Actions
Forum Thread Details
  • Replies 79 replies
  • Subscribers 640 subscribers
  • Views 4800 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Related

Favourite technological word

Workshopshed

mentioned that his favourite word was "Just" as in, "it just works" which often hides a massive amount of work done by others to make it happen for you.

 

My favourite is "Simply" which comes up in our requirements statements. e.g. "It simply needs to guide the rocket and land on the asteroid". We find it used most when the person writing the request has no idea at all about what needs to be done.

Parents

  • 'NREs'  Non-recurrent engineering.  Those are all of those rando parts distributed on the bench and floor when one is designing something or trying to get something to work.  I am hooking up the air on my new laser cutters, I will have a surfeit of nipples and tubing lying around by the time I get it right.

  • in reply to D_Hersey

    Yes, that one goes along with, "Don't bother to document anything, its just for a demonstration!"

     

    After the demo, it suddenly becomes a full blown prototype that they expect you to quickly turn into a product rather than let you redesign it for its intended task.

     

    I have been caught on that one, but never twice.

     

    DAB

  • in reply to DAB

    I document everything!

    I have the approach - "Document as you work!"

    If you can touch type and use illustration packages well it does not hinder the development in any way whatsoever.

     

    It's a real time saver!

     

    The ROI is fantastic!

  • in reply to DAB

    Thank you. The last bunch of stuff that I had seen from CERN, and the like, was starting to look more like metaphysics than physics. I had already heard the photon propagation phenomenon. Your explanation brings in something that I had been discounting, which is Heisenberg issues (usually something that I point out to others), where the measurement instrument is directing the results. Time for me to get caught up on my dark matter reading.

     

    Cheers,

    Jack

  • in reply to jack.chaney56

    Hi Jack,

     

    In my theory, we show that photons are two mass/charged objects that vibrate at a frequency determined by the mass.

     

    That makes all discussions on particle or wave moot.  Most of the wave effects are the result of not understanding the edge effects of individual photons being affected by the mass of the aperture.

     

    We have shown that all photons are involved in discrete exchanges between the source and the absorbing atom.

     

    DAB

Reply
  • in reply to jack.chaney56

    Hi Jack,

     

    In my theory, we show that photons are two mass/charged objects that vibrate at a frequency determined by the mass.

     

    That makes all discussions on particle or wave moot.  Most of the wave effects are the result of not understanding the edge effects of individual photons being affected by the mass of the aperture.

     

    We have shown that all photons are involved in discrete exchanges between the source and the absorbing atom.

     

    DAB

Children
  • in reply to DAB

    Thank you. The last bunch of stuff that I had seen from CERN, and the like, was starting to look more like metaphysics than physics. I had already heard the photon propagation phenomenon. Your explanation brings in something that I had been discounting, which is Heisenberg issues (usually something that I point out to others), where the measurement instrument is directing the results. Time for me to get caught up on my dark matter reading.

     

    Cheers,

    Jack