🚀 go-pugleaf

On Thu, 25 Jun 2009 14:37:54 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid>
wrote:

>John Larkin wrote:
>> On Thu, 25 Jun 2009 12:56:30 -0700, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid>
>> wrote:
>> 
>
>[...]
>
>>> Probably the litmus test for RF stuff like this is when people schlepp 
>>> it to Otis Street and see if it can survive Sutro Tower.
>> 
>> It's terrible here. Scope traces are gross fuzz, and all sorts of
>> opamp front-ends like to rectify stuff.
>> 
>> You should see the spectrum of a 10" clip lead.
>> 
>> http://www.jimprice.com/sutro/tower1.jpg
>> 
>
>Once I took off on a Europe flight out of SFO and the antenna top stuck 
>out of the clouds while the rest of the tower was in the white. Picture 
>perfect, and I had my camera in the overhead <aargh>. I could still bite 
>myself, that opportunity never came again.

A couple of times I've been up on Twin Peaks and there was a sharply
defined fog layer below. Only a couple of big buildings poke through,
and a few plumes from power plants and such.

Sometimes the sun gets under the fog at sunrise/sunset. Cool.

ftp://jjlarkin.lmi.net/Kit1.JPG


>
>
>> We did do a useful simulation of a system that has a superconductive
>> magnet/front end on one side of a room and some ADCs on the other
>> side. We convinced ourselves that we need to go differential.
>> 
>
>Yesterday I had my comeuppance WRT to the Instek GDS-2204 scope that I 
>thought is so much better than Tektronix. In many ways it is, and also 
>doesn't have the nasty conducted emissions on the probe cables. But when 
>debugging 74MHz gear I could not figure out where a weird buzz was 
>coming from. Until I turned off the scope ...

CPU clock maybe?

John