My girlfriend is getting into electronics

[Ldanielrosa1]

I've bored her to tears some time ago, but her major requires that she take some classes in electronics.

 

[Alun]

Have you taken an electronics course before?

You never know she might become more knowledgeable  than you are!

 

[Ldanielrosa1]

Yes, I have.  She just might- she already overtook me in math 3 years ago.  Did I mention the holograms she made last quarter?

 

[Alun]

If she's good at mathematics then electronics should be easy for her. ;D

 

[Kevin Weddle]

You are right on the money Alun. Mathematics, not Physics, is the key to understanding electronics.

 

[audioguru2]

f = 0.16 divided by RC.
xR = 0.16 divided by fC.
xC = 0.16 divided by fR.
Forget about pi.

E = I times R.
I = E divided by R.
R = E divided by I.

P = E times I.
P = I squared times R.
P = E squared divided by R.

hFE = Ic divided by Ib.

Is this math?  ??? ???
It's just simple arithmatic, isn't it?  ??? ???

Math doesn't explain how a Johnson counter or an ExOR gate works.
I think that understanding electronics just takes a lot of plain common sense!  ;D

 

[Dazza]

How about trial and error ;D,

Will maybe this time I will connect this overhear and that over their, and maybe this time it will work :,

Oops, that was more smoke then the last time ,

Oh, so that's why it didn't work :, I won't do that again ;D ;D.

 

[Alun]

audioguru,

To understand the basic principles common sense and a basic understanding of arithmatic is all that's required.

But if you really want to get into electronic engineering properly and do complex AC networks analysis, DC transients and  harmonic analysis, radio wave propagation and antenna and wave guide calculations you will need quite an advanced understanding of Mathematics - laplace transforms make my head hurt.

 

[Alun]

How about trial and error ;D,

Will maybe this time I will connect this overhear and that over their, and maybe this time it will work :,

Oops, that was more smoke then the last time ,

Oh, so that's why it didn't work :, I won't do that again ;D ;D.

This is a very good way to learn electronics. To really master electronic engineering you need both theory and practical experiance. I have more of the former but some people I know have more of the latter. Ideally it's best to learn them both at the same time but I would say theory should come first, but pracital experiance is equally important. If you're building a circuit and you require some 5K resistors, you wouldn't know you could just use 2 10Ks in parallel if you didn't know ohms law.

 

[prateeksikka]

HELLO !!!!!!!!!
COME ON !!!!
GOOD MORNING PLEASE WAKE UP U ALL!!!
HOW COULD YOU RULE OUT PHYSICS AS A REQUIREMENT FOR ELECTRONICS DO U KNOW ONE THING A SIMPLE GOLDEEN RULE WHICH I LEARNT TILL NOW?
MATHEMATICIAN+PHYSICIST=SCIENTIST
SCIENTIST+ECONOMIST(FOR OPTIMAL COST IMPLEMENTATION)=ENGINEER!!!!
ELECTRONICS ENGINEER IS NO EXCEPTION
PRATEEK

 

[Miles Prower]

Math doesn't explain how a Johnson counter or an ExOR gate works.

Yes it does: Boolean Algebra does that. 

I think that understanding electronics just takes a lot of plain common sense!

That certainly helps, especially in those cases where things don't work out like the calculations say they should. (Yeah, I've had that happen. Bummer.) When that happens, then being able to think and improvise becomes a most helpful ability. There's as much art as science to design work. Still, the science takes a helluvalot of work out of just trying to solve everything by a brute force approach.

 

[prateeksikka]

hi there!
IF U WISH TO BUILD A HOUSE .AND U KNOW THAT 1 LABOURER WILL BUILD IT IN 10 DAYS.SO 10 LABOURERS WILL BUILD IT IN 1 DAY,
AND SO IF U PUT ABOUT 1 MILLION LABOURERS IT WILL BE BUILT IN LESS THAN A SECOND!!!!!!!
BELIEVE ME GUYS,IT IS TRUE MATHEMATICIAN WILL HAVE NO OBJECTION TO IT BUT A PHYSICIST,ENGINEER ETC THOSE WHO REALIZE MORE PRACTICAL ISSUES THEY WONT AGREE TO IT!
IT IS IMPOSSIBLE! ;D
PRATEEK

 

[audioguru2]

Whenever I see 10 labourers, one is doing all the work and the others are just watching or supervising him.  ;D

 

[prateeksikka]

hi audioguru!
yeah!
same the case with me too!
can u believe that mathematics still says its possible even when there is no place for 1 million labourers to stand,it is the population of an average city in india!

 

[TekNoir]

hi there!
IF U WISH TO BUILD A HOUSE .AND U KNOW THAT 1 LABOURER WILL BUILD IT IN 10 DAYS.SO 10 LABOURERS WILL BUILD IT IN 1 DAY,
AND SO IF U PUT ABOUT 1 MILLION LABOURERS IT WILL BE BUILT IN LESS THAN A SECOND!!!!!!!
BELIEVE ME GUYS,IT IS TRUE MATHEMATICIAN WILL HAVE NO OBJECTION TO IT BUT A PHYSICIST,ENGINEER ETC THOSE WHO REALIZE MORE PRACTICAL ISSUES THEY WONT AGREE TO IT!
IT IS IMPOSSIBLE! ;D
PRATEEK

I would tend to agree with this statement. More only ever equals more efficient up to a common visible point. Let us take being married for instance and cooking dinner. One person can accomplish the job just as efficiently as both, and for two you can generally cut down on preparatory time (unless you say something to start an argument). Yet, you still cannot speed up the rate at which whatever cooks (unless you are simply making salad). This is true no matter how many people you stuff into the kitchen and I would be quick to point out that the more people that you have working on any one project, the more crowded it becomes and before long productiveness actually decreases. (You may want to point out that more chefs in a large kitchen could get more done quicker, but you would still eventually run into the physical limitations of floor space for the people, counter space for preparation, and stove space for cooking.) I would hate to try and cook while stumbling over ten other people. Likewise, I would rather build my house using three of my handiest friends than ten other people (no matter how good they are) if they are getting in each other's way. (The construction time might very well take the exact amount of time once you consider in the "human factor," i.e. arguing, mistakes, space, laziness, break time, and so on.) This is true for nearly everything in life. (Just try typing a research paper with another person at the same time!) These have been just a few examples.

I believe that electronics relies more on visual recognition, being able to recognize what certain combinations of components are able to do at any one time. Mathematics can only take a backseat as can physics when it comes down to it. (Please note that I didn't say that they were completely unimportant, just far less important than being able to recognize common circuit configurations.) You don't have to know boolean math to recognize yes/no logic. Likewise, the more circuits you have seen or built and watched in action, the more that you will understand what any other circuit that utilizes those components in that configuration is doing. All the math in the world cannot make up for visual experience. I would dare say that we all learned electronics in this way to some extent. This from the day that we saw our first simple amplifier made of a single transistor and attempted to understand it. Without any math or physics or anything else, one can look at nearly any circuit and take certain pieces of it and fairly reliably tell you how that particular section is going to act. Even the mathematics behind electronics belies this fact, that everything can be compartmentalized and "summed up" into equivelant basics. Some examples include converting parallel or series resistors into a single equivelant resistance. Troubleshooting any circuit usually involves breaking parts of the circuit down into very basic equivelants. We are only able to do this by recognizing the function (by merely sight alone) of that part and then "black boxing" it. Mathematics or not, this encapsulation is the whole idea behind ICs.

Anyhow, I've droned on for far too long.  Maybe more some other time.