> > It's really amazing how many hairbrain schemes pop up whenever
someone asks
> > a simple question like this.
>=20
> A new degree of subtlety and beating :-) !
....
> A substantial school of thought holds that unfettered brain storming
> sessions, where anything that comes to mind can be suggested, achieves
> very good results, with the apparently hair brain thoughts acting as
> mental catalysts for ideas which other wise were unlikely to have been
> thought of. End result is more pigs to market, not less.

To be fair, Russell, Olin didn't claim any specific scheme was
harebrained - although using correllators as I suggested is probably one
of the most harebrained of the ones presented on this thread, it would
be expensive to make (involve a fair amount of electronics) and would
need a camera to obtain the streaming images to work from, which would
in turn require some means of keeping the camera lens clean. But I'm not
taking umbrage at what Olin said, I tossed an idea into the ring,
appreciating it had absolutely minimal chance of succeeding. Also I
suspect the object is going to be moving at far too high a speed for
image capture to be fast enough - steel in a rolling mill would tend to
be moving a lot slower than a train.

And Olin didn't just junk everything, he did give his thoughts on the
one he figured would be the simplest to implement and most likely to
work, and some reasons why.

I do sometimes get the feeling that as soon as Olin produces a vaguely
negative comment that there is a tendency for an instant 'whoa there'
comment in return, whatever positive aspects there may also be in the
message. In a lot of ways I feel that the first line of your reply,
which I quoted above, is just as bad as his that you quoted (also
above).
--=20
Scanned by iCritical.

--=20
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
.