| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 518.1 | No PhD needed, but clarity would be preferred | MARKER::KALLIS | loose ships slip slips. | Wed May 04 1988 23:54 | 14 |
| This is one of those annoying cases where techspeak obfuscates intent.
It's translation could be, "To determine approximate values [of
whatever] when voltages [of whatever] exceed a peak value of 20,000
Volts, [the values determined by whatever process has gone before]
can be calculated through mathematical extrapolation. These
approximate values also can be indicated graphically using paper with
both the horizontal and vertical axes' values represented by
logarithmic scales. The graphical approximation will take the form
of a straight line, which can be used for extrapolation."
Admittedly, the original quote is shorter. It's also foggier.
Steve Kallis, Jr.
|
| 518.2 | everything you always wanted to know about ... | ZFC::DERAMO | I am, therefore I'll think. | Thu May 05 1988 01:17 | 10 |
| If two variables y and x are related by an equation of
the form
c1 c2
x y = c3
where c1, c2, and c3 are constants, then the graph of
this relationship on "log-log" graph paper will be a
straight line. And vice versa. [Void where prohibited.]
Dan
|
| 518.3 | Newspeak vs. Techspeak | GRNDAD::STONE | Roy | Thu May 05 1988 16:30 | 6 |
| Re: .0 JACKAL::KEARNS (ffk)
The statements in the original note were written in perfectly
acceptable engineering terms. If ffk has difficulty with words like
"extrapolate" and "double logarithmic diagram" he would best consult
his supervisor or one of the trained engineers in his group.
|
| 518.4 | audience? | VIA::RANDALL | I feel a novel coming on | Thu May 05 1988 17:43 | 9 |
| If the quoted statement comes from a document aimed at hardware
engineers, it's perfectly clear and acceptable. I had no trouble
understanding it (two years calculus, basic physics, an interest
in electronics).
However, if the document is aimed at a non-engineering audience
(doubful if it's a spec), then it would be better rewritten.
--bonnie
|
| 518.5 | Gee... | DECSIM::HEILMAN | Now I try to be amused... | Thu May 05 1988 19:40 | 2 |
| Gee, Mill Specks... are those small pieces of dirt found on windows
in Maynard? :-)
|
| 518.6 | Nahh | PAMOLA::RECKARD | Jon Reckard, 381-0878, ZKO3-2/T63 | Thu May 05 1988 21:44 | 4 |
| > Gee, Mill Specks... are those small pieces of dirt found on windows
> in Maynard? :-)
No, they're John Stuart's bifocals.
|
| 518.7 | The Good Old Days | COMICS::DEMORGAN | Richard De Morgan, UK CSC/CS | Mon May 09 1988 12:31 | 6 |
| Mill specks? When I worked in Maynard ('69 - 71) you could hardly
see out of the windows. They were covered in cobwebs and were reputed
to house unbelievably large spiders. Another problem in those days
was the probability of a large dollop of lanolin (Maynard was formerly
a wool mill) falling out of the ceiling and glueing all the papers
on your desk together.
|
| 518.8 | good for crumpled disks, too, I bet | VIA::RANDALL | I feel a novel coming on | Tue May 10 1988 23:37 | 4 |
| I know the lanolin must have been a nuisance, but nobody from the
Mill ever had trouble with dried, wrinkled listings . . .
--bonnie
|
| 518.9 | If It Don't Itch, Don't Scratch | DRUMS::FEHSKENS | | Mon Jun 13 1988 23:16 | 14 |
| re .4 - the only problem with rewriting it is that no matter how
clearly you try to express the relationship, it won't help if the
audience doesn't understand the concepts (interpolation, linearity,
log graph paper, exponentials). If you do understand the concepts,
the language is perfectly clear. If you have to have the concepts
explained, a brief, straightforward statement turns into a rather
lengthier lecture on mathematics.
Given your qualification "(doubtful if it's a spec)", I suspect
we agree.
len.
|