Toshiba TV29C90 problem; Image fades to black...

R. Steve Walz wrote:
Paul Burridge wrote:

On Sun, 13 Jul 2003 09:57:10 +0100, "Kevin Aylward"
kevin@anasoft.co.uk> wrote:

Existence is pointless. We exist because the laws of physics allow
it. Thats all there is to it.
------------------
No, we're here because our inner nature allows the laws of physics
that make us possible in this manner.
Oh rubbish. Inner nature indeed. Just what are you on. The laws of
physics are there independent of whether we are here or not.

Er, no. The point of existence is simply to reproduce successfuly.
We're all slaves to that all-pervasive macromolecule, DNA.
-------------------
The physical world cannot be shown to exist as other than thoughts
in the mind.
I agree with this statement, but it does not logically follow that
without the human mind, that the physical world does not exist. As I
have explained many times, Goedal allows for true, but unprovable
statements. The evidence strongly suggest that the universe is not
dependant on the consciousness of any particular individual. Why should
it. Consciousness is nothing special from a physics point of view. Its
just the result of complex organisation of mass-energy.

Kevin Aylward
salesEXTRACT@anasoft.co.uk
http://www.anasoft.co.uk
SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode
Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture,
Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.
 
On 26 Jun 2003 11:20:38 -0700, aumars.yann@club-internet.fr (yaumars)
wrote:

"Alex" <no@no.spam.com.au> wrote in message news:<bdet48$hpa$1@lust.ihug.co.nz>...
have u checked the flux capacitor? ;)

"yaumars" <aumars.yann@club-internet.fr> wrote in message
news:4e006755.0306251134.425c244e@posting.google.com...
My Akai TV model SN71Y2 is dead, StandBy LED lit but no picture, no
sound.
Seems that the chassis is the same as Nokia Stereo Plus2 (and not
Nokia Stereo plus) Look at
http://w1.455.telia.com/~u45521195/images/Nokia/StereoPlus2.jpg to see
the picture.

Can someone help me (any repair tips) as I don't have the schematic
for this chassis.
Thanks

Sorry, what do you mean by flux capacitor ? (I'm not a TV repair guy)
Flux capacitor.... from the movie "Back to the Future"

If you're not familiar with electronics, take this set to a repair
shop.

Don't try to repair it yourself if you're not familiar with it!

Rinus
 
"Kevin Aylward" <kevin@anasoft.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3_sQa.69$2c1.8458@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net...
R. Steve Walz wrote:
Paul Burridge wrote:

On Sun, 13 Jul 2003 09:57:10 +0100, "Kevin Aylward"
kevin@anasoft.co.uk> wrote:

Existence is pointless. We exist because the laws of physics allow
it. Thats all there is to it.
------------------
No, we're here because our inner nature allows the laws of physics
that make us possible in this manner.


Oh rubbish. Inner nature indeed. Just what are you on. The laws of
physics are there independent of whether we are here or not.


Er, no. The point of existence is simply to reproduce successfuly.
We're all slaves to that all-pervasive macromolecule, DNA.
-------------------
The physical world cannot be shown to exist as other than thoughts
in the mind.

I agree with this statement, but it does not logically follow that
without the human mind, that the physical world does not exist. As I
have explained many times, Goedal allows for true, but unprovable
statements. The evidence strongly suggest that the universe is not
dependant on the consciousness of any particular individual. Why should
it. Consciousness is nothing special from a physics point of view. Its
just the result of complex organisation of mass-energy.

Kevin Aylward
In my opinion, consciousness may play a bigger role in the universe than we
think. Since consciousness allows us to be aware of our existence, it also
allows us, and drives us to change it. We are attempting to change the way
we exist on a daily basis, including changing physics outside of our own
planet by attempting to reach further into space. If we land a robotic ship
on mars, have we not, to some degree, just altered that planets physics from
what they were before we landed there? I don't know if I am explaining
myself well on this subject, because I am not an expert on this topic. I
just have ideas and opinions about it. Humans can change the physical
makeup or properties of something, based on our judgement. That's makes us
unique to anything else in nature that effects the universe in either a
random, unrandom, or predetermind matter.

P.S. Don't laugh at me, I am doing the best I can here :)
 
cessna,
Actually that does help narrow it down a bit.
Seems that these boards were used in both the VS-400 and VS-401 sets.
The numbers on the boards would more than likely be 935C10901 for the power
board.
Signal board would be 935B06802, and the Main board is 935B06504.
Later on Mits added another digit to their part numbering system so that the
listed board part numbers would have an additional "0" on the end of their
numbers. This little factoid is almost useless at this point as Mits doesn't
have any boards for these sets and haven't for quite some time.
Anyway, this is about an '84 model anyway. Are you quite sure that you want
to undertake trying to get this set running? You most probably will find
that the CRT's will be worn out by this time in their life. Quite a few
replacement parts will be difficult to find if maybe not available at all.
I'll take a look around in our boneyard to see if there are any boards this
old still laying around, but I don't think that we are going to get that
lucky.

Which board(s) do you think could be missing?

Do you have a "home" page that you could upload a few pictures to?

Try that and let us know.

Good Luck,
Bill Jr

My encrypted email address is NLA due to spam.



"cessna" <nfroehling@houston.rr.com> wrote in message
news:VVoQa.72301$hV.4676175@twister.austin.rr.com...
OK, a tag on the side of the cabinet, indicates possible projection tube
numbers VT0729B22, a power supply board has 93C10901.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9,
the tuner has ENV 5677062 and 295P22701, another board video? also has a
93Bxx- similar to the other board, what else would help?
and Thanks for your interest

Bill Jr wrote:

How about checking the part numbers on the boards and see if one of us
can
decipher those to a proper model number. Then you may be able to get
some
useful information.
BTW, even with the back missing they usually had a little white sticker
on
the main board that had the model and serial number on it.

Good Luck,
Bill Jr


"cessna" <nfroehling@houston.rr.com> wrote in message
news:zpcQa.80025$TJ.4185360@twister.austin.rr.com...

Yes, a private pilot with electronics as a second hobby, looks like no
one is repairing any more

Arthur Jernberg wrote:

One question, with your username, are you a private pilot>> BTW just

saw a

VS400 setting in a scrap pile but have no access to any of it's

components.

"cessna" <nfroehling@houston.rr.com> wrote in message
news:M7LPa.76858$TJ.3963998@twister.austin.rr.com...


Need service manual, ckt boards for a Mitsubishi projection Tv model
unknown (rear cover missing) made mid '80s - early '90s, can email pic
Thanks
 
And here is what I got back about 2 minutes later....


The original message was received at Mon, 14 Jul 2003 10:21:33 -0400 (EDT)
from [69.20.6.25]


*** ATTENTION ***


Your e-mail is being returned to you because there was a problem with its
delivery. The address which was undeliverable is listed in the section
labeled: "----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -----".


The reason your mail is being returned to you is listed in the section
labeled: "----- Transcript of Session Follows -----".


The line beginning with "<<<" describes the specific reason your e-mail could
not be delivered. The next line contains a second error message which is a
general translation for other e-mail servers.


Please direct further questions regarding this message to your e-mail
administrator.


--AOL Postmaster




----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -----
jurb6006@aol.com


----- Transcript of session follows -----
.... while talking to air-xn02.mail.aol.com.:
RCPT To:<jurb6006@aol.com
550 jurb6006 IS NOT ACCEPTING MAIL FROM THIS SENDER
550 <jurb6006@aol.com>... User unknown


Reporting-MTA: dns; rly-xn03.mx.aol.com
Arrival-Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2003 10:21:33 -0400 (EDT)


Final-Recipient: RFC822; jurb6006@aol.com
Action: failed
Status: 2.0.0
Remote-MTA: DNS; air-xn02.mail.aol.com
Diagnostic-Code: SMTP; 250 OK
Last-Attempt-Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2003 10:21:41 -0400 (EDT)
etc etc etc.....


If you could e-mail me from some other address which doesn't block
basically everything sent to it, I'll reply and then maybe we could
communicate!

Cheers,
Bob



Hate spam? Go to http://www.bluebottle.com (It's free)
 
tanya wrote:
hello,
X-posted
2 questions:
mitsubishi colt 1989
1. its current mechanic says that the ?camShaft? cables are the original
and are cracked and need to be rpl'd
just wonder whether this diagnosis could account for the car NOT
accelerating, needing to use 2nd gear vs. drive almost all the time
(even down hill) (it's an automatic) vibrating in reverse and 2nd gear?
or where i can find out more about the camShaft (if in fact this car
even has it:)
He might be referring to the timing belt (which drives the camshaft). If it is original it is overdue for replacement.

2. same car: i've learned (or heard) that fans are supposed to start
turning to help cool the engine... according to an AAA
jumpStarter/tower...
would anyone know whether they should start turning when the car is
idling or the gauge is warm (not hot)
symptom here is that the car heats up in minutes (and did so in Winter)
but did not used to heat up for ages (iow it used to take ~ 15' to warm
up)
before driving it onto the highWay is there a test for the fans?
thank you very much in advance
and to those of you who were kind enough to answer my post a while back
on the dead battery thank you (the thread had expired)
and if anyone cares, the battery *was* a lemon...
THANK YOU IN ADVANCE!
Depends on the vehicle. Some fans come on anytime the air conditioner is on or the coolant is warm. On other vehicles the fan will not come on until A/C pressure is high or engine coolant is almost hot enough to overheat.

--
toAnswerSend2:userName:tjtmd
domain:attglobal.net
separate these with the at sign
--
Mike Walsh
West Palm Beach, Florida, U.S.A.
 
gsm@mendelson.com (Geoffrey S. Mendelson) wrote in message news:<slrnbh2ecj.p98.gsm@cable.mendelson.com>...
I can listen to streaming
MP3 and Ogg files and am loving it. My two favorites are WCPE (clasical
music) and Virgin Radio in London.
Ma, he's talking about us!

Great news.

By the way, we've a Kerbango in our boardroom. Still works. We're
still on it... ;)

--
http://www.virginradio.co.uk/ | http://www.catchthegroove.com/ |
http://www.listen2liquid.com/
No. 1, Golden Square, London W1F 9DJ - Tel 020 7434 1215

VIRGIN RADIO IS THE MOST LISTENED-TO ONLINE RADIO STATION IN THE
WORLD! (Arbitron Webcast May 2003)
 
"LeeAnn Rice" <punky2@mindspring.com> wrote in message news:<bcu6bq$24l$1@slb4.atl.mindspring.net>...
Actually it seems contrary to normal instincts, but use hot soapy water
(dish soap-cuts grease,etc.) and a nylon brush (toothbrush if necessary)
The big problem with this is drying the board. Doesn't take long to start
corroding. First, use an air-compressor to get rid of the largest amount of
water. Then, place the board into your pre-heated oven (250 deg) for 5 min.
Next, leave the board outside in the sunshine for 3-4 hrs. (on-end). This
usually gives us the cleanest boards.
Steve
I most definitely agree with you Steve,

If the sound system board can be removed from the
sound system, the hot running water/brush with soap
then the oven at 140 F is the best method. Take care
not to get large encased power transformers wet, as the
windings may retain moisture for a long time...

For stubborn grease spots, use an artist's brush with
100% isopropyl alcohol, then go to water/soap.

The cleaning fluids sold at electronics stores sometimes
just loosen dirt and get it to dry up at other spots, plus
they are expensive and in enclosed environments, not
so good for your respiratory system!

This hot water method is perfectly safe for even the most delicate
electronics, like motherboards and power supply boards,
VCRs, and those pepsi-laced remotes ;-)

During a recent flood, I was able to salvage and return
to life ten appliances, including a VCR, a DVD and two
computers... Flooded monitors are a little bit harder...
But they make a great fireworks display when you put
the power back on... guess those HV components really
zap everything when you add water and mud! Oh well...

Robert, in Montreal
 
"bigmike" <bigmike@cornhusker.net> wrote in message news:...
"Kevin Aylward" <kevin@anasoft.co.uk> wrote in message
news:povQa.225$2c1.21902@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net...
bigmike wrote:
"Kevin Aylward" <kevin@anasoft.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3_sQa.69$2c1.8458@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net...
R. Steve Walz wrote:
Paul Burridge wrote:

On Sun, 13 Jul 2003 09:57:10 +0100, "Kevin Aylward"
kevin@anasoft.co.uk> wrote:

Existence is pointless. We exist because the laws of physics allow
it. Thats all there is to it.
------------------
No, we're here because our inner nature allows the laws of physics
that make us possible in this manner.


Oh rubbish. Inner nature indeed. Just what are you on. The laws of
physics are there independent of whether we are here or not.


Er, no. The point of existence is simply to reproduce successfuly.
We're all slaves to that all-pervasive macromolecule, DNA.
-------------------
The physical world cannot be shown to exist as other than thoughts
in the mind.

I agree with this statement, but it does not logically follow that
without the human mind, that the physical world does not exist. As I
have explained many times, Goedal allows for true, but unprovable
statements. The evidence strongly suggest that the universe is not
dependant on the consciousness of any particular individual. Why
should it. Consciousness is nothing special from a physics point of
view. Its just the result of complex organisation of mass-energy.

Kevin Aylward

In my opinion, consciousness may play a bigger role in the universe
than we think. Since consciousness allows us to be aware of our
existence, it also allows us, and drives us to change it.
We are
attempting to change the way we exist on a daily basis, including
changing physics outside of our own planet by attempting to reach
further into space.

But this is not what is meant by the laws of physics. This is modifying
the environment. The laws of physics are the basic ones such non
creation of mass energy, things move in a straight line unless acted
upon by force sort of thing. Nothing we can do will alter the fact that
the charge on an electron is 1.6e-19C

If we land a robotic ship on mars, have we not,
to some degree, just altered that planets physics from what they were
before we landed there?

We would have altered the environment. Any alteration we make is
constrained by the laws of physics.

I don't know if I am explaining myself well
on this subject, because I am not an expert on this topic. I just
have ideas and opinions about it. Humans can change the physical
makeup or properties of something, based on our judgement.

But as RSW keeps pointing out, our "judgment", at is core, is
essentially illusory, in that we do what we have been programmed or
already determined to be. consciousness is still no more then the result
of normal physics. It can't be any other way, unless you believe in
magic.

This is where I jump ship, because I beleive that trying to explain
consciousness through physics is impossible. The questions of why, how,
and
for what reason are we are conscious is where physics no longer can supply
any answers. Consciousness and physics are two completely separate
entities
in my opinion. Is consciousness magic? Pretty close, since it is beyond
out
ability to understand.


There is nothing that a supposed consciousness can do, that in
principle, a programmed machine can not do, e.g. the Turing test.

That's
makes us unique to anything else in nature that effects the universe
in either a random, unrandom, or predetermind matter.


I hope you don't exclude animals with this claim of unique human
behaviour. Animals certainly have some limited sort of consciousness .
They certainly feel pain in a way that makes any reasonable person
believe that it is not acceptable to boil cats alive.
I agree with you, but if we are to believe that emotions are simply a part
of physics, then what would make such a thing as boiling cats not
acceptable? Why would we not want to do such a thing? And why do they do
such things in some other parts of the world? Steve treats most people like
dirt when he replies to them. I am not surprised. If he believes that he has
no free will, and that his life and his thoughts are predetermined, what
reason does he have to act in any way other than what he chooses. But then
again, according to him, he does not choose, we do not have the ability to
choose and make choices. Somebody is missing something somewhere here,
because even though science can sound like it has explainations for
everything, it often falls short, and seems to run around in endless circles
when trying to explain how and why the brain works, beyond it's physical
properties. Maybe for some people, science seems to be able to answer these
questions, but for me and many others, it keeps falling flat on it's face.
I love science, but I also except the fact that is has it's limitations.

Kevin Aylward
salesEXTRACT@anasoft.co.uk
http://www.anasoft.co.uk
SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode
Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture,
Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.
 
The missing board is driver for the deflection , are any board photos,
schematics available, what cost would this deflection board be?

Bill Jr wrote:
cessna,
Actually that does help narrow it down a bit.
Seems that these boards were used in both the VS-400 and VS-401 sets.
The numbers on the boards would more than likely be 935C10901 for the power
board.
Signal board would be 935B06802, and the Main board is 935B06504.
Later on Mits added another digit to their part numbering system so that the
listed board part numbers would have an additional "0" on the end of their
numbers. This little factoid is almost useless at this point as Mits doesn't
have any boards for these sets and haven't for quite some time.
Anyway, this is about an '84 model anyway. Are you quite sure that you want
to undertake trying to get this set running? You most probably will find
that the CRT's will be worn out by this time in their life. Quite a few
replacement parts will be difficult to find if maybe not available at all.
I'll take a look around in our boneyard to see if there are any boards this
old still laying around, but I don't think that we are going to get that
lucky.

Which board(s) do you think could be missing?

Do you have a "home" page that you could upload a few pictures to?

Try that and let us know.

Good Luck,
Bill Jr

My encrypted email address is NLA due to spam.



"cessna" <nfroehling@houston.rr.com> wrote in message
news:VVoQa.72301$hV.4676175@twister.austin.rr.com...

OK, a tag on the side of the cabinet, indicates possible projection tube
numbers VT0729B22, a power supply board has 93C10901.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9,
the tuner has ENV 5677062 and 295P22701, another board video? also has a
93Bxx- similar to the other board, what else would help?
and Thanks for your interest

Bill Jr wrote:


How about checking the part numbers on the boards and see if one of us

can

decipher those to a proper model number. Then you may be able to get

some

useful information.
BTW, even with the back missing they usually had a little white sticker

on

the main board that had the model and serial number on it.

Good Luck,
Bill Jr


"cessna" <nfroehling@houston.rr.com> wrote in message
news:zpcQa.80025$TJ.4185360@twister.austin.rr.com...


Yes, a private pilot with electronics as a second hobby, looks like no
one is repairing any more

Arthur Jernberg wrote:


One question, with your username, are you a private pilot>> BTW just

saw a


VS400 setting in a scrap pile but have no access to any of it's

components.


"cessna" <nfroehling@houston.rr.com> wrote in message
news:M7LPa.76858$TJ.3963998@twister.austin.rr.com...



Need service manual, ckt boards for a Mitsubishi projection Tv model
unknown (rear cover missing) made mid '80s - early '90s, can email pic
Thanks
 
Kevin Aylward wrote:
R. Steve Walz wrote:
Kevin Aylward wrote:

No, our need to coooperate founds our need for rules. If we live alone
far apart we die off. If welive alone close together we win the whole
world and defeat all enemies, and strictly through the use of Rules.
Animals don't have social "rules", all theirs are genetic and
non-conscious.

In disagree. Animals behave within a framework and certainly animals
have conscious.
---------------
Nonsense, anything that is conscious as we are will want to tell us
that it is intelligent and can communicate with us. Cats don't, dogs
don't. They act like cats and dogs. If we were trapped in the body of
a cat or dog we'd be trying to send messages to prove our awareness
and intelligence. We would NOT be acting like cats or dogs. We are so
used to not having another intelligent species on this planet that we
forget that cats and dogs ONLY act like cats and dogs, but if this
were a plabet with multiple forms of conscious AND non-conscious life,
we'd know the difference! The former bunch we'd be arranging alliances
with, the latter bunch would be pets or food sources!


Anyone with a cat can see this. I agree that it is not
much of a conscious, but they do have one. You cant just draw a line and
say, this has consciousness, this doesn't. There is a graduation of
awareness from pure automatic instinct, to what we call "free will"
consciousness.
--------------------------------
There is no such thing as "Free Will" in any animal that even COULD
exist, so don't get yourself all confused about THAT as *WELL* now!!
What you're thinking of actually is just a time-binding awareness,
but you haven't studied enough cognitive theory to actually know that!

Free Will has nothing to do with Self-Concept. And Self-Concept has
nothing to do with animal attention, either.


This is the Meta-evolution of Memes and Genes as well.
It is like unto the first multi-cellular colonies that conglomerated
for safety and advantage.


So, Hume views above are *completely* and utterly wrong with regard
to this. Period.
---------------
I disagree completely.

Not surprising, you don't understand replicator theory.
------------------------------------
Don't prate. It gives you delusions. I most certainly do.
I merely disagree with Dawkins in part.


No doubt because his/the knowledge of the selfish gene was
somewhat lacking at that time.
---------------
I think you have completely misunderstood Hume on Morality.
He indicates an advantage to fellow feeling in our nature.


For example, it took a lot of work to
come up with a correct mathematical model of why the Peacock, despite
adding apparent disadvantaged features, still resulted in a net
selfish advantage. All of the above are easily explained by the
selfish replicator theory. The whole idea of something like
"benevolence is an original principle" is nonsense. Social, or good
for the group theories died in the 60's due, in part, to a complete
failure to obtain any mathematical models to support such a view.
------------------------------------
Nope,

Yes.
-------------------------
Nope. That's something republicans say at parties to keep each other
warm.


I don't knmow where you get such crap.

I read respected books, and evaluate using the scientific method. What I
stated is well accepted by essentially, all scientist in the field.
---------------------------------
The Scientific Method is not applicable to pop end-table books like
Dawkins' came to be, and especially his social interpretations of the
impiications of replicator theory. He went much awry of good sense.


And it is a poor analysis

Its a correct one. One that is pretty much universally accept by
zoologists, biologists and evolutionist scientists. To deny it is to
deny evolution.
----------------------------------
I don't deny evolution, don't be a ponce!


that Hume would never agree with, and neither would I.

Nevertheless, its correct. It based on trivial, easily verified,
assumptions.

1 Characteristics/traits are passed on to offspring.
2 Characteristics/traits are randomly generated
3 Characteristics/traits are selected by the environment.
--------------------------------
Everyone agrees with that, but still need not agree with everything
Dawkins puts forward!


These assumptions directly result in the "we observe what ever copies
itself the
most". Its really not debatable. Its almost a tautology. Jesus wept
dude, this is so obvious. If a replicator don't copy itself as well as
another replicator, after enough generations, the better replicator must
dominate. Any replicator that continually puts another's interests
first, must be overrun by one that doesn't. Its 101 maths. Its called
geometric progression.
---------------------------
And it works in species vying for dominance, not for individuals within
species. Altruism can emerge as survival-enhancing in animals where a
higher social milieu is possible.


reactionary, merely a lashing out by Rightists frustrated by the
whole of the latter half of the 20th century.

There is no emotion in this view whatsoever. Its a simple, cold,
application of the scientific method to known facts. Anyone, given the
same assumptions will be able to derive the same consequences.
---------------------------------------------
Republican daydreams.
The corrected interpretation of replicator theory supports collectivism
exclusively.

-Steve
--
-Steve Walz rstevew@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
http://www.armory.com/~rstevew or http://www.armory.com/~rstevew/Public
 
Kevin Aylward wrote:
R. Steve Walz wrote:
Paul Burridge wrote:

On Sun, 13 Jul 2003 09:57:10 +0100, "Kevin Aylward"
kevin@anasoft.co.uk> wrote:

Existence is pointless. We exist because the laws of physics allow
it. Thats all there is to it.
------------------
No, we're here because our inner nature allows the laws of physics
that make us possible in this manner.

Oh rubbish. Inner nature indeed. Just what are you on. The laws of
physics are there independent of whether we are here or not.
-----------------------------------------
No, if you kill yourself, they aren't here anymore.
And there here isn't even "here" anymore.

Being here is something WE do, not something the observed universe
does. The ONLY way atoms, stars, galaxies, or anything has ever
existed or will ever exist is within the scope and the bounds of
a person living their Life as an observer. Matter will never "exist"
more than as someone's perception that it does, it will simply not
EVER happen. Reality exists as observation, not as concrete ground
of being beneatn us, that honor goes to the heart of awareness itself,
which generates the atoms stars and galazies into being on a case by
case basis as they need be perceived by us, and to the depth and
degree that we do so, and NO MORE!! If you never have a chance to
look at a specific phenomenon, then it doesn't ever exist.


Er, no. The point of existence is simply to reproduce successfuly.
We're all slaves to that all-pervasive macromolecule, DNA.
-------------------
The physical world cannot be shown to exist as other than thoughts
in the mind.

I agree with this statement, but it does not logically follow that
without the human mind, that the physical world does not exist.
------------------
Sure it does, nor can you possibly tell me hwo THAT COULD happen!!


As I
have explained many times, Goedal allows for true, but unprovable
statements.
------------------
So does subjective existence, which indicates that the origin of
ourselves and the universe are the same and are perceptuo-cognitive.

Objective existence of the universe as what makes US, does NOT!


The evidence strongly suggest that the universe is not
dependant on the consciousness of any particular individual.
--------------------
Since the only universe that can be shown to exist does so through
the perception of one single being, yourself, and no other such beings
can be shown to BE other real beings in their own right, except that
they are confabulations of your reality, then that notion is bogus.

Now this doesn't mean solipsism, as anyone who is reasonable will see
the universe as a shared awareness of all aware beings, but they will
nevertheless admit, that the laws of how the universe is perceived,
must come down to the ONE solitary individual's perception of it, as
only that perception can exist "at a time" and be examinable in its
totality, and in an honest way by whomever identifies themself as the
central being or entity in their universe. Other expressed assertions
cannot always be trusted like one knows they can trust themselves, and
this is part of the structure of their universe.


Why should
it. Consciousness is nothing special from a physics point of view.
----------------------
OH REALLY!!!! Then YOU go nip off and build me one, eh??


Its just the result of complex organisation of mass-energy.
Kevin Aylward
----------------------------
What hand-waving!!
You don't even know where to BEGIN!!
-Steve
--
-Steve Walz rstevew@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
http://www.armory.com/~rstevew or http://www.armory.com/~rstevew/Public
 
Kevin Aylward wrote:
bigmike wrote:
"Kevin Aylward" <kevin@anasoft.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3_sQa.69$2c1.8458@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net...
R. Steve Walz wrote:
Paul Burridge wrote:

On Sun, 13 Jul 2003 09:57:10 +0100, "Kevin Aylward"
kevin@anasoft.co.uk> wrote:

Existence is pointless. We exist because the laws of physics allow
it. Thats all there is to it.
------------------
No, we're here because our inner nature allows the laws of physics
that make us possible in this manner.


Oh rubbish. Inner nature indeed. Just what are you on. The laws of
physics are there independent of whether we are here or not.


Er, no. The point of existence is simply to reproduce successfuly.
We're all slaves to that all-pervasive macromolecule, DNA.
-------------------
The physical world cannot be shown to exist as other than thoughts
in the mind.

I agree with this statement, but it does not logically follow that
without the human mind, that the physical world does not exist. As I
have explained many times, Goedal allows for true, but unprovable
statements. The evidence strongly suggest that the universe is not
dependant on the consciousness of any particular individual. Why
should it. Consciousness is nothing special from a physics point of
view. Its just the result of complex organisation of mass-energy.

Kevin Aylward

In my opinion, consciousness may play a bigger role in the universe
than we think. Since consciousness allows us to be aware of our
existence, it also allows us, and drives us to change it.
We are
attempting to change the way we exist on a daily basis, including
changing physics outside of our own planet by attempting to reach
further into space.

But this is not what is meant by the laws of physics. This is modifying
the environment.
-----------------
So let's see: Physics can have nothing whatsoever to do with
modifying the environment??


The laws of physics are the basic ones such non
creation of mass energy, things move in a straight line unless acted
upon by force sort of thing. Nothing we can do will alter the fact that
the charge on an electron is 1.6e-19C
------------------------------
You're forgetting how odd QM looked at the beginning, or the principles
of observer theory on QM. Do you seriously think that physics, in order
to BE universal and unified, will NOT have to deal with why the universe
appears in the eye-windows of our heads only, and not some other way???


I don't know if I am explaining myself well
on this subject, because I am not an expert on this topic. I just
have ideas and opinions about it. Humans can change the physical
makeup or properties of something, based on our judgement.

But as RSW keeps pointing out, our "judgment", at is core, is
essentially illusory, in that we do what we have been programmed or
already determined to be. consciousness is still no more then the result
of normal physics. It can't be any other way, unless you believe in
magic. There is nothing that a supposed consciousness can do, that in
principle, a programmed machine can not do, e.g. the Turing test.
-------------------------------------------
While that may be true, still, look to explaining awareness before you
think you're done with physics!


That's
makes us unique to anything else in nature that effects the universe
in either a random, unrandom, or predetermind matter.
x
I hope you don't exclude animals with this claim of unique human
behaviour. Animals certainly have some limited sort of consciousness .
----------------------
No, they have attention, and their responses due to that allow us to
infer awareness where there isn't any, sort of like a robot that
responds to our face.


They certainly feel pain in a way that makes any reasonable person
believe that it is not acceptable to boil cats alive.
---------------------------------------
We basically just don't like the noises.


Fundermenatlly, we are not unique. There is no rational why we should be
unique. There is a whole contineous range from simple automatic pure
instint responses to fully developed consciousness.

Kevin Aylward
-------------------------------
You're missing the point. The unexpressed part of every lab experiment
equipment list is missing, and you don't even know it!!

It's YOU!
-Steve
--
-Steve Walz rstevew@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
http://www.armory.com/~rstevew or http://www.armory.com/~rstevew/Public
 
bigmike wrote:
"Kevin Aylward" <kevin@anasoft.co.uk> wrote in message
news:povQa.225$2c1.21902@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net...
bigmike wrote:
"Kevin Aylward" <kevin@anasoft.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3_sQa.69$2c1.8458@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net...
R. Steve Walz wrote:
Paul Burridge wrote:

On Sun, 13 Jul 2003 09:57:10 +0100, "Kevin Aylward"
kevin@anasoft.co.uk> wrote:

Existence is pointless. We exist because the laws of physics allow
it. Thats all there is to it.
------------------
No, we're here because our inner nature allows the laws of physics
that make us possible in this manner.


Oh rubbish. Inner nature indeed. Just what are you on. The laws of
physics are there independent of whether we are here or not.


Er, no. The point of existence is simply to reproduce successfuly.
We're all slaves to that all-pervasive macromolecule, DNA.
-------------------
The physical world cannot be shown to exist as other than thoughts
in the mind.

I agree with this statement, but it does not logically follow that
without the human mind, that the physical world does not exist. As I
have explained many times, Goedal allows for true, but unprovable
statements. The evidence strongly suggest that the universe is not
dependant on the consciousness of any particular individual. Why
should it. Consciousness is nothing special from a physics point of
view. Its just the result of complex organisation of mass-energy.

Kevin Aylward

In my opinion, consciousness may play a bigger role in the universe
than we think. Since consciousness allows us to be aware of our
existence, it also allows us, and drives us to change it.
We are
attempting to change the way we exist on a daily basis, including
changing physics outside of our own planet by attempting to reach
further into space.

But this is not what is meant by the laws of physics. This is modifying
the environment. The laws of physics are the basic ones such non
creation of mass energy, things move in a straight line unless acted
upon by force sort of thing. Nothing we can do will alter the fact that
the charge on an electron is 1.6e-19C

If we land a robotic ship on mars, have we not,
to some degree, just altered that planets physics from what they were
before we landed there?

We would have altered the environment. Any alteration we make is
constrained by the laws of physics.

I don't know if I am explaining myself well
on this subject, because I am not an expert on this topic. I just
have ideas and opinions about it. Humans can change the physical
makeup or properties of something, based on our judgement.

But as RSW keeps pointing out, our "judgment", at is core, is
essentially illusory, in that we do what we have been programmed or
already determined to be. consciousness is still no more then the result
of normal physics. It can't be any other way, unless you believe in
magic.

This is where I jump ship, because I beleive that trying to explain
consciousness through physics is impossible. The questions of why, how, and
for what reason are we are conscious is where physics no longer can supply
any answers. Consciousness and physics are two completely separate entities
in my opinion. Is consciousness magic? Pretty close, since it is beyond out
ability to understand.
------------------
Even if we could build awarenesses, just as we can make them with our
bodies now, it wouldn't mean we really understood why when we do that,
SOMEONE comes into being, and why they feel they exist in their very own
Universe, and indeed, why Universes can ONLY exist that way!!
-Steve
--
-Steve Walz rstevew@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
http://www.armory.com/~rstevew or http://www.armory.com/~rstevew/Public
 
I agree with you, but if we are to believe that emotions are simply a
part
of physics, then what would make such a thing as boiling cats not
acceptable? Why would we not want to do such a thing? And why do they do
such things in some other parts of the world? Steve treats most people
like
dirt when he replies to them. I am not surprised. If he believes that he
has
no free will, and that his life and his thoughts are predetermined, what
reason does he have to act in any way other than what he chooses. But then
again, according to him, he does not choose, we do not have the ability to
choose and make choices. Somebody is missing something somewhere here,
because even though science can sound like it has explainations for
everything, it often falls short, and seems to run around in endless
circles
when trying to explain how and why the brain works, beyond it's physical
properties. Maybe for some people, science seems to be able to answer
these
questions, but for me and many others, it keeps falling flat on it's face.
I love science, but I also except the fact that is has it's limitations.
Many people who respect and know about science and math agree that they both
have definite limits. For example, physics has no structure to deal with
questions such as "What was it like before the big bang that created our
universe?" Science and math are both outstanding because they are among the
few (perhaps the only?) self-correcting human systems that we have
developed. If something is bogus, it will be corrected ... it's just a
matter of time. But, exemplary as they are, they are no replacement for
faith. Some folks need faith and some don't. For those who need faith,
they should not look to science and math to answer their personal issues and
they should not invoke them to sell a particular brand of faith to the
unwashed. It's disgusting to read about how many times this has been
attempted for the last couple of thousands of years. The reason that it's
disgusting is that it is almost always used as a ploy by the privileged to
advance their agendas. Education, if it ever catches on, will surpass
science and math as the true liberator of an quasi-intelligent species. Of
course, education without science and math is mostly a joke.

Most real scientists will not engage in arguments that are anecdotal, purely
philosophical, semantic in nature, political, or targeted by self-proclaimed
clever folks to arouse emotions among other folks. They are too smart for
that.

Newtonian physics once promised absolute predictions for any system, given
well-defined initial conditions. QM has thrown that into the garbage and
that resonates well with me and a lot of others. To ponder that our entire
miserable existence is predicted by a set of initial conditions is just not
palatable.
 
So, no tips . Sorry, must throw my Tv away. Thanks for your advice !!!

Žinoceros <No.Spam@This.address> wrote in message news:<2hs4hvs6v9d4lfk9j40t83dihv4vhs355t@4ax.com>...
On 26 Jun 2003 11:20:38 -0700, aumars.yann@club-internet.fr (yaumars)
wrote:

"Alex" <no@no.spam.com.au> wrote in message news:<bdet48$hpa$1@lust.ihug.co.nz>...
have u checked the flux capacitor? ;)

"yaumars" <aumars.yann@club-internet.fr> wrote in message
news:4e006755.0306251134.425c244e@posting.google.com...
My Akai TV model SN71Y2 is dead, StandBy LED lit but no picture, no
sound.
Seems that the chassis is the same as Nokia Stereo Plus2 (and not
Nokia Stereo plus) Look at
http://w1.455.telia.com/~u45521195/images/Nokia/StereoPlus2.jpg to see
the picture.

Can someone help me (any repair tips) as I don't have the schematic
for this chassis.
Thanks

Sorry, what do you mean by flux capacitor ? (I'm not a TV repair guy)

Flux capacitor.... from the movie "Back to the Future"

If you're not familiar with electronics, take this set to a repair
shop.

Don't try to repair it yourself if you're not familiar with it!

Rinus
 
Mike Walsh wrote:
<snip>

He might be referring to the timing belt (which drives the camshaft). If it is original it is overdue for replacement.
<snip>

Depends on the vehicle. Some fans come on anytime the air conditioner is on or the coolant is warm. On other vehicles the fan will not come on until A/C pressure is high or engine coolant is almost hot enough to overheat.
thank you for replying

--
toAnswerSend2:userName:tjtmd
domain:attglobal.net
separate these with the at sign

--
Mike Walsh
West Palm Beach, Florida, U.S.A.



--
to reply:
userName: tjtmd
domain: attglobal.net
and separate the 2 words with the at sign:)
 
"S, Graw" <smg7@cornell.edu> wrote in message
news:bdss10$c6a$1@news01.cit.cornell.edu...
Dear List readers:
I'm in need of some parts for a Mitsubishi DT-40S (home audio) cassette
player.
As some of you may know, that's a top of the line item from over 25 years
ago &
Mitsubishi's home audio division & parts inventory are long history.
Does anyone know of a parts source or even a unit-for-sale that could be
cannibalized? My client wants a repair for sentimental reasons.
Thanx
Steve Graw

Try writing Mitsubishi in japan (yes send a letter)
I have had this work in the past.
If you cant find a junker.
Jeff
 
Humm, that must be it, there is no board with a flyback, didn't find DD,
but DA, DE, DL, DC, and wires to the deflection yokes R G B, are all
unplugged, I could have missed DD. you Florida?
Maybe I should find another to tinker with ? ? ?

Bill Jr wrote:
You mean the board with the flyback transformer?
Find a connector labeled "DD" and tell me if it is plugged into anything.

Bill Jr

"cessna" <nfroehling@houston.rr.com> wrote in message
news:lRDQa.83528$TJ.4426976@twister.austin.rr.com...

The missing board is driver for the deflection , are any board photos,
schematics available, what cost would this deflection board be?

Bill Jr wrote:

cessna,
Actually that does help narrow it down a bit.
Seems that these boards were used in both the VS-400 and VS-401 sets.
The numbers on the boards would more than likely be 935C10901 for the

power

board.
Signal board would be 935B06802, and the Main board is 935B06504.
Later on Mits added another digit to their part numbering system so that

the

listed board part numbers would have an additional "0" on the end of

their

numbers. This little factoid is almost useless at this point as Mits

doesn't

have any boards for these sets and haven't for quite some time.
Anyway, this is about an '84 model anyway. Are you quite sure that you

want

to undertake trying to get this set running? You most probably will find
that the CRT's will be worn out by this time in their life. Quite a few
replacement parts will be difficult to find if maybe not available at

all.

I'll take a look around in our boneyard to see if there are any boards

this

old still laying around, but I don't think that we are going to get that
lucky.

Which board(s) do you think could be missing?

Do you have a "home" page that you could upload a few pictures to?

Try that and let us know.

Good Luck,
Bill Jr

My encrypted email address is NLA due to spam.



"cessna" <nfroehling@houston.rr.com> wrote in message
news:VVoQa.72301$hV.4676175@twister.austin.rr.com...


OK, a tag on the side of the cabinet, indicates possible projection tube
numbers VT0729B22, a power supply board has 93C10901.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9,
the tuner has ENV 5677062 and 295P22701, another board video? also has a
93Bxx- similar to the other board, what else would help?
and Thanks for your interest

Bill Jr wrote:



How about checking the part numbers on the boards and see if one of us

can


decipher those to a proper model number. Then you may be able to get

some


useful information.
BTW, even with the back missing they usually had a little white sticker

on


the main board that had the model and serial number on it.

Good Luck,
Bill Jr


"cessna" <nfroehling@houston.rr.com> wrote in message
news:zpcQa.80025$TJ.4185360@twister.austin.rr.com...



Yes, a private pilot with electronics as a second hobby, looks like no
one is repairing any more

Arthur Jernberg wrote:



One question, with your username, are you a private pilot>> BTW just

saw a



VS400 setting in a scrap pile but have no access to any of it's

components.



"cessna" <nfroehling@houston.rr.com> wrote in message
news:M7LPa.76858$TJ.3963998@twister.austin.rr.com...




Need service manual, ckt boards for a Mitsubishi projection Tv model
unknown (rear cover missing) made mid '80s - early '90s, can email

pic

Thanks
 
Hi, the sony site needs a name/pwd, can someone help me out there?

Thankx,
JM





"Bob K" <goblinman48@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message news:<qJZJa.19188$0v4.1563956@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>...
Nice collection. I'll have to download them all but CDP420GS is not in the
group.


"Sidney" <sidneybek@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:fecdbb87.0306240337.58653771@posting.google.com...
"Free Sony computer monitor service manual downloads:

http://www.denom.com
 

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top