Jim Naseum
-
Posts
2026 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Forums
Events
Gallery
Posts posted by Jim Naseum
-
-
Relative yes, arbitrary no. I think the estimate in "years" is referencing the distance light travels over time.The universe is 13B years old.
Or 6000 years, or 1 second.
Time is relative. Once that was established, any definition of duration became rather relative as well.
Dave
But sure enough, relative to some other event it could be the blink of an eye! It's not all that meaningful.
Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk
-
The universe is 13B years old. And of course very large. So, hurricanes are just a little noise.
Thermodynamic entropy says that instead of hot suns and warm rocks and planets and empty space that's cold, everything will settle into one even temperature given enough time. Earth's hot core will cool. The sun will burn out. Buildings will fall.
Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk
-
I'm hoping DWI recalls the link.
Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk
-
I don't know what a full differential design means nor what it's true benefits are. I "think" I know enough to say that it's "good"???
If you add an input transformer, is that going to contort the sound a bit? (for the purist at heart person)
The only advantage of a balanced line is reducing the noise that is picked up on the cable connecting two devices. Often, this is done for long runs, like 50 feet, where noise can be an issue.
If there is no noise issue, adding an input transformer means adding a LOT of cost. Good ones are very dear. Crappy ones will ruin the sound.
-
Or maybe not. I guess no one has any technical advise about the OPs interesting inquiry, then.
Jo, this was addressed to some degree in posts #14 and 18 in the "Ultimate Gem" thread. Richard, as to using XLR, it would require either an input transformer to create a balanced to unbalanced network, or a differential/balanced driver arrangement. Either way, it is not going to be full differential all the way through.
Maynard
OIC.
He mentioned XLR connectors. I didn't think he would mean balanced input on a tube amp. Got it.
-
For consideration.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy_%28energy_dispersal%29
Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk
-
I think the reference is energy state.Energy always moves from a useful to a non-useful state and life's processes have the ability to use consciousness to create order to fend off, at least temporarily, the natural tendency to disorder or equilibrium.
Those are the two competing ideas, and neither one of them can rule out the other. It is the "Yin and the Yang."
If things always tend toward disorder, isn't that order?
Order implies disorder, and vice versa.
Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk
-
Good thoughts. I believe the mind can use meditation transcendentally to see the arrow of time going in other directions. But, short of that, the net net of your life must be an increase in entropy. I think Hawking was describing human psychology, as in, the tendency of seeing the arrow only moving to increased entropy. Certainly, many easterners reject that maxim.A great book by an incredible mind. I have often wondered if he's set the record for survival with that disease. If so, it would suggest that someone with real purpose can overcome almost anything but a safe landing on their heads.
Dave
Yes, an incredible mind. He can fathom, for instance, that the arrow of time only moves in one direction for the HUMAN MIND, but moves in all directions for the rest of the universe. His reasoning was impeccable. Computation can only increase entropy. The human brain computes! Therefore, we can only imagine time moving in the direction of increasing entropy!
Simple, really.
But isnt the mind, and more specifically consciousness, an instrument to constantly battle against Entropy? Energy always moves from a useful to a non-useful state and life's processes have the ability to use consciousness to create order to fend off, at least temporarily, the natural tendency to disorder or equilibrium. Such as our ability to maintain the ecosystem of our body for 80 or so years until the laws of the universe catches up with us and we decay into equilibrium of the soil at which point plant life etc uses our decayed body to sustain their temporary lives and so on. In fact, our entire civilization was created to more efficiently and effectively ward off this natural tendency.
Perhaps we should not look at time in a linear function but rather that of a balance between Creation and Decay.
Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk
-
The money you save will be an inconsequential fraction of the whole cost. XLR Connectors? That are about $2 more than RCA.
-
The human brain computes!
Hence the total loss of us and our science to comprehend, much less understand, non-temporality.
Dave
Now yer talkin'!
-
What makes you a sore loser is whining, complaining, placing blame, etc. CAM didn't do any of those things.
I see the making of an iconoclast here. A different kind of individual who isn't going to let himself be dragged into someone else's traditions. And, let's face it, some guys are not natural press hounds.
-
Or maybe not. I guess no one has any technical advise about the OPs interesting inquiry, then.
-
A great book by an incredible mind. I have often wondered if he's set the record for survival with that disease. If so, it would suggest that someone with real purpose can overcome almost anything but a safe landing on their heads.
Dave
Yes, an incredible mind. He can fathom, for instance, that the arrow of time only moves in one direction for the HUMAN MIND, but moves in all directions for the rest of the universe. His reasoning was impeccable. Computation can only increase entropy. The human brain computes! Therefore, we can only imagine time moving in the direction of increasing entropy!
Simple, really.
-
You wouldn't necessarily get more mid band power. The real advantage is you can get away with much smaller output iron. When you airgap a transformer which is necessary when standing DC current is passing through the winding the inductance drops off. To compensate for a lower L output transformer designers use more turns to increase L. More turns means more copper and iron and this is why a 20-20k output transformer for SE tube amps are so expensive.
-Cindy
Hey, it's great to see some ladies interested in the technology. Very pertinent post. It will be interesting to see a lady's POV here.
-
He's not giving up yet on black holes. he is now suggesting we could power the whole earth with a small black hole orbiting the earth. And in the process, win his long awaiting Nobel Prize.
How can the author of THIS masterpiece miss?
-
I'm asking more out of curiosity.... I keep telling myself I don't need a tube amp..... don't need a tube amp.....
I read some things the other day and can't get this question out of my head.
For the sake of conversation, let's just say that tube amps are designed to play 20/20K.
What if you are biamping and don't need the amp to go to 20hz?
What if you are crossing at say, 300/500 (other) hz. Can you skew the output such that you can maximize other benefits into the sound since the amp isn't expected to play as low?
If so, what are the other trade-off's that you can now explore?
(no particular amp/tube flavor in mind although since SET seems to be a popular flavor, we can use SET)
Would you simply use different iron?
Could you squeeze more output since the total output isn't spread so wide? (make a 2A3 think it was a bad-azz KT-90??)
The output is determined by the output tube setup, not the transformer as an upper limit. Transformer quality doesn't increase just because it has narrow bandwidth, in fact, the reverse is generally true. Just look at the cheap little MI transformers compared to HiFi transformers. They are 1/4 the size, and have more distortion. If you could design a special transformer for the narrow band, then yes, you could improve it over larger ones, but the cost of doing that for a one off is kind of prohibitive. The small ones on the shelf will not likely be better than "full bandwidth" HiFi trannies.
There's really not much to recommend designing a limited bandwidth amp.
-
1
-
-
I don't see the link? Can you post it?Here is the Link to the compensation act that pays downwinders and uranium workers.
Congress passed this compensation plan right before the downwinders case was getting ready to go to trial.
Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk
-
So, it looks like you have no answer to the topic, just more personal vitriol? Any limits to that?
Now you see the difference between you and me. I'm generally about the interesting subjects. You.....? Well, it seems obvious.
Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk
-
Angst? Was it the heaven question? The Indians think there are thousands of universes separated by levels of goodness, or status. What do you think?Jo, you really need to get a grip, go find a healthier outlet for whatever angst it is you're suffering.
Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk
-
Where is heaven? It must be in another universe.
Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk
-
What? Now you can't look up words?
Define "useful."
Ok, you win. I don't think it is possible to engage you in a useful conversation about these topics of science and metaphysics.
I thought this thread was about the nature of the universe, not brotherly love. No human being's dream caused this universe to exist.How does science teach you how to live? Where will you learn "the principles" about love, charity, compassion, respect, justice, morality? From Maxwell? Planck? Is it even possible that you have not studied any philosophy, any metaphysics at all?
You seem to imply that a scientific explanation of the nature of the universe is somehow immoral. Science and morality are two different concepts.I seem to recall reading that PWK was a churchgoer**. Now, why would that be if all he needed was science? What use has a man for Saul, or Abraham, or Mark, when he has Einstein and Hertz and Feinman? Most people I know create a moral framework for life first, and then simply apply science as needed.
Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk
What on earth are you posting here for? Really? What are you trying to accomplish?
Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk
-
Philosophies are opinion based. It's a great tool for those who can't handle facts and who think they are generating the universe by what they think or dream.
That's what you said.
Then you said PWK was great because he only worked on science and making speakers.
I pointed out he was religious. Which means he believed in "opinions" which according to you, would have made him "incapable of handling facts. "
As I say, "useless."
Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk
-
Around 5B of the world's populace believe in multiple universes beyond the "telescopic universe" of western science. The Indians had very closely pegged the age of the earth a few thousand years before western science. They have one of the most fascinating and complex cosmologies in all of civilization. The temporal world we see with our senses is regarded as an illusion (maya).
Almost all cultures believe that life doesn't end when the body goes dead, and this obviates the need for still more universes of various kinds. Considering the laws of thermodynamics, there kind of has to be a place for that 20W mind to land.
I wonder how Americans came to embrace the most threadbare cosmology on Earth?
-
Ok, you win. I don't think it is possible to engage you in a useful conversation about these topics of science and metaphysics.How does science teach you how to live? Where will you learn "the principles" about love, charity, compassion, respect, justice, morality? From Maxwell? Planck? Is it even possible that you have not studied any philosophy, any metaphysics at all?
I thought this thread was about the nature of the universe, not brotherly love. No human being's dream caused this universe to exist.
I seem to recall reading that PWK was a churchgoer**. Now, why would that be if all he needed was science? What use has a man for Saul, or Abraham, or Mark, when he has Einstein and Hertz and Feinman? Most people I know create a moral framework for life first, and then simply apply science as needed.
You seem to imply that a scientific explanation of the nature of the universe is somehow immoral. Science and morality are two different concepts.
Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk
Tip of the Iceberg, or Bottom?
in Lounge
Posted
It certainly dispels the common myth that the USG would never willfully kill it's own citizens. The snowjob that was laid on citizens by the AEC was unconscionable by any standard. I would say, tip of the iceberg.
Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk