On Tue, 2 Jun 2009 10:04:50 -0700 (PDT), rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote:> >One of the things I have thought about is when in court defending a >ticket for not stopping at a stop sign, asserting that there is no >defense possible since you can never prove a quantity is exactly zero >by measurement. Somehow I suspect the interesting aspects of this >defense would be lost on the judge...Yeah, and then there are those of us that, as we aged and learned, did not decide to cast out half of what we were taught and pull crap like ignoring rules, not using turn signals, flicking their cigarette butts out onto the rest of the world, forgetting what the rule is for a stop sign, and generally growing up thinking they are smart, and then doing stupid shit like applying to much precision where less is used by the rest of the world, and invariably using too little where it is needed, and then they have a wreck, and want to call it "an accident" when they should be charged with negligence. It was an accident that we let them make laws that allow any dumb mutant to get a license to drive. Because invariably some other retarded mutant observes said mutant driving, and then picks up his mutated foul driving habits.
What is the smallest physically-possible voltage that can be detected or processed given the state of today's technology?
Started by ●June 1, 2009
Reply by ●June 2, 20092009-06-02
Reply by ●June 2, 20092009-06-02
On Tue, 2 Jun 2009 10:06:00 -0700 (PDT), rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote:>On Jun 2, 9:08�am, Jerry Avins <j...@ieee.org> wrote: >> rickman wrote: >> >> �> On Jun 1, 10:33 pm, ItsASecretDummy�> <secretasian...@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote: >> >> �>> On Mon, 01 Jun 2009 17:40:20 -0700, John Larkin >> �>>�>> <jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >> >> �>> >> �>>> Single-electron transistors can sense, well, single electrons. >> �>>> John >> �>> � PMTs can be good enough to detect single photon events. >> �> >> �> Hmmm... �I have a $35 digital multimeter that can measure exactly 0 >> �> volts! >> >> How exactly? >> >> Jerry > >The usual way. It's not a magic voltmeter! > >RickIt would have to be to be able to measure zero volts, since such feats are not possible.
Reply by ●June 2, 20092009-06-02
On Tue, 02 Jun 2009 17:02:36 -0400, Jerry Avins <jya@ieee.org> wrote:>rickman wrote: >> On Jun 2, 9:08 am, Jerry Avins <j...@ieee.org> wrote: >>> rickman wrote: >>> >>> > On Jun 1, 10:33 pm, ItsASecretDummy > <secretasian...@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote: >>> >>> >> On Mon, 01 Jun 2009 17:40:20 -0700, John Larkin >>> >> >> <jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >>> >>> >> >>> >>> Single-electron transistors can sense, well, single electrons. >>> >>> John >>> >> PMTs can be good enough to detect single photon events. >>> > >>> > Hmmm... I have a $35 digital multimeter that can measure exactly 0 >>> > volts! >>> >>> How exactly? >>> >>> Jerry >> >> The usual way. It's not a magic voltmeter! >> >> Rick > >I meant not "How, exactly", but "exact to what extent". > >JerryAhh... the resolution question again. He already answered that one too, you just have to read what was written. Another resolution question is the guys trying to determine the age of the universe. I would think it quite hard to look that far back because things would be so distorted that even your determination of how far back you are "seeing" could be off an order of magnitude. 13.5 Billion years could really be 135 Billion. See you on 12/20/2012.
Reply by ●June 2, 20092009-06-02
On Jun 2, 12:26�pm, John Larkin <jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:> On Tue, 02 Jun 2009 18:03:42 +1000, F Murtz <hagg...@hotmail.com> > wrote: > > >Eric Gisse wrote: > >> On Jun 1, 4:15 pm, GreenXenon <glucege...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> Hi: > > >>> What is the smallest physically-possible voltage that can be detected > >>> or processed given the state of today's technology? > > >>> Thanks > > >> Oh my god please fuck off from sci.physics. We do not want you. > >Is there any one in this group with the necessary scholastic > >qualifications to diagnose the reason this poster asks such esoteric > >questions > > He seems interested in the issues but confused about physical units. > > I suppose I should get on with writing my book, to make all this stuff > plain. > > JohnJohn, Are you really writing a book. You can sign me up for a copy. And if you want to measure a small voltage (difference) you need to also specify how long you are willing to wait for measurement. Give me a billion years and I can do a lot of averaging. George Herold
Reply by ●June 3, 20092009-06-03
F Murtz wrote:> > Eric Gisse wrote: > > On Jun 1, 4:15 pm, GreenXenon <glucege...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi: > >> > >> What is the smallest physically-possible voltage that can be detected > >> or processed given the state of today's technology? > >> > >> Thanks > > > > Oh my god please fuck off from sci.physics. We do not want you. > > Is there any one in this group with the necessary scholastic > qualifications to diagnose the reason this poster asks such esoteric > questionsSo, cross post to alt.psychology -- Paul Hovnanian mailto:Paul@Hovnanian.com ------------------------------------------------------------------ Who is General Failure and why is he reading my hard drive?
Reply by ●June 3, 20092009-06-03
On Jun 2, 1:04�pm, rickman <gnu...@gmail.com> wrote:> On Jun 2, 12:17�am, "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terr...@earthlink.net> > wrote: > > > > > > > rickman wrote: > > > > On Jun 1, 10:33 pm, ItsASecretDummy > > > <secretasian...@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote: > > > > On Mon, 01 Jun 2009 17:40:20 -0700, John Larkin > > > > > <jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > > > > > >Single-electron transistors can sense, well, single electrons. > > > > > >John > > > > > � PMTs can be good enough to detect single photon events. > > > > Hmmm... �I have a $35 digital multimeter that can measure exactly 0 > > > volts! > > > � � No, it can't. �It can display zero, even with some voltage at the > > input. �The issues is the resolution of the meter. �Even with the probes > > shorted, you will have some Johnson noise which is generated by the > > resistors in the input circuitry, if the meter is above absolute zero > > degrees. That voltage is too low to be displayed, but it is still there. > > > -- > > You can't have a sense of humor, if you have no sense! > > That was my point. �It was supposed to be funny... � I guess I needed > to add the smiley. > > One of the things I have thought about is when in court defending a > ticket for not stopping at a stop sign, asserting that there is no > defense possible since you can never prove a quantity is exactly zero > by measurement. �Somehow I suspect the interesting aspects of this > defense would be lost on the judge...Well, it would be, since stop signs don't really have anything to do with Judges, but only really concern DAs. Which is mostly why the people with actual brains started building Optical Computers, Distributed Processing, Self-Assembling Robots, Self-Replicating Machines, Holograms, On-Line Banking, On-Line Publishing, GPS, Autonomous Vehicles,, and Drones for the idiots, Rather than more roads.> > Rick- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
Reply by ●June 3, 20092009-06-03
The Great Attractor wrote: ...> Another resolution question is the guys trying to determine the age of > the universe. > > I would think it quite hard to look that far back because things would > be so distorted that even your determination of how far back you are > "seeing" could be off an order of magnitude. 13.5 Billion years could > really be 135 Billion.13.5 billion is so last year! The number now is 13,500,000.001. Jerry -- Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get. �����������������������������������������������������������������������
Reply by ●June 3, 20092009-06-03
The Great Attractor wrote:> > I would think it quite hard to look that far back because things would > be so distorted that even your determination of how far back you are > "seeing" could be off an order of magnitude. 13.5 Billion years could > really be 135 Billion. > > See you on 12/20/2012.Have fun... Javascript calculator of the many distances involved in cosmology http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/CosmoCalc.html
Reply by ●June 3, 20092009-06-03
On Tue, 02 Jun 2009 18:40:51 -0700, ItsASecretDummy <secretasianman@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote:>On Mon, 1 Jun 2009 22:00:07 -0700, "Eric Jacobsen" ><eric.jacobsen@ieee.org> wrote: > >> >>"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote in message >>news:CMudnRFLId9xOrnXnZ2dnUVZ_qCdnZ2d@earthlink.com... >>> >>> rickman wrote: >>>> >>>> On Jun 1, 10:33 pm, ItsASecretDummy >>>> <secretasian...@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote: >>>> > On Mon, 01 Jun 2009 17:40:20 -0700, John Larkin >>>> > >>>> > <jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >>>> > >>>> > >Single-electron transistors can sense, well, single electrons. >>>> > >>>> > >John >>>> > >>>> > PMTs can be good enough to detect single photon events. >>>> >>>> Hmmm... I have a $35 digital multimeter that can measure exactly 0 >>>> volts! >>> >>> >>> No, it can't. It can display zero, even with some voltage at the >>> input. The issues is the resolution of the meter. Even with the probes >>> shorted, you will have some Johnson noise which is generated by the >>> resistors in the input circuitry, if the meter is above absolute zero >>> degrees. That voltage is too low to be displayed, but it is still there. >>> >>> >>> -- >>> You can't have a sense of humor, if you have no sense! >> >>Yeah, but when it's exactly zero volts, that what the $35 multimeter will >>display, > > >] Not if it is turned on it wont. > >> so he wasn't incorrect. > > Oh yes he was, and so is most of the other responses to him. > > If the meter is off, there will be no display. If it is on, it will >not be very likely to read zero volts when probing a bare piece of metal >or shorting the leads. > > Like a scale that has been zeroed, one will see drift above and below >the zero line if the scale can resolve to tenths of a gram. It will also >drift as the internal electronics heats up. Not so much with a meter as >with scale electronics, for some reason. > > So if the meter has more than 2 digits behind the decimal point, one >will likely see errant values pop in and out.Fluke 75, shorted leads, VDC range: steady .000 Fluke 87, ditto: steady 0.000 AlwaysWrong. John
Reply by ●June 3, 20092009-06-03
On Tue, 02 Jun 2009 18:47:14 -0700, GoldIntermetallicEmbrittlement <GoldIntermetallicEmbrittlement@youdontknowjack.org> wrote:>On Tue, 2 Jun 2009 06:17:53 -0700 (PDT), GreenXenon ><glucegen1x@gmail.com> wrote: > >>On Jun 1, 5:40 pm, John Larkin >><jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >> >>> You can buy nanovoltmeters that will resolve a couple of hundred >>> picovolts, if you're careful. >>> >>> Superconductive SQUID detectors can measure a picovolt. >>> >>> Single-electron transistors can sense, well, single electrons. >> >> >>Are there any devices that can detect, receive, record, playback, >>modulate/demodulate, transmit and/or otherwise process signals with >>peak-to-peak amplitudes around 1 femtovolt? > > Yes, your FM receiver. Usually takes 3 or more though.Femtovolts, with an FM receiver? Good ones need microvolt or so. A 3 dB noise figure, optimistic for a radio, is ballpark 1 nV RMS noise per root Hz, and an FM radio has a couple of hundred KHz bandwidth. AlwaysWrong. John
