From the schematic:

1. Set the DSO for a single sweep triggered by channel 1 going high.

2. Pull M1 away from M2 and M3, which are just barely touching,
and let them settle for a few seconds.

3. Arm the DSO.

4. Release M1 so that it hits M2 directly across from where M3 is
touching M2.

5. Read the time it took for channel 2 to go low after channel 1 went
high. That'll be the time it took for the momentum accumulated by
M1 to be transferred to M3.

--
JF

On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 16:37:19 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

From the schematic:

1. Set the DSO for a single sweep triggered by channel 1 going high.

2. Pull M1 away from M2 and M3, which are just barely touching,
and let them settle for a few seconds.

3. Arm the DSO.

4. Release M1 so that it hits M2 directly across from where M3 is
touching M2.

5. Read the time it took for channel 2 to go low after channel 1 went
high. That'll be the time it took for the momentum accumulated by
M1 to be transferred to M3.

Aha! You rolled your own. Nice toy!

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

Spice is like a sports car...
Performance only as good as the person behind the wheel.

John Fields wrote:

From the schematic:

1. Set the DSO for a single sweep triggered by channel 1 going high.

2. Pull M1 away from M2 and M3, which are just barely touching,
and let them settle for a few seconds.

3. Arm the DSO.

4. Release M1 so that it hits M2 directly across from where M3 is
touching M2.

5. Read the time it took for channel 2 to go low after channel 1 went
high. That'll be the time it took for the momentum accumulated by
M1 to be transferred to M3.


It took a lot of balls to post that! ;-)

On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 22:49:45 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


John Fields wrote:

From the schematic:

1. Set the DSO for a single sweep triggered by channel 1 going high.

2. Pull M1 away from M2 and M3, which are just barely touching,
and let them settle for a few seconds.

3. Arm the DSO.

4. Release M1 so that it hits M2 directly across from where M3 is
touching M2.

5. Read the time it took for channel 2 to go low after channel 1 went
high. That'll be the time it took for the momentum accumulated by
M1 to be transferred to M3.


It took a lot of balls to post that! ;-)

---
Jokester: "What has 16 balls and sings."

Listener: "I dunno, what?"

Jokester: "A quartet."

Listener: "Ha, ha, ha, pretty funny!"
"Hey, wait a minute, that's only 8 balls."

Jokester: "Yeah, one of the guys is a tenner."

--
JF

On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 22:49:45 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


John Fields wrote:

From the schematic:

1. Set the DSO for a single sweep triggered by channel 1 going high.

2. Pull M1 away from M2 and M3, which are just barely touching,
and let them settle for a few seconds.

3. Arm the DSO.

4. Release M1 so that it hits M2 directly across from where M3 is
touching M2.

5. Read the time it took for channel 2 to go low after channel 1 went
high. That'll be the time it took for the momentum accumulated by
M1 to be transferred to M3.


It took a lot of balls to post that! ;-)

The monkey was a victim of a cold snap.

On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 14:50:33 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:


Aha! You rolled your own. Nice toy!

...Jim Thompson
---
Thanks. :-)

--
JF

John Fields wrote:

On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 22:49:45 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


John Fields wrote:

From the schematic:

1. Set the DSO for a single sweep triggered by channel 1 going high.

2. Pull M1 away from M2 and M3, which are just barely touching,
and let them settle for a few seconds.

3. Arm the DSO.

4. Release M1 so that it hits M2 directly across from where M3 is
touching M2.

5. Read the time it took for channel 2 to go low after channel 1 went
high. That'll be the time it took for the momentum accumulated by
M1 to be transferred to M3.


It took a lot of balls to post that! ;-)

---
Jokester: "What has 16 balls and sings."

Listener: "I dunno, what?"

Jokester: "A quartet."

Listener: "Ha, ha, ha, pretty funny!"
"Hey, wait a minute, that's only 8 balls."

Jokester: "Yeah, one of the guys is a tenner."


GROAN!

On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 16:37:19 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

From the schematic:

1. Set the DSO for a single sweep triggered by channel 1 going high.

2. Pull M1 away from M2 and M3, which are just barely touching,
and let them settle for a few seconds.

3. Arm the DSO.

4. Release M1 so that it hits M2 directly across from where M3 is
touching M2.

5. Read the time it took for channel 2 to go low after channel 1 went
high. That'll be the time it took for the momentum accumulated by
M1 to be transferred to M3.

---
"Slow", "Medium", and "Fast" refer to the pulse width of the pulse on
channel 1, the width of which was determined by releasing the ball
farther and farther from plumb.

the fact that there _is_ a trailing edge means that M2 wasn't hit
squarely or that there are imperfections in the rig.

In either case, the bounce represents an impedance mismatch reflecting
power back from the load to the source.

In any case, the momentum transfer time is from the leading edge of
the trace on channel 1 to the falling edge of the trace on channel 2.

I'll get some more data together as time permits, and post it, and the
video's in the works...

---
JF

On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 09:07:44 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 16:37:19 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

From the schematic:

1. Set the DSO for a single sweep triggered by channel 1 going high.

2. Pull M1 away from M2 and M3, which are just barely touching,
and let them settle for a few seconds.

3. Arm the DSO.

4. Release M1 so that it hits M2 directly across from where M3 is
touching M2.

5. Read the time it took for channel 2 to go low after channel 1 went
high. That'll be the time it took for the momentum accumulated by
M1 to be transferred to M3.

---
"Slow", "Medium", and "Fast" refer to the pulse width of the pulse on
channel 1, the width of which was determined by releasing the ball
farther and farther from plumb.

the fact that there _is_ a trailing edge means that M2 wasn't hit
squarely or that there are imperfections in the rig.

In either case, the bounce represents an impedance mismatch reflecting
power back from the load to the source.

In any case, the momentum transfer time is from the leading edge of
the trace on channel 1 to the falling edge of the trace on channel 2.

I'll get some more data together as time permits, and post it, and the
video's in the works...

---
New game:

30.jpg is with M3 tied back, M1 pulled about 30° away from plumb when
released, and shows how long it takes for the momentum in M1 to be
transferred to M2 and have M2 lose contact with M1; just about 100µs.

60.jpg is the same thing, but with M1 at about 60° when it's released,
and 90.jpg is with with M1 at about 90°.

The balls are McMaster-Carr P/N 9617K47 and from their spec sheet:

begin quote

Material Formable Brass (Alloy 260)

Alloy 260

Finish Reflective

Shape Balls

Diameter 3/4"

Diameter Tolerance ±.001"

Sphericity .0002"

Tolerance Standard

Test Report Without Test Report

Hardness Rockwell B75-B87

Yield Strength 57,000 psi

Condition/Temper Not Rated

Grade 200

Specifications Met American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM)

ASTM Specification ASTM B134

Notes Not heat treatable.

WARNING Hardness and yield strength are not guaranteed
and are intended only as a basis for comparison.
end quote



Alloy 260 (Cu70 Zn30) is cartridge brass and, in it, sound propagates
at about 4700 m/s, which is about 213 µs/m, which is about 5.4
µs/inch.

That means that if the shock wave propagating through M2, after M1
hits it, is propagating at the speed of sound and is carrying all of
the energy imparted to M2 by M1, M2 ought to disconnect after about
4.05 µs.

However, we see from experimental data that the disconnect occurs some
100 µs after the collision.

Any thoughts?

---
JF

On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 17:20:27 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 09:07:44 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 16:37:19 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

From the schematic:

1. Set the DSO for a single sweep triggered by channel 1 going high.

2. Pull M1 away from M2 and M3, which are just barely touching,
and let them settle for a few seconds.

3. Arm the DSO.

4. Release M1 so that it hits M2 directly across from where M3 is
touching M2.

5. Read the time it took for channel 2 to go low after channel 1 went
high. That'll be the time it took for the momentum accumulated by
M1 to be transferred to M3.

---
"Slow", "Medium", and "Fast" refer to the pulse width of the pulse on
channel 1, the width of which was determined by releasing the ball
farther and farther from plumb.

the fact that there _is_ a trailing edge means that M2 wasn't hit
squarely or that there are imperfections in the rig.

In either case, the bounce represents an impedance mismatch reflecting
power back from the load to the source.

In any case, the momentum transfer time is from the leading edge of
the trace on channel 1 to the falling edge of the trace on channel 2.

I'll get some more data together as time permits, and post it, and the
video's in the works...

---
New game:

30.jpg is with M3 tied back, M1 pulled about 30° away from plumb when
released, and shows how long it takes for the momentum in M1 to be
transferred to M2 and have M2 lose contact with M1; just about 100µs.

Did I guess good or what?

John

On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 16:16:39 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 17:20:27 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 09:07:44 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 16:37:19 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

From the schematic:

1. Set the DSO for a single sweep triggered by channel 1 going high.

2. Pull M1 away from M2 and M3, which are just barely touching,
and let them settle for a few seconds.

3. Arm the DSO.

4. Release M1 so that it hits M2 directly across from where M3 is
touching M2.

5. Read the time it took for channel 2 to go low after channel 1 went
high. That'll be the time it took for the momentum accumulated by
M1 to be transferred to M3.

---
"Slow", "Medium", and "Fast" refer to the pulse width of the pulse on
channel 1, the width of which was determined by releasing the ball
farther and farther from plumb.

the fact that there _is_ a trailing edge means that M2 wasn't hit
squarely or that there are imperfections in the rig.

In either case, the bounce represents an impedance mismatch reflecting
power back from the load to the source.

In any case, the momentum transfer time is from the leading edge of
the trace on channel 1 to the falling edge of the trace on channel 2.

I'll get some more data together as time permits, and post it, and the
video's in the works...

---
New game:

30.jpg is with M3 tied back, M1 pulled about 30° away from plumb when
released, and shows how long it takes for the momentum in M1 to be
transferred to M2 and have M2 lose contact with M1; just about 100µs.

Did I guess good or what?

---
Not really.

In the 3 ball case, which is what was presented originally, you
guessed 100µs from the make of M1 to M2, to the break of M3 from M2,
which is really about 150µs, a 50% error.

Since I hadn't suggested a 2 ball reaction when you made your guess
it, of course, (the 2 ball reaction) didn't apply, so what you _must_
have been referring to was the 3 ball case, where 100µs doesn't work.

But, more importantly, and I don't know whether you remember or not, a
few years ago (maybe six or seven) a question came up about marbles
being run down a tube, hitting other marbles, and how long it would
take for the hit marble to move away from the hitter.

Your take on it was that the hit marble would move away from the
hitter as soon as the shock wave from the hit traversed the hit
marble, and I built my Newton's cradle to test your hypothesis.

As it turns out, you were wrong, and it takes much longer for the mass
to move than you predicted.

---
JF

On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 22:49:45 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


John Fields wrote:

From the schematic:

1. Set the DSO for a single sweep triggered by channel 1 going high.

2. Pull M1 away from M2 and M3, which are just barely touching,
and let them settle for a few seconds.

3. Arm the DSO.

4. Release M1 so that it hits M2 directly across from where M3 is
touching M2.

5. Read the time it took for channel 2 to go low after channel 1 went
high. That'll be the time it took for the momentum accumulated by
M1 to be transferred to M3.


It took a lot of balls to post that! ;-)

And they are brass to boot.

JosephKK wrote:

On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 22:49:45 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
? wrote:

?
?John Fields wrote:
??
?? From the schematic:
??
?? 1. Set the DSO for a single sweep triggered by channel 1 going high.
??
?? 2. Pull M1 away from M2 and M3, which are just barely touching,
?? and let them settle for a few seconds.
??
?? 3. Arm the DSO.
??
?? 4. Release M1 so that it hits M2 directly across from where M3 is
?? touching M2.
??
?? 5. Read the time it took for channel 2 to go low after channel 1 went
?? high. That'll be the time it took for the momentum accumulated by
?? M1 to be transferred to M3.
?
?
? It took a lot of balls to post that! ;-)

And they are brass to boot.


From a brass monkey?

On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 11:32:09 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


JosephKK wrote:

On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 22:49:45 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
? wrote:

?
?John Fields wrote:
??
?? From the schematic:
??
?? 1. Set the DSO for a single sweep triggered by channel 1 going high.
??
?? 2. Pull M1 away from M2 and M3, which are just barely touching,
?? and let them settle for a few seconds.
??
?? 3. Arm the DSO.
??
?? 4. Release M1 so that it hits M2 directly across from where M3 is
?? touching M2.
??
?? 5. Read the time it took for channel 2 to go low after channel 1 went
?? high. That'll be the time it took for the momentum accumulated by
?? M1 to be transferred to M3.
?
?
? It took a lot of balls to post that! ;-)

And they are brass to boot.


From a brass monkey?

From Larkin, petrified from lack of use :-)

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

Spice is like a sports car...
Performance only as good as the person behind the wheel.

Jim Thompson wrote:

On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 11:32:09 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
? wrote:

?
?JosephKK wrote:
??
?? On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 22:49:45 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
?? ? wrote:
??
?? ?
?? ?John Fields wrote:
?? ??
?? ?? From the schematic:
?? ??
?? ?? 1. Set the DSO for a single sweep triggered by channel 1 going high.
?? ??
?? ?? 2. Pull M1 away from M2 and M3, which are just barely touching,
?? ?? and let them settle for a few seconds.
?? ??
?? ?? 3. Arm the DSO.
?? ??
?? ?? 4. Release M1 so that it hits M2 directly across from where M3 is
?? ?? touching M2.
?? ??
?? ?? 5. Read the time it took for channel 2 to go low after channel 1 went
?? ?? high. That'll be the time it took for the momentum accumulated by
?? ?? M1 to be transferred to M3.
?? ?
?? ?
?? ? It took a lot of balls to post that! ;-)
??
?? And they are brass to boot.
?
?
? From a brass monkey?

From Larkin, petrified from lack of use :-)


You can't petrify a brass monkey!

BTW, I just got one of these:
http://www.geeks.com/details.asp?invtid=R227-R&cpc=SCH

Sanyo R227 802.11g WiFi/Ethernet Internet Radio & Media Player
w/Alarm Clock (Black/Silver) $99.99

I figure that I'll save the price from the lower electric bill, and
won't need to have a computer on all the time. Sometimes I've had to
have two computers running to listen to streaming audio.

It has a line out, along with a headphone jack and a remote control.
The alarm clock sets itself on line, too.

On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 17:37:59 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


Jim Thompson wrote:

On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 11:32:09 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
? wrote:

?
?JosephKK wrote:
??
?? On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 22:49:45 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
?? ? wrote:
??
?? ?
?? ?John Fields wrote:
?? ??
?? ?? From the schematic:
?? ??
?? ?? 1. Set the DSO for a single sweep triggered by channel 1 going high.
?? ??
?? ?? 2. Pull M1 away from M2 and M3, which are just barely touching,
?? ?? and let them settle for a few seconds.
?? ??
?? ?? 3. Arm the DSO.
?? ??
?? ?? 4. Release M1 so that it hits M2 directly across from where M3 is
?? ?? touching M2.
?? ??
?? ?? 5. Read the time it took for channel 2 to go low after channel 1 went
?? ?? high. That'll be the time it took for the momentum accumulated by
?? ?? M1 to be transferred to M3.
?? ?
?? ?
?? ? It took a lot of balls to post that! ;-)
??
?? And they are brass to boot.
?
?
? From a brass monkey?

From Larkin, petrified from lack of use :-)


You can't petrify a brass monkey!

BTW, I just got one of these:
http://www.geeks.com/details.asp?invtid=R227-R&cpc=SCH

Sanyo R227 802.11g WiFi/Ethernet Internet Radio & Media Player
w/Alarm Clock (Black/Silver) $99.99

I figure that I'll save the price from the lower electric bill, and
won't need to have a computer on all the time. Sometimes I've had to
have two computers running to listen to streaming audio.

It has a line out, along with a headphone jack and a remote control.
The alarm clock sets itself on line, too.

This is the one I have...

http://soundbridge.roku.com/soundbridge/index.php

runs off the router, no PC required, though you can use PC as a
jukebox storage.

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

Spice is like a sports car...
Performance only as good as the person behind the wheel.

On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 17:37:59 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


Jim Thompson wrote:

On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 11:32:09 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
? wrote:

?
?JosephKK wrote:
??
?? On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 22:49:45 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
?? ? wrote:
??
?? ?
?? ?John Fields wrote:
?? ??
?? ?? From the schematic:
?? ??
?? ?? 1. Set the DSO for a single sweep triggered by channel 1 going high.
?? ??
?? ?? 2. Pull M1 away from M2 and M3, which are just barely touching,
?? ?? and let them settle for a few seconds.
?? ??
?? ?? 3. Arm the DSO.
?? ??
?? ?? 4. Release M1 so that it hits M2 directly across from where M3 is
?? ?? touching M2.
?? ??
?? ?? 5. Read the time it took for channel 2 to go low after channel 1 went
?? ?? high. That'll be the time it took for the momentum accumulated by
?? ?? M1 to be transferred to M3.
?? ?
?? ?
?? ? It took a lot of balls to post that! ;-)
??
?? And they are brass to boot.
?
?
? From a brass monkey?

From Larkin, petrified from lack of use :-)


You can't petrify a brass monkey!

BTW, I just got one of these:
http://www.geeks.com/details.asp?invtid=R227-R&cpc=SCH

Sanyo R227 802.11g WiFi/Ethernet Internet Radio & Media Player
w/Alarm Clock (Black/Silver) $99.99

I figure that I'll save the price from the lower electric bill, and
won't need to have a computer on all the time. Sometimes I've had to
have two computers running to listen to streaming audio.

It has a line out, along with a headphone jack and a remote control.
The alarm clock sets itself on line, too.

---
Can't get much more off topic than that, huh?

Thanks, Michael...

---
JF

On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 17:37:59 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


Jim Thompson wrote:

On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 11:32:09 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
? wrote:

?
?JosephKK wrote:
??
?? On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 22:49:45 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
?? ? wrote:
??
?? ?
?? ?John Fields wrote:
?? ??
?? ?? From the schematic:
?? ??
?? ?? 1. Set the DSO for a single sweep triggered by channel 1 going high.
?? ??
?? ?? 2. Pull M1 away from M2 and M3, which are just barely touching,
?? ?? and let them settle for a few seconds.
?? ??
?? ?? 3. Arm the DSO.
?? ??
?? ?? 4. Release M1 so that it hits M2 directly across from where M3 is
?? ?? touching M2.
?? ??
?? ?? 5. Read the time it took for channel 2 to go low after channel 1 went
?? ?? high. That'll be the time it took for the momentum accumulated by
?? ?? M1 to be transferred to M3.
?? ?
?? ?
?? ? It took a lot of balls to post that! ;-)
??
?? And they are brass to boot.
?
?
? From a brass monkey?

From Larkin, petrified from lack of use :-)

He hasn't commented on my estimate, in SED, that it would take about
100 us for the shock wave to cross the middle ball. And that JFs last
measurement was 100 us.

John

On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 18:32:25 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 16:16:39 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 17:20:27 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 09:07:44 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 16:37:19 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

From the schematic:

1. Set the DSO for a single sweep triggered by channel 1 going high.

2. Pull M1 away from M2 and M3, which are just barely touching,
and let them settle for a few seconds.

3. Arm the DSO.

4. Release M1 so that it hits M2 directly across from where M3 is
touching M2.

5. Read the time it took for channel 2 to go low after channel 1 went
high. That'll be the time it took for the momentum accumulated by
M1 to be transferred to M3.

---
"Slow", "Medium", and "Fast" refer to the pulse width of the pulse on
channel 1, the width of which was determined by releasing the ball
farther and farther from plumb.

the fact that there _is_ a trailing edge means that M2 wasn't hit
squarely or that there are imperfections in the rig.

In either case, the bounce represents an impedance mismatch reflecting
power back from the load to the source.

In any case, the momentum transfer time is from the leading edge of
the trace on channel 1 to the falling edge of the trace on channel 2.

I'll get some more data together as time permits, and post it, and the
video's in the works...

---
New game:

30.jpg is with M3 tied back, M1 pulled about 30° away from plumb when
released, and shows how long it takes for the momentum in M1 to be
transferred to M2 and have M2 lose contact with M1; just about 100µs.

Did I guess good or what?

---
Not really.

In the 3 ball case, which is what was presented originally, you
guessed 100µs from the make of M1 to M2, to the break of M3 from M2,
which is really about 150µs, a 50% error.

Since I hadn't suggested a 2 ball reaction when you made your guess
it, of course, (the 2 ball reaction) didn't apply, so what you _must_
have been referring to was the 3 ball case, where 100µs doesn't work.

But, more importantly, and I don't know whether you remember or not, a
few years ago (maybe six or seven) a question came up about marbles
being run down a tube, hitting other marbles, and how long it would
take for the hit marble to move away from the hitter.

Your take on it was that the hit marble would move away from the
hitter as soon as the shock wave from the hit traversed the hit
marble, and I built my Newton's cradle to test your hypothesis.

As it turns out, you were wrong, and it takes much longer for the mass
to move than you predicted.


What bull. I was pretty close for things like this. Your various
measurements pretty nicely straddle my estimate.

John

John Fields wrote:

On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 17:37:59 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


Jim Thompson wrote:

On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 11:32:09 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
? wrote:

?
?JosephKK wrote:
??
?? On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 22:49:45 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
?? ? wrote:
??
?? ?
?? ?John Fields wrote:
?? ??
?? ?? From the schematic:
?? ??
?? ?? 1. Set the DSO for a single sweep triggered by channel 1 going high.
?? ??
?? ?? 2. Pull M1 away from M2 and M3, which are just barely touching,
?? ?? and let them settle for a few seconds.
?? ??
?? ?? 3. Arm the DSO.
?? ??
?? ?? 4. Release M1 so that it hits M2 directly across from where M3 is
?? ?? touching M2.
?? ??
?? ?? 5. Read the time it took for channel 2 to go low after channel 1 went
?? ?? high. That'll be the time it took for the momentum accumulated by
?? ?? M1 to be transferred to M3.
?? ?
?? ?
?? ? It took a lot of balls to post that! ;-)
??
?? And they are brass to boot.
?
?
? From a brass monkey?

From Larkin, petrified from lack of use :-)


You can't petrify a brass monkey!

BTW, I just got one of these:
http://www.geeks.com/details.asp?invtid=R227-R&cpc=SCH

Sanyo R227 802.11g WiFi/Ethernet Internet Radio & Media Player
w/Alarm Clock (Black/Silver) $99.99

I figure that I'll save the price from the lower electric bill, and
won't need to have a computer on all the time. Sometimes I've had to
have two computers running to listen to streaming audio.

It has a line out, along with a headphone jack and a remote control.
The alarm clock sets itself on line, too.

---
Can't get much more off topic than that, huh?

Thanks, Michael...


I had just finished setting it up while I was replying to Jim.
'Strike while the iron is hot'! I'm listening to WSM out of Nashville
right now.

Jim Thompson wrote:

On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 17:37:59 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


Jim Thompson wrote:

On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 11:32:09 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
? wrote:

?
?JosephKK wrote:
??
?? On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 22:49:45 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
?? ? wrote:
??
?? ?
?? ?John Fields wrote:
?? ??
?? ?? From the schematic:
?? ??
?? ?? 1. Set the DSO for a single sweep triggered by channel 1 going high.
?? ??
?? ?? 2. Pull M1 away from M2 and M3, which are just barely touching,
?? ?? and let them settle for a few seconds.
?? ??
?? ?? 3. Arm the DSO.
?? ??
?? ?? 4. Release M1 so that it hits M2 directly across from where M3 is
?? ?? touching M2.
?? ??
?? ?? 5. Read the time it took for channel 2 to go low after channel 1 went
?? ?? high. That'll be the time it took for the momentum accumulated by
?? ?? M1 to be transferred to M3.
?? ?
?? ?
?? ? It took a lot of balls to post that! ;-)
??
?? And they are brass to boot.
?
?
? From a brass monkey?

From Larkin, petrified from lack of use :-)


You can't petrify a brass monkey!

BTW, I just got one of these:
http://www.geeks.com/details.asp?invtid=R227-R&cpc=SCH

Sanyo R227 802.11g WiFi/Ethernet Internet Radio & Media Player
w/Alarm Clock (Black/Silver) $99.99

I figure that I'll save the price from the lower electric bill, and
won't need to have a computer on all the time. Sometimes I've had to
have two computers running to listen to streaming audio.

It has a line out, along with a headphone jack and a remote control.
The alarm clock sets itself on line, too.

This is the one I have...

http://soundbridge.roku.com/soundbridge/index.php

runs off the router, no PC required, though you can use PC as a
jukebox storage.


It's plugged into the Netgear WGR614 Router I picked up for free,
right now. The price was right for both.

John Larkin wrote:

He hasn't commented on my estimate, in SED, that it would take about
100 us for the shock wave to cross the middle ball. And that JFs last
measurement was 100 us.


I don't care to get involved in the arguments between you two. I'm
busy rebuilding two business websites right now.

On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 02:08:28 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


John Larkin wrote:

He hasn't commented on my estimate, in SED, that it would take about
100 us for the shock wave to cross the middle ball. And that JFs last
measurement was 100 us.


I don't care to get involved in the arguments between you two. I'm
busy rebuilding two business websites right now.

Does anyone give a flaccid **** what Larkin thinks?

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

Spice is like a sports car...
Performance only as good as the person behind the wheel.

On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 19:32:43 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 18:32:25 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 16:16:39 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 17:20:27 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 09:07:44 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 16:37:19 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

From the schematic:

1. Set the DSO for a single sweep triggered by channel 1 going high.

2. Pull M1 away from M2 and M3, which are just barely touching,
and let them settle for a few seconds.

3. Arm the DSO.

4. Release M1 so that it hits M2 directly across from where M3 is
touching M2.

5. Read the time it took for channel 2 to go low after channel 1 went
high. That'll be the time it took for the momentum accumulated by
M1 to be transferred to M3.

---
"Slow", "Medium", and "Fast" refer to the pulse width of the pulse on
channel 1, the width of which was determined by releasing the ball
farther and farther from plumb.

the fact that there _is_ a trailing edge means that M2 wasn't hit
squarely or that there are imperfections in the rig.

In either case, the bounce represents an impedance mismatch reflecting
power back from the load to the source.

In any case, the momentum transfer time is from the leading edge of
the trace on channel 1 to the falling edge of the trace on channel 2.

I'll get some more data together as time permits, and post it, and the
video's in the works...

---
New game:

30.jpg is with M3 tied back, M1 pulled about 30° away from plumb when
released, and shows how long it takes for the momentum in M1 to be
transferred to M2 and have M2 lose contact with M1; just about 100µs.

Did I guess good or what?

---
Not really.

In the 3 ball case, which is what was presented originally, you
guessed 100µs from the make of M1 to M2, to the break of M3 from M2,
which is really about 150µs, a 50% error.

Since I hadn't suggested a 2 ball reaction when you made your guess
it, of course, (the 2 ball reaction) didn't apply, so what you _must_
have been referring to was the 3 ball case, where 100µs doesn't work.

But, more importantly, and I don't know whether you remember or not, a
few years ago (maybe six or seven) a question came up about marbles
being run down a tube, hitting other marbles, and how long it would
take for the hit marble to move away from the hitter.

Your take on it was that the hit marble would move away from the
hitter as soon as the shock wave from the hit traversed the hit
marble, and I built my Newton's cradle to test your hypothesis.

As it turns out, you were wrong, and it takes much longer for the mass
to move than you predicted.


What bull. I was pretty close for things like this.

---
"For things like this"???

That's just another catch phrase designed to minimize the significance
of your error, charlatan.
---

Your various measurements pretty nicely straddle my estimate.

---
They don't straddle your guess, since your guess starts at zero and my
numbers are all longer than your guess.

---
JF

On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 02:08:28 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


John Larkin wrote:

He hasn't commented on my estimate, in SED, that it would take about
100 us for the shock wave to cross the middle ball. And that JFs last
measurement was 100 us.


I don't care to get involved in the arguments between you two. I'm
busy rebuilding two business websites right now.

---
Good man! :-)

---
JF

On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 23:13:15 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 02:08:28 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


John Larkin wrote:

He hasn't commented on my estimate, in SED, that it would take about
100 us for the shock wave to cross the middle ball. And that JFs last
measurement was 100 us.


I don't care to get involved in the arguments between you two. I'm
busy rebuilding two business websites right now.

Does anyone give a flaccid **** what Larkin thinks?

---
In my experience, it seems that as time goes by, fewer and fewer do
since 90% of what John does is sow seeds of discord and bring bones of
contention to the table.

---
JF

On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 06:29:12 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 23:13:15 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 02:08:28 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


John Larkin wrote:

He hasn't commented on my estimate, in SED, that it would take about
100 us for the shock wave to cross the middle ball. And that JFs last
measurement was 100 us.


I don't care to get involved in the arguments between you two. I'm
busy rebuilding two business websites right now.

Does anyone give a flaccid **** what Larkin thinks?

---
In my experience, it seems that as time goes by, fewer and fewer do
since 90% of what John does is sow seeds of discord and bring bones of
contention to the table.

---
JF

I'm very pleased that the silent majority lurkers have seen the light
and nailing JL instantly :-)

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

Spice is like a sports car...
Performance only as good as the person behind the wheel.

On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 06:29:12 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 23:13:15 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 02:08:28 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


John Larkin wrote:

He hasn't commented on my estimate, in SED, that it would take about
100 us for the shock wave to cross the middle ball. And that JFs last
measurement was 100 us.


I don't care to get involved in the arguments between you two. I'm
busy rebuilding two business websites right now.

Does anyone give a flaccid **** what Larkin thinks?

---
In my experience, it seems that as time goes by, fewer and fewer do
since 90% of what John does is sow seeds of discord and bring bones of
contention to the table.


Seeds? Bones? I talk about electronics, not biology. If 10% of the
group wants to stay on topic and talk electronics, that's actually
pretty good by usenet standards.

I do point it out when you post electronics that's wrong. Is that what
you mean by "seeds of discord"? Is that why you don't talk about
electronics much any more?

I notice that JT seldom mentions electronics either. All he talks
about is me. How weird.

John

On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 06:18:44 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 19:32:43 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 18:32:25 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 16:16:39 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 17:20:27 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 09:07:44 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 16:37:19 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

From the schematic:

1. Set the DSO for a single sweep triggered by channel 1 going high.

2. Pull M1 away from M2 and M3, which are just barely touching,
and let them settle for a few seconds.

3. Arm the DSO.

4. Release M1 so that it hits M2 directly across from where M3 is
touching M2.

5. Read the time it took for channel 2 to go low after channel 1 went
high. That'll be the time it took for the momentum accumulated by
M1 to be transferred to M3.

---
"Slow", "Medium", and "Fast" refer to the pulse width of the pulse on
channel 1, the width of which was determined by releasing the ball
farther and farther from plumb.

the fact that there _is_ a trailing edge means that M2 wasn't hit
squarely or that there are imperfections in the rig.

In either case, the bounce represents an impedance mismatch reflecting
power back from the load to the source.

In any case, the momentum transfer time is from the leading edge of
the trace on channel 1 to the falling edge of the trace on channel 2.

I'll get some more data together as time permits, and post it, and the
video's in the works...

---
New game:

30.jpg is with M3 tied back, M1 pulled about 30° away from plumb when
released, and shows how long it takes for the momentum in M1 to be
transferred to M2 and have M2 lose contact with M1; just about 100µs.

Did I guess good or what?

---
Not really.

In the 3 ball case, which is what was presented originally, you
guessed 100µs from the make of M1 to M2, to the break of M3 from M2,
which is really about 150µs, a 50% error.

Since I hadn't suggested a 2 ball reaction when you made your guess
it, of course, (the 2 ball reaction) didn't apply, so what you _must_
have been referring to was the 3 ball case, where 100µs doesn't work.

But, more importantly, and I don't know whether you remember or not, a
few years ago (maybe six or seven) a question came up about marbles
being run down a tube, hitting other marbles, and how long it would
take for the hit marble to move away from the hitter.

Your take on it was that the hit marble would move away from the
hitter as soon as the shock wave from the hit traversed the hit
marble, and I built my Newton's cradle to test your hypothesis.

As it turns out, you were wrong, and it takes much longer for the mass
to move than you predicted.


What bull. I was pretty close for things like this.

---
"For things like this"???

Yup. I'm an electrical engineer, not an ME, and I didn't use any
references or even a calculator or a pencil. I did it in my head. I
thought it was pretty good shootin'. It sure did annoy you.


That's just another catch phrase designed to minimize the significance
of your error, charlatan.
---

Your various measurements pretty nicely straddle my estimate.

---
They don't straddle your guess, since your guess starts at zero and my
numbers are all longer than your guess.


"100 us" starts at zero? Would you please explain that to us?

John

John Fields wrote:

On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 02:08:28 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


John Larkin wrote:

He hasn't commented on my estimate, in SED, that it would take about
100 us for the shock wave to cross the middle ball. And that JFs last
measurement was 100 us.


I don't care to get involved in the arguments between you two. I'm
busy rebuilding two business websites right now.

---
Good man! :-)


I try. Some friends needed help, so I offered to fix the problems.
What they have right now is bits and pieces of code that was copied from
other websites in an attempt to change the look of the websites. The
person that did it doesn't understand the finer details, and thinks that
Front Page is a good web tool. The rest of her code was done in Word,
with all the crap that MS adds to each line. Some of the revised pages
are less than 10% of the original size. She also laid everything out
for a very large format. Their server data shows a lot of older
browsers in use, so most people have to scroll both V & H to see each
page. I even came up with a trick to make a variable width logo for the
top of each page.

On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 11:17:56 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


John Fields wrote:

On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 02:08:28 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


John Larkin wrote:

He hasn't commented on my estimate, in SED, that it would take about
100 us for the shock wave to cross the middle ball. And that JFs last
measurement was 100 us.


I don't care to get involved in the arguments between you two. I'm
busy rebuilding two business websites right now.

---
Good man! :-)


I try. Some friends needed help, so I offered to fix the problems.
What they have right now is bits and pieces of code that was copied from
other websites in an attempt to change the look of the websites. The
person that did it doesn't understand the finer details, and thinks that
Front Page is a good web tool. The rest of her code was done in Word,
with all the crap that MS adds to each line. Some of the revised pages
are less than 10% of the original size. She also laid everything out
for a very large format. Their server data shows a lot of older
browsers in use, so most people have to scroll both V & H to see each
page. I even came up with a trick to make a variable width logo for the
top of each page.

Michael, What do you use as an editor? My oldest son, Aaron, wrote my
basic page structure in straight html, but I use Frontpage to add
stuff... easy to see what I'm doing graphically... and I just copy and
edit lines of what Aaron wrote :-)

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

Spice is like a sports car...
Performance only as good as the person behind the wheel.

On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 11:17:56 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


John Fields wrote:

On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 02:08:28 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


John Larkin wrote:

He hasn't commented on my estimate, in SED, that it would take about
100 us for the shock wave to cross the middle ball. And that JFs last
measurement was 100 us.


I don't care to get involved in the arguments between you two. I'm
busy rebuilding two business websites right now.

---
Good man! :-)


I try. Some friends needed help, so I offered to fix the problems.
What they have right now is bits and pieces of code that was copied from
other websites in an attempt to change the look of the websites. The
person that did it doesn't understand the finer details, and thinks that
Front Page is a good web tool. The rest of her code was done in Word,
with all the crap that MS adds to each line. Some of the revised pages
are less than 10% of the original size. She also laid everything out
for a very large format. Their server data shows a lot of older
browsers in use, so most people have to scroll both V & H to see each
page. I even came up with a trick to make a variable width logo for the
top of each page.

The Brat is redoing our web site. She tried using a couple of the
drag-and-drop web authoring things, didn't like them, so bought "HTML
for Dummies" and is doing it bare metal [1]. It's looking pretty good,
except for that ever-changing POS Internet Explorer, which requires a
heap of exception code for each of its versions.

How come everybody can write good browser code except for the world's
biggest software company?

John

[1] Just like Dear Old Dad, who codes embedded products in absolute
68K assembly.

On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 08:04:11 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 06:29:12 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 23:13:15 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 02:08:28 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


John Larkin wrote:

He hasn't commented on my estimate, in SED, that it would take about
100 us for the shock wave to cross the middle ball. And that JFs last
measurement was 100 us.


I don't care to get involved in the arguments between you two. I'm
busy rebuilding two business websites right now.

Does anyone give a flaccid **** what Larkin thinks?

---
In my experience, it seems that as time goes by, fewer and fewer do
since 90% of what John does is sow seeds of discord and bring bones of
contention to the table.


Seeds? Bones? I talk about electronics, not biology.

---
Analogy, John, analogy.

Are you really so thick that you didn't get it?
---

If 10% of the
group wants to stay on topic and talk electronics, that's actually
pretty good by usenet standards.

---
Straw man, since the group has nothing to do with causing the
problems that _you_ create, Mr. Phony.
---

I do point it out when you post electronics that's wrong. Is that what
you mean by "seeds of discord"?

---
Certainly not.

I'm always appreciative when someone finds an error in my work and
points it out in a civil manner.

You however, seem to take great pleasure from belittling anyone whom
you believe is in error, whether the facts substantiate it or not, and
generally just being an asshole about coming up with data to
substsantiate your claim. That's sowing the seeds of discord.

On the flip side of the coin lie the bones of contention, which are
what you fight over, tooth and nail, to take possession of and deny,
when someone points out one of your errors.

That's a serious character flaw, but one which you have to deny exists
in order to keep yourself from fralling off of that throne you've
built for yourself.
---

Is that why you don't talk about
electronics much any more?

---
No, it seems that there's less and less actually worth talking about
any more, and if I don't join the party someone else will who will say
pretty much what I would have.

I read through the threads though, and if someone misses something
important I'll usually address it toward the end.
---

I notice that JT seldom mentions electronics either. All he talks
about is me. How weird.

---
When there's a turd in the punch bowl it's hard to talk about anything
else.

---
JF

On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 08:07:43 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 06:18:44 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

---
"For things like this"???

Yup. I'm an electrical engineer, not an ME, and I didn't use any
references or even a calculator or a pencil. I did it in my head. I
thought it was pretty good shootin'. It sure did annoy you.

---
I don't see where you got that, since I presented the facts and why
you were in error in a civil manner.

Just for grins, though, why don't you go ahead and outline how you
came up with 100µs?

You know, explain the process, OK?
---

That's just another catch phrase designed to minimize the significance
of your error, charlatan.
---

Your various measurements pretty nicely straddle my estimate.

---
They don't straddle your guess, since your guess starts at zero and my
numbers are all longer than your guess.


"100 us" starts at zero? Would you please explain that to us?

---
Instead of retreating into the collective (which I think pretty much
understands what I meant, if it even cares) for protection, take the
responsibility for yourself and if _you_ don't understand, say so and
I'll be glad to smart you up.

---
JF

On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 12:12:22 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 08:04:11 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

[snip

I read through the threads though, and if someone misses something
important I'll usually address it toward the end.
---

I notice that JT seldom mentions electronics either. All he talks
about is me. How weird.

No. It's hard to resist poking fun at the foibles of a devout asshole
:-)


---
When there's a turd in the punch bowl it's hard to talk about anything
else.

---
JF

Larkin, of course, ignores technical discussions, such as...

Lamp Model

Data Reduction

Laptop Batteries

Skype Messaging

measuring fuel efficiency

AND 32 circuit posts to the LTspice list in the past 10 months.

Moderated, by the way. Larkin-style non-circuit **** would be tossed
by Helmut.

JF,

I thought I had the Larkin nonsense cleansed by only plonking you in
SED, but leaving ABSE clear.

Regrettably, It's spilled over here, so the plonk must go global.

Send me a Message ID if something of import is discussed.

I'm always pleased to note that I'm the highest standard for Larkin's
disdain, but please don't feed the jerk. Let him die that most un-
pleasant of deaths... alone ;-)

--
...Jim Thompson

| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

Jim Thompson wrote:

On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 11:17:56 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


John Fields wrote:

On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 02:08:28 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


John Larkin wrote:

He hasn't commented on my estimate, in SED, that it would take about
100 us for the shock wave to cross the middle ball. And that JFs last
measurement was 100 us.


I don't care to get involved in the arguments between you two. I'm
busy rebuilding two business websites right now.

---
Good man! :-)


I try. Some friends needed help, so I offered to fix the problems.
What they have right now is bits and pieces of code that was copied from
other websites in an attempt to change the look of the websites. The
person that did it doesn't understand the finer details, and thinks that
Front Page is a good web tool. The rest of her code was done in Word,
with all the crap that MS adds to each line. Some of the revised pages
are less than 10% of the original size. She also laid everything out
for a very large format. Their server data shows a lot of older
browsers in use, so most people have to scroll both V & H to see each
page. I even came up with a trick to make a variable width logo for the
top of each page.

Michael, What do you use as an editor? My oldest son, Aaron, wrote my
basic page structure in straight html, but I use Frontpage to add
stuff... easy to see what I'm doing graphically... and I just copy and
edit lines of what Aaron wrote :-)


I do it in Wordpad. I create templates to give the website a style,
with each section clearly marked. Then I write the custom content for
each page. I'm looking at Joomla right now. It is a CMS to help keep
track of everything on a website.

John Larkin wrote:

On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 11:17:56 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


John Fields wrote:

On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 02:08:28 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


John Larkin wrote:

He hasn't commented on my estimate, in SED, that it would take about
100 us for the shock wave to cross the middle ball. And that JFs last
measurement was 100 us.


I don't care to get involved in the arguments between you two. I'm
busy rebuilding two business websites right now.

---
Good man! :-)


I try. Some friends needed help, so I offered to fix the problems.
What they have right now is bits and pieces of code that was copied from
other websites in an attempt to change the look of the websites. The
person that did it doesn't understand the finer details, and thinks that
Front Page is a good web tool. The rest of her code was done in Word,
with all the crap that MS adds to each line. Some of the revised pages
are less than 10% of the original size. She also laid everything out
for a very large format. Their server data shows a lot of older
browsers in use, so most people have to scroll both V & H to see each
page. I even came up with a trick to make a variable width logo for the
top of each page.

The Brat is redoing our web site. She tried using a couple of the
drag-and-drop web authoring things, didn't like them, so bought "HTML
for Dummies" and is doing it bare metal [1]. It's looking pretty good,
except for that ever-changing POS Internet Explorer, which requires a
heap of exception code for each of its versions.

How come everybody can write good browser code except for the world's
biggest software company?


I used a couple inch thick book to learn HTML right after I was laid
off in 2001. As far as I.E. goes, you either compromise on the
complexity or the appearance. of the site. If a page passes the w3c
tests, you can bet that it won't work with at least one browser. The
worst is the error list generated when you post a link to a page on
another website.

validator.w3.org


BTW, has she found http://www.cooltext.com or
http://www.buttonator.com yet? They create custom buttons and some
other graphics online for free.

On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 12:12:22 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 08:04:11 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 06:29:12 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 23:13:15 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 02:08:28 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


John Larkin wrote:

He hasn't commented on my estimate, in SED, that it would take about
100 us for the shock wave to cross the middle ball. And that JFs last
measurement was 100 us.


I don't care to get involved in the arguments between you two. I'm
busy rebuilding two business websites right now.

Does anyone give a flaccid **** what Larkin thinks?

---
In my experience, it seems that as time goes by, fewer and fewer do
since 90% of what John does is sow seeds of discord and bring bones of
contention to the table.


Seeds? Bones? I talk about electronics, not biology.

---
Analogy, John, analogy.

Are you really so thick that you didn't get it?
---

If 10% of the
group wants to stay on topic and talk electronics, that's actually
pretty good by usenet standards.

---
Straw man, since the group has nothing to do with causing the
problems that _you_ create, Mr. Phony.
---

I do point it out when you post electronics that's wrong. Is that what
you mean by "seeds of discord"?

---
Certainly not.

I'm always appreciative when someone finds an error in my work and
points it out in a civil manner.

You however, seem to take great pleasure from belittling anyone whom
you believe is in error, whether the facts substantiate it or not, and
generally just being an asshole about coming up with data to
substsantiate your claim. That's sowing the seeds of discord.

On the flip side of the coin lie the bones of contention, which are
what you fight over, tooth and nail, to take possession of and deny,
when someone points out one of your errors.

That's a serious character flaw, but one which you have to deny exists
in order to keep yourself from fralling off of that throne you've
built for yourself.
---

Is that why you don't talk about
electronics much any more?

---
No, it seems that there's less and less actually worth talking about
any more, and if I don't join the party someone else will who will say
pretty much what I would have.

I read through the threads though, and if someone misses something
important I'll usually address it toward the end.
---

I notice that JT seldom mentions electronics either. All he talks
about is me. How weird.

---
When there's a turd in the punch bowl it's hard to talk about anything
else.

Fetish, sure enough.

John

On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 12:25:35 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 08:07:43 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 06:18:44 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

---
"For things like this"???

Yup. I'm an electrical engineer, not an ME, and I didn't use any
references or even a calculator or a pencil. I did it in my head. I
thought it was pretty good shootin'. It sure did annoy you.

---
I don't see where you got that, since I presented the facts and why
you were in error in a civil manner.

Just for grins, though, why don't you go ahead and outline how you
came up with 100µs?

I visualized the spheres colliding in space, thought about the
deformations and the shock waves, guessed the speed of sound in the
metal, and, well, guessed. I was impressed when your measurements came
pretty close, at least some of them.

Reasonably accurate guessing, "lightning empiricism", is very useful
to estimate if some effect is important enough to justify more serious
calculation. Just today, talking about an SSR and stray capacitance,
somebody said something like "4 ohms, 20 pF, 80 picoseconds, can't
matter."



You know, explain the process, OK?
---

That's just another catch phrase designed to minimize the significance
of your error, charlatan.
---

Your various measurements pretty nicely straddle my estimate.

---
They don't straddle your guess, since your guess starts at zero and my
numbers are all longer than your guess.


"100 us" starts at zero? Would you please explain that to us?

---
Instead of retreating into the collective (which I think pretty much
understands what I meant, if it even cares) for protection, take the
responsibility for yourself and if _you_ don't understand, say so and
I'll be glad to smart you up.

Why is an estimated time of "100 us" wrong because "your guess starts
at zero" ? I never mentioned zero. That doesn't make any sense. It
would follow that all numbers are wrong because they "start at zero."

Yes, please explain it.

John

On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 19:04:42 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 12:25:35 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 08:07:43 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 06:18:44 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

---
"For things like this"???

Yup. I'm an electrical engineer, not an ME, and I didn't use any
references or even a calculator or a pencil. I did it in my head. I
thought it was pretty good shootin'. It sure did annoy you.

---
I don't see where you got that, since I presented the facts and why
you were in error in a civil manner.

Just for grins, though, why don't you go ahead and outline how you
came up with 100µs?

I visualized the spheres colliding in space, thought about the
deformations and the shock waves, guessed the speed of sound in the
metal, and, well, guessed. I was impressed when your measurements came
pretty close, at least some of them.

Reasonably accurate guessing, "lightning empiricism", is very useful
to estimate if some effect is important enough to justify more serious
calculation. Just today, talking about an SSR and stray capacitance,
somebody said something like "4 ohms, 20 pF, 80 picoseconds, can't
matter."

---
Ah, but there's the rub.

For the SSR situation you can proceed farther and, with the data at
hand, determine whether your guess was accurate.

However, in the case of the colliding Foucault pendulums, such doesn't
seem to be the case.

Given the mass of the spheres, the length of their arms, and the angle
of release of the moving pendulum, can you come up with a way to
validate your guess?
---

You know, explain the process, OK?
---

That's just another catch phrase designed to minimize the significance
of your error, charlatan.
---

Your various measurements pretty nicely straddle my estimate.

---
They don't straddle your guess, since your guess starts at zero and my
numbers are all longer than your guess.


"100 us" starts at zero? Would you please explain that to us?

---
Instead of retreating into the collective (which I think pretty much
understands what I meant, if it even cares) for protection, take the
responsibility for yourself and if _you_ don't understand, say so and
I'll be glad to smart you up.

Why is an estimated time of "100 us" wrong because "your guess starts
at zero" ? I never mentioned zero. That doesn't make any sense. It
would follow that all numbers are wrong because they "start at zero."

Yes, please explain it.

---
Regardless of how you try to confound it, I'll take that to mean: "I
don't understand, please explain."

OK.

Since time started when M1 hit M2 and ended when M3 left M2, the
recorded elapsed time between those events was about 150 microseconds.

Therefore, since time started when M1 hit M2, your guess of 100
microseconds elapsing before M3 left M2 was about 50 microseconds
short and, since M1 hitting M2 was the beginning of the counting
period, there's really no way of bracketing your 150µs guess around
100µs to get a +/- 25% error.

---
JF