I think we all understand, Jeff...please back away from the keyboard and keep your hands where we can see them... David Ilvedson, RPT Pacifica, CA 94044 ----- Original message ---------------------------------------- From: "Jeff Tanner" <tannertuner at bellsouth.net> To: caut at ptg.org Received: 5/9/2009 12:16:12 PM Subject: Re: [CAUT] Semantics >No. You completely misunderstand. "I and the rest of the world" have been taught >from early school years that the word "amplify" means "to make larger or more >powerful". Applied to volume of noise, the definition becomes "to make the volume >of noise larger or more powerful". >The fact that we are bickering over this difference in semantics - and that is what it >is - has to do with the reality that there is a very small portion of the population that >uses the word differently, and rejects what we have all been taught to accept as >the definition of the word from early grade school. The non-physicists of the world >have not been taught that, in physics in order to "amplify", energy must be >increased. We all just know it gets louder. Indeed, I have not been the only >technician to misuse the word in this discussion. Obviously, we all learned the same >thing to begin with, and we've had someone even post to that effect. Those of you >who studied physics obviously had to unlearn it and apply the word differently as it >pertains to your context. >Jeff > ----- Original Message ----- > From: PAULREVENKOJONES at aol.com > To: caut at ptg.org > Sent: Friday, May 08, 2009 6:12 PM > Subject: Re: [CAUT] Semantics > Your apology is marred by the continuing glib and facile ad hominem of "I and rest >of the world..." implying, I take it, that the rest of us are insane, stupid, >misinformed, or just pedantic sticklers for high-end communication. Just because >we're technicians doesn't mean that we can't or shouldn't be encouraged to correctly >draw our language for technical phenomena from the scientific world, and attempt to >understand the language. If you wish to redefine for your purposes only accepted >technical verbiage, then the result will be as it is: we are talking different languages. >Your choice. > P > In a message dated 5/8/2009 3:16:02 P.M. Central Daylight Time, >tannertuner at bellsouth.net writes: > I apologize for using the word "amplify" incorrectly, as those of you > understand it. Here's how I and the rest of the world previously understood > the meaning of "amplify": > Amplify: 1. To make larger or more powerful; increase. 2. To add to, as by > illustration and make complete. 3. Exaggerate. 4. Electronics. to produce > amplification of. verb: to write or discourse at length; expatiate. > Source: American Heritage Dictionary, 2nd College Edition. > So, who has the correct definition? Physicists or the rest of the world? > Is it soccer or football? > Semantics. > Jeff Tanner > (I have never in 42 years and seriously doubt I will ever use the word > "transduce". Nobody else will know what it means.) > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Ron Nossaman" <rnossaman at cox.net> > To: <caut at ptg.org> > Sent: Friday, May 08, 2009 7:47 AM > Subject: Re: [CAUT] Accujust and grunting fish bait > > David Love wrote: > >> Sorry to disagree but I think in this case it is a semantic issue and the > >> original question has been lost on this tangent. > > > > I disagree. It's not a semantic issue. The terms are clearly defined, > > regardless of colloquial usage. It's the continued use and tolerance of > > fuzzy ill defined concepts that make these discussions nearly useless, and > > doomed to repeat endlessly. > > > > Ron N > > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Remember Mom this Mother's Day! Find a florist near you now.
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC