From: bill.sloman@ieee.org
On 11/11/2025 11:12 pm, Edward Rawde wrote:
> "Bill Sloman" wrote in message news:10e
nlu$hv9m$1@dont-email.me...
>> On 11/11/2025 2:48 am, Edward Rawde wrote:
>>> "Bill Sloman" wrote in message news:1
es5mv$3r8qk$1@dont-email.me...
>>>> On 10/11/2025 4:01 pm, Edward Rawde wrote:
>>>>> "Bill Sloman" wrote in message news
10erqko$3o5c0$6@dont-email.me...
>>>>>> On 10/11/2025 3:29 pm, Edward Rawde wrote:
>>>>>>> "Bill Sloman" wrote in message ne
s:10ermr8$3o5c0$1@dont-email.me...
>>>>>>>> On 10/11/2025 2:57 am, Edward Rawde wrote:
>>>>>>>>> "Bill Sloman" wrote in message
ews:10epc7k$33b3h$1@dont-email.me...
>>>>>>>>>> On 9/11/2025 4:01 am, Edward Rawde wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> "Bill Sloman" wrote in message
news:10emnnb$2cnh3$1@dont-email.me...
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/11/2025 4:49 am, Edward Rawde wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Bill Sloman" wrote in message
news:10elb3i$20r3i$3@dont-email.me...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/11/2025 3:31 am, Edward Rawde wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Liz Tuddenham" wrote in
message
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:1rlfnmd.5t4y3yjlsancN%liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bill Sloman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/11/2025 9:24 pm, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bill Sloman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/11/2025 10:41 am, john larkin wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I'd need access to a lot more information than I can find on-line
to construct such a mathematical argument. And I haven't
>>>>>>>>>> been arguing that other people can't design ferrite cored or other
inductors very well.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Er when Liz said "I worked for a company that built its reputation
on the R.F. inductors
>>>>>>>>> it designed; these factors were among the many problems they
tackled."
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Your reply was "Probably not very well."
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So either we have an issue with the meaning of words or you're
talking nonsense.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In fact it is you that is talking nonsense.
>>>>
>>>> What I actually posted was
>>>>
>>>> "In fact it is you that is talking nonsense. For a company to make a
reputation for building good RF inductors, they merely have
>>>> to make them better than the competition. To do it "very well" they'd
have needed some kind of mathematical insight into what
>>>> they were doing, and there wasn't a lot of that around in UK industry
when I was working there from 1971 to 1993. The Cambridge
>>>> university electronic engineers were trained in math, but seemed
singularly incapable of applying it in real life. If a problem
>>>> was framed in exactly the way their lecturers had presented it they were
happy, but not creative, nor flexible."
>>>>
>>>> You snipped out the bulk of the comment without marking the snip, which
made my response look very different.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately for you, your paragraph above was posted AFTER the quotes in
question.
>>>
>>> Even if relevant (which it isn't) I did not snip out any of your paragraph
which begins "In fact" and ends with "nor flexible".
>>
>> Yes. You posted your response after the bit you wanted to respond to,
>
> Why would anyone post a response _before_ the bit they want to respond to?
You need to respond to the entire message, not the message you've
managed to create by truncating what was posted to create the message
that you'd prefer to respond to.
> Please do try to make some sense Bill.
I don't think that there's any point in producing the kind of response
you'd have the wit to understand.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
