Toshiba TV29C90 problem; Image fades to black...

[Alex]

thanks alex for your input,

The first thing I noticed was that there is no fan, so dirt is almost
out of the question.
I did call my friend again to investigate what the conditions are when the
failure occurs. He told me that he only uses cd's from the record store,
and that skipping "seconds" did not occur in the past.

so the skipping happens straight away? or only when the volume is raised
and some vibration is introduced to the unit?

did you check the laser lens closely for dust? (dont do this with the unit
on).
I need to know If you have checked the things I suggested In my last email.
if you do find the laser lens to be dirty, **dont** clean it with any
solvent or water. U can clean
it with a clean, dry cotton swab, or u can use a pure alcohol based liquid
such as isopropyl alcohol if it is really bad.

disconnect the unit from the mains, you will notice a sled gear (this
assists movement
of the laser pickup from the inner most area to the outter edge during
playback)

try and move it by hand and see how freely it moves. Of course, the other
option
is to place the unit in test mode and using the track up/down keys observe
the
behaviour yourself.

Theres a couple of ways to check the spindle motor. One is to disconnect it
from the servo, connect it to a 1.5v power supply and hook up a meter
in series and watch how much current is being drawn. If you find it drawing
more than 600ma, time for a new motor. Although this method will not
reveal a noisy motor, which can cause skipping too. With the unit turned off
give the motor a quick flick in the clockwise direction. If it doesnt spin
at all
or sounds noisy, the motor is worn. U can try a very small drop of light oil
into the shaft of the motor and see if this frees it up.be careful doing
this.

Should I tell him that this is normal behaviour, and that the best thing
to
do is buying new stuff ...?

skipping is not normal behaviour. component deterioration after an extended
period of use IS normal The repair cost could go either way actually.
If it is only a spindle motor that has to be replaced or a plastic gear, it
will
be quite cheap to fix. Should the laser pickup be faulty, this can get
rather expensive.
You would have to find out for your friend how much he is willing to spend
on
fixing it.

I can imagine that replacing the drive unit is financialy not advisable.

the entire laser assembly does not have to be replaced, individual
components
are usually available.

PS: I noticed also that the drive skippes when you open the volume of the
amplifier. The unit receives some physical vibrations wich consequently
turn the pioneer into skipping.(but isn't this normal behaviour for each
cd-player ?)

The unit should be able to handle some degree of vibration. This could
be signs of a weak laser or a worn spindle motor.If you want to check
the lasers strength, you're going to need some specialised equipment
and tools. One would be an oscilloscope, and a test disc that conforms
to a special standard. Using these tools, u can place the unit in test mode
and check many things. One would be the RF amplitude of the laser.

In the service manual, they will give u a nominal peak to peak value
of the RF signal, this varies depending on the circuitry and of course, the
laser.

typical values are 800mV to 1.2v p-p

obviously if you check this and find the amplitude to be 200mV p-p.
the laser is weak and should be changed.

There are other things to check as well besides RF.

You must be prepared to do this if you want to check everything yourself.
or you can take a blind guess and change the laser.

I suggest checking what i said earlier in this email and in my last email,
and posting the results..

regards, alex.

 

[Nigel]

Have a look at this page, it might help you get sorted at a very reasonable
cost

http://www.mces.co.uk/Tuners.htm


"Colin McCormick" <colin99@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:bf9gb1$40h$1@news6.svr.pol.co.uk...

x-no-archive:yes

I'm trying to repair an old Sanyo vhr-7260e
video recorder, UK model. There is virtually
no off-air picture or sound, just some lines
and occasional smatterings of sound when the
tuning is scanned.

This has three packs on the PCB:
Modulator / splitter
IF strip
Tuner

I eliminated the modulator / splitter by
taking the input to the tuner directly from
the UHF aerial, the results remained unchanged.

So the IF strip or tuner unit appears to be
suspect. Squirting freezer around them did
not help. I suspect the IF myself.

Does anyone have any experience of these machines,
and maybe be able to get me down to a component
level repair of the tuner or IF PCB's? New
replacements would be out of the question for
such an old machine.

Playback and recording from AV input is fine.
Thanks for any help, please copy my email
on any reply: colin99@bigfoot.com (spam
filters apply).

Thanks,

Colin

 

[Wayne]

In a 19" Panasonic SL90 TX-D9S54 FCCID ACJ93312134, R482 and R483 are
both 1.2 Ohm (brown red gold gold)

On Fri, 18 Jul 2003 01:38:32 -0700, "max" <maxg70@cwnet.com> wrote:

I working on Panasonic monitor model E110, FCC ID: ACJ93312133.I got two
burned resistors on the main board.I can't configure what's the nominal of
this resistors because instead color code rings I see only black burned
mass.I don't have repair manual or schematic for this monitor so could you
help me to know what's the resistance is on this resistors.On the main board
they R482 and R483.They both stays close to vertical output IC LA7875
circuit.
Thanks

 

[R. Steve Walz]

Kevin Aylward wrote:

ShrikeBack wrote:

Of course, it cant be proved that the universes exists without
someone to observe it, but the evidence suggests that when anyone
dies, the universe still exists.

Agreed.

Indeed.
-------------------------

Nonsense. The evidence, as currently and imperfectly viewed without
reasonable support may look that way, but it cannot be shown to be so.
In fact the "concrete assumption" reveals itself to be a superstitious
unsupportable conclusion.

If it cannot be proved, it is not true, it is an assumption based
on a poor understanding of natural law that will someday be remedied,
per the Correspondence Principle of Science.

Someday it will be well-recognized that the physical laws MUST include
the observer or they are not true, cannot be demonstrated in any but
a subjective circumstances, and that Personal Subjectivity is a firm
boundary condition upon the thing we call "Natural Physical Law".

Apparently RSW thinks otherwise. From time to time, I do observe
labourers building roads, bridges etc, it makes no rational sense that
these could all appear just for me.

Kevin Aylward
--------------------

If they had to appear other than when you saw them, you might be right,
but as strictly existing when you see them, they are just part of what
you are.

But I'm not promoting solipsism, even though the argument can support
it in a contorted fashion.

Instead I promote the notion of a Reality that has many facets, called
Ourselves, but whose natural laws are reflected ONLY in the nature of
these individuated facets, like a jewel. Natural laws need only provide
that what we see makes sense when we see it, and not at any other time.
Be honest!: There is NO way to prove the existence of anything you're
not able to see.

The Nature of Physical Law OBVIOUSLY includes that, because these
natural laws can ONLY come to their fruition within the context of
a subjective observation by a Being living their Lifetime, and in
the manner of all the moments of their life, centered upon their
awareness.
-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

 

[gothika]

No it wasn't a typo. He bit her on the back on her shoulder.
I used to work CSU both on the Federal level and later for the State
police.
So I've spent more than a few hours sitting in class learning criminal
psych profiling.(Quantico)
Any first year profiler will tell you that biting on the back is dead
givaway that this guy considers women to be only things.(attacks on
the back is an attempt to depersonalize the victim. To him she wsn't
human only a "thing" to vent deep seated angers on.)
As for being in the middle, it part of my job being caretaker/super
for this property.
My past was one reason I was chose for this job. This is a very bad
neighborhood.
He's not the first, actually something like the 30th since I started
on the job. I quit counting after the third year.
I average 4-6 criminal types a year.
This is the first to actually have enough knowledge to do what he's
done.
Let me explain:
These particular apartments have alot of unit that are off street and
out of site from the public domain, making it a very desirable
location for the local drug dealers and other assorted felons.
We have three units in the rear that are completely out of sight of
the street, consequently we've had three different crack dealers rent
the units there. All worked for the same one's distributing the junk
in our area.
I'm thinking that this joker I'm dealing with in the unit next to ours
may not be a coincidence. May have been sent to do just what he's
done.
I found out yesterday that another tenant is having problems with her
phone.(Can hear someone breathing whenever she's talking on her
phone.)
At any rate I'll be stringing the new line and using metal conduit to
keep this from happening again.(I've nearly got all the security
cameras mounted as well as the motion detector grid.)
Thanks again for the help.
Any other advice on security tips would be gladly appreciated.


On Friday, 18 Jul 2003 09:13:44 -500, "Asimov"
<warpcastgate@-removethis-bbs.juxtaposition.dynip.com> wrote:

"gothika" wrote to "All" (18 Jul 03 03:19:24)
--- on the topic of "Re: detecting phone taps?"

Was this a typo, "Bit" or "Hit"?
My advice: stay out of it, let the bailif/cops handle it, but get him out!


go> From: gothika <gothika@earthlink.net

go> This joker is already postal.
go> He's a convicted felon with hard time for felony assault.
go> That's ok, I'm ex-military and from the south.(EVERYBODY carries
go> here.)
go> I have no compunction to do what it takes to defend myself and mine.
go> This character has already attacked another tenant.
go> He bit her and has her so terrorized that's she won't file a
go> complaint.

 

[RWatson767]

Mike

Can you measure Impedance with an Ohm Meter

Which begs another question: will playing normal audio material through a
speaker, and measuring the ac voltage and current match the nominal impedence
reasonably well, say within 10%?

We used to measure voice coil and other audio impedance by inserting a low ohm
resistor in series with the load. We did have an idea of the actual impedance.
We onfirmed this by reading the voltage across the resistor. We also checked
the procedure by using actual carbon resistors to "calibrate" the procedure.
Bob AZ

 

[**THE-RFI-EMI-GUY**]

I guess you could chance swapping the memory IC.

turtle wrote:

Is there anyone in Australia that can reprogram a Suzuki Hayabusa odometer.

If not.... does anyone have any advice on how I can get this done?

I have dismantled the speedo cluster and have noticed 4 IC's in total. The
smallest one has 8 pins and has the following numbers on it 945B 924, would
this be the eeprom which stores the milage?

Please... any help on this topic would be greatly appreciated.

Cheers

--
Joe Leikhim K4SAT


"Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny." -F.Z.

 

[Rich Andrews]

"Dave D" <someone@somewhere.com> wrote in
news:bd29vd$i5p$1@sparta.btinternet.com:

"Rich Andrews" <n0-spam@yah0o.com> wrote in message
news:Xns93A12939F86ADmc2500183316chgoill@216.168.3.44...
My replacement KDS monitor is starting to exhibit the same problem as my
original. The brightness has been slowly creeping up over the past few
months and now normal brightness is achieved when the OSM says 35%. The
original monitor kept getting brighter and brigter over the months until
even
at 0 it was too bright. Has anyone seen this issue and what is the
solution?
I suspect a resistor, but don't have a schematic to work from. I would
rather fix this problem once and forget it.


Is it under warranty? If so let them worry about it. If not, resist the
temptation to start tweaking anything inside. Your monitor has a failing
component and it requires repair, if cost effective.

Dave

This is the third time it will be exchanged under warranty for the same
problem and soon the warranty runs out. There has to be some component that
is failing and will fail on nearly all of their units. I will just have to
get a schematic and figure it out for myself I suppose.

r


--
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from
magic."

Arthur C. Clarke (1917 - ), "Technology and the Future"

 

[Rich Andrews]

Z <post@imaZZZZris.demon.co.uk> wrote in
news:2BuK37E2i+D$Ew7X@imaris.demon.co.uk:

In article <GDNO9.141717$Db4.4009219@twister.tampabay.rr.com>, Bill Jr
bill@nospam.usa2net.net> writes
Those recommendations are fine if you want to spend $150-$300.
If you don't need the additional functions of the Fluke 87 then I would
recommend the Fluke 10 or 12.
I have been using my Fluke 12 for over 11 years with great results.
The "10" can usually be found for under $100 while the "12" is just a bit
over $100.
The "12" has the cap value checker that the "10" doesn't have, and it does
min-max value storage readings.
BTW, I have a bench full of Sencore equipment for the intense stuff and use
the "12" for strictly voltage, resistance and diode test functions.

Just go to www.fluke.com and make your own assessments.

Happy Holidays,
Bill Jr

"Jerry G." <jerryg50@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:aeKO9.563$z6.617760@news.ca.inter.net...
For all around hobby electronics at home the Fluke 87 would be an
excellent choice. The second choice would be the Fluke 77. These are
models from about 2 years ago. They have newer equivalents. The local
Fluke dealer near you can give you the newer models.

The 87 has the advantage of being a true RMS meter, with a built in
basic frequency counter that is excellent for audio and low frequency RF
applications. It also has high and low voltage capturing which is
excellent for troubleshooting intermittent. This meter also has a basic
cap meter that will check the uF of the caps. (None of these meters do
ESR tests).

--

Greetings,

Jerry Greenberg GLG Technologies GLG
==============================================
WebPage http://www.zoom-one.com
Electronics http://www.zoom-one.com/electron.htm
Instruments http://www.zoom-one.com/glgtech.htm
==============================================
"Z" <post@imaZZZZris.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:UbUYMyAJruC+EwT8@imaris.demon.co.uk...
I'm looking maybe for a new multimeter.
It would be used for the odd repair (television, audio, radio and comms
gear)

Any recommendations? I'd prefer a Fluke as some have lifetime warranty.

--
Z
Remove Zeds in e-mail address to reply.






Thanks all.
I got a new meter at a Fluke trade show - the 189.
The logging facility I thought I'd rarely use but I've used this
function the most and it's helped find several faults already in the
first week of use.

Bill, I got an electronics directory for a song from the library sell
off of withdrawn books. I didn't see "Sencore" brand listed there.
Perhaps they are under a different name in the UK. Presumably it's
pretty high end gear?

Sencore is anything but high end. Overpriced stuff sold to TV repair shops
with too much money for the most part. Some of their stuff was just
horrible. Some wasn't too bad. It all depends.

r


--
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from
magic."

Arthur C. Clarke (1917 - ), "Technology and the Future"

 

[Franc Zabkar]

On Sat, 19 Jul 2003 09:09:15 +1000, "turtle" <speedturtle@mail.com>
put finger to keyboard and composed:

Perhaps I should explain why....... My original odometer failed and I have
a replacement unit with more milage on it than my failed unit.... therfore
I wish to reprogram the odometer to match my original milage

Swap the EEPROMs. The 8-pin IC sounds like the most likely candidate.
Can you determine its pinouts, ie which pins connect to Vcc, Ground,
Clock, Data, etc?

Cheers

"Gary Tait" <taitg@hurontel.on.ca> wrote in message
news:3l3ghvss29hvjkt6o86m7v4ctegg6oe4lh@4ax.com...
On Fri, 18 Jul 2003 22:42:26 +1000, "turtle" <speedturtle@mail.com
wrote:

Is there anyone in Australia that can reprogram a Suzuki Hayabusa
odometer.

If not.... does anyone have any advice on how I can get this done?

I have dismantled the speedo cluster and have noticed 4 IC's in total.
The
smallest one has 8 pins and has the following numbers on it 945B 924,
would
this be the eeprom which stores the milage?

Please... any help on this topic would be greatly appreciated.

Cheers


Doing that would be illegal in many places.

- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 's' from my address when replying by email.

 

[max]

Thanks a lot for help
"Wayne" <whmrs@mrbc.ca> wrote in message news:3f18ab7c.3658430@shawnews...

In a 19" Panasonic SL90 TX-D9S54 FCCID ACJ93312134, R482 and R483 are
both 1.2 Ohm (brown red gold gold)

On Fri, 18 Jul 2003 01:38:32 -0700, "max" <maxg70@cwnet.com> wrote:

I working on Panasonic monitor model E110, FCC ID: ACJ93312133.I got two
burned resistors on the main board.I can't configure what's the nominal
of
this resistors because instead color code rings I see only black burned
mass.I don't have repair manual or schematic for this monitor so could
you
help me to know what's the resistance is on this resistors.On the main
board
they R482 and R483.They both stays close to vertical output IC LA7875
circuit.
Thanks

 

[Laurence Taylor]

John \"O\" wrote:

Does anyone know how I can obtain or at least find the cross reference model
number for a Finlandia Video which is labelled up as a Granada model, with
the model number: V/WHS LH7/G

If I remember rightly, this is an Hitachi machine. One of the spares
distributors, I think HRS, had the cross-reference list in their
catalogue but I can't get at it now. You could always ring up Granada
in bedfors, or the service department in Twickenham (yes, the old
Radio Rentals place).


rgds
LAurence

.... Keep the streets safe: Run down a cyclist today!
begin the search for better software

 

[jakdedert]

Uh...just what are saying 'not really' to? I'm not following your logic,
although the advice in your next post is sound. I was referring to
monitoring the pre/main jumpers. The idea below of crossing those in/outs
is a much more simple, elegant way to do so, though.

jak

"Jeff" <frontline_electronics@NSatt.net> wrote in message
news:06%Ra.61661$0v4.4119515@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...

Not really, the tone section is after preamp but before
amp. It will be connected before pre/main in/out if the
unit has that.
Jeff

"jakdedert" <jdedert@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:grXRa.697$wv6.498@fe03.atl2.webusenet.com...
You need to be able to monitor the output of the pream somehow to see if
it's noisey as well. However, since you stated that the headphone
output
was clean (right?), likely the problem is later in the signal chain. If
not, one way to check that output is to record something from it on tape
and
listen to the playback on known-good gear. Another way is to hook up a
cheap set of computer speakers there. You will need the a RCA to mini
stereo plug adaptor to do so....

jak

"Sharon Leigh" <sleigh@aol.com> wrote in message
news:YzJRa.4665$KZ.1480428@news1.news.adelphia.net...
Jeff,

It's a model 2120. It does have a pre-amp output, but I didn't test
it.
I'm
not really sure what I need to do.

"Jeff" <frontline_electronics@NSatt.net> wrote in message
news:y9FRa.59888$3o3.3972922@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Ok, if it has preamp output is it OK?
DC voltage across output when noisy?
Model? (strange the headphone would be OK)
Unless its only distorted/noisy when loaded.
Jeff

"Sharon Leigh" <sleigh@aol.com> wrote in message
news:WboRa.3034$KZ.1115395@news1.news.adelphia.net...
Yes, I swapped speakers. I also moved the set over to the B
speaker
terminals. Guess what? Same problem.


"Jeff" <frontline_electronics@NSatt.net> wrote in message
news:31lRa.57999$0v4.3923232@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Have you swapped the speakers?
Jeff

"Sharon Leigh" <sleigh@aol.com> wrote in message
news:k4eRa.1876$KZ.911568@news1.news.adelphia.net...
Yes, I do have sound in the bad channel. I think the best way
to
describe
it
is that it sounds like a radio station that's not tuned in
properly.
It's
staticy and garbled.
"bigmike" <bigmike@cornhusker.net> wrote in message
news:3f14de13$0$24599$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com...

"Sharon Leigh" <sleigh@aol.com> wrote in message
news:VA4Ra.1371$KZ.745283@news1.news.adelphia.net...
I was just reading the post about the marantz receiver
static
problem.
Mine's slightly different, in that it goes away when I
turn
the
balance
all
the way left, and my headphones work fine. I cleaned every
conceivable
contact and circuit and still have the static. The
receiver's
32
years
old
so I am suspecting something has died or fried along the
way.
anyone
have
any ideas?


Lot's of possibilities. Dirty or worn speaker switch
contacts,
bad
relay
(if the old amp uses one) contacts, dried up caps, leaky
transistors.
Headphones require very little power to produce sound, so
some
problems
in
the output stage might not show up when using them. By the
way,
do
you
have
sound through the bad channel along with the static, or just
static?

 

[jakdedert]

I don't know what your tolerance would be...the way to check accurately is
to run a plot using an audio generator, sweeping from 20 Hz to 20k Hz and
taking an average...or merely using the plot like you see in speaker spec
sheets. Running a few of those compared to your 'quick & dirty' procedure
below will give you your tolerance. White (or pink) noise would be
preferable to 'normal' (just what is 'normal' anyway) program material, as
you will have a consistent measurement.

jak

"RWatson767" <rwatson767@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030718235815.27762.00000188@mb-m23.aol.com...

Mike
Can you measure Impedance with an Ohm Meter

Which begs another question: will playing normal audio material through a
speaker, and measuring the ac voltage and current match the nominal
impedence
reasonably well, say within 10%?

We used to measure voice coil and other audio impedance by inserting a low
ohm
resistor in series with the load. We did have an idea of the actual
impedance.
We onfirmed this by reading the voltage across the resistor. We also
checked
the procedure by using actual carbon resistors to "calibrate" the
procedure.
Bob AZ

 

[ShrikeBack]

"Kevin Aylward" <kevin@anasoft.co.uk> wrote in message news:<JSVRa.1900$nT4.228501@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>...

ShrikeBack wrote:
"Kevin Aylward" <kevin@anasoft.co.uk> wrote in message
news:<z_7Qa.19910$4O4.2190192@newsfep2-win.server.ntli.net>...

I have run across those who believe the past is infinte, though
not in the context of determinism. Moreover, usually, those people
are talking about physical existence. I tell those people that
if the past were infinite, there would have been an infinity
of passing time before the present. Saying something will not
occur until an eternity has passed is equivalent to saying that
it will never happen. Thus, the present would never have been
reached.


This logic is inherently not usable. Its a 101 math standard fallacy.
When one discusses infinite, in general, all bets are off. Its only
specific examples that can be handled, by taking the limit as x-
infinite, and this requires that the function be continuous. Most
logic deduced by assuming infinite leads to contradictions, e.g.
1=0, so you simply can't use an argument like the one you describe
above.

If logic deduced by assuming infinity leads to contradictions, that
would mean infinity was something disproven by contradiction.

Yes. In mathematics, infinity is completely meaningless.

Actually, I was only allowing this for the sake of argument, and now
I have to insist that that is as false as a proposition can be.
Infinity is a quite meaningful concept in mathematics. If infinity
were meaningless mathematically much of mathematics would be
necessarily meaningless too, since much of mathematics implicitly
or explicitly uses it. And it is useful. We have tools to do
infinite sums. We can establish that some sets with an infinite
number of elements are larger than others. We do limits, as you
mentioned. We do integrals, differentials. Infinitesimals abound
in mathematics. Space and time are assumed to be infinitely
subdividable in geometry, in topology, in calculus. And these
formal systems have meaning.

Therefore infinity is meaningful as well -- mathematically.

I have a feeling you wanted to assert something else. That, though
infinity is a useful mathematical concept, its applicability to
reality is dubious.

I actually prefer the idea that the universe has always existed, like
the continuous big bang and big crunch cycle e.g.

I can understand that.

1 Fact, there is mass-energy in the universe.
2 If there was a time when there was no mass-energy, i.e. truly zero
content to the universe, how could this mass-energy come into sudden
existence.?

I will just point out for you that QM has an interesting result
with regard to vacuum fluctuations.


I was hoping you wouldn't. That's *specifically* why I said *truly*
empty.

Virtual particles are
presumed to flip in and out of existence continually, violating
the law of energy conservation for tiny periods of time.


This is misleading in my view.

It
has been suggested that the universe itself is one big vacuum
fluctuation.

This is an attempt to make things sound stranger than what they really
are. i.,e. confuse the masses, with what is actually quite trivial.

I am not sure whether I am one of the confusers or if I am the masses
in the above sentence.

If the potential energy (which is negative) of
the universe had a high enough magnatude to offset the mass
energy of the universe, the overall net energy of the universe
could be zero. I think this requires a closed universe,
however.


Consider that the universe is random noise generator. Now consider a
normal oscillator driving an LC circuit. I measure form time to time the
instantaneous voltage across one of the components. Guess what, I get a
voltage and current. Wow I measure some power. But low and behold, its
average power is zero. On other occasions I measure zero. Now why don't
we all act bloody amazed that conservation of energy is violated on an
instantaneous basis with our common or garden oscillator driving an LC
circuit?

This is an attempt to make something which is quite profound sound
trivial. Nevertheless, you do admit that mass-energy conservation
is violated for small periods of time. In a null universe, time
would not exist, nor would the law of mass-energy conservation.

A *true* empty universe, could not have an effect, by assumption, to
spark the mass energy creation. Note, a *true* *empty* universe is
also zero ZPE, by definition.

A truly empty universe would also have no constraints on what
could happen.


Doesn't really follow.

I disagree.

If it were truly empty it would contain no laws
whatsover.


Laws would be non-existent, therefore you can argue that nothing could
happen, not anything could happen. It just dosne make sense that if
nothing is there, something can happen.

How does it follow that if no rules exist, nothing could happen?
In fact, this would be a constraint, a rule. If such a rule
existed, the universe would not be null. Therefore, something
could happen in a null universe, but that something would be
entirely arbitrary. Once it did happen, of course, that universe
would no longer be null.

QM, as noted above, simple says that there is a continuous noise
generator in the universe, with zero average, but non zero standard
deviation, not that the universe is empty. This is obviously true by
construction, if we measure something. Its there.

Your argument was by mass-energy conservation. Potential energy is
negative and if the universe were closed, it's total net energy
would be zero.

Of course, the universe, at this point, doesn't look closed. It
seems that it will expand indefinitely. This result could change
if it is established that the universe has more energy than we
currently know about.

If an effect could happen without any cause whatsoever, i.e. magic,
this last objection can be ignored. However, despite my claim on what
standard QM states, I don't personally believe in magic.

To me, an infinite past seems a bit magical too. Particularly since
you provided us with a disproof of the reality of infinity.

Since infinity means nothing. The statement infinite past is
meaningless, therefore of zero consequence.

You were the one who said that you liked the idea of an infinite past.
You are also getting a little positivistic here.

It is quite obvious to me that I can construct a model of an infinite
past, and therefore the concept has meaning. If it had no meaning,
I could not construct an model and manipulate that model. You may
be correct that it is of no consequence. The claim that it is
meaningless is too strong, however.

If a rule
of logic exists in the void, but there is no one there to think
about it, does it really exist at all?

Thinking, i.e consciousness is irrelevant to existence. All
mass-energy is under the same rules of physics. Consciousness is no
different, it cant be. It is not special. All this conscious stuff
that abounds in some expositions of QM is all nonsense. It comes
from when people were daft enough to have ideas of souls and spirits
and other such nebulous nonsense. Consciousness is a result of
normal physical processes, it can't be any other way, well unless
you believe in magic.

Does it strike you as ironic then, that consciousness, which is
constrained by the laws of physics, is considered to be capable
of fully explicating the laws of physics?

I don't know if it is, or can be. I suspect that we will always be
adding new axioms to explain new phenomena, as in Goedal.

I suspect that these formal systems made of logic will yeild considerable
inconsistency too -- rather like the determinism of relativity as
opposed to the indeterminancy of QM.

Of course, it cant be proved that the universes exists without
someone to observe it, but the evidence suggests that when anyone
dies, the universe still exists.

Agreed.

Indeed.

Apparently RSW thinks otherwise. From time to time, I do observe
labourers building roads, bridges etc, it makes no rational sense that
these could all appear just for me.

He could counter that you see things such as this in dreams, too,
I suppose. Of course, if everything were created for me, but not
by me, that would necessarily imply that I am certainly not all
that there is.

It is interesting that he combines his solipsism with determinism,
both of which he holds to dogmatically. One knows that one is not
entirely in control of reality, though, or one's existence would
never have pain or loss. I am sure that if were in control of my
solipsistic universe that there would have been 72 fair maidens
at my disposal when I was 15, without the need for martyrdom.
So, I can't really assume that I am all there is and that I have
free will, because there is certainly a will outside my own, forcing
reality on me. So either mine is not the only will in existence, or
my will is not my own. If my will is not my own, then there is
necessarily something outside myself also, such as the great
clockwork mechanism, by which my will is controlled.

Therefore I am not all that there is. QED.

Now, unfortunately, or fortunately, I am going away, off to Victoria
for a week. Though perhaps I will find an Internet Cafe while I am
there, and check on this thread. So maybe you won't get the last
word.

 

[R. Steve Walz]

Kevin Aylward wrote:

R. Steve Walz wrote:
Kevin Aylward wrote:

ShrikeBack wrote:

Of course, it cant be proved that the universes exists without
someone to observe it, but the evidence suggests that when anyone
dies, the universe still exists.

Agreed.

Indeed.
-------------------------
Nonsense. The evidence, as currently and imperfectly viewed without
reasonable support may look that way, but it cannot be shown to be so.

So what.

In fact the "concrete assumption" reveals itself to be a superstitious
unsupportable conclusion.


Nope. Your out to lunch. A right raving loony.
---------------------

Useless blather on your part. Grow up.

Its supported by the
10000's of bridges, millions of buildings, millions of roads, etc. etc,
all obviously designed and made by a consciousness, and such that they
could not have reasonable been built during my known lifetime.
---------------------------------

But they don't exist when you're not looking at them.
Nor do they need to be "built again" for them to exist again.
There's nothing wrong with them not being there when you're not looking.
You don't need them then!
STICK WITH THE OBSERVABLE!!

If it cannot be proved, it is not true,

Goedel says otherwise. You just don't seem to get this do you.
---------------------------------------

Goedel says it's not forbidden, which doesn't make it mandatory.
That's all.
What I'm saying need not be proven either to be right.

it is an assumption based
on a poor understanding of natural law that will someday be remedied,

Its based on a trivial application of the known laws. to wit, an average
brickie has 6 coffee breaks, plus lunch and afternoon tea, leaving
approximately 2hrs 45 minutes to swing his trawl.
-------------------------------------

Useless blathering again.

per the Correspondence Principle of Science.

Someday it will be well-recognized that the physical laws MUST include
the observer or they are not true,

They already do and it is already well recognised. There is no
distinction whatsoever between the observed and the observer. They are
all made up of the same electrons, protons, Swiss cheese etc.
-----------------------------------

Nope. Stuff is something you sense, but what you are is thought.
Now sensing is also just thought, but a separable category.

cannot be demonstrated in any but
a subjective circumstances, and that Personal Subjectivity is a firm
boundary condition upon the thing we call "Natural Physical Law".

Nonsense, wea generally all agree on things like 1, 2 ,3 etc..this is
objective.
----------------------------------

You see people saying that. Your subjective perception and belief.
You cannot prove anyone but you exists, you merely like the notion.

Apparently RSW thinks otherwise. From time to time, I do observe
labourers building roads, bridges etc, it makes no rational sense
that these could all appear just for me.

Kevin Aylward
--------------------
If they had to appear other than when you saw them, you might be
right, but as strictly existing when you see them, they are just part
of what you are.

It makes no sense whatsoever, for things to disappear just because they
went out of my field of view.
------------------------

Have you ever seen "outside your field of view"? Of course not, you
CAN'T!

Sure, this could happen, in a the silly,
daft, absurd universe you live in, but certainly not for us sane people.
--------------------------

You're claiming that your notional concept is somehow more sane
than mine which limits itself to observation.

But I'm not promoting solipsism, even though the argument can support
it in a contorted fashion.

Your supporting the nuthouse view of the universe.
-------------------------

No, it still works just fine.
It simply sees natural law as participatory, and concreteness of
the physical as undemonstrable, which it is.

Instead I promote the notion of a Reality that has many facets, called
Ourselves, but whose natural laws are reflected ONLY in the nature of
these individuated facets, like a jewel. Natural laws need only
provide that what we see makes sense when we see it, and not at any
other time. Be honest!:

Nonsense. They need to make sense consistently.
-------------------------------

Makes fine sense to me, things will be here when they have to be,
reliably, as always, I simply won't be entertaining silly assumptions
about when I'm not looking.

You are a right bloody idiot.
------------------

You're right bloody desperate and pitiable when you get this way.
You abandon reason and lash out like a toddler.

There is NO way to prove the existence of
anything you're not able to see.

Irrelevant.
----------------------

Perhaps, but true. The danger of assumptions is too much for a
genuine scientist to merely stand by for.

The Nature of Physical Law OBVIOUSLY includes that, because these
natural laws can ONLY come to their fruition within the context of
a subjective observation by a Being living their Lifetime, and in
the manner of all the moments of their life, centered upon their
awareness.
-Steve

More meaningless ramblings.
------------------

More pitable nonsense statements.

Kevin Aylward
-------------------

It's called phenomenology, get with it!
-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

 

[R. Steve Walz]

ShrikeBack wrote:

"Kevin Aylward" <kevin@anasoft.co.uk> wrote:

Laws would be non-existent, therefore you can argue that nothing could
happen, not anything could happen. It just dosne make sense that if
nothing is there, something can happen.

How does it follow that if no rules exist, nothing could happen?
-----------------

It doesn't, rules are abstracted from events, not the other way.

In fact, this would be a constraint, a rule. If such a rule
existed, the universe would not be null. Therefore, something
could happen in a null universe, but that something would be
entirely arbitrary. Once it did happen, of course, that universe
would no longer be null.
----------------------------

The Universe is already happening. Irrelevant.

I suspect that these formal systems made of logic will yeild considerable
inconsistency too -- rather like the determinism of relativity as
opposed to the indeterminancy of QM.
-----------------------

Misstatement: It's determinacy vs indeterminacy.
Not determinism, which is something else.

Apparently RSW thinks otherwise. From time to time, I do observe
labourers building roads, bridges etc, it makes no rational sense that
these could all appear just for me.

He could counter that you see things such as this in dreams, too,
I suppose. Of course, if everything were created for me, but not
by me, that would necessarily imply that I am certainly not all
that there is.
-----------------

Bingo.
We did not bring ourselves here, or bring ourselves into being.

It is interesting that he combines his solipsism with determinism,
both of which he holds to dogmatically. One knows that one is not
entirely in control of reality, though, or one's existence would
never have pain or loss. I am sure that if were in control of my
solipsistic universe that there would have been 72 fair maidens
at my disposal when I was 15, without the need for martyrdom.
So, I can't really assume that I am all there is and that I have
free will, because there is certainly a will outside my own, forcing
reality on me. So either mine is not the only will in existence, or
my will is not my own. If my will is not my own, then there is
necessarily something outside myself also, such as the great
clockwork mechanism, by which my will is controlled.

Therefore I am not all that there is. QED.
----------

Yup.

-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

 

[Ken Morrow]

kenm@morro.co.uk (Ken Morrow) wrote in message news:<20f8de50.0307091344.5d4b415d@posting.google.com>...

I am having a clear out.

Anyone want an old (vacuum tube) Roband RO50A oscilloscope
(30MHz bandwidth I think).
Complete with instructions and circuit diagrams.
Can't find the mains lead at the minute.
Worked OK last time I used it, which was about 10 years ago.


I also have 20 or so data books, mainly analogue, and mainly 1990s if
anyone wants them.

Also assorted other electronics bits (e.g. Old fax machine).

These items are available for collection in Stony Stratford, Milton Keynes.

Email me if you are interested. Ommit the m after ken in the address given
above.

Cheers,

Ken.

No Interest?

Is there a more appropriate group I could try, or are such items only fit
for the dump?

Thanks,

Ken.

 

[lcoe]

Ken Morrow <kenm@morro.co.uk> wrote:

kenm@morro.co.uk (Ken Morrow) wrote in message news:<20f8de50.0307091344.5d4b415d@posting.google.com>...
I am having a clear out.

Anyone want an old (vacuum tube) Roband RO50A oscilloscope
(30MHz bandwidth I think).
Complete with instructions and circuit diagrams.
Can't find the mains lead at the minute.
Worked OK last time I used it, which was about 10 years ago.


I also have 20 or so data books, mainly analogue, and mainly 1990s if
anyone wants them.

Also assorted other electronics bits (e.g. Old fax machine).

These items are available for collection in Stony Stratford, Milton Keynes.

Email me if you are interested. Ommit the m after ken in the address given
above. >> >> Cheers, >> >> Ken.

No Interest?
Is there a more appropriate group I could try, or are such items only fit
for the dump? > Thanks, > Ken.

dunno about the UK, but in the Colonies, that stuff would be gone. a working
30mhz o'scope, tube or not, w/manual(!). i cannot believe you Limies have gone
so "soft". we still have folks bit kicking on cp/m computers (well, a few).

Regards, --Loren

 

[Michael Black]

Ken Morrow (kenm@morro.co.uk) writes:

These items are available for collection in Stony Stratford, Milton Keynes.

Email me if you are interested. Ommit the m after ken in the address given
above.

Cheers,

Ken.

No Interest?

Is there a more appropriate group I could try, or are such items only fit
for the dump?

Thanks,

Ken.

Have you tried posting in your local buy and sell newsgroup, or at least
one specific to the UK? You may find fewer people who are interested
in electronics, but you would at least find locals who obviously are
in the position to collect the items.

Plus, by posting where the general population might see it, you might
catch the attention of someone starting out or at least a relative
beginner, who has yet to catch on to the places where a more experienced
hobbyist might hang out.

I have no idea what your local buy and sell newsgroup might be, though.

Michael