"Anthony Fremont" wrote in
:

MassiveProng wrote:
On Sun, 4 Mar 2007 04:23:21 -0600, "Anthony Fremont"
Gave us:

QUOTED:
"Are you suggesting that I should drag it across town, spend $200
and be without it for 2 weeks just to get it adjusted by some
obstinate, E-1 grade line tech, instead of using a brand new DMM w
.03% accuracy to tweak it myself? I'm quite sure that my Micronta
is up to the task to be honest."

A calibration house would NOT use a 0.03% DMM to calibrate your scope
with, you pathetic piece of ****!

Did I say they would? I said I would tweak it myself and that it
would be good enough. Stay on track, you're here to prove why it
won't work.

What part of that don't you understand?

What part of that proves that you are a brainless, pathetic piece of
**** do you not understand?

PLEASE READ MY POSTS BEFORE ****ING
YOURSELF!!!!!

**** you. I read the thread. It doesn't matter who the author is,
and when it is you, you retarded ****, it becomes glaringly obvious
due to your total stupidity. Just like the "E-1 grade tech" remark.
You prove with your every post that it is you that is an incompetent
*******.

Is that an apology? Where are your scematics and submissions?

If you don't understand something just ask for help.

**** you. It is you that lacks the basic understanding that errors
chain together.

Show one post where I demonstrated that I don't understand that. You
can't.

The problem here is that you read something and then, in your twisted
little way, you interpret it as the poster is stupid and then you go
off on some totaly different train of thought. Like Don Quixote you
then procede to fight a battle against an illusion. You then begin to
see every response as though it's calling you a liar, even if they are
just trying to put you back on track. Many of your comments were
valid, but they weren't germane to the discussion at that point, just
like the one you just made here.

You make it sound like the OP was going to cal some critical lab
equipment at home and that lives were at stake. Then you go on to
tout calibrating your home theater by using a DVD/CD. And that's fine
for home theater, but for lab quality work (like you constantly brag
about, and compare everything to) considering the use of a signal from
a CD is just F*CKING STUPID!!! 1Hz accuracy would be atrocious and
you know that very well.


A .03%
METER CAN BE USED, ESPECIALLY WHEN THAT METER IS AVAILABLE WITH NIST
CERTS, NOW CAN'T IT????

NOPE.

Now tell us why not? Exactly what kind of standard is required to
adjust a scope's vertical response to 3% as it's specs state?

0.75% or better accuracy.(4X or better)
(and that would be "adjust to within 3%". the actual result may be better
than 3%;you just can't depend on it staying that way for any length of
time.)


And why
wouldn't a .03% meter with traceable certs be good enough? I'm not
saying it isn't, since I never even visited a cal lab, much less
worked in one. I just want to hear your expert opinion on what is
required.

You need to understand the concept of ACCEPTABLE ERROR, there is no
perfection only "good enough". What is "good enough" is in the eye of
the beholder, not yours.






--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net