wave-particle duality and TV reception
 

Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article , Bill Wright
wrote:
Max Demian wrote:
"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
The whole science of RF seems to be based on wave theory. Does
particle theory have any place?
It looked as if he deliberately missed the tin cans with the red ping
pong balls.


There's been a lot of stories recently about scientists fiddling their
results! Apparently a lot of them admit to it, years later.

OK, I confess that when I took my English Language O-Level I fibbed. I
didn't really want to be a train driver. I just wrote that in my essay for
effect. :-)

Jim

My Eng Land O level had a comprehension test. We had to read about a
proposal to equip fire engines with a gadget that would switch the
traffic lights in their favour.

Bill

wave-particle duality and TV reception
 

"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article , Bill Wright
wrote:
Max Demian wrote:
"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
The whole science of RF seems to be based on wave
theory. Does
particle theory have any place?
It looked as if he deliberately missed the tin cans
with the red ping
pong balls.


There's been a lot of stories recently about scientists
fiddling their
results! Apparently a lot of them admit to it, years
later.

OK, I confess that when I took my English Language
O-Level I fibbed. I
didn't really want to be a train driver. I just wrote
that in my essay for
effect. :-)

Jim

My Eng Land O level had a comprehension test. We had to
read about a proposal to equip fire engines with a gadget
that would switch the traffic lights in their favour.

Bill


I assume that was a typo - 'Land?'


--
Woody

harrogate three at ntlworld dot com

wave-particle duality and TV reception
 

Max Demian wrote:
"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
Max Demian wrote:
"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
The whole science of RF seems to be based on wave theory. Does particle
theory have any place?
It looked as if he deliberately missed the tin cans with the red ping
pong balls.

There's been a lot of stories recently about scientists fiddling their
results! Apparently a lot of them admit to it, years later.

At uni we learned that Mendel probably cheated in his pea breeding
experiments.


http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/ja...heating-again/

Bill

wave-particle duality and TV reception
 

In article ,
says...

On Thu, 11 Dec 2014 08:12:29 -0000, "Woody"
wrote:

Looks like the RS Christmas Lectures this year will be
interesting - being delivered by a woman (name escapes me)
who is Professor of Radio Frequency Engineering at UMIST.

Yes, I find it genuinely encouraging that such creatures exist, as in
all the time I spent in broadcast engineering, I never met one. I
don't mean just professors of course; there were never female versions
of any kind of engineer (except a few I recruited myself, which
probably doesn't really count).


Waves


I expect the usual suspects, notably in the Guardian, will make the
usual noises about this, suggesting that the reason for it is some
kind of fiendish male plot to keep the girlies away from our technical
toys, but I've never seen any evidence of any such thing, rather the
reverse if anything. My life's experience, all the way from childhood,
would suggest that most girls and women avoid involvement in
technology because most of them are simply not interested.


Just getting the qualifications I needed from an all-girls school in the
70s was a tough job involving my parents visiting the school to sort out
my time table.

In more modern times, from what I have read, girls in all-girls schools
do better in technical subjects than those (the majority) who attend
mixed schools, where the girls tend to shy away from the more
traditionally male subjects.

And when they do get their qualifications it is still a tough choice for
them as it is very isolating being the only female who you know who does
your particular type of job.

Yes, I get my own designated Ladies toilet (that the blokes use any way)
but being the only woman you have ever met who does you job in 34 years
is harsh. Until more women see engineering as normal not enough women
will want to work in the field, making it normal - at least, that's how
I see it.

You need to be determined, thick skinned, tolerant to loneliness and
isolation, prepared to put up with discrimination and sexist talk (yes,
even today!) and able to hold your pee when working on site as they only
Ladies loos will be up in the offices and I am yet to master nipping
round the back and ****ing up against a wall.

Would I do it again, knowing what I know now? The work has been fun, a
lot of fun, and I enjoy my current job, and I have been to a few
interesting places. But I'm not sure that outweighs the negatives so I
would tell any girl who asked me if I would recommend my job to them to
think carefully about the pro and the cons before making a decision.

And if they wanted to, I would support and help them 100%, but if they
picked something else with a high female participation, I would wouldn't
blame them.

wave-particle duality and TV reception
 

In article ,
says...

In article , Roderick Stewart
wrote:


My life's experience, all the way from childhood, would suggest that
most girls and women avoid involvement in technology because most of
them are simply not interested.

However that still may be a 'conditioned response' which is indoctrinated
long before they approach the end of schooling. The young tend to pick up
their ideas from their peers and the ones who are a year or two older at
school. Hence may be acquired as just one part of a general social set of
fitting in.

IIRC the stats indicate that women are far more likely to take an interest
in 'science' if they went to a single-sex school.

After that they tend to run into the assumptions, etc, in workplaces, etc.
Again, as a part of the general taken-for-granted assumptions of society.

Jim

Yes, you are right - at least in my view.

My boss said he would not consider taking on girl apprentices "as they
need to be able to do the job" and he has passed two comments in my
hearing about a women in her late 20s who works on the shop floor who
shouldn't be carrying heavy items when there is a chap at hand to do it
for her and shouldn't be on her hands and knees doing up huge bolts.

She on the other hand loves her job and is extremely capable, and
wouldn't dream of asking for aid unless she actually needed it.

And when I tell people what I do for a living, you always need to pull
their eye brows back down off their forehead afterwards.

wave-particle duality and TV reception
 

In article , says...

Jim Lesurf wrote:

My life's experience, all the way from childhood, would suggest that
most girls and women avoid involvement in technology because most of
them are simply not interested.

However that still may be a 'conditioned response' which is indoctrinated
long before they approach the end of schooling. The young tend to pick up
their ideas from their peers and the ones who are a year or two older at
school. Hence may be acquired as just one part of a general social set of
fitting in.

I did a lot to avoid sexual stereotyping with my kids. It made no
difference. The girls developed girly interests; the boy developed
masculine interests. Of course, parents are only one influence on a
child, and in any case they probably model themselves on their parents.

Bill

There was a tv show on a few month back where they showed some
experiments that have been carried out that look into this - and it was
the adult that dun it!

The children, if left to their own devices and a big bag of toys, showed
no gender preference towards their traditional toys, the girls enjoying
the cars and much as the boys enjoyed the dolls and teddies.

They then put a girl in blue and a boy in pink and changed their names
and gave them to some adults who though they were the opposite to their
actual gender.

In both cases, the adult took a toy traditional to the gender they
thought their child to be, and pretty much pushed it on to the child and
even resorted to taking away toys that they adult thought opposite to
their gender.

When challenged, the adults believed they had been complete gender
neutral towards the children.

As a girl (now an engineer) who was not allowed to play with her
brother's lego or meccano or train set (he's now a scientist) I found
this all quite interesting.

wave-particle duality and TV reception
 

Yellow wrote:

Just getting the qualifications I needed from an all-girls school in the
70s was a tough job involving my parents visiting the school to sort out
my time table.
So I'm guessing you're a girl then. Welcome to this bastion of male
prejudice. I should introduce myself. I'm the rather dashing, handsome one.

You need to be determined, thick skinned, tolerant to loneliness and
isolation, prepared to put up with discrimination and sexist talk (yes,
even today!)
Why should you care about sexist talk? We blokes have to put up with it
all the time, whenever two or more women get together. Try being the
only bloke in a female environment, like a male nurse or junior school
teacher. The sexist talk is dreadful really, but blokes don't fuss about it.

and able to hold your pee when working on site as they only
Ladies loos will be up in the offices and I am yet to master nipping
round the back and ****ing up against a wall.
If the site lavatories don't have a ladies they are by definition
unisex, so use them! If any blokes complain the management know what
they have to do: provide a ladies'.

Bill

PS: I'm a feminist. My wife says so.

wave-particle duality and TV reception
 

Yellow wrote:

And when I tell people what I do for a living, you always need to pull
their eye brows back down off their forehead afterwards.

I have a friend who is a female cabinetmaker and she is the absolute
tops. Apart from her woodworking skills she has something few blokes
have: she will put her ego away and let the customer say what he wants,
and not try to tell him what he wants.

I use cabs a lot and I'd far rather have a female driver.

Bill

wave-particle duality and TV reception
 

In article , Yellow
wrote:


My boss said he would not consider taking on girl apprentices "as they
need to be able to do the job" and he has passed two comments in my
hearing about a women in her late 20s who works on the shop floor who
shouldn't be carrying heavy items when there is a chap at hand to do it
for her and shouldn't be on her hands and knees doing up huge bolts.

She on the other hand loves her job and is extremely capable, and
wouldn't dream of asking for aid unless she actually needed it.

And when I tell people what I do for a living, you always need to pull
their eye brows back down off their forehead afterwards.

FWIW in my career sic I employed over a dozen postgrads to do research.
Of those, two were women. One was excellent at the work, the other was OK.
i.e. given the small statistical sample, pretty much in line with the men.
And overall similar to the ratio in our undergrad classes.

The excellent one was easily able to get repeat contracts, etc. The work
was very much practical science and engineering as we made things on
contract.

So far as I could tell from my limited experience is / was no real gender
difference in ability. My impression was simply that long before university
many were losing any interest in science for the kinds 'social'
reasons I mentioned.

I do wonder how much this may vary from country to county, but have no info
on that.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

wave-particle duality and TV reception
 

On Sat, 13 Dec 2014 11:09:05 +0000, brightside S9
wrote:

On Thu, 11 Dec 2014 11:57:01 -0800 (PST), wrote:

Waves, particles, neither, both? Who knows?

Treating EM waves as "waves" makes the maths easier,(for some value of easier), for calculating aerial lengths, diffraction, etc.

But you can turn it around and say something like:-
The transmitter emits a stream of photons, some of which bang into the recieving aerial and knock electrons out of their orbits around the atoms. These bang into the next atom up, and then the next, and if you get enough of them, you end up with an electric current to feed into the receiver.
Simples!

It was a good program, though. Except I got lost at Bell's inequality.


Try this:
http://www.upscale.utoronto.ca/PVB/H...lsTheorem.html

John Stewart Bell (of the theorem) was born and educated in Belfast.
There was a attempt recently to name a street in his honour. That came
to grief because there is a policy of not naming streets after people.
However, it has now been agreed to name the street after the theorem. It
will be Bell's Theorem Crescent.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-30189690

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/ne...-30719234.html


Remember photons, electrons and such are not things as we understand it. Just as radio waves are not waves as we understand them, as they're not waves IN anything. Trying to think about it hurts the head.

As someone famous said:- If you're not shocked by Quantum theory, you haven't understood it. I think someone else said "No-one really understands it at all".

Good thinking, Ian.

--
Peter Duncanson
(in uk.tech.digital-tv)