Re: CO2 Funny

On Sun, 26 May 2024 14:22:28 -0400, "Edward Rawde"
<invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:

"Bill Sloman" <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in message news:v2uhs7$39s6m$1@dont-email.me...

On 26/05/2024 4:38 am, Edward Rawde wrote:

"Bill Sloman" <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in message news:v2na16$1nvei$1@dont-email.me...

On 23/05/2024 3:52 am, john larkin wrote:

On Wed, 22 May 2024 18:10:58 +0100, Pomegranate Bastard
<pommyB@aol.com> wrote:
>

...

>
John Larkin doesn't seem to 'design" anything. He throws together the stuff he sells like every other tinkerer.
>

>
Why does that matter to you so much?
>
I have two books in front of me.
One is "Introduction to Solid State Physics, C. Kittel"
The other is "FET Circuits. Rufus P Turner"
>
If I open the physics book at a random page I find a contour integral.
I wasn't bad at math and can handle contour integrals but it is also true that I grew up in a very practical electronics
environment
where getting things working was way more important than understanding every little detail of the theory of how they worked.

>
I got into electronics while a I was doing a Ph.D. physical chemistry. Win Hill started a Ph.D. in chemical physics, but had better
advisors.

>

Getting things working is always important, but understanding the detail of what's going on can be vital to getting them to work
well.

>
So both of these are needed if you want the best design.

Not really. Understanding at some level can help a lot, but it's not
necessary. Besides, we don't actually understand what we're doing, all
the way down to the quantum mechanics.