In Reply to: Something new? That would certainly come as a surprise to Copernicus. posted by Steve Eddy on December 6, 2003 at 21:36:05:
1) I think your analogy was (and is) backwards. You described JC as being like the Catholic Church in its fanatical response to Galilleo. I would say that the reaction to JC's measurements over the last several months bears a fair resemblance to the Spanish Inquisition. You guys represent the rabid defence of the status quo, not the path to greater understanding.BTW, unless I'm mistaken, Galilleo's trouble with the Church was precisely because the (NEW) world view he espoused was in conflict with that of the Church (OLD). Whether it had been previously described by Copernicus was irrelevant to the point. You're a smart guy, as far as I can tell, but the dysfunctional way you engage in discussion makes real dialogue impossible.
2) Thanks for posting the rest (or is it more?) of Bruno's original post. I know I could have gone to look at the original myself, but the fact that you chose to end the quote from his article with
"In short, apart from a constant time delay of a few nanoseconds (depending on length), an interconnect will have the same voltage at its output as at its input.", even though he immediately qualified that statement makes it very clear how you view this discussion. Stopping there had the maximum impact, even though it was (IMO) intellectually dishonest to selectively edit.Bruno's tests are being used to serve an agenda here, and it ain't getting at the truth. Just my opinion, of course.
I think you have spawned a wonderful set of discussions (and a lot more crap and infantile behavior). Hopefully, some real advancement will come out of this, once the discrepancies in the measurements are resolved.
Peter
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Two small points - Commuteman 16:12:15 12/08/03 (34)
- Re: Two small points - Phil Tower 09:36:36 12/09/03 (32)
- Re: Two small points - LarryR 11:26:24 12/09/03 (7)
- Re: Two small points - Phil Tower 14:37:31 12/09/03 (6)
- Re: Two small points - john curl 19:35:00 12/09/03 (4)
- Re: Two small points - Phil Tower 21:31:19 12/09/03 (2)
- Re: Two small points - john curl 23:12:33 12/09/03 (1)
- Re: Two small points - Phil Tower 08:00:57 12/10/03 (0)
- Re: Two small points - Steve Eddy 20:14:16 12/09/03 (0)
- Thanks for the info, Phil - It's given me something more to think about..........(nt) - LarryR 15:05:55 12/09/03 (0)
- One more thing - Commuteman 11:05:31 12/09/03 (10)
- Re: One more thing - john curl 20:36:23 12/09/03 (7)
- Re: One more thing - Steve Eddy 21:05:47 12/09/03 (6)
- Re: One more thing - john curl 23:20:32 12/09/03 (5)
- Re: One more thing - Steve Eddy 00:34:47 12/10/03 (4)
- Re: One more thing - john curl 11:28:53 12/10/03 (3)
- Re: One more thing - Steve Eddy 13:26:47 12/10/03 (2)
- Re: One more thing - john curl 13:38:14 12/10/03 (1)
- Re: One more thing - Steve Eddy 14:43:45 12/10/03 (0)
- Re: One more thing - Phil Tower 13:05:00 12/09/03 (0)
- Re: One more thing - Steve Eddy 12:14:17 12/09/03 (0)
- What the hell are you talking about? - Commuteman 10:57:54 12/09/03 (9)
- Re: What the hell are you talking about? - Steve Eddy 13:41:58 12/09/03 (0)
- Re: What the hell are you talking about? - Phil Tower 12:22:32 12/09/03 (7)
- Phil, how would YOU characterize the Copernicus comment? - Commuteman 13:03:25 12/09/03 (6)
- Re: Phil, how would YOU characterize the Copernicus comment? - Phil Tower 14:45:42 12/09/03 (5)
- Look, rational discussion... - Commuteman 12:23:46 12/10/03 (4)
- Re: Look, rational discussion... - Phil Tower 15:06:30 12/10/03 (3)
- Re: Look, rational discussion... - john curl 15:56:33 12/10/03 (2)
- Uh oh.....thugs are us.. - jneutron 13:10:28 12/11/03 (0)
- Thugs are people too (nt) - Phil Tower 21:18:24 12/10/03 (0)
- Hi Phil - jneutron 09:53:21 12/09/03 (2)
- Re: Hi Phil - Phil Tower 14:54:34 12/09/03 (1)
- Re: Hi Phil - jneutron 08:43:16 12/12/03 (0)
- Re: Two small points - Steve Eddy 21:09:17 12/08/03 (0)