I was just going thru the forum and came upon a member Ratch , I believe is the nick.
Why was he banned. He did have a lot posts, I think

Just curios

Rifaa

 

I had missed that happening myself. I tend to get into my own world sometimes.

 

I had missed that happening myself. I tend to get into my own world sometimes.

I am sorry but I didn't quite get you

Rifaa

 

I've noticed it as well. I don't know why Ratch was banned.

 

I have my own projects I'm attending to here, like the new PWM section for the AAC book.

In this thread...

http://forum.allaboutcircuits.com/showthread.php?t=32202

I noticed Ratch was trying to convince a new student conventional flow was correct (as usual). Some of his posts were deleted from this thread. I suspect it has something to do with it.

He never did understand when not to confuse new students with contrary views, and his views were a bit off the mainstream sometimes. His ideas had a place, but not with new students trying to wrap their heads around new (to them) concepts.

For what it's worth, this site acknowledges conventional flow, but uses electron flow, because it is the current scientific standard.

 

.......... For what it's worth, this site acknowledges conventional flow, but uses electron flow, because it is the current scientific standard.

Are you sure of that?
What standards organisation set this standard?
I know that in electrical engineering its more usual and convenient to work with conventional current rather than electron flow (once you have moved on past basic concepts) but I am not aware of any standard setting out which you should use.

 

It isn't a standard, it is basic physics. See this sticky...

Conventional flow vs Electron Flow

I wrote this to help folks new to the site understand where the AAC book was coming from.

So, do you think electrons on atoms are positive? Or that protons, the core of atoms, move through a conductor?

The conventional standard was invented before the nature of atoms was understood. This didn't happen for around 150 years, so it is pretty entrenched.

 

So I guess the new Einstein is not who we think he is ....EH!