The Foundation is Being Laid...

Solve all the world's problems in this forum.
NOTE: While debate is a good thing, we expect all parties to have respect for individual opinions here.

Postby kg5uc » Mon Feb 19, 2007 6:29 pm

Skinjob: <i>"In my time line many scientific theories have gone down. One went down while I was in electronics school; and that was the idea that electricity flowed from + (positive) to - (negative). It was known as "Common Flow" theory. During the transition to "Electron Flow" theory, all the books and schematics had to be changed. It was confusing to say the least, because nothing changes over night, and the manuals for many electronic devices were still in Common Flow terminology. We all know now that electricity flows from negative to positive; but for how long will that "fact" hold?"</i>

Now you're in one of my fields...

<i><b>Surely you jest?!</b></i> As of yesterday (the 18th of February) I am 55 years old. I started studying electronics at the age of 8 and obtained my first two Ham radio licenses at the age of 12 (Novice, and 6 months later, General). I fixed my first T.V. (which the T.V. technician said was not repairable) at the age of 9. I studied books which a ham friend of mine loaned me which were old at <i>that</i> time (no semiconductors...all tube theory). I had <i>never</i> heard of the "Common Flow" theory in all my studies, so I did a little research. Paraphrased from <a href="http://madsci.org/posts/archives/2006-07/1152479101.Eg.r.html">http://madsci.org/posts/archives/2006-07/1152479101.Eg.r.html:</a>

<i>"During the late 1700s, when it was discovered that electricity had a polarity (+ and -), scientists such as Benjamin Franklin proposed that electricity flowed from positive potentials to negative potentials. Thus during the development of electrical power systems and rail systems during the 1800s electrical devices were marked with arrows to show the direction electrical current is flowing from positive to negative in the devices and systems.

Around 1900 negatively charged electrons were discovered to be the actual source of electrical current flow and they flowed from negative potentials and were attracted to positive potentials. However, there was so much electrical equipment already in the world by 1900 marked with the wrong direction of current flow and so many electricians that were taught about current that way, the marking system has been continued to this day to be in the old, wrong direction. Even today electrical and electronic devices such as diodes and transistors and their symbols are marked with arrows in the opposite direction of electron current flow!"</i>

So the "conversion" from your "Common Flow" Theory to the "Electron Flow" Theory happened around 1900. Surmising that one would have to be at least 16 years of age in that day to attend an electronics school, you must be around, what...123 years old, if not a bit older?

It's one thing to debate Empiricism vs. Rationalism, and to debate whether Global Warming (or Cooling) is cyclical or not; caused or aided by human intervention; or whether it exists at all, but when giving examples such as these, one should consider chronology before placing oneself in such a position.
73 from KG5UC

Be nice to America or we'll bring Democracy to <u>your</u> country!
User avatar
kg5uc
Trapped Under Ice
 
Posts: 218
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2005 9:47 pm
Location: Godfrey, IL

Postby ohlia » Mon Feb 19, 2007 10:15 pm

:birthday: kg5uc!!

I am truly impress with your achievements when you were 'that' young age. :woot:
You calling me stupid do not make me stupid; it makes you a person calling me stupid.
User avatar
ohlia
Stone Cold Crazy
 
Posts: 1976
Joined: Wed Jul 05, 2006 10:21 am

Postby kg5uc » Mon Feb 19, 2007 10:25 pm

Thanks Ohlia! Most people start counting backwards at their 40th birthday...that would make me 25!

:wchair:
73 from KG5UC

Be nice to America or we'll bring Democracy to <u>your</u> country!
User avatar
kg5uc
Trapped Under Ice
 
Posts: 218
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2005 9:47 pm
Location: Godfrey, IL

Postby AJRC_CS » Tue Feb 20, 2007 4:23 am

Yeah, happy birthday kg5uc for Sunday just gone.
The ignorant close their mind and convince themselves that there's only one truth. The wise keep an open mind to the different possibilities leading to and stemming from the present. Look not with your eyes but with your mind.
User avatar
AJRC_CS
Outlaw Torn
 
Posts: 1049
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2006 3:39 am
Location: Newcastle Upon Tyne, England

Postby Skinjob » Tue Feb 20, 2007 6:29 pm

kg5uc,

I stand corrected in terminology. Instead of "Common Flow", I meant "Conventional Flow".

http://www.opamp-electronics.com/tutori ... _01_07.htm

Many, if not all, of the older Navy electronic technical manuals and schematics of the 1930s and 1940s were written in "Conventional Flow", not "Electron Flow". But, at the time I went to Navy electronics school they taught "Electron Flow"; but the manuals and technical data were still in "Conventional Flow". This was a bit confusing while in school because the technical data was not labeled accordingly, and we had to sort it out for ourselves. It was particularly confusing with control circuits using servos, selsyns, and control transformers.

Probably where I got confused, since it was over 50 years ago, was that the course was called "Common Core", referring to the fact that regardless of your electronic specialty, the first six weeks were the same for everyone. I was a Gun Fire Control Technician, FT.

Anyway, it was explained to us in that school that the Navy was changing from Conventional Flow to Electron Flow, because electrons were negative charged particles and Protons were the positive particles, and were over 1800 times heavier than electrons.

I based my statement on what the school taught me at that time, 1954. Of course there is still debate about polarity. But, if that makes me a liar....... ?
Sixty miles per gallon? Not really. Cheap? Nope. Phoney and stupid? Yes, the Prius is global warming on 4 wheels.
User avatar
Skinjob
Hero Of The Day
 
Posts: 567
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2006 9:44 pm
Location: Oregon

Postby Skinjob » Mon Mar 05, 2007 9:58 pm

http://www.channel4.com/science/microsi ... index.html

Some climatologists are coming forward to dispute the myth of global warming, and are expressing themselves in the "Great Global Warming Swindle".
Sixty miles per gallon? Not really. Cheap? Nope. Phoney and stupid? Yes, the Prius is global warming on 4 wheels.
User avatar
Skinjob
Hero Of The Day
 
Posts: 567
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2006 9:44 pm
Location: Oregon

Postby bermbits » Thu Apr 05, 2007 10:01 am

We're getting closer...

From Yahoo News India:

Kuwait City, April 4 (Xinhua) The US is planning to attack Iran's nuclear reactors and other nuclear facilities by the end of this month, the Kuwait-based Arab Times newspaper reported Wednesday.

Citing anonymous sources in Washington, it said that various White House departments had started preparing the political speech to be delivered by the US president later this month, announcing the military attack on Iran.

The speech will provide the 'evidence' and the 'justification' for the US to resort to the military option after failing to persuade Tehran to give up its nuclear ambitions, said the report.

According to the Times, one of the justifications expected in the speech is Iran's alleged role in the killing of American soldiers in Iraq by supporting various militias with money and arms.

The US president's speech will also point to Iran's political interference in Iraq, obviously in cooperation with Syria.

The sources were quoted as saying that US will not resort to a ground attack in order to avoid human losses.
"Veritas et probitas super omnia."
User avatar
bermbits
Stone Cold Crazy
 
Posts: 1568
Joined: Sat May 14, 2005 6:51 am
Location: New Hampshuh! Ayuh!

Postby AJRC_CS » Thu Apr 05, 2007 11:06 am

Looks like we will finally see if Iran either puts up or shuts up.
The ignorant close their mind and convince themselves that there's only one truth. The wise keep an open mind to the different possibilities leading to and stemming from the present. Look not with your eyes but with your mind.
User avatar
AJRC_CS
Outlaw Torn
 
Posts: 1049
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2006 3:39 am
Location: Newcastle Upon Tyne, England

Postby Bedford » Thu Apr 05, 2007 11:16 am

It would help if we knew how credible that paper was.
:teach: The Professor Penguin of Brainformation :GF:

<i>"This is the greatest concentration of talent and genius, except for those times when Bedford eats alone.”</i>-- JFK, were he alive today.
User avatar
Bedford
Holier Than Thou
 
Posts: 6055
Joined: Sat May 14, 2005 3:26 pm
Location: Sunnyside of Louisville

Postby bermbits » Thu Apr 05, 2007 11:51 am

I guess we'll see.
"Veritas et probitas super omnia."
User avatar
bermbits
Stone Cold Crazy
 
Posts: 1568
Joined: Sat May 14, 2005 6:51 am
Location: New Hampshuh! Ayuh!

Postby Yogi » Thu Apr 05, 2007 1:14 pm

Makes me wonder why he isn't considering an attack on North Korea?
Could it be that Iran doesn't have any missles that can reach our mainland, and the fact they are not close neighbors of China?
Inside every older person is a younger person wondering what the hell happened.
User avatar
Yogi
Big Kahuna
 
Posts: 3351
Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 4:29 pm
Location: near Chicago

Postby bermbits » Thu Apr 05, 2007 2:34 pm

Yes.
"Veritas et probitas super omnia."
User avatar
bermbits
Stone Cold Crazy
 
Posts: 1568
Joined: Sat May 14, 2005 6:51 am
Location: New Hampshuh! Ayuh!

Postby Yogi » Thu Apr 05, 2007 2:39 pm

Thought so. I guess going after an easy target is better than going after a target that is actually a threat.
Inside every older person is a younger person wondering what the hell happened.
User avatar
Yogi
Big Kahuna
 
Posts: 3351
Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 4:29 pm
Location: near Chicago

Jundullah

Postby Yogi » Thu Apr 05, 2007 2:59 pm

Oh, and by the way, if you think Iran is the only trouble maker in the region who supports insurgents, read this article and be enlightened.

A Pakistani tribal militant group responsible for a series of deadly guerrilla raids inside Iran has been secretly encouraged and advised by American officials since 2005, U.S. and Pakistani intelligence sources tell ABC News.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/200 ... xclus.html


NOTE: I'm not sure if my source is one of those lying bastard Liberal media news outlets, or not- I lost track. Maybe somebody here can remind me :biggrin:
Inside every older person is a younger person wondering what the hell happened.
User avatar
Yogi
Big Kahuna
 
Posts: 3351
Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 4:29 pm
Location: near Chicago

Postby Skinjob » Thu Apr 05, 2007 4:42 pm

All governments do that against their enemies, Yogi. I'm not judging the morality or truth in it at all.

But, it is common knowledge that we fought against Russian pilots in the air war over Korea, and later in the air war over Vietnam. We were even bolder when we helped China against Japan with the "American Volunteer Group", known as the "Flying Tigers".

Even before the war in Vietnam, Kennedy sent in so-called "Advisors", Army Rangers that trained the South Vietnamese. But, to no avail; we eventually lost that war from inside the United States where are soldiers were spit on by back-stabbers in our own country. Hmmm. History repeats itself.
Sixty miles per gallon? Not really. Cheap? Nope. Phoney and stupid? Yes, the Prius is global warming on 4 wheels.
User avatar
Skinjob
Hero Of The Day
 
Posts: 567
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2006 9:44 pm
Location: Oregon

Postby van » Thu Apr 05, 2007 4:51 pm

Kia ora

MOSCOW, April 5 (Xinhua) -- Iran has a strong air defense potential to resist possible U.S. air strikes, a senior Russian military official told a news conference on Thursday.

The Iranian air defense system "makes it possible to oppose any types of aircraft," including those possessed by the U.S. armed forces, Yury Solovyov, commander of Russian special forces, was quoted by the Interfax news agency as saying.

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2007- ... 940144.htm

An excellent time for the likes of Russia and China among others to see how good their weapon systems are, provided they have supplied them with their latest technology.
If they are up to scratch, there will be some fireworks

Arohanui
Shalom
Bill
van
Hero Of The Day
 
Posts: 684
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2004 2:42 pm
Location: nz

Postby Bedford » Thu Apr 05, 2007 5:09 pm

I don't sweat North Korea. As they are atheists, they see no upside in dying. Muslims, however, do, which is them having a nuke is a much bigger threat.

Besides, if it wasn't for Carter and Clinton, North Korea wouldn't have nukes anyways.
:teach: The Professor Penguin of Brainformation :GF:

<i>"This is the greatest concentration of talent and genius, except for those times when Bedford eats alone.”</i>-- JFK, were he alive today.
User avatar
Bedford
Holier Than Thou
 
Posts: 6055
Joined: Sat May 14, 2005 3:26 pm
Location: Sunnyside of Louisville

Postby Yogi » Thu Apr 05, 2007 5:17 pm

One of the reasons why I am skeptical about talks of bombing Iran has to do with its ability to disrupt delivery of oil from the middle east. It would be close to suicidal to cut off supplies, and a man from Texas should be able to figure that one out quite easily.

China has a big stake in energy supplies from that part of the world as well. I'm thinking they would not just sit by idly while we shut off a major part of their energy supply.

Plus, the Secretary of State seems to be carrying a much different message than what I've read regarding impending bombings of Iran. She apparently is on a track that I've endorsed for a while now, i.e., to recognize Iran for the power it is and find ways to work with it instead of against it. ( http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/ ... 5520070405 ) I doubt that she is acting independently of the president even if she is looking more and more liberal.
Inside every older person is a younger person wondering what the hell happened.
User avatar
Yogi
Big Kahuna
 
Posts: 3351
Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 4:29 pm
Location: near Chicago

Postby AJRC_CS » Thu Apr 05, 2007 5:19 pm

Of course, Bedford. It's all the leftists fault. :roll:
The ignorant close their mind and convince themselves that there's only one truth. The wise keep an open mind to the different possibilities leading to and stemming from the present. Look not with your eyes but with your mind.
User avatar
AJRC_CS
Outlaw Torn
 
Posts: 1049
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2006 3:39 am
Location: Newcastle Upon Tyne, England

Postby AJRC_CS » Thu Apr 05, 2007 5:27 pm

This troubles me as well, Yogi. If it's just as the article bermbits posted says and they only attack the nuclear reactors then i don't think China would get involved. But if the oil flow to China is somehow compromised then i think the "Big Red Giant" may just step in and cause all kinds of problems.

Does America want a war with China? I don't think so! As you said that's probably the main reason Dubya chose Iraq and not N. Korea. I mean why else would you attack a country without WMD and not a country with WMD and a deep seated hatred of America, unless you were afraid that the country with the WMD and a deep seated hatred of America would call on it's big red friend to come help it.

We will have to watch China very closely, if they want to get involved we are in big trouble.
The ignorant close their mind and convince themselves that there's only one truth. The wise keep an open mind to the different possibilities leading to and stemming from the present. Look not with your eyes but with your mind.
User avatar
AJRC_CS
Outlaw Torn
 
Posts: 1049
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2006 3:39 am
Location: Newcastle Upon Tyne, England

PreviousNext

Return to Politics and Government

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron