0e95f1lo4u1qhq8vt6494067a730bmkh1n@4ax.com...
On Thu, 4 Aug 2005 17:10:11 -0500, "DBLEXPOSURE"
celstuff@hotmail.com> wrote:


"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:7su4f1p8tnkkngdc7n0bngbsonv5s6hrkt@4ax.com...
On Thu, 4 Aug 2005 14:40:00 -0500, "DBLEXPOSURE"
celstuff@hotmail.com> wrote:


quantum entaglement, It's like you read my mind.

---
Well, no. I was thinking quantum entanglement.

--
John Fields
Professional Circuit Designer

And how does this hint at super luminal velocities? I am curios.

---
You have this annoying habit of deleting previously posted material
which must then be searched out and reposted in order to properly
reply to your queries, which invariably require reference to the
previously posted material.

I won't play that game.

If you're serious, and you'd like to discuss the possibility of
massive bodies achieving transluminal or superluminal velocities,
aquaint yourself with Einstein, the EPR paradox, quantum
entanglement, and then report back with what you've found.

Otherwise, well, you know, piss off...

--
John Fields
Professional Circuit Designer


No sir, I replied to your post from which the previously posted material,
was missing.



But if it helps, here ya go.



Today (actually, 70 years ago...) we have the EPR paradox and
quantum entaglement which _hints_ that superluminal velocities are
possible, but we also have:


m0
mr = --------------------
sqrt (1 - (v˛/c˛))


which states that anything with a rest mass, m0, will have its
relativistic mass, mr, tend toward infinity as its velocity, v,
approaches that of light, c.

Every experiment ever done to try to refute the veracity of the
equation has confirmed that the equation is valid and, consequently,
indicates that it is impossible for massive bodies to achieve the
speed of light.

However, we also have Cerenkov radiation, which is emitted whenever
a massive particle exceeds the speed of light in the medium through
which the particle is travelling...

---
OK, so what do you want to know?

--
John Fields
Professional Circuit Designer

And how does this, (quantum entaglement) hint at super luminal velocities?
I am curios.


I worked at a university and they achieved a zero speed of light inside a
crystal.
With this in mind almost everything can achieve super luminal velocities..

---
Being able to slow something down doesn't mean that you can speed it
up.

--
John Fields
Professional Circuit Designer

 

[DBLEXPOSURE]

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:eqn7f1drtrm2mpobmkf4r3j8ujn5vos83g@4ax.com...

On Thu, 4 Aug 2005 19:20:16 -0500, "DBLEXPOSURE"
celstuff@hotmail.com> wrote:


"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:0e95f1lo4u1qhq8vt6494067a730bmkh1n@4ax.com...
On Thu, 4 Aug 2005 17:10:11 -0500, "DBLEXPOSURE"
celstuff@hotmail.com> wrote:


"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:7su4f1p8tnkkngdc7n0bngbsonv5s6hrkt@4ax.com...
On Thu, 4 Aug 2005 14:40:00 -0500, "DBLEXPOSURE"
celstuff@hotmail.com> wrote:


quantum entaglement, It's like you read my mind.

---
Well, no. I was thinking quantum entanglement.

--
John Fields
Professional Circuit Designer

And how does this hint at super luminal velocities? I am curios.

---
You have this annoying habit of deleting previously posted material
which must then be searched out and reposted in order to properly
reply to your queries, which invariably require reference to the
previously posted material.

I won't play that game.

If you're serious, and you'd like to discuss the possibility of
massive bodies achieving transluminal or superluminal velocities,
aquaint yourself with Einstein, the EPR paradox, quantum
entanglement, and then report back with what you've found.

Otherwise, well, you know, piss off...

--
John Fields
Professional Circuit Designer


No sir, I replied to your post from which the previously posted material,
was missing.



But if it helps, here ya go.



Today (actually, 70 years ago...) we have the EPR paradox and
quantum entaglement which _hints_ that superluminal velocities are
possible, but we also have:


m0
mr = --------------------
sqrt (1 - (v˛/c˛))


which states that anything with a rest mass, m0, will have its
relativistic mass, mr, tend toward infinity as its velocity, v,
approaches that of light, c.

Every experiment ever done to try to refute the veracity of the
equation has confirmed that the equation is valid and, consequently,
indicates that it is impossible for massive bodies to achieve the
speed of light.

However, we also have Cerenkov radiation, which is emitted whenever
a massive particle exceeds the speed of light in the medium through
which the particle is travelling...

---
That equation states that it's impossible for any massive body to
achieve lightspeed unless

1
---
0

can be quantified. Quantum entanglement, on the other hand, has
demonstrated that changes in relationships which exist between
massive objects can be transmitted between the bodies at greater
than the speed of light. Not that the objects themselves can go
superluminal, but that the changes in the states of being between
them can.

Cerenkov radiation is radiation which is generated when a massive
particle traverses a medium in less time than it would take a
particle/wave of massless electromagnetic radiation, i.e. a photon,
to traverse the same distance in that medium. An interesting
parallel is the shock wave (sonic boom) which is propagated when the
speed of sound in air is exceeded by anything going through air
faster than the speed of sound.

My opinion is that, if a massive body could, somehow, achieve
lightspeed, the shock wave it would emit, when passing through C,
would be a "time boom", and it (the body) would cease to exist in
our time frame.

--
John Fields
Professional Circuit Designer

I appreciate your take on this.



The massive objects must first be "entangled" that is to say somehow related
to each other. It seems that there also needs to be an observer or actually
two observers.



I once read a simplified example. If a laser is split into two beams, say
red and blue, by a prism and these two beams leave the prism in two
different directions, one towards observer one and the other towards
observer two, (assuming the observers are equidistant from the entangled
prism and even light years apart from one another), when the beam reaches
one of the observers he immediately knows which color beam is being received
by the other observer.



So, no massive particles are actually breaking the cosmic speed limit but it
seems that maybe knowledge, facts or data might. However, in this thought
experiment there exists a certain amount of uncertainty, (an un-entangled
participant could come along and ruin the day)



It has also been argued that that actual act of observing changes the
quantum state leading to further uncertainty.



The curiosity is that data, knowledge, facts really have no mass or any
physical properties and therefore do not, necessarily, have to play by
rules.



Cerenkov radiation is analogous with the wake a boat make when it exceeds
the velocity of the water or medium it is traveling in. So, your "time
boom" analogy makes a certain amount of sense. The massive object would be
exceeding the speed of space-time itself and would create a wake in the
space-time. Same as supersonic flight creates a sonic wake. However, this
implies that space-time is moving at C, or perhaps just a tad faster.



I have often wondered if the elusive yet undiscovered graviton is at work
here... If it is and you can prove it there might be a Nobel Prize in it
for ya.





<Cease to exist in our time frame.



I would love to do that for a few weeks......





um das Puzzlespiel zu lösen, müssen Sie alles zuerst werfen weg, dem Sie
glauben, um zutreffend zu sein.

 

[Alexander]

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> schreef in bericht
news:hgt7f1dll2dh7v0p67ga6gb4bjcombmg22@4ax.com...

On Fri, 5 Aug 2005 16:56:57 +0200, "Alexander"
electricdummy@hotmail.com> wrote:


"DBLEXPOSURE" <celstuff@hotmail.com> schreef in bericht
news:9-6dncZtvblZK2_fRVn-jw@rapidnet.com...

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:5tc5f1tcb2vd5l2kvu56o3lbhg4ro4jhh6@4ax.com...
On Thu, 4 Aug 2005 19:20:16 -0500, "DBLEXPOSURE"
celstuff@hotmail.com> wrote:


"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:0e95f1lo4u1qhq8vt6494067a730bmkh1n@4ax.com...
On Thu, 4 Aug 2005 17:10:11 -0500, "DBLEXPOSURE"
celstuff@hotmail.com> wrote:


"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:7su4f1p8tnkkngdc7n0bngbsonv5s6hrkt@4ax.com...
On Thu, 4 Aug 2005 14:40:00 -0500, "DBLEXPOSURE"
celstuff@hotmail.com> wrote:


quantum entaglement, It's like you read my mind.

---
Well, no. I was thinking quantum entanglement.

--
John Fields
Professional Circuit Designer

And how does this hint at super luminal velocities? I am curios.

---
You have this annoying habit of deleting previously posted material
which must then be searched out and reposted in order to properly
reply to your queries, which invariably require reference to the
previously posted material.

I won't play that game.

If you're serious, and you'd like to discuss the possibility of
massive bodies achieving transluminal or superluminal velocities,
aquaint yourself with Einstein, the EPR paradox, quantum
entanglement, and then report back with what you've found.

Otherwise, well, you know, piss off...

--
John Fields
Professional Circuit Designer


No sir, I replied to your post from which the previously posted
material,
was missing.



But if it helps, here ya go.



Today (actually, 70 years ago...) we have the EPR paradox and
quantum entaglement which _hints_ that superluminal velocities are
possible, but we also have:


m0
mr = --------------------
sqrt (1 - (v˛/c˛))


which states that anything with a rest mass, m0, will have its
relativistic mass, mr, tend toward infinity as its velocity, v,
approaches that of light, c.

Every experiment ever done to try to refute the veracity of the
equation has confirmed that the equation is valid and, consequently,
indicates that it is impossible for massive bodies to achieve the
speed of light.

However, we also have Cerenkov radiation, which is emitted whenever
a massive particle exceeds the speed of light in the medium through
which the particle is travelling...

---
OK, so what do you want to know?

--
John Fields
Professional Circuit Designer

And how does this, (quantum entaglement) hint at super luminal
velocities?
I am curios.


I worked at a university and they achieved a zero speed of light inside a
crystal.
With this in mind almost everything can achieve super luminal velocities..

---
Being able to slow something down doesn't mean that you can speed it
up.

--
John Fields
Professional Circuit Designer

After slowing it down, they also speed it up to the orginal speed.

 

[John Fields]

On Sat, 6 Aug 2005 08:31:16 +0200, "Alexander"
<electricdummy@hotmail.com> wrote:

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> schreef in bericht
news:hgt7f1dll2dh7v0p67ga6gb4bjcombmg22@4ax.com...
On Fri, 5 Aug 2005 16:56:57 +0200, "Alexander"
electricdummy@hotmail.com> wrote:
I worked at a university and they achieved a zero speed of light inside a
crystal.
With this in mind almost everything can achieve super luminal velocities..

---
Being able to slow something down doesn't mean that you can speed it
up.

--
John Fields
Professional Circuit Designer

After slowing it down, they also speed it up to the orginal speed.

---
That's not superluminal.

I think you'll find, if you check, that all they did to speed it up
was to stop slowing it down. Kind of like being in a car with the
accelerator stuck wide open but which you've managed to bring to a
stop by pressing _really_ hard on the brake. Let go, and the car
will speed up again, but it won't go any faster than it did
previously.

--
John Fields
Professional Circuit Designer

 

[Dré Jansen]

Hi,

you want more power in short time.
most of the time you use far less than the max alowed power.
sometimes you need more than alowed, then the fuse blows.

use a battery charger that is limmitted for the max current.
connect this to an set of batteries, the higer the voltage, the lesser the
current.
you can use 48 V= (4 truck accu's in serial)
use an DC to AC converter, the 48V= to 110V AC
the supply socket never gives more than allowed.
you can always use the power you need
all these products are commonly avaleble in Europe, but i guess also in your
country.
you can use low voltage AND high voltage in the same time.

sucses!
--


Groeten, Dré Jansen

djansen.2@hccnet.nl





"Pat Ziegler" <pzig@weisd.com> schreef in bericht
news:irKdnY8uaccBM1PfRVn-ow@rapidnet.com...

Are you blowing the breaker or tripping the GFI?

If you are tripping the GFI you might have a problem with one of your
appliances and that needs to be fixed before some gets hurt. Unplug
everthing, connect to the GFI outlet. If all is well then start plugging
in the appliances one at a time to see which one trips the GFI. Then have
that one checked out by a tech.

If you are blowing breakers then you are drawing too much current. You'll
have to shed some load or at least manage it. don't use the hair dryer
and
the TV at the same time or whatever.

Pat Ziegler

Wholesale Electronics Inc.

www.weisd.com












"Mike Rothe" <Mike@therothes.C0M> wrote in message
news:2%qze.1900437$6l.559334@pd7tw2no...
You could try using an isolation transformer (110V to 110V) this would
not deliver a greater amperage than what the breaker is rated for, but may
solve a GFI problem. I have heard of a device that indoor grow ops are
using now to prevent brown outs in their neighborhoods when their lights
turn on. I'm not sure exactly what it is, but I believe what it does is
somehow draws power from a few AC cycles then slowly increases the number
of
cycles it draws from until it is running at the full 60 Hz (I think),
another thing you could do (maybe) is connect to a second outlet in
another
lot, I would think that each trailer is on it's own breaker (BE VERY
CAREFUL
doing this as you may end up crossing hots, or even worse if the plug in
the
park is wired wrong you could pump 220V into your system!). I'm pretty
sure
that all capacitors would do is shift the AC phase, maybe a UPS might
solve
the problem.

Hello All,

We have a converted bus and when we travel we mostly plug into regular
15
to
20 amp outdoor GFI outlets. We have a few lights, RV frig, few
heaters,
bat
chargers, etc and this almost always blows the breaker at the outlet we
are
plugged into.

Does anyone know of any products or perhaps someone can help me make
something using high power capacitors that will deliver greater
amperage
for
our bus while only drawing up to 15-20 amps from the source?

Thanks In Advance!




--------------= Posted using GrabIt =----------------
------= Binary Usenet downloading made easy =---------
-= Get GrabIt for free from http://www.shemes.com/ =-

 

[datasheet]

Free DataSheet Site.

http://www.datasheet.in

Very Good Site.


--
datasheet

 

[peterlonz]

Look carefully at your bridge rectifier - the AC input & DC outputs are
almost always clearly marked.
The DC polarity will be marked, but if you can't be sure the longest output
pin is by comvention DC +
Remember AC is sometimes labelled by a "wiggly line".

The transformer is best examined IMHO using a "multmeter" (test meter) set
to AC in the voltage range 0-20 or whatever is most suitable to measure
around 12 VAC on your meter.
I would expect you can confirm the two terminals most distant apart (IE
excluding the centre tap terminal) will show you the higher voltage you
seek.
I can't quite recall if the AC RMS voltage will read 12 or about 14.5 but
after rectification & some smoothing you should see 12VDC.
Pete


Check the output terminals first
"dwbauer" <dwbauer@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:56kme.35524$lQ3.18488@bignews5.bellsouth.net...

I am attempting to replace a bad transformer in a 12v battery charger. I
went to Radioshack and purchased a 12v transformer and a 4 amp full wave
bridge, but I don't know how to connect it. The transformer is center
tapped
Primary is 120v Secondary is - 6.3 - 0 - 6.3, 3a the bridge is marked +
AC - with four leads (|=leads)
e.g. | + | | AC | - |
I have three leads from the transformer, two yellow and a black center.
What do I do with the transformer three and four on the bridge?
Thanks for any help to a dummy; Don

 

Many residential electricians use the spring-tensioned "stab-in" wire
termination points on the back of cheaper duplex u-ground
receptecles... this is often a weak link where a loose "grab" on a
wire creates an open condition or a high series resistence with part
of your voltage being dropped across this "load." If this is not the
problem, you want to check voltage to ground/ hot to neutral/ neutral
to ground with a high impedence meter. If spring terminals were the
problem, reconfigure wiring so that load, line, and device wires are
scotch locked together. Pigtails feeding receptecles constitutes a
better installation because then, if a device fails, down-stream
devices continue to work (even when the problem device is removed.



On Sun, 21 Sep 2003 23:02:57 GMT, "Pony" <pony@nothing.com> wrote:

In one of my rooms I have 4 outlets. All 4 are on the same breaker yet one
is getting around 123 volts while the other 3 are only getting 68. What
could be causing this problem? I am unable to use these outlets due to the
low voltage.

Thanks for the help!

 

Cut into hot wire feeding lightbulb (the swithleg from opener), add
wire, then wire-nut these 3 wires together and use the newly added
wire to fire off a relay w/120v coil. Take hot wire feeding 3way
switch and tap off of it and use to feed n/o dry contacts of relay.
Switched side of relay contact now needs to go over to your other 3way
switch and double up with its outside lighting switch-leg. This
creates a parallel path so relay can turn lights on even if power
isn't comming through snap-switches (relay overrides 3ways).

On 3 Oct 2003 09:23:31 -0700, andrew_0812@hotmail.com (Andrew) wrote:

I have a home wiring project that I need help with. Actually I need
to find a device that can control a light, using power from another
light socket, and still letting a light be in that socket.

Ok. I will explain.

I have a garage door opener with a light in it. I have 2 lights
outside my garage. The builder only installed 1 switch to these
lights, so the first thing is to put another switch in an easier
location to access. I can figure out the 2 way switch.

But I want for these outdoor lights to come on when the garage door
opener's light comes on, -ie when the opener is in motion. There is
no auxilary control for this on the opener, but I think this could be
accomplished by using the power to the garage door opener's light to
control power to the outdoor lights.

I would like for this feature to override the 2 light switches, so I
would want them connected in series.

Any ideas? Is there a device that could do this for me available on
the market? Or is one easy to build? I have moderate electrical
knowledge.

Thanks

 

[robert]

Robert wrote,

You have a ground condition. Somewhere the wiring is going to ground. If
you take a voltage meter the hot side should read about 115 vac the common
(white cable should read 0 vac) Right now you have 68 vac on the hot and 47
vac on the common. This is a dangerous problem to have and should be fixed
asap. If you suffer a voltage spike you will have problems and devices that
are plugged in will be ruined and the building could burn down. Have an
experinced electrician look at the problem asap.
<robnmikey@netzero.com> wrote in message
newsh5mi11r02mo33cq017ia2h2jh6cokhvkb@4ax.com...

Many residential electricians use the spring-tensioned "stab-in" wire
termination points on the back of cheaper duplex u-ground
receptecles... this is often a weak link where a loose "grab" on a
wire creates an open condition or a high series resistence with part
of your voltage being dropped across this "load." If this is not the
problem, you want to check voltage to ground/ hot to neutral/ neutral
to ground with a high impedence meter. If spring terminals were the
problem, reconfigure wiring so that load, line, and device wires are
scotch locked together. Pigtails feeding receptecles constitutes a
better installation because then, if a device fails, down-stream
devices continue to work (even when the problem device is removed.



On Sun, 21 Sep 2003 23:02:57 GMT, "Pony" <pony@nothing.com> wrote:

In one of my rooms I have 4 outlets. All 4 are on the same breaker yet
one
is getting around 123 volts while the other 3 are only getting 68. What
could be causing this problem? I am unable to use these outlets due to
the
low voltage.

Thanks for the help!

 

[Jasen Betts]

I have a home wiring project that I need help with. Actually I need
to find a device that can control a light, using power from another
light socket, and still letting a light be in that socket.

using electricity to control electricity - sounds like a task for
a relay.

Ok. I will explain.

I have a garage door opener with a light in it. I have 2 lights
outside my garage. The builder only installed 1 switch to these
lights, so the first thing is to put another switch in an easier
location to access. I can figure out the 2 way switch.

. . . . . . .
lamp in . . <--- mains powered relay
---------+-----~~~3||| . try an electrical
opener (X) . 3||| . wholesaler
---------+-----___3||| . - a place that supplies
. | . electricians
+----------_| -----------+
| . ~- . |
| . . . . . . . |
| |
| ____________ |
L--------+-___ \____--+-----+----+
\____________ (X) (X)
N---------------------------------------+----+
2-way switch setup outdoor lammps

in this way the the outside lamps will light when the opener light is on
or when the manual 2-way switch is on.


you'll need to open the opener and connect wires to the back of the lamp
socket and run them out of the opener and to the relay. these wires won't
carry a high current so lighting cable is fine.



Bye.
Jasen

 

[JeffM]

On 3 Oct 2003 09:23:31 -0700, andrew_0812 @ hotmail.com (Andrew) wrote:
I have a home wiring project that I need help with.

On 19 Sep 2005 robnmikey @ netzero.com wrote:
Cut into hot wire feeding lightbulb

What's up with responding to posts that are 2 years old?
Are you bored? ..or don't you "get" Usenet?
..
..
In addition, post BELOW the post to which you are responding.
Feel free to trim that post;
there is rarely a need to repost ALL of it.

 

[Al]

Does anyone know where I can find a schematic for a Pacemaker? Any
brand
will do, I'd just like to see what's so special about their circuitry
that
would justify a cost of $10,000 dollars.

It's not the circuitry. It's the cost of all the testing to prove it is
reliable. It's the cost of the insurance as sooner or later someone will
sue for a failure. And they are not spit out like jellybeans; how many
will a manufacturer actually make and sell? The factory area has to be
antispeptic as well as uncontaminated. The materials have to be chosen
so they are compatible with corrosive body fluids. And they have to meed
stringent rules set up by the overseers of medical devices in every
country.

Just think military electronics and scale it up by several factors.

Al

 

[Don.]

Al wrote:

Does anyone know where I can find a schematic for a Pacemaker? Any

brand

will do, I'd just like to see what's so special about their circuitry

that

would justify a cost of $10,000 dollars.


It's not the circuitry. It's the cost of all the testing to prove it is
reliable. It's the cost of the insurance as sooner or later someone will
sue for a failure. And they are not spit out like jellybeans; how many
will a manufacturer actually make and sell? The factory area has to be
antispeptic as well as uncontaminated. The materials have to be chosen
so they are compatible with corrosive body fluids. And they have to meed
stringent rules set up by the overseers of medical devices in every
country.

Just think military electronics and scale it up by several factors.

Al

Thanks Al. I worked for TRW during the space race days (60's) as a
circuit designer. I've not designed a circuit, be it analog or digital,
since I retired in 1986 so don't know what components are available now.
The latest and greatest things at that time were PLAs and PLL for
transceivers. Op amps, which I would think come into play with PMs were
still in DIP packages. Surely things have progressed in the last 20
years. ;-)

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

 

[Jayson]

Don,

I'm far from knowledgeable about electronics compared to probably everyone
here in this newsgroup. However, I would assume the cost is not only a
result of R&D, but, the material that the case is made from (titanium I
would assume), the battery used, the RF shielding, the intricate SMT
technology but the fact that they are probably assembled and packaged in a
class 100 room as well. Now of course, you're paying the price for the
manufacturing as well, not to mention essentially, what it does for a human,
but I'm sure that the companies that produce them have to pay some serious
royalties to those whom hold the patents.

If they run only $10k, then, welp. I would have guessed much higher a price
for a pacemaker. That's one of the nice things about the "need" factor.
They're sold to those that 'need' them, not those that 'want' them.. supply
and demand in the end I suppose.

Sorry I cannot contribute the circuitry.. so I supplied the next best
thing.. my 2 cents ;p


"Don." <Me@Don.com> wrote in message
news:1128881436_129963@spool6-east.superfeed.net...

Al wrote:
Does anyone know where I can find a schematic for a Pacemaker? Any

brand

will do, I'd just like to see what's so special about their circuitry

that

would justify a cost of $10,000 dollars.


It's not the circuitry. It's the cost of all the testing to prove it is
reliable. It's the cost of the insurance as sooner or later someone will
sue for a failure. And they are not spit out like jellybeans; how many
will a manufacturer actually make and sell? The factory area has to be
antispeptic as well as uncontaminated. The materials have to be chosen
so they are compatible with corrosive body fluids. And they have to meed
stringent rules set up by the overseers of medical devices in every
country.

Just think military electronics and scale it up by several factors.

Al

Thanks Al. I worked for TRW during the space race days (60's) as a
circuit designer. I've not designed a circuit, be it analog or digital,
since I retired in 1986 so don't know what components are available now.
The latest and greatest things at that time were PLAs and PLL for
transceivers. Op amps, which I would think come into play with PMs were
still in DIP packages. Surely things have progressed in the last 20
years. ;-)

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet
News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+
Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption
=----

 

[Al]

In article <xkn2f.3109$jw6.2131@lakeread02>,
"Jayson" <jayson_hansen@keepyourspam.hotmail.com> wrote:

Don,

I'm far from knowledgeable about electronics compared to probably everyone
here in this newsgroup. However, I would assume the cost is not only a
result of R&D, but, the material that the case is made from (titanium I
would assume), the battery used, the RF shielding, the intricate SMT
technology but the fact that they are probably assembled and packaged in a
class 100 room as well. Now of course, you're paying the price for the
manufacturing as well, not to mention essentially, what it does for a human,
but I'm sure that the companies that produce them have to pay some serious
royalties to those whom hold the patents.

If they run only $10k, then, welp. I would have guessed much higher a price
for a pacemaker. That's one of the nice things about the "need" factor.
They're sold to those that 'need' them, not those that 'want' them.. supply
and demand in the end I suppose.

Sorry I cannot contribute the circuitry.. so I supplied the next best
thing.. my 2 cents ;p


"Don." <Me@Don.com> wrote in message
news:1128881436_129963@spool6-east.superfeed.net...
Al wrote:
Does anyone know where I can find a schematic for a Pacemaker? Any

brand

will do, I'd just like to see what's so special about their circuitry

that

would justify a cost of $10,000 dollars.


It's not the circuitry. It's the cost of all the testing to prove it is
reliable. It's the cost of the insurance as sooner or later someone will
sue for a failure. And they are not spit out like jellybeans; how many
will a manufacturer actually make and sell? The factory area has to be
antispeptic as well as uncontaminated. The materials have to be chosen
so they are compatible with corrosive body fluids. And they have to meed
stringent rules set up by the overseers of medical devices in every
country.

Just think military electronics and scale it up by several factors.

Al

Thanks Al. I worked for TRW during the space race days (60's) as a
circuit designer. I've not designed a circuit, be it analog or digital,
since I retired in 1986 so don't know what components are available now.
The latest and greatest things at that time were PLAs and PLL for
transceivers. Op amps, which I would think come into play with PMs were
still in DIP packages. Surely things have progressed in the last 20
years. ;-)

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet
News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+
Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption
=----

Jeesh, another top poster! At any rate, think cell phone or mobile as
the British call it, for complexity just as great if not greater than a
pacemaker. It costs only a few bucks or is given away free due to the
mass production involved. But then again, life does not depend upon it.
I wonder what the failure rate is anyway?

Al

 

[John Fields]

On Mon, 10 Oct 2005 12:47:32 GMT, Al <no.spam@wanted.com> wrote:

Jeesh, another top poster! At any rate, think cell phone or mobile as
the British call it, for complexity just as great if not greater than a
pacemaker. It costs only a few bucks or is given away free due to the
mass production involved. But then again, life does not depend upon it.

---
Never had to dial 911 on a cellphone?
---

I wonder what the failure rate is anyway?

Google is your friend:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Pacemaker+failure+rate

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=cell+phone+failure+rate&spell=1
--
John Fields
Professional Circuit Designer

 

[Don.]

John Fields wrote:

On Mon, 10 Oct 2005 12:47:32 GMT, Al <no.spam@wanted.com> wrote:



Jeesh, another top poster! At any rate, think cell phone or mobile as
the British call it, for complexity just as great if not greater than a
pacemaker. It costs only a few bucks or is given away free due to the
mass production involved. But then again, life does not depend upon it.


---
Never had to dial 911 on a cellphone?
---


I wonder what the failure rate is anyway?


Google is your friend:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Pacemaker+failure+rate

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=cell+phone+failure+rate&spell=1

We sure got OT in this message Thread. Doesn't anyone read a message and
respond to the subject and query in kind? :-(

And it seems I didn't either until this message.

Don

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

 

[Winston]

Ronny wrote:

hi guys. does anyone know where i can get one of these eproms. Its out of my
2004 Holden Commodore ECU.

I found one place thats sells them but min order in 50 chips @ $15ea

Thanks
Ronny


Would an Intel 28F400B5B80 do you?

ftp://download.intel.com/design/flcomp/support/datashts/29045105.pdf

I can make you such a deal!

--Len

 

[Bob Monsen]

On Mon, 05 Dec 2005 22:22:54 +0000, c d saunter wrote:

This may or may not work - many lab power supplies and some bricks
conenct the 0V from the DC side to the mains earth, so doing this
with two such supplies will cause funny noises, bad smells and possibly
worse as the magic smoke escapes.

If you're not sure, don't try ths aproach!

The bricks I've used have always isolation, but I live a
relatively sheltered life. Where have you seen them, mainly?

--
Regards,
Bob Monsen

"You told me, 'God made the World.'" "No, no!" Harshaw said hastily.
"I told you that, while all these many religions said many things,
most of them said, 'God made the World.' I told you that I did not
grok the fullness, but that 'God' was the word that was used." "Yes,
Jubal," Mike agreed. "Word is 'God'" He added. "You grok." "No, I must
admit I don't grok." "You grok," Smith repeated firmly. "I am explain.
I did not have the word. You grok. Anne groks. I grok. The grass under
my feet groks in happy beauty. But I needed the word. The word is
God." Jubal shook his head to clear it. "Go ahead." Mike pointed
triumphantly at Jubal. "Thou art God!" Jubal slapped a hand to his
face. "Oh, Jesus H. What have I done? Look, Mike, take it easy! Simmer
down! You didn't understand me. I'm sorry. I'm very sorry! Just forget
what I've been saying and we'll start over again on another day. But "
"Thou art God," Mike repeated serenely. "That which groks. Anne is
God. I am God. The happy grass are God, Jill groks in beauty always.
Jill is God. All shaping and making and creating together ." He
croaked something in Martian and smiled.