Re: WAY off topic!

"outsider" <outsider@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:9f6iqeFhn6U1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On 10/6/2011 9:26 AM, hemyd wrote:
"outsider"<outsider@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:9f5fdpF1c4U1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On 10/5/2011 11:54 PM, hemyd wrote:
"outsider"<outsider@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:9etpbrFmu5U1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On 10/2/2011 11:27 PM, MI wrote:

On 10/2/11 7:06 PM, in article 9esjkhFm7dU1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
"outsider"
<outsider@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Wikipedia discussion of physics states: "More broadly, it is the
general analysis of nature, conducted in order to understand how
the universe behaves."

This discussion is about technology.

Wickipedia may say that, but when I went to school we didn't just
learn
general analysis we learned practical physics. Grade 8 students learn
about
volts, watts, amps and formulas to calculate them.

I can't and won't question what you learned or when. If they called
that "physics" then it was technology foisted off as science. That
delineation is clear to some of us, not so clear to everyone.

A few years back I saw a TV commercial starring a Doctor of Optometry
who, in regular practice, called themselves "a scientist." I'll never
forget that when I was in High School and on a trip in a big city
hotel the maintenance worker called himself "engineer." That's when
I learned that many "titles" are political rather than real world.

In that practical physics segment, did they teach *why* current moves
from positive to negative? :-)

When I did my electronics course (last century), the general concensus
was
that current moved from negative to positive. Now<here> was the start
of
a
flame war! The "positive-to-negative" and the "negative-to-positive"
camps
were at loggerheads with each other just as much as the carb/lo/no carb
folks.

We had no problem with that in high school, or later in college. Edison
made the wrong choice, + to -. When electron theory entered the realm
of electrical theory, electrons were understood to move from - to +.
Edison's was then referred to as "current flow" while the reality of
that day was named "electron flow." Then along came "fields."

Nomenclature covered the screw up.

My electronics course started getting too much for me when learning
transistor theory. This was when I found out that while electrons moved
from
negative to positive, holes (yes, there is such a thing as holes in
transistor theory) moved from positive to negative!

I always thought of them as "not-electrons". :-)

The subject matter was what happens at the junction of the transistor. It
sort of popped my mind. In those days I was working at the Post Office
operating some then advanced IBM sorting machine. I used to get together
with the IBM engineers over a schematic manual and heatedly debate how the
transistors did what they were supposed to.

I much preferred the integrated circuits with their "input", "output" and
voltage pins only. Mind you, I also miss the days of the cathodes, grids and
anodes of the valve (tube) days.

Henry.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: WAY off topic!
    ... general analysis of nature, conducted in order to understand how ... In that practical physics segment, did they teach *why* current moves ... When I did my electronics course, ... When electron theory entered the realm ...
    (alt.support.diabetes)
  • Re: WAY off topic!
    ... general analysis of nature, conducted in order to understand how ... My electronics course started getting too much for me when learning ... transistor theory) moved from positive to negative! ... tubes and I managed to teach myself vacuum tube theory from that book. ...
    (alt.support.diabetes)
  • Re: WAY off topic!
    ... general analysis of nature, conducted in order to understand how ... My electronics course started getting too much for me when learning ... transistor theory) moved from positive to negative! ... tubes and I managed to teach myself vacuum tube theory from that book. ...
    (alt.support.diabetes)