You been shot down again.

You are hurling abuse, as you always do.

Only you thinks otherwise.

Everyone else is laughing at you.




no we are not...hundreds of us don't give a **** about your one technical
upmanship....

"Stephen Thomas Cole" wrote in message
...

That Gareth is still stewing over the correction you gave him 11 years ago
underlines his mental instability.

Once again your only contribution is rather silly and infantile abuse,
which,
unfortunately for you, fails to mask your complete ignorance about
any matter technical.

"Jim GM4DHJ..." wrote in message
...

As you say, he is best ignored, although some of his whacky theories
have given me a good laugh from time to time.

laughing at others would appear to be your speciality.......

Another illustration of, "Empty vessels make the most noise"?

"Brian Morrison" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 25 Feb 2015 00:32:59 +0000 (UTC)
Brian Reay wrote:

If you look in the archives you will see him referring to 'negative
frequency'

Genuine DSP gurus refer to negative frequency too, they simply mean
the opposite phasor in the pair, the one rotating clockwise instead of
anti-clockwise on the Real-Imaginary axis diagram.


And also the negative X-Axis on the Laplacian complex plane.

On 25/02/15 11:38, Stephen Thomas Cole wrote:
Brian Reay wrote:
On 25/02/15 10:39, gareth wrote:
"rickman" wrote in message
...

I thought it might be that, but it still makes no sense to me. Who or how
does changing the direction of rotation of a rotating vector change its
"size". Are you defining size as the rotation so that going from a + to
a - is like reversing the direction of a vector? I think most people
would consider the "size" of a vector to be the magnitude which is
independent of phase angle and so rotation, no?

Perhaps you can explain this with a little math?

Not my gibberish, refer to the original posting ...

-----ooooo-----

From: "Brian Reay"
Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical,uk.radio.amateur
Subject: Phase noise
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 10:21:54 -0000
Message-ID:


The term e^(-jwt) isn't some magical time machine relating to "minus
time", e^(-jwt) is simply another way of writing 1/(e^jwt) which
is a value that decreases as t increasing.



See, he has trimmed his part, which clearly didn't refer to the true
usage of negative frequency. I simply over estimated is ability to grasp
the meaning of what I'd said without more detail. This was obvious as he
also claimed claimed that division was impossible with complex numbers.

He will attempt to drag this out, as he always does, but a look in the
archive will show his claims to be nonsense. He drags this up from time
to time, generally after a drubbing, He really doesn't like being proven
wrong. Look at the date, he has been dragging this up with boring
regularity since then. I've lost count of the times it has been explained
to him. He has finally got the idea of the clockwise rotating phasor. He
struggled with the idea that, as the phasor rotated, the angle became
more negative, and thus decreased. eg -20 -10

That Gareth is still stewing over the correction you gave him 11 years ago
underlines his mental instability.



It is his way of trying to cope with is own failings. If you read his
Westinghouse rant, you will see in his own words, a summary of how he
conducts himself. He has repeated it for other places. It is easy to see
why he hasn't been successful and is facing a grim future- bouncing of
the walls of his Spartan hovel.

"gareth" wrote in message
...
"Jim GM4DHJ..." wrote in message
...

As you say, he is best ignored, although some of his whacky theories
have given me a good laugh from time to time.

laughing at others would appear to be your speciality.......

Another illustration of, "Empty vessels make the most noise"?



no ....

and is facing a grim future- bouncing of
the walls of his Spartan hovel.



that is your best put down yet ! .... kwality

"Brian Reay" wrote in message
...
It is his way of trying to cope with is own failings. If you read his
Westinghouse rant, you will see in his own words, a summary of how he
conducts himself. He has repeated it for other places. It is easy to see
why he hasn't been successful and is facing a grim future- bouncing of the
walls of his Spartan hovel.

What's up this morning, brian, that has you blurting out childish remarks
at every turn? Why are you so sad and bitter?

It does nothing for your reputation as a technical aficionado when you
decline to discuss technical issues and resort to personal abuse at every
turn.

Shame on you.

"Jim GM4DHJ..." wrote in message
...
"gareth" wrote in message
...
"Jim GM4DHJ..." wrote in message
...
As you say, he is best ignored, although some of his whacky theories
have given me a good laugh from time to time.
laughing at others would appear to be your speciality.......
Another illustration of, "Empty vessels make the most noise"?

no ....

Oh. Well, what about, "Vessels full of **** create the biggest stinks"?

"Brian Reay" wrote in message
...
Some who refuse to embrace new technologies and are constantly playing
with old techniques etc. simply lack the ability to move on.

I find it difficult to correlate your childish remark above with your
oft-repeated
mantra that although there are many aspects of amateur radio in which you
do not indulge, that you do not criticise those who do so indulge.

Are you, perchance, changing your viewpoint to suit the direction from which
the wind is blowing?