The Cyber-Spy.Com Usenet Archive Feeds Directly
From The Open And Publicly Available Newsgroup
This Group And Thousands Of Others Are Available
On Most IS NNTP News Servers On Port 119.
Cyber-Spy.Com Is NOT Responsible For Any Topic,
Opinions Or Content Posted To This Or Any Other
Newsgroup. This Web Archive Of The Newsgroup And
Posts Are For Informational Purposes Only.
From: Mike Monett
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Win16; I)
Subject: Re: Apology
References: <3E29E229.74EF@sneakemail.com> <3E2A0E4A.firstname.lastname@example.org> <3E2C093F.email@example.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 17:39:34 -0500
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 17:39:01 EST
Organization: Bell Sympatico
John Larkin wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Jan 2003 14:33:38 GMT, Mark Fergerson
> >Mike Monett wrote:
> >> John Larkin wrote:
> >> [...]
> >>>The acknowledgement...
> >>> 1. Grateful credit is given to John Larkin, owner of Highland
> >>>Technology for his many helpful comments including a circuit
> >>>description that led to the development of the Binary Sampler.
> >>>is incorrect. The circuit was developed by at latest 1963, and I
> >>>didn't tell you about it until January of 2000.
> >>>Sylvan deserves the credit.
> >> I'm sorry John, I don't recall a communication from you as you describe.
> >> Could you either post or email the information again?
> >> Mike
> > A fine example of a Conspiracy; two guys (White Males?)
> >trying desperately to make sure the right people get credit
> >for their work, with one of them actually _asking_ to be
> > Do I understand that this is now seen as a twist in
> >technique (undersampling vs. oversampling), rather than a
> >"new idea"?
> > Mark L. Fergerson
> How could anything related to a newsgroup be desperate? This has
> nothing to do with life.
> All equivalent-time oscilloscopes undersample; that's the point.
> They've been doing so for well over 100 years.
Stroboscopic analysis of waveforms dates back to the beginning of the
century. The first modern oscilloscope patent was in 1942. Mark Kahrs has
a brief bibliography of the history on his web site at
I also have an advance copy of a paper he wrote on the history. It is
free for the asking, and wonderful to read.
John, I have to apologize. With the recent cold weather, everyone
downstairs closed their windows tight, so there is no ventilation in the
building. I have been suffering from severe mold problems, and have been
so sick I can't even think.
This is going to sound very bad, but it suddenly dawned on me what you
have been trying to say all along, and what is the significance of the GE
tunnel diode sampler that you built for your high school project.
You are absolutely correct. This is an early version of the binary
sampler. However, without more detailed information, we do not know if
the inventor realized the significance of his invention.
He may not have known of the zero aberrations while following dynamic
signals, or of the noise rejection property. There is no mention that I
can find of these properties associated with the binary sampler, and if
someone recognized them before, there should be a paper published
It is also interesting that you mentioned PC Instruments tried the
technique using an AMD 687. In my article on Sampler Design Guidelines, I
state clearly the following:
Single-Ended TTL Devices
"All high-speed TTL comparators such as the Am686/687, AD9696/8, LT1016,
and MAX9686 will oscillate when the input differential voltage is close
to zero. These devices are not suitable for use with the binary sampler."
I wrote and uploaded that over a year ago. Here's the url
It is not surprising they had trouble with their product and had to
withdraw it. Since their did not understand how it actually worked, they
would not know how to solve the problem. Simply switching to a Motorola
10K131 ecl D flop would have eliminated the internal oscillation, as I
mentioned in another post. I include more information on the operation of
the Master-Slave flip-flop on my page at
As far as proper credit for perevious work, consider the following: a
person walks along the road and stubs his toe on a pebble. He kicks it
into the weeds.
The next person goes into the weeds and picks up the pebble. He cleans
it, and discovers it is really a diamond.
Who gets the credit for the discovery? It doesn't matter, and I really
don't care. I have the diamond.
I will be delighted to add another category to my web site showing prior
art and the problems encountered that would encourage previous inventors
to abandon the technology.
And, of course, I will give full attribution to the person who brought
these things to my attention.
Thank you very much, John.
I may or may not be able to respond to news postings for a while. The
weather is turning colder, and the mold problems makes me so ill I
probably won't be able to understand what is on the screen.
Go Back To The Cyber-Spy.Com
Usenet Web Archive Index Of
The sci.electronics.design Newsgroup