On Saturday, October 3, 2020 at 12:07:25 PM UTC+10, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Oct 2020 18:47:54 +0200, Gerhard Hoffmann <dk...@arcor.de>
> wrote: 
> 
> >Am 02.10.20 um 17:48 schrieb jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com: 
> >> On Fri, 2 Oct 2020 15:43:08 +0200, Gerhard Hoffmann <dk...@arcor.de> 
> >> wrote: 
> >> 
> >>> Am 01.10.20 um 22:58 schrieb whit3rd: 
> >>>> On Thursday, October 1, 2020 at 12:19:23 PM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote: 
> >>>> 
> >>>>> It's impressive that nobody understands lightning. 
> >>>> 
> >>>> Don't be silly! Avalanche in solids (like a Zener diode) or gasses (Geiger tubes, to 
> >>> 
> >>> Avalanche diodes are NOT Zener diodes. 
> >> 
> >> Everybody calls them zeners. 
> >> 
> >>> Prof. Zener even sued against his name being used for this. 
> >>> They settled to call them Z-Diodes and attribute it to the form of the 
> >>> curve. 
> >> 
> >> That sure didn't last long. 
> > 
> >Just a case of honesty. Does not fit into today's world. 
> 
> What should we call a 5.2v diode? 

Try voltage regulator diode. "Zener diode" has worked for as long as I've known about them (which is some 55 years now). It might not be technically accurate, but it's demonstrably good enough for practical use.
 
> Zenalanche? Avazar? 
> 
> Should Digikey have three categories?

Why should they bother? Who would it help? And how?

-- 
Bill Sloman, Sydney

On Fri, 2 Oct 2020 18:47:54 +0200, Gerhard Hoffmann <dk4xp@arcor.de>
wrote:

>Am 02.10.20 um 17:48 schrieb jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com:
>> On Fri, 2 Oct 2020 15:43:08 +0200, Gerhard Hoffmann <dk4xp@arcor.de>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Am 01.10.20 um 22:58 schrieb whit3rd:
>>>> On Thursday, October 1, 2020 at 12:19:23 PM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> It's impressive that nobody understands lightning.
>>>>
>>>> Don't be silly!  Avalanche in solids (like a Zener diode) or gasses (Geiger tubes, to
>>>
>>> Avalanche diodes are NOT Zener diodes.
>> 
>> Everybody calls them zeners.
>> 
>> 
>>> Prof. Zener even sued against his name being used for this.
>>> They settled to call them Z-Diodes and attribute it to the form of the
>>> curve.
>> 
>> That sure didn't last long.
>
>Just a case of honesty. Does not fit into today's world.
>
>
>Gerhard

What should we call a 5.2v diode?

Zenalanche? Avazar?

Should Digikey have three catagories?





-- 

John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc

Science teaches us to doubt.

  Claude Bernard

Am 02.10.20 um 17:48 schrieb jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com:
> On Fri, 2 Oct 2020 15:43:08 +0200, Gerhard Hoffmann <dk4xp@arcor.de>
> wrote:
> 
>> Am 01.10.20 um 22:58 schrieb whit3rd:
>>> On Thursday, October 1, 2020 at 12:19:23 PM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:
>>>
>>>> It's impressive that nobody understands lightning.
>>>
>>> Don't be silly!  Avalanche in solids (like a Zener diode) or gasses (Geiger tubes, to
>>
>> Avalanche diodes are NOT Zener diodes.
> 
> Everybody calls them zeners.
> 
> 
>> Prof. Zener even sued against his name being used for this.
>> They settled to call them Z-Diodes and attribute it to the form of the
>> curve.
> 
> That sure didn't last long.

Just a case of honesty. Does not fit into today's world.


Gerhard

On Fri, 2 Oct 2020 15:43:08 +0200, Gerhard Hoffmann <dk4xp@arcor.de>
wrote:

>Am 01.10.20 um 22:58 schrieb whit3rd:
>> On Thursday, October 1, 2020 at 12:19:23 PM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:
>> 
>>> It's impressive that nobody understands lightning.
>> 
>> Don't be silly!  Avalanche in solids (like a Zener diode) or gasses (Geiger tubes, to
>
>Avalanche diodes are NOT Zener diodes.

Everybody calls them zeners. 


>Prof. Zener even sued against his name being used for this.
>They settled to call them Z-Diodes and attribute it to the form of the 
>curve.

That sure didn't last long.



-- 

John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc

Science teaches us to doubt.

  Claude Bernard

On Friday, October 2, 2020 at 11:43:17 PM UTC+10, Gerhard Hoffmann wrote:
> Am 01.10.20 um 22:58 schrieb whit3rd:
> > On Thursday, October 1, 2020 at 12:19:23 PM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote: 
> > 
> >> It's impressive that nobody understands lightning. 
> > 
> > Don't be silly! Avalanche in solids (like a Zener diode) or gasses (Geiger tubes, to
> > name the old examples) are well-studied in a variety of materials and regimes. 
> > Nobel Prize 1992 went to Georges Charpak for this subject. 

> Avalanche diodes are NOT Zener diodes. 

What are sold as "zener diodes" ranges from actual Zener diodes which have breakdown voltages below 5V to avalanche diodes which break down above this.

Around 5V  both mechanisms.  are going on in parallel. Low voltage regulator diodes in which the Zener mechanism is dominant have a negative temperature coefficient, while higher voltage regulator diodes have a positive temperature coefficient, but if you want a low temperature coefficient regulator, a roughly 5.6V avalanche diode in series with a forward biassed diode - as in the 1N821 to 1N829 series - is the usual choice, giving you a distribution between 5.89V and 6.51V centered at about 6.2V at 7.5mA.  If you want to get stability you pay for in a 1N829, you have to be very careful to keep the current very closes to 7.5mA

> Prof. Zener even sued against his name being used for this. 
> They settled to call them Z-Diodes and attribute it to the form of the 
> curve.

I don't think that anybody gets too excited about the name.

<snip>

-- 
Bill Sloman, Sydney

On a sunny day (Fri, 2 Oct 2020 08:28:48 -0500) it happened John S
<Sophi.2@invalid.org> wrote in <rl79uf$3d4$1@dont-email.me>:

>On 10/2/2020 1:00 AM, Jan Panteltje wrote:
>> PS
>
>> We really know shit.
>> :-)
>
>But not much else.

plonk

Am 01.10.20 um 22:58 schrieb whit3rd:
> On Thursday, October 1, 2020 at 12:19:23 PM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:
> 
>> It's impressive that nobody understands lightning.
> 
> Don't be silly!  Avalanche in solids (like a Zener diode) or gasses (Geiger tubes, to

Avalanche diodes are NOT Zener diodes.
Prof. Zener even sued against his name being used for this.
They settled to call them Z-Diodes and attribute it to the form of the 
curve.


> name the old examples) are well-studied in a variety of materials and regimes.
> Nobel Prize 1992 went to Georges Charpak for this subject.
> 
> Large scale and atmospheric chemistry are... minor details.
> 

Cheers, Gerhard

On 10/2/2020 1:00 AM, Jan Panteltje wrote:
> PS

> We really know shit.
> :-)

But not much else.

On Thursday, October 1, 2020 at 11:56:15 PM UTC-4, Steve Wilson wrote:
> jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, 1 Oct 2020 19:22:56 -0700 (PDT), George Herold
> > <ggherold@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> >>On Thursday, October 1, 2020 at 4:58:33 PM UTC-4, whit3rd wrote:
> >>> On Thursday, October 1, 2020 at 12:19:23 PM UTC-7, John Larkin
> >>> wrote: 
> >>> 
> >>> > It's impressive that nobody understands lightning. 
> >>> 
> >>> Don't be silly!  Avalanche in solids (like a Zener diode) or gasses
> >>> (Geiger tubes, to name the old examples) are well-studied in a
> >>> variety of materials and regimes. Nobel Prize 1992 went to Georges
> >>> Charpak for this subject. 
> >>> 
> >>> Large scale and atmospheric chemistry are... minor details.
> >>
> >>Last I read there were/are uncertainties in the charge separation
> >>mechanism.  
> >>
> >>George H. 
> > 
> > The common phrase in the Wiki article on lightning is "For reasons not
> > well understood,..."
> 
> What article are you referring to?
This looks OK.  Many of the hits I got searching google were for papers
from the 60-80's.  
http://www.phy.olemiss.edu/~jgladden/phys510/spring06/Gurevich.pdf

George H. 
> 
> > The x-ray and gamma radiation from lightning aren't understood either.
> 
> A great deal is understood about lighting, from high speed videos to 
> actual flights inside thunderstorms. A more generous term might be 
> "details are still being studied". See Wikipedia
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightning
> 
> See Also
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thunderstorm
> 
> Thunderstorms and lightning are fascinating topics. As engineers, it 
> behooves us to learn as much as possible in order to minimize the 
> destructive effects of nearby strikes.