[time-nuts] Advantages & Disadvantages of the TPLL Method
sar10538 at gmail.com
Mon Jun 21 09:06:11 UTC 2010
Thanks for letting us have your name.
On 21 June 2010 10:05, <GandalfG8 at aol.com> wrote:
> Your stock answer of claiming that everyone and his granny is missing the
> point is wearing a bit thin, and despite your suggestion I have not missed
> anything either and that includes John's results.
But have you looked at the block schematic and understood how it works
> Those results, as far as they go, look very good, and I have no doubt you
> deserve credit for what you've achieved, but what YOU seem to have missed,
> or conveniently continue to ignore, is the need to be able to prove, or
> provide sufficient information so that someone else can prove, that your
> results are applicable to a more general case, and at least to the accuracy that
> you claim.
So the only way to prove this for you is not empirically, it has to be
numerically! Enjoy your wait!
> There will always be empirical design methods, so called "rules of thumb"
> for example, and these can be very valuable tools but the results from such
> methods, indeed the results from any design method, still need to be
> evaluated and confirmed in practice.
And what part of "confirmed in practice" have you not understood so
far. Your saying one thing and then something different. I am totally
confused by your use of the English language despite coming from
somewhere that teaches the Queen's English.
> In a similar fashion your measurement technique, again as with all others,
> needs validation and proper analysis of its limitations before you can
> truly come to rely upon it as a stand alone tool.
> It may well be "good enough" for everything you need but despite John's
> measurements, and however good his results, what you haven't demonstrated so
> far is the ability to evaluate those limitations so you can be sure of that.
> The only way at the moment that you can be really sure of your
> measurements each and every time is to have someone like John check your results each
> and every time.
John spent a month testing LOTS of different devices with thei TPLL
against a $$$$ TSC trying to see if it would fail but he could not. He
did come to some conclusions as to the limited range that the TPLL can
be used over and we accept that. So, you want to be pedantic and say
that if you can only prove it empirically, then you have to test it in
an infinite number of ways. It's a bloody good job that the guy who
invented the lightbulb only had to do it 14,000 times and not an
infinite number of times as we would all be in the dark now, wouldn't
> It doesn't matter how many times your results are checked and confirmed,
> and it doesn't matter that your technique might be perfect and your results
> might be perfect every time, what you've demonstrated very clearly so far is
> that you just don't know whether or not that's true.
Do you believe in God? Go ahead and prove it!
> I've wondered sometimes if you're just frightened that somebody might
> prove you wrong but I don't recall anyone suggesting you're actually "wrong",
> all I've seen is folks trying to help you and offer well meant and useful
> advice that could assist you properly evaluate the limitations of what you're
Actually, over the whole period that the TPLL has been discussed on
this list it's my observation that a lot of the input from "others"
has NOT been "well meant and useful advice" and your just proving it
here and now.
> However, there must be a definite blockage somewhere because you seem to
> have gone into auto repeat mode, and for someone who claims not to have time
> to produce any documentation you must have wasted hours and hours churning
> out the same old smokescreens.
And your still asking the same old questions over and over again when
you should have realised that your not talking to someone who can give
you the answers you need to satisfy YOU. It's no good trying to get
blood out of a stone, perhaps it's your turn to donate some of the red
stuff and try to understand this thing without someone being able to
describe it your language.
OK, I hear you say, so let's have a full schematic for us to work
with. Well, I'll tell you exactly what will happen if that gets put on
the table shall I. There will be a flood of posts from certain
quarters who will say, you shouldn't do it like that, you should do it
like this, what a stupid design, this is all wrong, what a stupid chap
this is! Get the idea. If you haven't already spotted this, this list
is a TOUGH ROOM and there is no sympathy for anyone who is unable to
show they are top of the class. Well, it's for time-nuts, so I agree
it's a bleeding edge technical group but there are a lot of people on
this list who are really fascinated by this area and really want to
learn and contribute. I've thrown up a good deal of "stupid" ideas
since I joined this group but have learnt a great deal on the subject,
perhaps you should learn some humility.
> Refusing to share your "recipe" so to speak, with all the bullshit you've
> come up with as to why that shouldn't be necessary, and to insult and
> attempt to belittle those who have tried to advise you, with all that crap about
> the "experts who just don't understand how it works" etc etc, well, sorry
> mate but that really is the mark of a true snake oil salesman and, if
> nothing else, you've certainly got that off to perfection.
A lot of you bully boys have held Warren up against the wall by the
throat and demanded answers so he has spilt the beans in whatever way
he felt would get you off his back. So don't shovel up this sort of BS
Nigel, take a step back and see what has been going on here. It's time
for us all to play nicely in the sandpit.
Steve - ZL3TUV & G8KVD (and I got my G8 before you)
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts at febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
Steve Rooke - ZL3TUV & G8KVD
The only reason for time is so that everything doesn't happen at once.
More information about the time-nuts