You sound like a little kid, you started it lol, actually Mike it was you calling the guy an idiot saying hes wrong and all the stuff you have typed. Oh the irony!
You are often wrong and I am yet to see you ever admit it, its no big deal because no one knows everything and we all even forget what we knew it happens all the time to me. Only someone who is faking it pretends they know everything, science itself is quite limited and it has a long long way to go and it wont ever have all the answers. No one even knows how a single atom works, its a complete WTF to everyone thats ever existed
I used to think all the answers are out there waiting to be discovered and science was going to do it but the more I have learnt about philosophy the more I have come to realise science is so limited and its not just maths that needs to catch up or anything as simple as that, the menu isnt the meal to quote a famous philosopher, science is just fitting patterns that everyone can recognise and atheism is just the other extreme after so many thousand years of organised religion both are as unlikely as each other but anyway I digress
This basic science as you call it Mike well its not so basic is it, polymorph provided some great information but its as if you have your tail between your legs and your not man enough to come back here and say oh yeah I actually learnt something
A capacitor and inductor are often touted as the inverse of each other (the duality principle) and they share similarities but so many people dont realise how to actually construct the proper dual circuits, the switch has to go in parallel to the capacitor for instance and lots of people forget one is voltage source the other is current source
To confirm what polymorph posted the time constant of an RL circuit is L/R hence increase the R and decrease the response time it can seem counter intuitive if you dont know it but its exactly true, typing off the bat about this stuff when you are just pretending to be this well seasoned expert will always expose you as a fake
Would be great to see an apology where its due but I wont hold my breath, keep pretending it didnt happen and in time hopefully everyone can forget and you will be able to go back to being this all singing all dancing expert lol
Fakes are everywhere and it can be surprising how long they get away with it
Resinator:
...science is just fitting patterns that everyone can recognise and atheism is just the other extreme after so many thousand years of organised religion both are as unlikely as each other but anyway I digress
and i will too then.
(apologies to OP)
i wouldn't say "just", there - it IS THE WAY for humans to understand - and Science will admit when it has understood something the wrong way. (if you are getting at the ultimate Truth - then Science is the path to that destination.)
and you are misunderstanding atheism as an "extreme opposite" of religion - you're probably thinking of anti-theism.
BabyGeezer:
and you are misunderstanding atheism as an "extreme opposite" of religion - you're probably thinking of anti-theism.
He is thinking of strong/gnostic atheism. I don't know anybody who is a gnostic atheist (aside maybe from some historic philosophers who didn't know anything about epistemology).
Everyone I know is an agnostic atheist*, who just says "I haven't seen any good evidence for god, so I assume there is no god as a basis for my choices." People may sometimes mistake them for strong atheists, because most discussions go between atheism and a specific religion, and while you cannot proof that there isn't any god, there is good evidence to assume that all existing religions are nonsense. And since major religions still affect atheists strongly, it is justified to have a strong opinion against them. This is in my opinion a good essay why atheism is not a religion.
I don't recognise "agnostic", which is often used in that sense, as an ideology on its on, it is an epistemological position. It can still be combined with atheism (common) or theism (uncommon, but arguably existing, e.g. because of Pascal's Wager, which is a really stupid idea).
You could even combine anti-theism with agnostic atheism, which essentially means "I haven't seen any good evidence for god, so I assume there is no god as a basis for my choices. Since there is no evidence for any god, all those people who claim a god and try to impose supernatural ideas and morals on other people are dickheads and should be fought."
xiyuanyuan:
PCB global order statistics
The simplest PCB maker prototype
This spam is so bad, I don't even know what it is advertising so I don't know what service to ignore forever oO
I was talking about atheism as the idea that the universe just happened. The Big Bang proposes that everything sprang into existence in an instant (quantum fluctuation) for no reason, its all just dumb energy.
Think about that and try to conceive an idea as unlikely. It is in fact just as unlikely as
And god said let there be light
You see I hate organised religion more than most, since the Age of Enlightenment science has done some impressive things but it’s like a put down theory trying to counteract the previous millenniums. It’s the opposite extreme. One minute a guy on a cloud was the architect the next everything just happened.
Just take a look at reality and existence, isn’t it a bit strange that anything exists? It’s enough to make you ask WTF
As soon as you say the god word everyone thinks of a bloke looking down and judging it’s a ridiculous proposition. That’s God with a big G most people are unaware of the idea of a god with a little g. Pantheism like Buddhism and eastern religions where god is all that exists and everything is a part of god, it is in fact the original message of all religions, Jesus was clearly a pantheist and Islam had the same message originally unfortunately the message has been corrupted to control people.
Check out luminaries of pantheism murial in California, look at the brains that believed in this concept, very interesting indeed
I’m not proposing this is the answer it’s just a concept few people are aware of and (IMO) its much more believable than any bible.
I could write so much more about this, Immanuel Kant, Alan Watts the psychedelic experience there’s a lot more but I’m on my phone and it’s tough
Resinator:
I was talking about atheism as the idea that the universe just happened. The Big Bang proposes that everything sprang into existence in an instant (quantum fluctuation) for no reason, its all just dumb energy.
again you mistake the meaning of atheism - it's got nothing to do with belief of how the universe happened.
Atheism is simply NOT believing there is a god(s).
NOT : believing there IS NO god.
i'm sure there are many scientists who are atheists and still disagree on HOW the universe started.
Resinator:
Think about that and try to conceive an idea as unlikely. It is in fact just as unlikely as
And god said let there be light
NOPE - God "said" (nothing more) - let there be light - it's only written in a book of dubious source.
Quantum fluctuations have proper theories explaining HOW it occurs and mathematical models to show how it does. Until someone proves such math in error - Science will be the arbiter of "what is (most likely) true".
@ElCaron; yes, i guess you are correct - it's more suitable for gnostic atheism than anti-theism; since those who "hate God" must acknowledge Her existence ! (oh, wait - that's a Misotheist !)
A side note, modern Bosch automotive relays now use a shunt across the coil, no diode. A diode is too slow in releasing relay contacts. Some may find it interesting the scope measured release times of a 12V relay:
No shunt, 2.2 ms break time
330 ohm shunt, 9 ms break time
680 ohm shunt, 6.2 ms break time
diode shunt, 17 ms break time
I didnt word it very well I admit and it reads badly, I know what Atheism is its not a difficult concept at all. You cant deny that science is atheistic sure there might be plenty of scientists who are religious but thats their personal choice since the age of enlightenment science has taken the general consensus from a bloke on a cloud creating the universe to the universe just happened. Its quite surprising how many people accept this fully automatic model without even really thinking about it, I was exactly the same and its only since I became interested in philosophy that I actually thought about it, I was interested in cosmology long before pholosophy about 20 years longer
Like I said its every bit as unlikely, the opposite extreme
Quantum fluctuations have proper theories explaining HOW it occurs and mathematical models to show how it does.
They have theories and theres very few people who can understand it, time after time history has shown us that we dont really have a clue even when we think its all been worked out, look at what Boltzmann went through when he inadvertently stumbled upon QM (without even knowing it!), it wasnt very well received in a world that knew Newtonian mechanics was the real deal
Until someone proves such math in error - Science will be the arbiter of "what is (most likely) true".
See you are assuming that humans have the capability of understanding everything a common assumption from the science camp. Who is to say that humans are ever even going to be capable of understanding reality its actually a big ask if you think about it. Sure humans are pretty amazing as far as animals go, a completely unique animal thats achieved a lot but theres no guarantee we are ever going to be capable of understanding everything, imagine trying to make a chimpanzee understand say economics, its not going to happen because the chimp aint got the skills. You only have to look at some of the mysteries that defy logic, double slit experiment, hydrogen wave function, quantum entanglement, holographic universe even life itself the list is long. Sure humans have a long way to go and theres plenty of things to be done but there is no guarantee we will ever be capable of understanding everything if we really understand anything at all
Godels incompleteness theorem says its not even possible to write down all the rules anyway hence AI wont ever be what the general public believe because you cant program something if you cant write down the rules
those who "hate God" must acknowledge Her existence
She is black =-) and thats a lot more profound to say than many realise, most people think its just a joke but it is much deeper than a joke. Alan Watts explains it for anyone thats interested
One circuit is missing in that picture.
A zener diode between collector/base (or drain/gate) of the drive transistor (almost as in picture#4).
Then the zener can be smaller (power), because the transistor itself is the brake.
This "active clamping" is used in TPIC6*595 shift register chips.
Leo..
Hi,
The thing I would query about the zener across the transistoir is;
In the first 3 circuits, the suppression is at the coil, so no current glitch is placed on the Vcc line.
In the 4th circuit, all the zener is doing is protecting the transistor, the Vcc line will still see a current glitch, so circuit layout would be critical.
Current glitch on Vcc? No, that's the point, inductors try to keep current constant. The current changes are
the steering of current between the transistor and zener as transistor goes high impedance, but that's not
on the Vcc side of the coil.
The stray capacitance of the coil will lead to a small voltage transient on the Vcc line as the collector voltage
jumps up.
Hi,
But how big is the current when the BJT goes open circuit, I'm talking real world and PCB layout, all tracks have resistance.
That coil current after the zener begins to conduct has to flow through gnd and Vcc
I would not be hanging my voltage sensitive sensor device, of even CPU. off the same PCB track as the coil Vcc.
Bypassing and PCB layout would surely be even more important.
The coil current is the coil current. It is just a relay coil. So it is drawing, say 80mA. When the transistor shuts off, 80mA continues to flow but the polarity of the relay reverses, rising until it reaches Zener breakdown.
Then the 80mA tails off until the current is insufficient to keep the Zener at breakdown.
All the time, that 80mA that is decaying, is flowing from Vcc to ground just as it was when the transistor was on.
The only place that sees increased voltage is the Zener and the transistor. Just the same as if you'd put the Zener across the relay coil, but in that case, the 80mA immediately stops flowing from Vcc to ground, instead only through the coil and the Zener.
