Re: [SI-LIST] : What's your favorite Screwy SI Concept?

About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: Adrian Shiner (adrian.shiner@virgin.net)
Date: Sun Jan 16 2000 - 10:55:02 PST


Hello Jim,

Thanks..I enjoy participating in this forum... hopefully prompting some
fresh thought & lateral thinking.

Having need to deal with lawyers in my work occasionally, I have a heathly
understanding of the nature of the beast...666!

Best wishes

Adrian
----- Original Message -----
From: Jim Freeman <freeman@broadcom.com>
To: <si-list@silab.eng.sun.com>
Sent: 14 January 2000 22:15
Subject: Re: [SI-LIST] : What's your favorite Screwy SI Concept?

> Hi Adrian,
> William Wallace couldn't have said it better.
> Jim Freeman
>
> Adr Shiner wrote:
>
> > It is one thing to disclose the intellectual property of your ex
employer.
> > it is another for lawyers to try & gag you on discussing textbook
> > engineering and general experience which supports your ability to put
food
> > into your mouth and a roof over your head! Come and live in the UK, the
> > taxes might be high but we have a certain understanding of lawyers and
their
> > ilk.
> >
> > Adrian
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Bradley S Henson <bhenson@notes.west.raytheon.com>
> > To: <si-list@silab.eng.sun.com>
> > Sent: 10 January 2000 15:55
> > Subject: Re: [SI-LIST] : What's your favorite Screwy SI Concept?
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Michael,
> > >
> > > For those who have not been through one of those exit interviews with
the
> > > corporate lawyers, it may seem like a convenient excuse. However, I
can
> > testify
> > > that those lawyers *don't* mince words about what can and cannot be
> > disclosed
> > > upon termination. When in doubt, keep silent on the subject.
Inconvenience
> > is a
> > > small price to pay considering the havoc those folks could cause to
your
> > > personal pocketbook.
> > >
> > > Brad Henson,Raytheon
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Michael Vrbanac <vrbanacm@swbell.net> on 01/08/2000 07:36:14 PM
> > >
> > > Please respond to si-list@silab.eng.sun.com
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > To: si-list@silab.eng.sun.com
> > >
> > > cc: (bcc: Bradley S Henson/RWS/Raytheon/US)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Subject: Re: [SI-LIST] : What's your favorite Screwy SI
> > > Concept?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Lee,
> > >
> > > I can explain it and have but I won't as I explained before. I have
had
> > > laboratory
> > > evidence but could not retain it as it was left at a previous place of
> > > employment.
> > > Sorry! That was in accordance with my work agreement. And, of course,
as
> > > many have said to me before... "that's such a convenient excuse!"
Again,
> > sorry!
> > >
> > > As a consolation for those disappointed, I will give only one final
hint.
> > For
> > > those
> > > who love simplicity, it indeed is. For those who love the complex, an
> > important
> > > piece of it can be seen in a section in a highly revered tome written
by a
> > well-
> > > respected author but it is not in a form that you would normally
expect.
> > > After seeing that, and considering its implications, compelling
supporting
> > > evidence
> > > can be seen in many texts. ( Those of you who already know, don't give
> > > it away! You'll spoil the learning experience for everyone else.) Ok,
one
> > more
> > > hint and its the very last... and this I will credit to Michael
Chan....
> > think
> > > of WHY
> > > someone might have needed to do something like this, what they needed
to
> > > accomplish, and where it just might make some sense.
> > >
> > > Have fun! <grin> Hopefully, the search might prove fruitful for many
> > looking
> > > for it
> > > even beyond learning about the 20H rule and where it really applies.
And
> > > maybe...
> > > just maybe, we can "unscrew" one "screwy rule" AND we might just all
be
> > > in agreement about it!!!
> > >
> > > Once you figure it out, you will probably agree with me when I say
that
> > the 20H
> > > rule
> > > may not provide significant benefit for every application in every
design
> > but it
> > > does have its uses.
> > >
> > > Michael
> > >
> > > Lee Ritchey wrote:
> > >
> > > > Michael,
> > > >
> > > > If you cannot explain the 20h rule, do you have any laborator
evidence
> > to
> > > support it?
> > > >
> > > > Lee
> > > >
> > > > Michael Vrbanac wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi, Michael,
> > > > >
> > > > > That is my point exactly. The "screwy rule" was driven by some
need
> > > > > at some time and place and more than likely be viewed negatively
in
> > > > > an industry segment where the need to use it is much less. The
funny
> > > > > "human thing" to do is to therefore deny the existence of anything
> > we've
> > > > > never seen or attempted to simulate.
> > > > >
> > > > > As I have, over time, attempted to "thoroughly explain" what I
believe
> > > > > the 20H rule is "doing and what it is meant to do", I never seem
to
> > get
> > > > > folks to accept that explanation for whatever reason even though
there
> > > > > have been designs which have benefitted from it. So I don't offer
> > > > > explanations anymore. Now I just let folks figure it out for
> > themselves.
> > > Its
> > > > > a whole like trying to argue about "grounding methodologies" with
> > someone
> > > > > who is intently opposed to your position. You can't possibly
create
> > any
> > > > > scenario to convince them otherwise. So the discussion is useless
> > > especially
> > > > > in a public forum. Perhaps you might understand what I mean if I
> > > > > asked you to defend exactly why it wouldn't work and let the
process
> > > > > go from there.
> > > > >
> > > > > I was serious about the point about being careful of what one
claims
> > as
> > > > > "non-applicable" or "nonsense" from a global sense (i.e. all
> > disciplines and
> > > > > sub-disciplines) unless it clearly violates Maxwell Equations. By
> > doing
> > > > > so, it amounts to a claim of infallibility both in reasoning and
test
> > > vehicle
> > > > > methodology and measurement. That's a pretty arrogant position
and
> > > > > I try to stay away from that. The best anyone can say is that,
based
> > on
> > > > > their testing and particular methodology and measurement, the
> > principle
> > > > > will or will not be applicable for that particular situation.
> > > > >
> > > > > Again, the creation of some of the "screwy rules" came from a
need to
> > > > > address a certain type of problem and it was apparently successful
> > > > > enough to gain a widespread audience in its application. Was it
all
> > > > > hoopla or was it a practical solution for a particular problem
that
> > many
> > > > > of us still don't understand? Either one is possible.... you must
> > decide.
> > > > >
> > > > > Michael E. Vrbanac
> > > > >
> > > > > "Chan, Michael" wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > My 2 cents is to find out how a "screwy rule" being drawn out. A
> > > > > > rule ( no matter it is good or bad ) has to come out from some
> > initatives
> > > > > > and/or motivatives. I don't think a rule can come out from
nowhere.
> > I
> > > > > > believe
> > > > > > a rule based on solid fundamental concepts cannot be wrong by
that
> > much
> > > and
> > > > > > any derivative from real world observations can be corrected
and/or
> > > > > > improved.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I believe building some test structures in order to see whether
a
> > rule
> > > will
> > > > > > break or not cannot help to try to understand how a rule being
drawn
> > up
> > > and
> > > > > > whether a rule make sense or not.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > For example, take the famous " 20H RULE " as a case. Can anyone,
> > > especially
> > > > > > the originator(s) ( if there is some ) of the 20H Rule explains
the
> > > physical
> > > > > >
> > > > > > concepts behind how this rule is being drawn up?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Michael Chan
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > **** To unsubscribe from si-list: send e-mail to
> > > majordomo@silab.eng.sun.com. In the BODY of message put: UNSUBSCRIBE
> > si-list,
> > > for more help, put HELP.
> > > > > si-list archives are accessible at
http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu/si-list
> > > > > ****
> > > >
> > > > **** To unsubscribe from si-list: send e-mail to
> > majordomo@silab.eng.sun.com.
> > > In the BODY of message put: UNSUBSCRIBE si-list, for more help, put
HELP.
> > > > si-list archives are accessible at
http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu/si-list
> > > > ****
> > >
> > >
> > > **** To unsubscribe from si-list: send e-mail to
> > majordomo@silab.eng.sun.com. In
> > > the BODY of message put: UNSUBSCRIBE si-list, for more help, put HELP.
> > > si-list archives are accessible at http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu/si-list
> > > ****
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > **** To unsubscribe from si-list: send e-mail to
> > majordomo@silab.eng.sun.com. In the BODY of message put: UNSUBSCRIBE
> > si-list, for more help, put HELP.
> > > si-list archives are accessible at http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu/si-list
> > > ****
> > >
> >
> > **** To unsubscribe from si-list: send e-mail to
majordomo@silab.eng.sun.com. In the BODY of message put: UNSUBSCRIBE
si-list, for more help, put HELP.
> > si-list archives are accessible at http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu
> > ****
>
>
> **** To unsubscribe from si-list: send e-mail to
majordomo@silab.eng.sun.com. In the BODY of message put: UNSUBSCRIBE
si-list, for more help, put HELP.
> si-list archives are accessible at http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu
> ****
>

**** To unsubscribe from si-list: send e-mail to majordomo@silab.eng.sun.com. In the BODY of message put: UNSUBSCRIBE si-list, for more help, put HELP.
si-list archives are accessible at http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu
****


About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Apr 20 2000 - 11:34:41 PDT