Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 10 Next
2
Originally the blue compound on oleds had the lowest livespan * by a lot *.
Not sure nowadays, but probably still the weakest.
3
Other Equipment & Products / Re: Different bases on Amscope microscope
« Last post by thm_w on Today at 08:56:30 pm »
I wouldn't bother with a foot switch. Power sensing outlet that turns on when the soldering iron is on costs maybe $10 and is super straightforward. You'll never forget to turn it on or off.

Be aware with the boom arm to adjust up/down beyond the focusing rack range, you'll have to lift the weight of the microscope head and the arm, which is quite heavy.
But if you can get it setup where it is focused at desk level, that might be good enough for 99% of stuff.

To avoid that you could use a gas spring style arm, but, most people don't like those (more shake).
4

would it be a sin if i find out how much I^t it takes to make a mercury thermostat explode?

Your insurance company would probably think so…
5
General Technical Chat / Re: new propellantless drive company
« Last post by coppercone2 on Today at 08:54:37 pm »
that is sad that you can get your reputation and career destroyed for challenging some assumption most people don't even understand. Because you know there is some zealot with no clue what center of gravity even is getting mad because "he challenged alot of smart people!!!' . bit of a religious thing IMO


they might lead the youth astray!!
6
I personally liked the original yellow color of OLED, also I think DavidAlfa mentioned something about yellow OLEDs having the most time longevity but I might be mistaken on that.
7
Beginners / Re: Why writing style and grammar matters in posts
« Last post by sparkydog on Today at 08:51:13 pm »
english spelling is FUBAR (no insult intended)

Oh, I think you had every intention of insulting the English language. 😉 Don't worry, most native speakers agree with you.

ps: imho its possible to spell english in phonetics way just using normal alphabets

I... respectively disagree, at least if you aren't going to use a whole lot of multi-glyph clusters to represent vowel sounds. English uses approximately 13 unique monophthongs. If by "normal alphabets" you mean ASCII, that gives you six "obvious" glyphs unless you make upper- and lower-case glyphs distinct. Personally, I don't recommend it.

I actually developed my own system for writing English phonetically. For monophthongs, I use 'a', 'ä', 'å', 'e', 'ë', 'i', 'y', 'ÿ', 'o', 'û', 'u' and 'ü'. Diphthongs are 'ai', 'au', 'oi' and 'üi'; dipthongs with 'ÿ' usually omit it, i.e. fear is "fir" not "fiÿr". (But see exception, below.) TBH, 'ÿ' and 'û' could probably be combined without loss of readability.

I'd spell "mi" and "laik" the same as you, but the second-person pronoun is "ju", and a feline is a "kät". IMHO your vowel choices... aren't very intuitive. I base mine on ecclesiastical Latin pronunciations (with possibly a bit of Spanish influence), and (at least if you can muddle your way through pronouncing Latin/Spanish) it's surprisingly easy to read even if you've never seen it before:

    Mai kät lüvz mi, liaks mai dåg, änd hets ju. Äkshûli, shi hets ëvriwün büt mi änd mai dåg.

    Diryst kricÿr yn krieshûn
    Stüd'jyŋ Yŋġlysh pronünsjeshûn,
       Ai wyl tic ju yn mai vÿrs
       Saundz laik korps, kor, hors änd wÿrs

    Ai wyl kip ju, Suzi, byzi,
    Mek joÿr hëd wyth hit ġro dyzi;
       Tir yn ai, jor drës jûl ter;
       Kwir, fer siÿr, hir mai prer.

  Pliz dont sir thü siÿr.

(Note "stüd'jyŋ" (two syllables) in the second line rather than "stüdiyŋ" (three syllables), and similarly "pronünsjeshûn" (four syllables) rather than "pronünsieshûn" (five syllables). The latter is still a horrid force-fit to the meter. Still, it's interesting how phonetic spelling can be used to change the spelling of words depended on how they're meant to be spoken. It's also useful for "writing" accents.)

Writing is another matter, of course, but with only a very little practice, I find I'm able to read this system almost as fast as "normal" English.
8
General Technical Chat / Re: Do you think an LED is a resistor?
« Last post by MK14 on Today at 08:49:30 pm »
Just for anyone who is interested, the OP seemed to be talking about the topic of this thread, around a couple of years ago.

You can call it generalized Ohm's law.

There is a vicious rumor that diodes are not resistors, but they are resistors. They are nonlinear resistors (if we neglect the dynamic parasitics, of course and assume the exponential curve in the VI plane is what characterize them).
If you need to invoke the principle of authority to defend this assertion, you can always quote Chua, Desoer, Kuh, "Linear and Nonlinear Circuits". This is what I call "THE bible of circuit theory". It's not some high school or vocational school textbook for courses limited to the easiest circuits.
9
Yeah, I tried to, but their response was:
Quote
While we appreciate your business, we regret to inform you that our IC business is currently winding down and we are no longer accepting new customers.

Not sure if they also are winding down or just don't sell to the end consumer / small quantities...
10
It was a good demo.
$75k/year sounds cheap too, for a large company that wants to do a lot of reverse engineering or in depth QC testing. Just that the product has to be relatively small.
Not sure if it resolution is capable of circuit board level reverse engineering though?
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 10 Next