Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design
Subject: Re: oscillator gain
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2024 02:01:38 +1100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 44
Message-ID: <vf5qcj$100u3$1@dont-email.me>
References: <tue7hjlscute2kmj2tdujsen4dumk65d1r@4ax.com>
 <vf3cs6$g5ng$5@dont-email.me> <nnd$27363729$5990ca7c@127865b2309a8d79>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2024 17:01:40 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="0f86087b06710df3bc5101656d81f6bb";
	logging-data="1049539"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/LptCne2PiioIFVKOBJ7ovKN8umA+65S8="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:FVlHL6t5kDCaOYj1t1r3Fu6XYMY=
X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 241021-2, 21/10/2024), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <nnd$27363729$5990ca7c@127865b2309a8d79>
Bytes: 3193

On 21/10/2024 11:28 pm, albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl wrote:
> In article <vf3cs6$g5ng$5@dont-email.me>,
> Cursitor Doom  <cd999666@notformail.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, 19 Oct 2024 07:05:08 -0700, john larkin wrote:
>>
>>> If the loop gain of an oscillator is slightly over 1.00, oscillations
>>> gain amplitude. Just under 1.00, they die out.
>>>
>>> Economies are like that.
>>>
>>> https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2024/10/19/record-633000-business-in-
>> britain-on-brink-of-collapse-report/
>>>
>>> and politicians don't understand control theory.
>>
>> Regulating an economy through monetary policy (interest rates - the usual
>> method) is far more problematic than most folks would ever imagine. It's
>> been likened to pulling a brick with an elastic band - and that's not a
>> bad analogy. It's incredibly difficult to get the rate set right in order
>> to produce long-term stability and the optimally desired 'goldilocks
>> economy'. That's why there's normally a panel of economic advisers
>> involved. It's too complex a decision for just one man.
> 
> Regulating an economy with pouring government money into crucial
> sectors and infrastructure, seems vastly more effective.
> China does this, and remember Trump-level corruption can get you
> a death penalty.

China has been playing catch-up until recently, as Japan did earlier.

When you've got foreign examples of what does work, it a lot easier to 
pour the investment into sectors that you know can use it, because other 
advanced industrial countries did it first and demonstrated that it 
could work.

Once you've caught up, you got to make your own developments decisions, 
and that's a lot more difficult. The rule of thumb I heard was that 
about 30% of development projects developed something useful and 
profitable, and the remaining 70% didn't earn anything out of the effort 
put in,and many got cancelled before they'd got anywhere at all.

-- 
Bill Sloman, Sydney