EEVblog #833 - Mailbag

[gadget73]

I have part of the items needed to set up a gamma spectroscope, but I lack the detector and a pile of lead bricks to make a sample chamber.

The detector is the nastiest bit really - the simplest would be a photomultiplier and a scintillator. You do not need lead bricks nor any shielding if you just accept a worse SNR and/or do long measurements, then substract the background. You should be able to find PMTs and scintillators relatively cheaply on ebay - though they do suck in the lower energy part of the spectrum.

yeah, this set of gear would want a scintillator/PM setup.  I can lay my hands on one, except that this set of electronics seems to need a scintillator with a separate HV input and signal output.  I haven't researched it enough to determine if I can simply "tee" them together at the detector and have it work.  If it would, there is a sodium iodide scintillation detector on an old rate meter that we used to use at work before changing it to a different system.    There is also a long disused gamma scaler sitting around that uses some odd looking detector.  I'm not actually sure what that detector is, but its possible that its precisely the thing I need.  The scaler is something of a manual spectroscope, you can adjust the HV and monitor for peaks in response to assemble a manual plot.   The lead bricks I can also obtain off the warehouse racks of various junk at work, but its largely a space issue.  I just don't want to devote all that space.  The final bit would be to see if the electronics I have can actually interface with a more modern computer.  They're probably better than 15 years old now.   This largely sums up to more effort and time than I want to devote to something that isn't of much interest to me. 

[gadget73]

I've noticed over the years that atheists tend to like to say little things to get Christians worked up. They don't tend to bother with other religions though.  They like to focus on things like "Well Jesus couldn't have been born in December." or "The holiday called Christmas was based on a pagan holiday that they stole." 

I just want to say "Yeah, and what's your point? Nobody's making that argument."

Yet somehow, I see those same people buying their kids presents on Christmas. I don't see any of them telling their boss that they want to work the last week of December when everyone else is off.

There's sort of a progression from agnostic to atheist. Agnostics tend to be reasonable people and respectful of others beliefs, but a lot of times atheists just come off as jerks.

I have my own reasons for not being an atheist. I've had some life experiences that are good enough evidence for me. And the fact that none of that would ever convince an atheist doesn't bother me.

Its probably a case of what you know.  In the West, generally the most prominent religion we are exposed to are various forms of Christianity, so atheists in those parts of the world know what is "low hanging fruit" with that religion.   

The thing with the Christmas holidays, particularly in the West, is that they are largely secular in nature now.  What does buying presents, eating a meal with family, or putting up a tree have to do with any religious text?  Many of the traditional elements of what we consider to be integral to a Christmas celebration are re-appropriated from various other cultures and religions to the point where its extremely easy to have a Christmas without Christ.  I've been doing it for years.  There is a tree in the living room, I had dinner with my family, and there was some gift exchange but we never went to church or said any prayers.  I suspect I'm not the only one who does this.  I love Christmas,  people are generally in a good mood, there are lights, there is food, and as a fat guy I love the fact that people make cookies. 


As for people being jerks, well, yeah.  That can happen, and its a bit unfortunate.  I understand it at some level, but at the same time I think there are better ways to communicate with people than being a snarky prick.  Sometimes it is a bit necessary to not be overly polite in order to be heard, but at the same time its not any of our business what people wish to believe.  The only time we have any cause to complain is when those beliefs affect us.  If I had kids, I'd be awful upset if they were being taught scripture in school for example.  I suspect most Christians would have the same objection if their children were being taught some other scripture.

Anyway, Merry Christmas and other winter holidays to you

[SeanB]

Here there are a lot of other religious holidays, and as I work with people who are a variety of different religions, Christian, Hindu, Jewish, Muslim, Shembe, Tamil and others, there can be quite a few assorted religious holidays over the year. Generally they all are happy to take the official mandated holidays along with the religion specific ones as well.

[Fungus]

I've noticed over the years that atheists tend to like to say little things to get Christians worked up. They don't tend to bother with other religions though.  They like to focus on things like "Well Jesus couldn't have been born in December." or "The holiday called Christmas was based on a pagan holiday that they stole." 

I just want to say "Yeah, and what's your point? Nobody's making that argument."

Yet somehow, I see those same people buying their kids presents on Christmas. I don't see any of them telling their boss that they want to work the last week of December when everyone else is off.

There's sort of a progression from agnostic to atheist. Agnostics tend to be reasonable people and respectful of others beliefs, but a lot of times atheists just come off as jerks.

I have my own reasons for not being an atheist. I've had some life experiences that are good enough evidence for me. And the fact that none of that would ever convince an atheist doesn't bother me.

I've noticed over the years that Christians have a really distorted view of what "atheists" are, and what "atheists" say.

(...also a really distorted view of what constitutes an argument)

[geareddev]

For anyone interested in vacuum tubes here is an old 1943 Westinghouse film on the vacuum tubes

Also Ron Soyland's videos on the construction of vacuum tubes are worth a visit

Thank you for these videos.  My vague understanding of how these worked has been upgraded.

[vlad777]

Although purpose of this is questionable , I enjoyed watching this video:

[zapta]

Is there any religious person who can make an argument in his favor, that doesn't sound like one of "it's true because I know it and there's nothing you can say to convince me otherwise"

It's called axiom, the basis for any logic system.

[TomS_]

These are quite common with EU banks.

Yes, quite. I have 3 of the bastards. 

Right pain if you have to make banking transactions while on the move and have to then carry them around.

Luckily two of them are from related banks, so I tend to be able to get away with carrying only one of them for my primary bank account. Gets me out of most trouble.

[jipihorn]

About that 6J9 tube, it not the US RCA version which is a triple triode but the russian version of the E180F/6688, the 6J9P (6?9?) with the russian letters replaced by the western equivalent. This is a pentode with noval socket.


I say this because of the tweet of Dave about this (and I don't have any twitter account).

J.

[ivaylo]

Is there any religious person who can make an argument in his favor, that doesn't sound like one of "it's true because I know it and there's nothing you can say to convince me otherwise"

It's called axiom, the basis for any logic system.

Like "Allahu Akbar"?

[zapta]

Is there any religious person who can make an argument in his favor, that doesn't sound like one of "it's true because I know it and there's nothing you can say to convince me otherwise"

It's called axiom, the basis for any logic system.

Like "Allahu Akbar"?

That's a deduction. Different axioms -> different deductions. 

Objectivity speaking, my axioms are the truly correct ones.

[c4757p]

Is there any religious person who can make an argument in his favor, that doesn't sound like one of "it's true because I know it and there's nothing you can say to convince me otherwise"

It's called axiom, the basis for any logic system.

"God exists" is one of the axioms of your logic system? Please.

I think from now on, every time I want to prove something is correct, I'm just going to declare it an axiom. Should save me quite a bit of trouble.

[zapta]

"God exists" is one of the axioms of your logic system? Please.

My logic system?  You are making things up now.

I think from now on, every time I want to prove something is correct, I'm just going to declare it an axiom. Should save me quite a bit of trouble.

Yep, this is how logic systems work, axioms + deduction rules. You will have better success with axioms that cannot be tested experimentally such as 'a supreme being exists' or 'we live in the matrix'  or 'time moves backward and we have the knowledge of the future'.

[EEVblog]

Is there any religious person who can make an argument in his favor, that doesn't sound like one of "it's true because I know it and there's nothing you can say to convince me otherwise" and "you're being a bully so shut up"?

Nope.
Not even one of the best apologists William Lane Craig vs Sam Harris in a lengthy prepared debate. It was just all waffle.
Nor could Ken Ham could do it against Bill Nye in another lengthy prepared debate. He had to admit nothing would change his mind.
And I've watched countless others where not a single even remotely convincing argument can be made. Which isn't surprising because it's called "faith" for a reason, there is zero evidence. If there was evidence then you wouldn't need faith, it would be demonstrably true, or at least plausible.

[EEVblog]

I've noticed over the years that Christians have a really distorted view of what "atheists" are, and what "atheists" say.

It's really bad in the US, polls show that atheists are one of the most hated "groups".
That's why almost no member of congress or anyone running for any government office in the US would dare admit they hold atheistic or even agnostic views. They just lie and say they believe in god.

[zapta]

And I've watched countless others where not a single even remotely convincing argument can be made.

Your arguments don't work on them and vice versa, it's symmetric. Live your life the way you want and let others live theirs. That's the best we can do. Being cocky about you viewpoint is bad, regardless on what side you are.

[c4757p]

Why? What's wrong with expressing your views and opinions and thoughts on the world? You might not change the mind of the person you're arguing with, but both of you might raise interesting points for other people to consider.

[zapta]

Why? What's wrong with expressing your views and opinions and thoughts on the world? You might not change the mind of the person you're arguing with, but both of you might raise interesting points for other people to consider.

Those views are often expressed with arrogance and morale superiority, and this applies for both sides. "I know better how you should view the world and live your life"

(I used to be a cocky atheist but now only an atheist)

[ErikTheNorwegian]

Is there any religious person who can make an argument in his favor, that doesn't sound like one of "it's true because I know it and there's nothing you can say to convince me otherwise" and "you're being a bully so shut up"?

Nope.
Not even one of the best apologists William Lane Craig vs Sam Harris in a lengthy prepared debate. It was just all waffle.
Nor could Ken Ham could do it against Bill Nye in another lengthy prepared debate. He had to admit nothing would change his mind.
And I've watched countless others where not a single even remotely convincing argument can be made. Which isn't surprising because it's called "faith" for a reason, there is zero evidence. If there was evidence then you wouldn't need faith, it would be demonstrably true, or at least plausible.

https://youtu.be/vj0NL2r6cnU

[EEVblog]

Why? What's wrong with expressing your views and opinions and thoughts on the world? You might not change the mind of the person you're arguing with, but both of you might raise interesting points for other people to consider.

Those views are often expressed with arrogance and morale superiority, and this applies for both sides. "I know better how you should view the world and live your life"

In terms of "arrogance" and "moral superiority", the religious claim they about atheists, but in reality it's the religious that take the cake by orders of magnitude.
They are the ones that claim that the creator of the universe is a personal god that cares for them, listens the their prayers, will invite them into heaven, will let them live for eternity in heaven, will forgive their sins, and even talk to them etc. It's all about them. If there is a more arrogant viewpoint in life, then I'm yet to hear it.
Atheists on the other hand think (usually) there is no evidence for any of it, that we are only accountable to ourselves and our society, and that we are just star dust, insignificant in the grand universe who are incredibly lucky to even be here, and that we will eventually die.

[free_electron]

Convert to Christianity. Who's says it's not Judaisim or Islam? It is, after all, the SAME god ... (islam recognises Jesus as a prophet...)


makes it all the more stupid that these religious factions can't stand each other...

[zapta]

In terms of "arrogance" and "moral superiority", the religious claim they about atheists, but in reality it's the religious that take the cake by orders of magnitude.
They are the ones that claim that the creator of the universe is a personal god that cares for them, listens the their prayers, will invite them into heaven, will let them live for eternity in heaven, will forgive their sins, and even talk to them etc. It's all about them. If there is a more arrogant viewpoint in life, then I'm yet to hear it.
Atheists on the other hand think (usually) there is no evidence for any of it, that we are only accountable to ourselves and our society, and that we are just star dust, insignificant in the grand universe who are incredibly lucky to even be here, and that we will eventually die.

Well, this can also be spun in the other direction. Atheists are arrogant because they don't submit themselves to the supreme being that created them and the entire universe.

Actually I was referring to arrogance toward people with opposing points of view which you can often observe in same-thinking groups. "We are much better/just/correct/enlighten/moral/objective/scientific than those ignorant/idiots/gullible/heretic  christians/atheists/audiophiles/liberals/vegans/geeks/...". It's a self assurance echo chamber.

The dynamic in two opposing ideologic bubbles is often very symmetrical. I would prefer to see fellow atheists taking the high road, recognizing that others prefer a different model to conduct their lives.

[Fungus]

The dynamic in two opposing ideologic bubbles is often very symmetrical. I would prefer to see fellow atheists taking the high road, recognizing that others prefer a different model to conduct their lives.

Sure: So long as the religious will keep their superstitions out of government policy and don't require an official state superstition that the people in power have to pretend to adhere to.

Trouble is: They don't. They'll fight tooth and nail to keep it in there. I expect to see a gay president of the USA long before I see an openly Atheist one.

As long as they're fighting to keep it in there it's up to the Atheists to fight to get rid of it. Yes, there may be some hurt feelings along the way (but they won't be the Atheists, weirdly enough...it's hard to feel bad when you have evidence instead of just being wrong)

PS: Have you read this: http://www.conservapedia.com/Main_Page

[Groucho2005]

I don't like to be called an atheist. It puts a label on something that does not require one. I'm simply not a member of any cult or religious group and don't base my life on bad evidence. There are 6 billion people who are not members of the Hillside Golf Club but nobody would refer to them as "non-members of the Hillside Golf Club".

By the way, here's a clip that shows the beauty of sience:

[Fungus]

There are 6 billion people who are not members of the Hillside Golf Club but nobody would refer to them as "non-members of the Hillside Golf Club".

Well obviously, because "non-member of the Hillside Golf Club" doesn't give you any information about the person. They might not play golf or they might be a member of the Lakeside Golf Club. You don't know. 

OTOH "member of the Hillside Golf Club" does give you some information about a person.

The label "Atheist" is similar, it gives you one very concrete piece of information about a person. That makes it a useful.

Maybe you personally don't see it as useful but that doesn't mean it isn't. I have no real use for a steam shovel but that doesn't make them useless.