Re: Ove Interest?

On Fri, 28 Feb 2025 15:42:05 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:

On Thu Feb 27 12:45:26 2025 Jeff Liebermann  wrote:

On Thu, 27 Feb 2025 19:29:55 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:
 

On Thu Feb 27 09:25:19 2025 Zen Cycle  wrote:

 
lol...says the idiot that thinks
- PWM is used for testing cables
- Fiber optic cables are called light lines
- aluminum oxide is flammable
- a dent can pop out of a steel bike tube by riding it
- thermostats don't have hysteresis
et plura....

>
We've already covered this

 
No, we haven't "covered" this.  Despite repeated requests by me and
others, you have repeatedly failed to provide a single example of
using PWM to test cables or a maker and model number of test equipment
that uses PWM to test cables.  The best you've done is incorrect
information and topic changes:
 
PWM to measure losses.
12/23/2021
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/_1eEehgsDD0/m/t0uJbEMbDQAJ>
"I'm not explaining anything to someone so stupid that they don't know
why you use pulse width modulation to measure loses due to line shorts
which is the failure mode of coax."
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/_1eEehgsDD0/m/bIkgkvkKDQAJ>
"Using PWM to test extremely long cables is common practice."
 

- because you're not enough of an engineer to understand how a wire testoer works doesn't mean I'm wrong.

 
I think you just demonstrated that you don't know how a cable tester
works.  (Hint: TDR which doesn't use PWM).
 

We all watched you supporting that ass Liebermann's claim that he knew PWM didn't work by SHOWING and instrumnent that in fact USED PWM to test wires.

 
Oh goodie.  I seem to have missed this amazing cable tester.  Please
provide the maker and model number so I can demonstrate that you're
clueless.
 

Your incompetence is comical. You couldn't look at the waveforms on that discription and tell how it worked.

 
Tom.  I also want to see those amazing PWM waveforms for testing
cables.  Please note that it's YOUR job to prove YOUR claims and not
anyone else's.  Nobody is going to do your homework for you.
 
I think I understand why Tom keeps resurrecting and repeating dead
topics.  It's called perseveration:
"Perseveration After Brain Injury: How to Stop Repetitive Thoughts and
Behaviors"
<https://neuliferehab.com/perseveration-after-brain-injury/>
"Perseveration is when a brain injury patient continuously repeats
words, actions, or thoughts. The cause is due to changes in their
brain that affect memory, attention, and cognition."

It was proven by the waveforms displayed in your own reference. But now the man who admitted he doesn't know shit about digital design is suddenly an expert at it.

What was proven?  The references I provided were all about how TDR can
be used to test cables.  I could not find and did not post anything
about using PWM to test cables.  Even if I had provided something that
you could declare to be proof of your claim:

<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/_1eEehgsDD0/m/bIkgkvkKDQAJ>
"Using PWM to test extremely long cables is common practice."

it would not be proof that such a device exists.  In other words,
you're evading my request for the maker and model number of such a
device you claim is "common practice".  If no company makes the test
equipment, it's not common practice and it probably doesn't exist.

Hint:  Cease the repetitive lying, admit that you lied, and move on.

Incidentally, I'm not an expert on digital design, but then neither
are you.  If you only take advice and accept corrections from genuine
experts, try posting your PWM claim to sci.electronics.design.  It
will be fun to watch a few real experts eat you alive.

--
Jeff Liebermann                 jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272      http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann      AE6KS    831-336-2558