EEVblog #888 - Mailbag

[EEVblog]

More Mailbag!

SPOILERS:
Electronics Dummy Load and the problems with paralelling MOSFET's
http://github.com/dangrie158/SmartDummyLoad
http://www.nupo-artworks.de
Atheist Book: Christian Mythology for Kids
http://christianmythologybook.com/
Metal Rectifier, / Selenium Rectifier.
Hornby Triang model train P5A Power Controller.
Gtronics Protoshield Plus for Arduino: http://www.gtronics.net/en/products/arduino-proto-shield-plus
Mitsubishi MT-398FOR6A Analog Mobile Phone
Swiss Tools Screwdrivers

[HighVoltage]

Really  nice to see those PB Swiss Tools in your mailbag.

I have a set of PB-Swiss-Tools ALLEN BALL END Hex tools.
And they are by far the most precision Hex key Wrenches I ever had.

I should check out, what else they have.

[Brumby]

The Triang train controller - I have one too!

Recognised it at this point...


Must see if I can dig mine out...

[Barny]

I have an "Kleinbahn" train controller.
Its an very interesting one.

Its content is a Transformator & a red dipped selen rectefier, a bimetal strip for overload protection and a switch to reverse the polarity.
Nothing else.

The speed was controlled by tapping of the voltage from the exposed top windings of the transformator with an slider.

[imidis]

More mailbags please! My addiction and jealousy can't help but request! 

[samnmax]

I have an "Kleinbahn" train controller.
Its an very interesting one.

Its content is a Transformator & a red dipped selen rectefier, a bimetal strip for overload protection and a switch to reverse the polarity.
Nothing else.

The speed was controlled by tapping of the voltage from the exposed top windings of the transformator with an slider.

Old Spanish "Ibertren" train controllers worked the same way, although i think the rectifier was a normal silicon diode bridge.

[TheAmmoniacal]

You have to do another mailbag on the small ones / letters. I have already assumed that my letter (non-paper stuff in it though!) got lost in the mail or something, but it might show up eventually 

[TheAmmoniacal]

He should try that one day, put them in piles in order of arrival and take the most recent pile for each mailbag.

[jancumps]

...

The speed was controlled by tapping of the voltage from the exposed top windings of the transformator with an slider.

The same principle was used in my Jouef HO controller. Aaaah those were the days

[bryanrj1]

If your mailbag item isn't showing up when you expect it to, then use the following "from" address: Ally Sheedy, Shermer High School, Shermer, Illinois, and use a Shermer High School T-Shirt as packing material.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

[tszaboo]

Two thumbs up!

Yarr!

[Flipflop]

I had a triang Scalextric transformer that was similar to the train transformer but only had an overload breaker on the front sloping panel and a single pair of 12volt terminals on the rear. I can't remember if it had proper rectifier diodes or not though.

[VK3DRB]

The only thing worse than religious nutters is atheist nutters.

[TheAmmoniacal]

The only thing worse than religious nutters is atheist nutters.

Why?

[rt]

FSM: I presume after the Brymen Dave will be bringing out a EEVblog branded colander?

After all tongue-at-correct-angle doesn't cut it without the correct head gear

rt

[Fungus]

The only thing worse than religious nutters is atheist nutters.

I assume that was a troll.

(at least, I hope it was a troll...)

[Fungus]

Everyone is entitled to their beliefs

Hitler was entitled to his beliefs?

How about slave owners, were they 'entitled' to theirs...?

Modern day suicide bombers?

People who refuse to take their sick baby to prayer session instead of a hospital?

These two are just opposite ends of the same spectrum.

I can go on all day long listing people who are not entitled to their beliefs, but I can't think of a single atheist belief that somebody shouldn't be entitled to. Can you think of one?

[TheAmmoniacal]

The only thing worse than religious nutters is atheist nutters.

I assume that was a troll.

(at least, I hope it was a troll...)

Everyone is entitled to their beliefs. But nutters is nutters. These two are just opposite ends of the same spectrum.
Not that I want to start a religion tangent. Nutters exist in many fields. Unity gain for example. Lotto numbers syndicates is another.

One is right and one isn't, I think that makes a difference.

[VK3DRB]

I can go on all day long listing people who are not entitled to their beliefs, but I can't think of a single atheist belief that somebody shouldn't be entitled to. Can you think of one?

You sound like you are a member of the Stasi. Devout atheists can believe what they want to, as can devout followers of Jesus Christ. Everyone is entitled to believe that they want. You cannot control what people think. And you cannot control what anyone believes. You don't own them. Even Illuminati believers are entitled to believe their conspiracy theories. Its a basic human right.

However it is not a human right to harm or kill innocent people based on misguided beliefs or downright lies. The Islamic State Mujahideen execute those who do not believe their exact beliefs. As the Roman Catholic Church did to the Cathars. In some ways Mao's Cultural Revolution was the atheist version. The result was the same, by psychopaths with the same mindset: Either believe as I tell you to believe or be humiliated, tortured or executed.

An issue here is when people have to put up with unsolicited ear-bashings from Illuminati believers, Jehovah's Witnesses, devout atheists, politicians or high pressure salesmen. It is bloody annoying.

[Fungus]

In some ways Mao's Cultural Revolution was the atheist version. The result was the same, by psychopaths with the same mindset: Either believe as I tell you to believe or be humiliated, tortured or executed.

Yes, many dictators have applied the label "Atheist" to what they do. Mao's Cultural Revolution, Lenin's misuse of Marx's remark that 'religion is the opiate of the people', etc.

Look a teeny bit deeper though and you'll find that their 'atheism' was just a label, nothing more. What they really wanted was a way to destroy the church because the church has power, and, well... they were dictators. State-enforced atheism was a means to that end. Hardly any of their actions demonstrated actual Atheism though.

An issue here is when people have to put up with unsolicited ear-bashings from Illuminati believers, Jehovah's Witnesses, devout atheists, politicians or high pressure salesmen. It is bloody annoying.

There's your problem, right there. You think Atheists are selling something.

They literally can't be doing that though because they don't have any beliefs to sell you. Atheists don't have beliefs, they accept evidence. It's not the same thing at all.

eg. I don't believe in evolution, I accept evolution (until a better theory comes along).

If you're hearing atheists tell you what to 'believe' it means:
(a) You're not actually listening to them, and
(b) You think all opinions are equally valid.

[rrinker]

 But who are you to decide which opinions are valid and which are not?

 The idea of enslaving a people is totally unacceptable by TODAY'S societal norms. But in past human history, it was standard practice for a conqueror to enslave the conquered. By today's standards - that is evil. By the standards of the day, it was an absolutely normal concept.

 That's part of the problem with looking back and 'interpreting' history. LOTS of things done in the past are reprehensible to modern society, but to really understand what was going on you need to apply the morals of the day, NOT modern morals. There are things we do that we consider proper civilized behavior that past cultures would consider absolutely reprehensible. Problem is, until someone invents a fully functional flux capacitor, we can only look back at recorded history, they can't see forward, nor can we, so see what 'normal' will be 1000 years from now.

 No, everyone is entitled to whatever opinion they want, no matter how reprehensible it may seem to others. ACTING on such opinions is a different story. There is not nor do I hope there EVER is a "thought police". There is no crime in thinking about offing your nutcase neighbor who wakes you up every weekend by mowing his lawn at the crack of dawn, but if you actually go and attempt it - THAT is a criminal act.

[Fungus]

The idea of enslaving a people is totally unacceptable by TODAY'S societal norms. But in past human history, it was standard practice for a conqueror to enslave the conquered. By today's standards - that is evil. By the standards of the day, it was an absolutely normal concept.

Nope:
a) There have always been people speaking out against slavery. At the end of the day people knew it was wrong.

b) If you were a slave would you sit around thinking, "Well, I guess master's entitled to his opinions..."?

No, everyone is entitled to whatever opinion they want, no matter how reprehensible it may seem to others.

Nope. Sick babies should be taken to hospital to see a doctor, not prayed over.

your nutcase neighbor who wakes you up every weekend by mowing his lawn at the crack of dawn

You wouldn't go downstairs and try to change his personal belief system?

[rrinker]

 You are making exactly the mistake I mentioned, you are applying modern day moral standards to history. Who was speaking out against slavery in ancient Egypt?

There's nothing wrong with someone having the belief that should their child get sick, some fantasy creature will heal them. Again, should that come to be, and they then ACT on that belief, then they are committing a crime based on the laws put in place by contemporary moral standards. How do you prevent this, other than better education? It is equally reprehensible to go around and ask everyone what they believe and if they say they believe god will heal their sick child, arrest them or take the children away even if they aren't sick and haven't been harmed.

Free thought and free speech means you need to accept that some people will say or think things you personally can't stand. We can't go down that rabbit hole of policing thoughts. Actions - that's a different story.

[TheAmmoniacal]

Moral and cultural relativists are the worst.

[Fungus]

It is equally reprehensible to go around and ask everyone what they believe and if they say they believe god will heal their sick child, arrest them or take the children away even if they aren't sick and haven't been harmed.

Nobody's proposing anything remotely like that. What's needed is a society where it would never happen in the first place, a society where praying to heal a sick baby is viewed on about the same level as going to Africa to catch slaves or state-sponsored courts trying young girls for witchcraft.

What shouldn't be happening is the government adding "In God We Trust" to the banknotes or putting the Ten Commandments in courtrooms.

This new society can only come through education and atheists not being afraid to speak out publicly.

....and that is why Dave should be putting a bit of atheism in his videos. A bit here, a bit there, it all helps. If somebody watches the James Randi video after watching a Dave video then it's a bit more light shone on a few more cockroaches.

PS: It's also Dave's channel and he can say what he likes.

Free thought and free speech means you need to accept that some people will say or think things you personally can't stand.

That's all fine and dandy... until they organize themselves into gangs.

Me? When I see stuff like that happening then I speak up (and I don't understand why you just shrug).

[apis]

I believe the problem isn't religion in itself but rather that religion is considered a valid excuse for being irrational. Normally when we do things that affect others we need to explain why it's necessary/beneficial in a rational manner, based on empirical evidence and formal logic. There is one exception though: religion.

If you ask a doctor to chop of pieces of your kids, the doctor would typically say no and report you to the authorities (unless there's a good medical reason for doing so). Except if you say "religion" then all logic is suddenly thrown out the door and the hospital happily assist you mutilating the poor kid. Want to kill someone? that's a no-no, unless of course: religion! Then religious people cheer as you chop of the head of the infidels. Want to brainwash your kids into believing the earth is at most 10000 years old? no way, unless of course: religion! Christians who insist being gay is a sin have obviously not even read the bible, they just scream religion! as if that justifies them being bigots.

Insisting on reason, logic, critical thinking and empirical evidence should be minimum standard everywhere. "God told me so" should never be a valid excuse for anything. Then we might have a chance against the stupidity.

[Fungus]

Then we might have a chance against the stupidity.

Why do they print "In God We Trust" on their banknotes, but don't allow "God told me to..." as a legal defense?

 

[bitslice]

Insisting on reason, logic, critical thinking and empirical evidence should be minimum standard everywhere.

There is empirical evidence that my cat sees an open door as a wormhole, because he always stops before going through.

There is a lot of solid reasons to curtail typical male behaviour, the downside is a feminised male who is deeply unhappy with his new role in society. Evolution is sometimes a better decider of what works than a gender studies group.

[Donziboy2]

Hey Dave, is there a formula for figuring out how large the Ballast/balance resistors need to be?

Im working on a high power/compact CC Dummy Load and I want to keep my high sense resistance so I have less issues with amplifying noise.
Would adding small <=0.01R resistors work?

[Fungus]

There is a lot of solid reasons to curtail typical male behaviour, the downside is a feminised male who is deeply unhappy with his new role in society.

Is the choice between:
a) Him being unhappy,
or
b) Other people being unhappy as a result of his behavior?

That's an easy choice to make.

[bitslice]

Is the choice between:
a) Him being unhappy,
or
b) Other people being unhappy as a result of his behavior?

That's an easy choice to make.

Is it?

Remember the film "Invasion of the Body Snatchers",
the aliens replacing the humans, offering them a world where submission to reason, logic, critical thinking would rid them of war.

Progressive liberal thinking is really just totalitarianism with better PR

[tszaboo]

Me? When I see stuff like that happening then I speak up (and I don't understand why you just shrug).

Yep. There should be freedom of religion. Also there it should be illegal to teach children religion (with prison time). Everyone is free to choose which religion they want to believe in, after they are adults, can vote, drink alcohol and drive a car.
But no, look at all the mayor religions. They are mandatory starting at an early stage, when children are gullible. They believe in the Tooth Fairy, Santa Claus, God or the Monster under the bed, if you tell them.

[apis]

Why do they print "In God We Trust" on their banknotes, but don't allow "God told me to..." as a legal defense?

 

Yeah, makes no sense in a country that is supposed to separate state and church.

[Fungus]

Remember the film "Invasion of the Body Snatchers", the aliens replacing the humans, offering them a world where submission to reason, logic, critical thinking would rid them of war.

Yep. Putting people in giant pea-pods and replacing them with clones is totally what would happen if Atheists ever got power.

[apis]

There is a lot of solid reasons to curtail typical male behaviour, the downside is a feminised male who is deeply unhappy with his new role in society. Evolution is sometimes a better decider of what works than a gender studies group.

Not sure what your point is. Isn't curtailing typical male behaviour what the church is most interested in (men in skirts preaching celibacy and taking 10% in tax)?

Evolution isn't a good decider though, it's just an explanation of how the species evolved. Unless you wan't to submit to the mosquitoes and cockroaches (who appear to be much more evolutionary successful than us humans for example). Evolution just is, it's neither something good nor bad and it has no purpose.

[bitslice]

Yep. Putting people in giant pea-pods and replacing them with clones is totally what would happen if Atheists ever got power.

As a metaphor it's close enough. You do understand that a painting is not simply a really bad photograph right?

There are lots of good reasons not to drive at more than 56mph, hands up who wants to live in a society where everyone wants that idea enforced.

Not sure what your point is.

Simply that basic humanity is absent from a lot of atheist thinking.

Evolution just is, it's neither something good nor bad and it has no purpose.

It's advantage is that it takes into account the entirety of the nature of an organism, it does not seek to suppress traits simply in a desire to conform to a spurious ideal.

[Fungus]

Yep. There should be freedom of religion. Also there it should be illegal to teach children religion (with prison time). Everyone is free to choose which religion they want to believe in, after they are adults, can vote, drink alcohol and drive a car.
But no, look at all the mayor religions. They are mandatory starting at an early stage, when children are gullible. They believe in the Tooth Fairy, Santa Claus, God or the Monster under the bed, if you tell them.

I like the cut of your jib.

Children is where it's at. I'm not sure it should be jail-worthy (lids need their parents) but schools could have a lot more "religion isn't true" teaching.

What does that mean? Stuff like opening up the Quran and reading them the exact same stories as they heard in the Bible.

When the parents come to school to complain, sit them down read it to them, too. I'm sure it would make them even angrier.

(nb. This^ is the sort of things I'd do if I was king - plant seeds of doubt, not lock people up in pea-pods...)

[Fungus]

There are lots of good reasons not to drive at more than 56mph, hands up who wants to live in a society where everyone wants that idea enforced.

I'll go with the German system: In Germany you can drive past a Police car as fast as you like and they'll just admire your car.

Tailgate? Change lanes without indicating? Eat? Talk on your cellphone while driving? They'll be down on you like a ton of bricks.

I've driven in the USA, I've driven in Germany, I know which felt safer (it's the German speeders)

The Autobahns have plenty of police cars but they're there to remind you that there's other people on the road, not just you. They make you drive considerately, not slowly.

Consideration of others is the real key. Countries like Germany prove that the right sort of government can nudge people in the right direction.

At night, when the autobahns are empty of commuters? That's when the real speeders come out to play. Can your car do 200mph? Let's find out...

[Fungus]

Not sure what your point is.

Simply that basic humanity is absent from a lot of atheist thinking.

Do you have evidence for that...? 

How would it be less harmful than making (eg.) abortion and pornography illegal just because it offends some religious people?

[HeywoodFloyd]

Ah, just what we needed, another atheist vs religion thread... 

Back (almost) on topic, I guess logically one has to put a small item into a very large box before sending it off, and then perhaps it gets selected. Just fill up the box with a lightweight filler and you'd stay below the 500 grams.

Thanks for the mailbag; I had a jolly good laugh at those pictures of the phone launch. 

[bitslice]

Do you have evidence for that...? 

evidence? that's like asking for evidence of a god.
I can point out that someone in a trench in WWII did not make himself feel better by calculating his odds of survival, but by investing some belief in a sky pixie.
Men are not inherently logical beings, we are a bunch of hormones and instincts designed to reproduce.

How would it be less harmful than making (eg.) abortion and pornography illegal just because it offends some religious people?

Another Strawman? how interesting

[Fungus]

Do you have evidence for that...? 

evidence? that's like asking for evidence of a god.

No, it's like asking for evidence that "basic humanity is absent from a lot of atheist thinking"

(your words, written exactly one line above the part where I asked "Do you have evidence for that...?")

Oh, wait, I get it: You removed that part deliberately, didn't you? 

In that case it looks like you're done.

[bitslice]

Oh, wait, I get it: You removed that part deliberately, didn't you? 

Err, it's called "quoting a post correctly",
you remove the obviously extraneous information for clarity.

Amazingly you can still read my previous posts if remembering the gist of a thread causes you problems

In that case it looks like you're done.

Most certainly, you appear to be one of those annoyingly vague posters looking for an argument about their favourite topic.

[Fungus]

you remove the obviously extraneous information for clarity.

And yet you left it so unclear that you answered a completely different question than the asked on the line above. 

[apis]

Do you have evidence for that...? 

evidence? that's like asking for evidence of a god.

Actually if God wanted to prove he (she?) exist he could simply reveal himself to everyone and show us a couple of miracles that would convince even the most stubborn atheist. It would be piece of cake for an omnipotent being!
You can not prove God does not exist though. How would you prove God isn't simply hiding in a parallel dimension? Impossible.
So please, some evidence to back up the statement: "basic humanity is absent from a lot of atheist thinking." Shouldn't be too hard, in fact I do not doubt it. Just as it is absent from a lot of religious thinking. Atheists are much more in touch with "basic humanity" than the major religions though, because atheist are forced to rely on rational thinking, empirical evidence and logic, in contrast to faith in what a guy in a fancy skirt tells you.

I can point out that someone in a trench in WWII did not make himself feel better by calculating his odds of survival, but by investing some belief in a sky pixie.

That depends on what type of person it is. Maybe some people like to be comforted by fairy tales, but I would guess most people prefer the truth even if it is not as comforting. I don't really mind if people believe in a sky pixie but: if they start killing people because the sky pixie told them so, or they insist we should teach children the sky pixie created the earth less than 10 000 years ago, or that no-one should be allowed to masturbate because the sky pixie doesn't like it, then we have a problem.

For example, the catholic church doesn't allow contraceptives since they claim it is a sin to have sex unless the purpose is to make babies and in that case you do not need contraceptives. Yet, millions of people have sex for pleasure and get unwanted pregnancies and diseases that could have been prevented if the church was not so out of touch with basic humanity.

Men are not inherently logical beings, we are a bunch of hormones and instincts designed to reproduce.

Almost agree, but we are not designed, evolution has no intent or purpose. Doesn't mean we can't demand rational arguments when people want to do things that affect others.