Generate the answer for a given question. The question requires common knowledge of English. Make sure that the answer is in detail, long, consistent with the context, and requires general knowledge of English. To be less repetitive, please vary your language for each question. Give a proper explanation to answer, and if necessary, provide the definition of various terms. And conclude your answer if it's long. If you have used other resources (e.g., Merriam Webster's.) to answer the question, include citations in your answer. You don't need to paraphrase the context of your resources, but make sure that your answer is consistent and complete.
--------
Question: The B strings tuned w/ low E 7th fret harmonic-(6th string,7th fret).

Answer: The shorthand w/ is used to mean with. 2 pieces toast w/ gravy Is a shorter way of writing 'Two pieces of toast with gravy.' The B strings tuned w/ low E 7th fret harmonic-(6th string,7th fret). means 'The B strings tuned with low E, 7th fret harmonic . . .' Edited to add: As Denis de Bernardy correctly notes in the comment below, w/o means the opposite: without.

Question: The phrase 'to break a butterfly on a wheel' is very evocative, but I can't bring myself to use it: I find the 'wheel' too disturbing. So: what are some good alternatives? (For those who are unfamiliar with this expression, Brewer's Dictionary of Phrase and Fable defines it as 'to employ superabundant effort in the accomplishment of a small matter'. [link]).

Answer: Use a sledgehammer to crack a nut. to do something with more force than is necessary to achieve the result you want When he sent ten men to arrest one small boy, he clearly used a sledgehammer to crack a nut. Better yet: Use a sledgehammer to swat a fly! idioms.thefreedictionary.com

Question: Example: [f] moving said second cart to said proximate end of said scanning device so that said trays in said second cart be passed through said scanning device at said proximate end. Is the language used in patents archaic or simply intentionally obtuse?.

Answer:
Patent lawyer here. I wouldn't call the language you cited either 'archaic' or 'intentionally obtuse.' 'Pedantic' or 'hyperliteral' may be better adjectives. The language you cited came from Claim 1 of US Pat. No. 6888460 Language in the claims section of the patent are considered the 'metes and bounds' of the intellectual property right. That is, the claim language describes the precise extent of the patent owner's monopoly. It is necessary for the language to be as accurate as possible in order to alert everyone to the scope of the patentee's property right. Because human language is so imprecise, it is very difficult to write text that comes even close to the level of clarity one would want in such a description. Some of the terms used are also jargon. Because patents are interpreted by courts, there is an entire history of court decisions determining the meaning of specific words. For example, the word 'comprising' means 'including the listed things but also potentially including other things as well' whereas 'consisting of' means 'including only the listed things.' In the language you cited, the word 'said' in the phrase 'said proximate end' makes it unambiguous that the reference is to the same 'proximate end' as previously recited ('wherein said scanning device comprises a proximate end and a distal end'). One might also use the word 'the' rather than 'said,' in this circumstance, but that's a matter of style.