![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#161
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Floyd Davidson wrote: "Peter" wrote: Amateur radio operators often use "c.w." as a kind of informal short form for radiotelegraphy. It isn't what it actually means. Ahem... that is *precisely* what it means! I should have known better than": a) cite an example outside my own but in anothers' field of expertise. b) take position which is frequent result of flamewar as somehow authoritative Peter. -- |
#162
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Jeremy Nixon wrote:
Chris Brown wrote: It's entirely unclear why you think this usage has "almost certainly been destroyed beyond hope of recovery". If a cricket-nerd uses it, it will be obvious from context which version they are talking about, hence there is to be no confusion. Do you really think that, even in the nerdiest of cricket-nerd circles, anyone can ever again use that word without everyone who hears him thinking of the "new" meaning? Well, cricketeers have for a very long time used the very common everyday word "silly" in a specialised, technical sense. Yet, it would seem that nobody who has ever been within four foot of a cricket bat, believes that the silly mid-off position is any more inherently stupid than plain old mid-off. With "google" there wouldn't be a theoretical chans to confuse the everyday sense with the technical one. So why would you think cricketeers would stop using it? Jan B=F6hme |
#163
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article .com, Jan
Böhme writes Well, cricketeers have for a very long time used the very common everyday word "silly" in a specialised, technical sense. Yet, it would seem that nobody who has ever been within four foot of a cricket bat, believes that the silly mid-off position is any more inherently stupid than plain old mid-off. In the days before head protectors and boxes became universal, I think anyone fielding at silly mid-off, or silly mid-on, or silly point, would know exactly why the distinction was made. David -- David Littlewood |
#164
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Jan B=F6hme wrote: Jeremy Nixon wrote: Chris Brown wrote: It's entirely unclear why you think this usage has "almost certainly been destroyed beyond hope of recovery". If a cricket-nerd uses it, it will be obvious from context which version they are talking about, hence there is to be no confusion. Do you really think that, even in the nerdiest of cricket-nerd circles, anyone can ever again use that word without everyone who hears him thinking of the "new" meaning? Well, cricketeers have for a very long time used the very common everyday word "silly" in a specialised, technical sense. Yet, it would seem that nobody who has ever been within four foot of a cricket bat, believes that the silly mid-off position is any more inherently stupid than plain old mid-off. With "google" there wouldn't be a theoretical chans to confuse the everyday sense with the technical one. So why would you think cricketeers would stop using it? =20 Jan B=F6hme Cricketers even ![]() - Siddhartha |
#165
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
According to Floyd Davidson :
"Peter" wrote: Amateur radio operators often use "c.w." as a kind of informal short form for radiotelegraphy. It isn't what it actually means. [ ... ] Here is the technical definition of "continious wave", according to the FTC 1037C Standards, available at http://www.its.bldrdoc.gov/fs-1037/fs-1037c.htm continuous wave (cw): A wave of constant amplitude and constant frequency. Clearly it means a transmission that is neither amplitude, frequency, nor phase modulated. Any such modulation necessarily must cause a discontinuity in the wave. The only thing you can do is turn it on and off... which is called radio telegraphy! Well ... to *my* mind, even keying (turning on and off) is a form of amplitude modulation -- a rather extreme one at 100% modulation. And it is certainly causing a discontinuity in the wave. Enjoy, DoN. -- Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564 (too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html --- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero --- |
#166
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#167
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Jan Böhme wrote:
With "google" there wouldn't be a theoretical chans to confuse the everyday sense with the technical one. So why would you think cricketeers would stop using it? I thought the word in cricket was "googlie". |
#168
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
no_name wrote:
Jan B=F6hme wrote: With "google" there wouldn't be a theoretical chans to confuse the everyday sense with the technical one. So why would you think cricketeers would stop using it? I thought the word in cricket was "googlie". That is the cricket term. I was puzzled as to what other use the word "google" has. The website is Google and the cricketer bowls a googlie. |
#169
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|