It's not easy being a beginner........

[Noidzoid]

I was reading Electronics for Dummies last night and thought I would have a browse in the glossary.  Now I was willing to accept everything I read as correct and to soak up the lingo (as I know next to nothing about this subject at the moment), UNTIL I read the following which I KNOW to be false.



I find this concerning! When trying to learn the technicalities of a new subject being mislead in such a way can make you believe that you'll never get the hang of something and give up when for instance a formula you learned off by heart was incorrect thus never allowing you to achieve the correct answer.

In this instance, imagine telling an engineering student that a hexagon was "squarish". Ok, so now a hexagon has what? Four sides, four corners. I could maybe understand, but only just, if the shape being described was a parallelogram or a rhombus.

Up to this point if the book had stated that a transistor was batteryish I would have read on without knowledge of the nonsense I had been served, until I had learned better later on and maybe wasted valuable time.

What else am I expected to cross reference before I can know that the information I am reading is correct?

OK. Thanks. Rant over....

[TheHolyHorse]

One way to make sure it's not just jibbirish is to do some research on what books to read. There are plenty of books that thousands have read, one of those books are less likely to contain false information. Personally I've never read an electronics book, I prefer just reading up some things on le internet and just wing it and see what happens. Failure is the best way to learn

[Gyro]

Well at least it has some corners, just a couple too many. It's when they become circular that you really need to worry!

I understand your concern though - Electronics for Dummies isn't the most authoritative reference (any more than the rest of the Dummies series). It is a relatively accessible basic taster though. As you learn and want to explore specific areas in more detail then you will certainly want to cross reference information. Luckily the internet makes that very easy these days.

No, it isn't easy starting from scratch.

[Noidzoid]

One way to make sure it's not just jibbirish is to do some research on what books to read. There are plenty of books that thousands have read, one of those books are less likely to contain false information. Personally I've never read an electronics book, I prefer just reading up some things on le internet and just wing it and see what happens. Failure is the best way to learn

That is what I do mostly these days. It's also how I thankfully ended up here, but I saw this book used and for £2.99 I thought it worth a go. To be fair, as an introduction to the subject it probably isn't that bad, I was just a shocked when I read the line in question.

[Noidzoid]

Well at least it has some corners, just a couple too many. It's when they become circular that you really need to worry!

Ha! Like it. I was going to use the analogy of sine & square waves but remembered reading something about the way some generators base one on the other which is not a good thing (or is it) and thought I didn't need to make a real dummy of myself, not understanding fully at the time anyway. :-)

[konzill]

I decided to go with The Art of Electronics for my main book.  Turns out it goes through things at breakneck speed and does not always do a great job of explaining them.

As an example its explanation of Thévenin's Theorem left me completely confused.  I guess its really meant to be used in a University setting where you are also attending lectures.

[Rigolon]

Well... English is not my first language and definitely not the language I learned electronics.
But in electronics many terms are used in english no matter the language you are learning in.

That being said, I don't think that's the part you should concern. It's Electronics for Dummies and not a book to be used as reference book in a university. Plus hex(allen) it's more linked to mechanics or geometry, if that's the case, instead to electronics. And I think it's easy to understand what they want to say with "squarish". So IMHO it shouldn't be something to fuzz about. Sure, they could just said hexagon instead of squarish, since hexagon is a pretty common thing.

What I would worry more it's about the High Signal. Again, as I did not learn in english, whenever we were talking about high signal, we are talking about the logic state. Specially in digital electronics. And in that case, not all signal higher than 0V is a high signal. In CMOS components, for example, high signal is between 3.3 to 5V (Vcc = 5V). Between 0 and 1.5V it's a low signal. Yet again, this interpretation could be because of the languages differences.

[andy3055]

I think it is time to put that book aside. If the author does not know the difference of the hex head and a square head, the more advanced stuff in it may be highly questionable. Or may be he knows his Electronics theory but has a poor knowledge of Mechanical engineering. I started as an electrical engineering apprentice at 21. But at home I had been tinkering with stuff since about 10 or 12. I remember dismantling dry batteries from the old radio to see what they looked like (yes, it is old stuff). The apprenticeship included going through all workshops even though it was Electrical. I did Machine shop, Foundry, Boiler, Pattern shop, Drawing office, etc, etc, before I did my last full year out of four in the Electrical shop. What I know in Electronics is all self taught. That makes me very cautious.

Ultimately, I am aware that there are thousands of times more things that I can still learn at 68! Knowledge is something we humans keep acquiring until the day we depart.

Just my 2 cents.

[Leiothrix]

Eh, it's just humor, I don't get the outrage.

The "for dummies" books are written very informally, I'd imagine there are plenty of similar things in there.

[rstofer]

Try this book "Getting Started In Electronics" by Forrest Mims:
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0945053282/ref=dbs_a_def_rwt_bibl_vppi_i0

You'll get nowhere unless you do some experiments.  It's easy to read and forget; if you want to remember, do an experiment.

Grab a battery, some resistors and a DMM.  Verify Ohm's Law!  Sure, it's boring, but it is vitally important to know how voltage dividers work.  And everything else we do with Ohm's Law without even thinking about it.  Have the three forms down cold!  Then add in the power equations.  If your resistors self-destruct, you'll have some idea why.  P = E²/R or I²*R or I * E so power goes up quickly with either voltage or current.  But of course, voltage and current are tied together with Ohm's Law.

Get this stuff down pat and you have a leg up when it comes to circuits.  We spent a LOT of time on Ohm's Law in EE school.

One problem with Mim's book is that he starts out using electron flow (page 20) while the rest of us are using conventional current flow  where the current flows from plus to minus while the electrons (about which we seldom care) flow from minus to plus.  I didn't look to see if he changes that when he gets to circuits.  Just something to be aware of.

[vk6zgo]

I was reading Electronics for Dummies last night and thought I would have a browse in the glossary.  Now I was willing to accept everything I read as correct and to soak up the lingo (as I know next to nothing about this subject at the moment), UNTILL I read the following which I KNOW to be false.

(Attachment Link)

I find this concerning! When trying to learn the technicalities of a new subject being mislead in such a way can make you believe that you'll never get the hang of something and give up when for instance a formula you learned off by heart was incorrect thus never allowing you to achieve the correct answer.

In this instance, imagine telling an engineering student that a hexagon was "squarish". Ok, so now a hexagon has what? Four sides, four corners. I could maybe understand, but only just, if the shape being described was a parallelogram or a rhombus.

Up to this point if the book had stated that a transistor was batteryish I would have read on without knowledge of the nonsense I had been served, until I had learned better later on and maybe wasted valuable time.

What else am I expected to cross reference before I can know that the information I am reading is correct?

OK. Thanks. Rant over....

Yeah!
Good to see your BS meter is working well!

The glossary statement was "double dumb"!

"Hex" in the electronics sense, is more likely to refer to "Hexadecimal" or sometimes just "six" as in things like "Hex Inverters"
(I aways felt the  latter device sounds more like something you would need for self defence if you upset a Witch!)

The bit about "high" digital voltage levels is BS, too---- the range of voltages which are read as "ones" or "zeroes" are different for the various types of technogy used to manufacture digital ICs, & normally are included in the device "spec sheet", but a "high" is never just  "any value above zero"!

Edit:- Oops! In my eagerness to get to my "witch" joke, Ialso misled you.
I have added the part in italics to clarify things!

[vk6zgo]

Well... English is not my first language and definitely not the language I learned electronics.
But in electronics many terms are used in english no matter the language you are learning in.

That being said, I don't think that's the part you should concern. It's Electronics for Dummies and not a book to be used as reference book in a university. Plus hex(allen) it's more linked to mechanics or geometry, if that's the case, instead to electronics. And I think it's easy to understand what they want to say with "squarish". So IMHO it shouldn't be something to fuzz about. Sure, they could just said hexagon instead of squarish, since hexagon is a pretty common thing.

What I would worry more it's about the High Signal. Again, as I did not learn in english, whenever we were talking about high signal, we are talking about the logic state. Specially in digital electronics. And in that case, not all signal higher than 0V is a high signal. In CMOS components, for example, high signal is between 3.3 to 5V (Vcc = 5V). Between 0 and 1.5V it's a low signal. Yet again, this interpretation could be because of the languages differences.

It's not a "language thing"-- see my posting!

On another issue, people have said, in effect, "Well, it's for Dummies, you can't expect much".
I have, in passing, read a few "for Dummies" books, & they are mostly better than that.

That said, I remember using recommended Maths books, where the "Answers"section at the rear were full of errors.(& that was in the "golden era" of textbooks).

If the errors in his book freaked the OP out, imagine what it would be like for High School kids where "the book" was virtually "the Word of God"!

[Noidzoid]

Eh, it's just humor, I don't get the outrage.

The "for dummies" books are written very informally, I'd imagine there are plenty of similar things in there.

My bad obviously.  I did buy a book "for dummies" so why would I expect it to be factual.  If you explain anything to a real dummy it probably wont be understood or appreciated anyway, so why bother making it true if you can amuse yourself at the dummies expense?

I suppose the "humour" of putting a joke book in the educational books section was part of the joke.  I know, not getting it proves my dummieness.

Oh well, live and learn eh? I try to anyway.

[RoGeorge]

When it's online info, chances are the material has no peer review, so less trustful.
When it's paper printed, almost sure the material was peer reviewed, so chances are the book is correct, even when it defies common sense.

That's a good reason to search if there are Allen keys with different head profiles.  Turned out square Allen keys exist:
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=square+allen+key&iax=images&ia=images

[Gyro]

Eh, it's just humor, I don't get the outrage.

The "for dummies" books are written very informally, I'd imagine there are plenty of similar things in there.

My bad obviously.  I did buy a book "for dummies" so why would I expect it to be factual.  If you explain anything to a real dummy it probably wont be understood or appreciated anyway, so why bother making it true if you can amuse yourself at the dummies expense?

I suppose the "humour" of putting a joke book in the educational books section was part of the joke.  I know, not getting it proves my dummieness.

Oh well, live and learn eh? I try to anyway.

Stick with it. The start of the learning curve is always the steepest. As you gain traction and start prototyping simple stuff then things will flow much better... until you accidentally stray into something more specialist like high frequency RF, then you realize that you know bugger all again. 

This forum is an excellent way of cross checking things. As long as it's clear that you've put in a bit of legwork first, you will find a vast amount of collective engineering experience at your disposal. Don't forget forum search too, it's likely that most basic questions will have been covered at least once before.

[Noidzoid]

When it's online info, chances are the material has no peer review, so less trustful.
When it's paper printed, almost sure the material was peer reviewed, so chances are the book is correct, even when it defies common sense.

That's a good reason to search if there are Allen keys with different head profiles.  Turned out square Allen keys exist:
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=square+allen+key&iax=images&ia=images

The definition was primarily of "Hex" followed by "(also called Allen)".  So I'm sorry but as much as I appreciate your reasoning I cannot agree with you. In this case, Hex was used, as was Allen therefore I don't  think it unreasonable to assume the item in question is a Hexagonal Allen. (Did I learn my shapes wrong in primary school?)

I am well aware of most of the different shapes that have been forged or machined onto the ends of allen type keys , including mass produced and ones I have had to make myself for specialist applications.

I believe the name "Allen" being taken from the Allen Manufacturing Company (bought out with various setups since) who registered it as a trademark.  The correct name for the tool made by any other manufacturer is Hex/Hexagonal Key, but in the same way that we call vacuum cleaners hoovers, the same applies in this situation.
A square allen key is therefore not technically an allen for two reasons, just a plain old square drive key, and not even that would be called "squarish" (with the possible exception maybe a one off having to be made for a special situation).

I am more than happy to be educated if any of what I have just written is incorrect but submit this post as being correct to the best of my knowledge.
Never too late to learn new things, which is also what I am trying to do here and elsewhere with electronics.

[Noidzoid]

Yeah!
Good to see your BS meter is working well!

The glossary statement was "double dumb"!

"Hex" in the electronics sense, is more likely to refer to "Hexadecimal" or sometimes just "six" as in things like "Hex Inverters"
(I aways felt the  latter device sounds more like something you would need for self defence if you upset a Witch!)

The bit about "high" digital voltage levels is BS, too---- the range of voltages which are read as "ones" or "zeroes" are different for the various types of technogy used to manufacture digital ICs, & normally are included in the device "spec sheet", but a "high" is never just  "any value above zero"!

Edit:- Oops! In my eagerness to get to my "witch" joke, Ialso misled you.
I have added the part in italics to clarify things!

Ha! Love Hex inverters, I always take one when walking in the woods late at night!

But seriously, you have just illustrated my point and highlighted my concerns, as I would in fact have read the next entry in the glossary without knowing it was wrong.

[Noidzoid]

Try this book "Getting Started In Electronics" by Forrest Mims:
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0945053282/ref=dbs_a_def_rwt_bibl_vppi_i0

You'll get nowhere unless you do some experiments.  It's easy to read and forget; if you want to remember, do an experiment.

Grab a battery, some resistors and a DMM.  Verify Ohm's Law!  Sure, it's boring, but it is vitally important to know how voltage dividers work.  And everything else we do with Ohm's Law without even thinking about it.  Have the three forms down cold!  Then add in the power equations.  If your resistors self-destruct, you'll have some idea why.  P = E²/R or I²*R or I * E so power goes up quickly with either voltage or current.  But of course, voltage and current are tied together with Ohm's Law.

Get this stuff down pat and you have a leg up when it comes to circuits.  We spent a LOT of time on Ohm's Law in EE school.

One problem with Mim's book is that he starts out using electron flow (page 20) while the rest of us are using conventional current flow  where the current flows from plus to minus while the electrons (about which we seldom care) flow from minus to plus.  I didn't look to see if he changes that when he gets to circuits.  Just something to be aware of.

Thanks for this, I will be sourcing this book asap. 

[StillTrying]

It's a good idea to learn how to do images as well.

10 kB version instead of 2 MB and 4160 pixels.

[Noidzoid]

It's a good idea to learn how to do images as well.

10 kB version instead of 2 MB and 4160 pixels.

(Attachment Link)

I see. Thank you kindly 

[StillTrying]

That's a much better usable viewable image in the 1st post.

I loaded the 2M 4160pix image.
Adjusted the brightness a bit, and the contrast a bit more.
Resized it to 700pix wide, which easily fits a browser's width without any resizing, and looked fine at 100%.
There's only about 230 unique colours in it, so reduced the colour to 8-bit grey scale.
Saved it at normal .jpg compression, which gave the only 10kB.

[krish2487]

Bingo!!! I was wondering when someone would notice the "absolute" statement about digital high!!!!
:-)


Quote from: vk6zgo on Yesterday at 04:18:39 am

>Quote from: Noidzoid on October 14, 2019, 07:32:40 pm

I was reading Electronics for Dummies last night and thought I would have a browse in the glossary.  Now I was willing to accept everything I read as correct and to soak up the lingo (as I know next to nothing about this subject at the moment), UNTILL I read the following which I KNOW to be false.

> (Attachment Link)

I find this concerning! When trying to learn the technicalities of a new subject being mislead in such a way can make you believe that you'll never get the hang of something and give up when for instance a formula you learned off by heart was incorrect thus never allowing you to achieve the correct answer.

In this instance, imagine telling an engineering student that a hexagon was "squarish". Ok, so now a hexagon has what? Four sides, four corners. I could maybe understand, but only just, if the shape being described was a parallelogram or a rhombus.

Up to this point if the book had stated that a transistor was batteryish I would have read on without knowledge of the nonsense I had been served, until I had learned better later on and maybe wasted valuable time.

What else am I expected to cross reference before I can know that the information I am reading is correct?

OK. Thanks. Rant over....

Yeah!
Good to see your BS meter is working well!

The glossary statement was "double dumb"!

"Hex" in the electronics sense, is more likely to refer to "Hexadecimal" or sometimes just "six" as in things like "Hex Inverters"
(I aways felt the  latter device sounds more like something you would need for self defence if you upset a Witch!)

The bit about "high" digital voltage levels is BS, too---- the range of voltages which are read as "ones" or "zeroes" are different for the various types of technogy used to manufacture digital ICs, & normally are included in the device "spec sheet", but a "high" is never just  "any value above zero"!

Edit:- Oops! In my eagerness to get to my "witch" joke, Ialso misled you.
I have added the part in italics to clarify things!

[StillTrying]

krish2487 If you want to fix your quotes untick "Show WYSIWYG editor on post page by default."

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/profile/?area=theme;u=11495

[krish2487]

Thanks @stilltrying.. I just changed the settings.. Lets see how that works out...

Edit: It Works!!! Thank you!! It was driving me crazy..

krish2487 If you want to fix your quotes untick "Show WYSIWYG editor on post page by default."

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/profile/?area=theme;u=11495

[tautech]

Turned out square Allen keys exist:
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=square+allen+key&iax=images&ia=images

And they're called Robertson drives.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P._L._Robertson