Re: TURMEL: Money, Interest and Prosperity

"Bill Ryan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Where do the looney toons get these ridiculous ideas?
> How do they dream them up?  Now Turmel et al. tell us
> there is something inherently "exponential" about
> "positive" feedback.


Umm, I would invite all readers of this thread to
google 'positive feedback', and find *one* credible source
(university, whatever) that does not make the *obvious*
connection that positive feedback, in a mathematical
or engineering sense, is of course an exponential formula.

In calling the obvious loony, bozo Bill is attempting the
big lie, which works on the concept that those who
are not well versed in cybernetics or math will think
there is something to his statement.  The reason for
this is that they have some inherent decency within
themselves and so would never dream of saying something
so false.  That is: liars like Bill are sometimes believed
because most people, who have decency, assume everyone
has decency.

excerpt

If these new data facilitate and accelerate the transformation in the same
direction as the preceding results, they are positive feedback - their
effects are cumulative. If the new data produce a result in the opposite
direction to previous results, they are negative feedback - their effects
stabilize the system. In the first case there is *exponential* growth or
decline; in the second there is maintenance of the equilibrium.

http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/FEEDBACK.html

I didn't read the rest of this post, as I know
Bankster Bill, and have no desire to see yet
more lying.

dp

Since they claim that interest
> is "positive" feedback, that "proves" it results in
> growth in debt that is "exponential."  The method of
> the crank: start from concocted assumptions, "prove"
> anything you want, even the utterly absurd.
>
> A resonating sound system is resonating at a constant
> frequency and volume.  That's what the very word
> resonance means.  There's nothing "exponential" about
> it.  Basic electronics 101.
>
> (I won't say that Parker is necessarily lying here
> because he doesn't claim to be an engineer.  He is
> merely a pitiful ignoramus.  But Turmel claims to
> have a diploma in electronics engineering.  He is
> lying or is an imposter; take your pick.  Otherwise,
> we will have to assume it is possible to get through
> that college's curriculum without learning anything of
> significance from the subject matter.  But it might
> be possible for a slick con man to do that and get
> away with it, I will grant, conning everyone along
> the way, including his instructors.  But I would bet
> he is simply lying.)
>
> Nor is there anything wrong with positive feedback
> ipso facto.  It depends entirely on the intended
> purpose for the circuit whether you want it to be
> there or not.  The same thing for feedback that is
> negative.
>
> In my last post I gave the example of the triode tube
> that revolutionized communications using positive
> feedback.  Supplementary material is appended below.
>
> Another dramatic example from history was the
> invention of the clock escapement, which uses
> positive feedback between the balance wheel and
> escapement wheel.  Each tick of the clock feeds
> energy back into the pendulum from the weight, spring
> or battery, keeping it going.  The technology made it
> possible for clocks to be constructed that were
> accurate enough to be used for navigation across open
> oceans.  It became possible for the first time to
> calculate longitude.  Before, navigators had to keep
> within sight of shorelines.
> --
>
> "Edwin Howard Armstrong enrolled in electrical
> engineering at Columbia, and in 1913, while still an
> undergrad, made his first great discovery,
> regeneration...Armstrong discovered that the gain of
> a triode amplifier could be enormously increased by
> feeding some of the amplifier output back into the
> input, i.e. by using positive feedback. Given enough
> feedback, the amplifier became a stable and powerful
> oscillator, perfect for driving radio transmitters.
> Given a little less feedback, the amplifier became a
> more sensitive radio receiver than anything else at
> the time."
>
> -- 
>
>
>
>
>
> "Dan Parker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >"Bill Ryan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> <**>Positive feedback introduces an exponential
> >> growth. Like bringing a mike up to a speaker. It
> >> blows.<**>
> >>
> >> No it doesn't if the speaker is sufficiently power
> >> rated for the amplifier.  The system merely resonates
> >> ("squeals") at a constant frequency and volume
> >> determined by the parameters of the system, including
> >> its volume setting.
> >
> >Utter BS as usual. Newer electronics will squelch the cascading
> >resonance, but only through negative feedback. Just about
> >everyone reading this will have experienced what is being
> >described about the positive feedback between a mic and
> >an amp.  You can see it in older movies even, where the mic
> >has to move away from the amp.  Bankster Bill has a very
> >glib line, but on examination, it turns out to be lies and more
> >lies.
> >
> >Dan Parker
> >
> >
> >It is indeed an example of
> >> "positive" feedback from speaker to microphone.  Note
> >> that when resonating the frequency and volume are
> >> constant, so this does not demonstrate "exponential"
> >> growth.
> >>
> >> When it is not resonating, the amplifier merely
> >> amplifies the input signal from the microphone to
> >> whatever level you choose limited by the amplifier's
> >> "gain" that you control through its "volume" knob, so
> >> this too is not a demonstration of "exponential"
> >> growth though it does represent positive feedback
> >> within the amplifier. All that is demonstrated is the
> >> linear relationship between the volume setting and
> >> volume.
> >>
> >> So, in the manner of the stereotypic crank, he leaps
> >> from false analogy to false conclusion.  But in this
> >> case he describes something that doesn't exist.  He
> >> thereby demonstrates that he is not only a crank but
> >> an ignoramus.  Or perhaps a liar.
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> >>
> >> The most important invention in the history of
> >> electronics was the triode vacuum tube at the
> >> beginning of the twentieth century.  Its elements
> >> were plate, grid and cathode that were designed to
> >> apply the Edison effect.  The signal at the grid was
> >> amplified at the plate and cathode.  Feeding back the
> >> signal from the plate or cathode to the grid made
> >> powerful oscillators possible.  So the reception of
> >> faint radio signals became possible that could be
> >> tuned to specific frequencies.  It meant that
> >> powerful high frequency radio signals could be
> >> blended with low frequency audio.  There were tubes
> >> at both transmitters and receivers.  The technology
> >> was entirely predicated on positive feedback at
> >> both.  If it hadn't been for the productive
> >> utilization of that phenomenon, we never would have
> >> had the computers that we use to post these messages.
> >> Nor read them.
> >>
> >> So fuck you, pinhead.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Turmel) wrote in message
> >>  news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> >> > >Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2003 18:32:52 -0500
> >> > >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Daniel Morin)
> >> > >Subject: Money, Interest and Prosperity
> >> > >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> >
> >> > Hi, I saw you on television
> >>
> >> What you saw was a fool with a big ego.