Is there a point to theoretical understanding?

John Woodgate wrote:

   ...

> Aha! That applies to a *cylindrical* solenoid; the expression for a
> square-section solenoid is EASY! So easy, I virtually already know it.
> And since I'm mostly interested in the field pattern at distances much
> larger than the dimensions of the solenoid, the shape makes very little
> difference.

Hadn't you better write "circular-section", rather than "cylindrical"?
Aren't there square-section cylinders?

I love your "Aha!" Come to think of it, it applies also when the point 
of interest is much closer than the curvature of the surface. It's the
middle ground that's hard. Is that one of life's lessons?

Jerry
-- 
Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get.
�����������������������������������������������������������������������

I read in sci.electronics.design that Jerry Avins <jya@ieee.org> wrote
(in <404a4500$0$3080$61fed72c@news.rcn.com>) about 'Nit-pick re: Is
there a point to theoretical understanding?', on Sat, 6 Mar 2004:

>Hadn't you better write "circular-section", rather than "cylindrical"?
>Aren't there square-section cylinders?

No, they are square prisms. But you can have elliptical cylinders, and
I've recently come across a description of an acoustic mirror as a
'parabolic cylinder'. That means you can have a hyperbolic cylinder as
well, described by x^2 - y^2 = k^2, z = c. 

Next time I'll write 'right circular cylindrical'. Then I'll be accused
of pedantry. You can't win. (;-)
-- 
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. 
The good news is that nothing is compulsory.
The bad news is that everything is prohibited.
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk 

John Larkin wrote:


> 
> Who do you think the boss prefers: the guy who did it in two weeks, or
> the guy who wants to study the problem for nine months or so?
> 

This was always a problem for me.  I nearly always took 
considerably longer to solve a given problem than others 
around me but in the end I nearly always found an optimal or 
novel solution within the criterion of optimality that 
applied and this resulted in a high profile when all was 
said and done but the constant cycle of going from the bad 
guy who held the project up to the hero that made it excel 
in production or in the customer's perception was nerve 
wracking to say the least.  :-)

As the years wore on I watched the emphasis in industry move 
ever more from excellent to quick and that cycle became even 
more nerve wracking.


Bob
-- 

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no 
simpler."

                                              A. Einstein

On Sat, 06 Mar 2004 16:22:13 -0800, Bob Cain
<arcane@arcanemethods.com> wrote:

>John Larkin wrote:
>
>
>> 
>> Who do you think the boss prefers: the guy who did it in two weeks, or
>> the guy who wants to study the problem for nine months or so?
>> 
>
>This was always a problem for me.  I nearly always took 
>considerably longer to solve a given problem than others 
>around me but in the end I nearly always found an optimal or 
>novel solution within the criterion of optimality that 
>applied and this resulted in a high profile when all was 
>said and done but the constant cycle of going from the bad 
>guy who held the project up to the hero that made it excel 
>in production or in the customer's perception was nerve 
>wracking to say the least.  :-)
>
>As the years wore on I watched the emphasis in industry move 
>ever more from excellent to quick and that cycle became even 
>more nerve wracking.
>
>
>Bob

In recent years I've had a rash of bids turned down because of the
length of time I quoted.  In each case, one year later, the customer
came back wanting me to do the work.

                                        ...Jim Thompson
-- 
|  James E.Thompson, P.E.                           |    mens     |
|  Analog Innovations, Inc.                         |     et      |
|  Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems  |    manus    |
|  Phoenix, Arizona            Voice:(480)460-2350  |             |
|  E-mail Address at Website     Fax:(480)460-2142  |  Brass Rat  |
|       http://www.analog-innovations.com           |    1962     |
             
Will you still need me, will you still feed me, when I'm sixty-four?

John Woodgate wrote:

   ...

> of pedantry. You can't win. (;-)

Do you really want to?

Jerry
-- 
Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get.
�����������������������������������������������������������������������

On Sat, 06 Mar 2004 18:04:06 -0700, Jim Thompson
<thegreatone@example.com> wrote:

>
>In recent years I've had a rash of bids turned down because of the
>length of time I quoted.  In each case, one year later, the customer
>came back wanting me to do the work.
>
>                                        ...Jim Thompson

I just got a purchase order that we've been expecting for two years.
They want it next week, of course.

John

I read in sci.electronics.design that Jerry Avins <jya@ieee.org> wrote
(in <404a91a4$0$3105$61fed72c@news.rcn.com>) about 'Nit-pick re: Is
there a point to theoretical understanding?', on Sat, 6 Mar 2004:
>John Woodgate wrote:
>
>  ...
>
>> of pedantry. You can't win. (;-)
>
>Do you really want to?

It beats losing, any day. (;-)
-- 
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. 
The good news is that nothing is compulsory.
The bad news is that everything is prohibited.
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk 

Frank Bemelman wrote:
> 
> "Scott Stephens" <scottxs@comcast.net> schreef in bericht
> news:7hR1c.177714$jk2.652553@attbi_s53...
> > Fred Marshall wrote:
> 
> > > "Better is the enemy of good enough".  I love to suggest that to
> engineers!
> >
> > Simpler is better. Less things to surprise you.
> 
> So, simpler is the enemy of good enough.
> 
> <g>
> 
> --
> Thanks, Frank.
> (remove 'x' and 'invalid' when replying by email)


I believe the quote is "Better is the mortal enemy of good"....

Richard Lamb <n6228l@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<404B70BE.86DD8383@earthlink.net>...
> Frank Bemelman wrote:
> > 
> > "Scott Stephens" <scottxs@comcast.net> schreef in bericht
> > news:7hR1c.177714$jk2.652553@attbi_s53...
> > > Fred Marshall wrote:
>  
> > > > "Better is the enemy of good enough".  I love to suggest that to
>  engineers!
> > >
> > > Simpler is better. Less things to surprise you.
> > 
> > So, simpler is the enemy of good enough.
> > 
> > <g>
> > 
> > --
> > Thanks, Frank.
> > (remove 'x' and 'invalid' when replying by email)
> 
> 
> I believe the quote is "Better is the mortal enemy of good"....

I believe the reality is trite slogans are the mortal enemy of
rational analysis. At least, that seems to be their main application,
:-)

Regards,
Steve

On 7 Mar 2004 21:50:32 -0800, steveu@coppice.org (Steve Underwood)
wrote:

  (snipped)
>> 
>> 
>> I believe the quote is "Better is the mortal enemy of good"....
>
>I believe the reality is trite slogans are the mortal enemy of
>rational analysis. At least, that seems to be their main application,
>:-)
>
>Regards,
>Steve

Hi Steve,
   you have perfectly described 
American politics.

[-Rick-]