Modulating a laserwave 150mW 532 dpss

[buffo]

No, he's bringing it up because he's never heard of "millihertz". Neither have I. And I'm willing to bet that damn few people here have *ever* heard of it. As discussed above, period is the term used for long-duration waves. (That is, frequencies below 1 Hz) Maybe it's commonplace in the Netherlands? I don't know for sure, but I consider it unlikely. For certain it's not common here though.

I think you have less experience than you give yourself credit for. If you were more experienced, then surely you would have used this term before and been corrected by someone else already. As for this particular incident, I think you were searching for a way to describe your experiment in English, and simply chose the standard unit prefix for 1/1000 without stopping to consider whether this was appropriate or not. And given that English is not your native language, I don't think anyone was terribly bothered by this - at least not at first.

But when you start trying to argue that it is in fact common to express things in terms of "millihertz", *that's* when people begin to take offense, because (at least in our experience) it is absolutely *not* common. So now, instead of it being a simple issue of a language barrier, now you're trying to teach us how to speak our own language. (That usually pisses people off, by the way.) Tocket's statements about how the English measurement system is "dumb" only added fuel to the fire...

Furthermore, your statement that your "message is only meant to be conveyed to those who grasp the concept of mHz at first glance" is considerably insulting. There are many people here who have more than enough experience to "grasp the concept". It is *you* who do not grasp the concept that the term you used is inappropriate when discussing waves of this nature.

In short, we don't need lessons in English from a non-native English speaker. Also, you are not the only one here who knows how to use an oscilloscope. Try to remember that before you talk down to the forums in the future.

Adam

PS: I should point out that despite the controversy over the terms you used, I nonetheless appreciate the time you spent performing the experiment and publishing the results. It's good information to have.

[ElektroFreak]

Adam

PS: I should point out that despite the controversy over the terms you used, I nonetheless appreciate the time you spent performing the experiment and publishing the results. It's good information to have.

Agreed. Thanks for your effort here Bart.

And Adam is right, I brought it up seeking an explanation for a term I had never seen before. While it does make mathematical sense, it's not a very clear term, at least not to an American. It's sad that you guys couldn't convey such an explanation without attacking both me personally and my nationality, but that kind of behavior is what I've come to expect from you. This purposefully insulting behavior robs from your credibility as far as I'm concerned, and I know I'm not alone. I'll be the first to admit that I've made some inflammatory statements here in the past (and maybe also in the future) but at least I've proven I'm man enough to also recognize that I might have misunderstood you or that I might be mistaken. The same cannot be said for you. Just because you make up a term doesn't mean it's commonly used (outside your country... or mind) or even logical to use at all. I'll be going with what my American education has taught me is right rather than what you say, and I've never seen the term milliHertz during the course of that education or my experience in the field so far. That's all I have to say about the matter.

[-bart-]

How typical !
Mega and milli are international scientific terms, there's nothing english about them, in fact they are derived from greek and latin. They are invented to avoid these misconceptions in the first place. I'm not dictating how anybody should notate their numbers, for all I care people use roman numerals if they like.
I used a valid scientific notation, that's used on my HP8116 (respected American company ?) too. I don't want to discus if it's common or not. I wanted to be consistent in de way I describe frequency, period.

As you can see in my first post, I'm strict in the use of capitals. So when say m I mean 10^-3 when I say M I mean 10^6. Besides that, the list of TTL graphs clearly shows factor 10 increments. The jpg shows a period time of 4x2,5sec. In face of all these clues E.F. assumes the absurd, that I successfully modulated a dpss laser into the 100MHz range by bypassing the driver. Then he claims something about the frequency must equal 1Hz or more in order to have a complete wave (whateverthatmaymean).
In that case the above mentioned information is clearly not intended for him.

If I see a scientific notation uncommon to me, I do some a little research trying to understand what the poster really means, instead of stubbornly assuming the absurd. Because I know that *really* pisses people off.

I nonetheless appreciate the time you spent

Thanks for the kudos

[ElektroFreak]

^Way to keep up the insulting tone Bart! I'm really looking forward to your future input here! It's always very pleasant talking with you.

I really appreciate the time you took to give a reasonable explanation for your usage of this term. Obviously you are very good at conveying your ideas clearly, while at the same time maintaining a modicum of respect for the people who might try to understand. [/sarcasm]

Twice so far i have admitted that I might have misunderstood you or been mistaken, but you just won't be happy until you have made some more uncalled for rude statements, will you? Call me absurd a few more times.. (and this is FAR from the first time you have displayed this kind of sad behavior) How many more times should I state the fact that I misunderstood you? 10, 50, 100? Do you want me to send you a PM acknowledging your genius on a daily basis?

What an absolutely worthless individual. I'm completely finished dealing with you, as I have no use for deliberately unpleasant people. Throughout this discourse I have maintained a respectful tone (and even admitted that I might have been mistaken at first), and I know it's not too much to expect the same from you. I also explained myself VERY clearly. Since you are obviously incapable of behaving respectfully or professionally, you're now going to grace my ignore list. You're welcome to throw a hissy fit about it, as I'm sure you will, and call me stupid or whatnot, but since you have lost all credibility with me there is no reason for me to continue to listen. Bye now Smokey..

[buffo]

I don't want to discus if it's common or not. I wanted to be consistent in the way I describe frequency.

If that's the way you want to describe it, that's fine. But it's *not* the way most other people describe it. If you want to continue to use your method, you will be forever explaining it to more experienced people, who at first glance will assume that you forgot to capitalize the "m", and will think you mean megahertz. Then, when you explain what you really meant, they will scratch their heads for a bit. Maybe they will say something, maybe they won't. But inside they'll be thinking: "Where did this guy learn about frequency?"

As you can see in my first post, I'm strict in the use of capitals. So when say m I mean 10^-3 when I say M I mean 10^6.

I'm glad that you are strict about the use of capitals. But not everyone is. Typing mistakes are very common, *especially* on a forum. Considering how easy it is to miss the shift key when typing, and how commonplace MHz is (as opposed to mHz), it's only logical that people would assume you made an error, rather than assuming that you really meant to specify "100 millihertz." In short, we are explaining to you why the English words you chose would be confusing to many people, and you have answered by telling us that you know better.

Besides that, the list of TTL graphs clearly shows factor 10 increments. <snip>
In face of all these clues E.F. assumes the absurd, that I successfully modulated a dpss laser into the 100MHz range by bypassing the driver.

It was not an absurd assumption at all. I made the same assumption at first. Then I realized that it was impossible. So then I started looking closely at your post, and after a little consideration I decided that, uncommon as it was, you must have been talking about "millihertz". I'll bet if E.F. had thought about it for a while, he might have come to the same conclusion eventually. But the point is that "millihertz" is such an uncommon term that *many* people will instead assume that you really meant Mhz, and just forgot to hit the shift key.

Let me give you another example. The average distance from the Sun to the Earth is roughly 93 million miles, or about 150 million kilometers. But I could also tell you that it is 150,000 megameters, couldn't I? Now, have you *ever* in your *entire life* heard someone use the term "megameters" before? Sure, it's technically correct, but it's just not done. By anyone.

So now, let's suppose I'm describing some obscure distance, one where you have no idea even of the order of magnitude of the measurement, and I happen to throw out the term "megameters", is it not reasonable for you to at least wonder if I might have really meant milimeters? (Which is far more common.) And would it not be even more confusing if, instead of typing "megameters", I just used the abreviation Mm? Would you assume I meant "megameters" if you saw that? Or would you think that I accidentally hit the shift key by mistake?

And as absurd as megameters sounds, millihertz is far worse, for all the reasons discussed above. If you can't accept that, then I don't know what else to tell you.

Adam

[Zoof]

All valid points, however, I read milliHerz first time off. mHz is a valid SI unit notation.
Mm is a valid SI unit as well. May not be very common but valid. It even has its own wikipedia entry: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megametre

Of course when speaking of the distance between earth and sun we like to express it as 1 AU. That is not one Australian, but one astronomical unit. This might be less common than the Mm, actually.

Lets see: luckily there is a scientifically proven method for judging popularity of terms:
Google.nl gives 8.64 Mhits on `mega meter' and 532 khits on `astronomical unit'. So the first has more popularity among the people in the position to contribute to the internet. Hmm, that proves my hypothesis right.

However, this has in no way any contribution to anything
</ day's frustration>

Given the sloppiness of most contributors with M and m, it is best to stick with what most people are likely to interpret correctly.

ps. Bart, thanks for sharing the analysis and being so precise in your description.

[ElektroFreak]

^well would you look at that! Zoof managed to explain it all in one post, complete with references. How hard would that have been Bart? Let me guess, it's just not as fun as making yourself feel superior by belittling others..

Thanks Zoof! Your explanation is excellent. While I haven't run into the term in the past, that doesn't make it any less valid. All I was looking for was a sensible explanation.. you learn something new every day!

[tocket]

I find it quite interesting to see how big a stir a single letter caused.

I immediately understood the meaning of mHz, and I did not even begin to consider that it might have been a mistake. It might be that I'm very used to the SI system, not only because of my schooling, but also because it's something I use every day in my research. The scientific community nowadays is completely metrified, regardless of where you are. At least if you're publishing in a respectable journal. It would be very inefficient to have it any other way.

The reason for my strong dislike of the English system is simply that I think it's costing the people of the world a lot of time and money. Ask NASA, they'd know (seeing as they have a $125 million satellite scattered all over Mars). For some strange reason you seem to take offense by this, which I don't understand. I know I wouldn't get upset if someone thought the metric system was stupid. Is it because the metric system is French?

[ElektroFreak]

I find it quite interesting to see how big a stir a single letter caused.

I immediately understood the meaning of mHz, and I did not even begin to consider that it might have been a mistake. It might be that I'm very used to the SI system, not only because of my schooling, but also because it's something I use every day in my research. The scientific community nowadays is completely metrified, regardless of where you are. At least if you're publishing in a respectable journal. It would be very inefficient to have it any other way.

The reason for my strong dislike of the English system is simply that I think it's costing the people of the world a lot of time and money. Ask NASA, they'd know (seeing as they have a $125 million satellite scattered all over Mars). For some strange reason you seem to take offense by this, which I don't understand. I know I wouldn't get upset if someone thought the metric system was stupid. Is it because the metric system is French?

fair enough. I have admitted three times so far that I misunderstood, and I wasn't the only one. Is that not sufficient? Do I need to say it more times? Your understanding of SI is incredible, but your understanding of plain English is clearly lacking if you can't even understand when someone concedes. What the fuck more do you people want? Frankly, I think you guys just like making yourselves feel big by belittling others, as that's the only reasonable explanation why we're still beating this horse after I admitted my misunderstanding THREE TIMES!! I have absolutely no respect for that.

[tocket]

Oh, sorry. That was in response to Adam, not you. When I started writing my post all these other replies hadn't been posted yet. I get a little distracted sometimes.