Driver to drive?

[bitrex]

On 2/7/20 11:05 PM, Phil Allison wrote:

bitrex wrote:

--------------


Yes, those fires down there are terrible !

I hope they contain them soon. I mean, I like warm wether and all but
it's getting rediculous now.

Good point that he might be fighting fires




** The gents that do that job live in rural ( therefor fire prone) areas and are mostly much younger and rather fitter than myself.

They all refuse to accept any payment, the motivation behind which is an interesting topic for another forum.



Some kind of Australian courtship ritual? "Paid" in antipodal women
dropping their bloomers?


** Now, now, I did not actually say that .....


..... Phil

I was on a date with a young woman one time when I told her I liked to
solder. Her eyes lit up and she said "Really?" turns out she had a dear
late uncle who was a radio ham or somesuch.

Long story short it was easier than running into flames as a profession.
But I was left with the uncomfortable feeling she would have preferred
to screw her uncle. Who was a ham radio operator.

 

[bitrex]

On 2/7/20 11:05 PM, Phil Allison wrote:

bitrex wrote:

--------------


Yes, those fires down there are terrible !

I hope they contain them soon. I mean, I like warm wether and all but
it's getting rediculous now.

Good point that he might be fighting fires




** The gents that do that job live in rural ( therefor fire prone) areas and are mostly much younger and rather fitter than myself.

They all refuse to accept any payment, the motivation behind which is an interesting topic for another forum.



Some kind of Australian courtship ritual? "Paid" in antipodal women
dropping their bloomers?


** Now, now, I did not actually say that .....


..... Phil

The consensus among American men "in the know" is we have little chance
of catching the eye of an Australian woman, much less surviving the
experience if we did.

When our President went to purchase his wives he didn't pick up a
catalog that said "Australian Mail-Order Brides"

 

[Phil Allison]

bitrex wrote:

-------------

Some kind of Australian courtship ritual? "Paid" in antipodal women
dropping their bloomers?


** Now, now, I did not actually say that .....



The consensus among American men "in the know" is we have little chance
of catching the eye of an Australian woman, much less surviving the
experience if we did.

** The opposite is true.

Aussie gals go nuts for American men, cos their accents makes them all sound like film stars. If they happen to be wearing a uniform, the effect is doubled.

A major reason Aussie men are jealous and despise Yanks.

During WW2, the saying went that US servicemen were: " over sexed, over paid and over here ".

Resulted in the famous Brisbane riot in 1942.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Brisbane



...... Phil


...... Phil

 

[bitrex]

On 2/7/20 11:43 PM, Phil Allison wrote:

bitrex wrote:

-------------



Some kind of Australian courtship ritual? "Paid" in antipodal women
dropping their bloomers?


** Now, now, I did not actually say that .....



The consensus among American men "in the know" is we have little chance
of catching the eye of an Australian woman, much less surviving the
experience if we did.


** The opposite is true.

Aussie gals go nuts for American men, cos their accents makes them all sound like film stars. If they happen to be wearing a uniform, the effect is doubled.

A major reason Aussie men are jealous and despise Yanks.

During WW2, the saying went that US servicemen were: " over sexed, over paid and over here ".

Resulted in the famous Brisbane riot in 1942.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Brisbane



..... Phil


..... Phil

Those Tom Cruise pictures were supposed to be a form of psychological
warfare they weren't supposed to like them. Sorry about that.

 

On Fri, 7 Feb 2020 12:13:35 -0800 (PST), Lasse Langwadt Christensen
<langwadt@fonz.dk> wrote:

fredag den 7. februar 2020 kl. 21.01.03 UTC+1 skrev DecadentLinux...@decadence.org:
dplatt@coop.radagast.org (Dave Platt) wrote in
news:qvq0hg-0mu.ln1@coop.radagast.org:

As to why it's not used more as a coolant... I suspect that the
higher pressures required to liquify it (as compared to the
halogen-based refrigerants commonly used) may play a part in that.


the fluorocarbon based coolants were far easier to work with. Remember
when they used dangerous ammonia as a coolant. It works very well.
Another good one is propane or butane, but BOTH are a no-go for obvious
reasons.

ammonia is still used in big industrial refrigeration, here most if not
all new refrigerators and freezers use propane (R290)

Absorbtion fridges do not have a compressor but requires a heat
source. It is often used in places in which there is no electricity,
such as summer cottages and some form of gas (propane) is used as heat
source.

In large industrial systems there are usually some waste heat sources
or some combustible waste products that can be used as the heat
source in the cooling process.

 

On Fri, 7 Feb 2020 17:19:11 -0500, Phil Hobbs
<pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

On 2020-02-07 17:12, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:
Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote in
news:42eb240e-f1d2-9231-85a1-b04fa2e1e051@electrooptical.net:

On 2020-02-07 17:04, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org
wrote:
whit3rd <whit3rd@gmail.com> wrote in
news:c17857fc-fce3-4cd0-8570-79a081d9d417@googlegroups.com:

On Friday, February 7, 2020 at 10:38:15 AM UTC-8, Rick C
wrote:
On Friday, February 7, 2020 at 12:51:58 PM UTC-5,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

CO2 is not used for cooling because it is a deadly gas
that has no stink indicators put into it like the
flammables have...

Your ignorance knows no bounds. The atmosphere is 0.04%
CO2. If it were a deadly gas we would already be dead.

Oh, it's toxic, all right, at about 4% (it acidifies the
blood); except for Apollo 13, there's not a lot of dangerous
situations. One can use ventilation to cope with the minor
annoyance.

Even oxygen is toxic, at 100%. The dose makes it toxic.


This cannot be true as the initial Apollo missions were 100%
oxygen environment. It failed for the other obvious reason.

In space, Apollo used pure oxygen at 3 psi, about the same partial
pressure as ambient air. 100% O2 at 15 PSI was what made the
Apollo 1 fire so deadly, not so much the absence of nitrogen.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs


No... In space Apollo mission planners INTENDED to use 100% oxygen.
After the Apollo 1 fire they changed it to low dilution low pressure.

Nope. The Apollo spacecraft wasn't physically strong enough for a 15
PSI pressure difference.

US Mercury and Gemini used pure oxygen at reduced pressure, Soviets
used normal air also in their early space suites. Leonov had great
problems when returning from the first space walk due to the inflated
space suite.

On ISS normal air is used, but in space suits pure oxygen is used at
reduced pressure to make the space suite more flexible. For this
reason, astronauts intending to go on a space walk needs to breath
pure oxygen one hour before dropping the pressure, to get nitrogen out
of the blood circulation in order to avoid bends.

 

Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
news:284a6c63-cdf4-410e-9641-a1f7ff04f14a@googlegroups.com:

It is the CO2, because the CO2 is what causes the reduction of
oxygen

in the combustion process that causes the rise in CO.

How would it do that? If it did, which it doesn't.

Running car in a closed garage. The CO2 builds up and the oxygen
DECREASES in the garage, so the combustion process degrades in the
engine and MORE unburned fuels enter the exhaust system and MORE
carbon MONoxide is generated. An engine sporting a full combustion
process does NOT exhibit much if any MONoxide.

The MONoxide component of exhaust gasses are from the unburned
combustion proces gasses.

You back on track now?

 

Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in news:570a341a-70c6-4288-
916e-0ce4955ae969@googlegroups.com:

so the combustion process degrades in the
engine and MORE unburned fuels enter the exhaust system and MORE
carbon MONoxide is generated.

Twaddle.

Bullshit. Look it up, punk.

An engine does not produce much CO. Especially when run lean.

SO. DECIDEDLY. The CO producing motor is the one running rich or
the one running with reduced oxygen. The motors of the sixties had
very high compression but let out more than they burned.

And as was also stated, if it has a good catalytic converter in it,
it will burn the waste gas and there will be little or no CO.

The problem with the garage is that even a catalytic converter
fails because it cannot catalyze unless oxygen is present and the air
injection system is injecting foul air. So deeper into the CO
producing rabbit hole goes the car.

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Saturday, February 8, 2020 at 2:19:29 PM UTC+11, dca...@krl.org wrote:

On Friday, February 7, 2020 at 7:02:50 PM UTC-5, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, February 8, 2020 at 1:23:15 AM UTC+11, dca...@krl.org wrote:

Liquid CO2 would be a first. It might even get you a Nobel Prize.

I thought the CO2 tanks that I have contained liquid CO2.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_carbon_dioxide

It's difficult to get a pressure of 5.1 atmospheres in an open jug.

As usual, Dan has missed the point.

No one mentioned an open jug. You just did not read what was written.

"A beer fridge for the chamber, a resistive heater, and a jug of liquid
CO2 for cooling. "

American English may be different different from Australian and English English, but where I come from a jug is open container that you pour stuff out of.

Americans also use the word pitcher for that kind of container.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Saturday, February 8, 2020 at 8:26:33 PM UTC+11, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
news:284a6c63-cdf4-410e-9641-a1f7ff04f14a@googlegroups.com:

It is the CO2, because the CO2 is what causes the reduction of
oxygen

in the combustion process that causes the rise in CO.

How would it do that? If it did, which it doesn't.

Running car in a closed garage.
The CO2 builds up and the oxygen DECREASES in the garage,

No garage is that closed. There's enough diffusion through the walls to keep the oxygen content way higher than than the sort of level that would mess up the combustion process.

so the combustion process degrades in the
engine and MORE unburned fuels enter the exhaust system and MORE
carbon MONoxide is generated.

Twaddle.

An engine sporting a full combustion
process does NOT exhibit much if any carbon monoxide.

The process always generates carbon monoxide. If it is set up right, most of the carbon monoxide gets further oxidised to carbon dioxide, but idling a car in a garage doesn't produce particularly complete combustion.

The carbon monoxide component of exhaust gasses are from the unburned
combustion process gasses.

In the sense that it should have got burnt to carbon dioxide in the engine.

> You back on track now?

Not on your track, which doesn't happen to be a correct exposition of what's going on.

If you were right, piping the exhaust gases back into the body of a car which was idling in open air wouldn't produce a lethal atmosphere.

Sadly, it does.

https://www.karger.com/Article/PDF/500009

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in news:570a341a-70c6-4288-
916e-0ce4955ae969@googlegroups.com:

> No garage is that closed.

Running a car in a garage with the door closed means the engine will
get less oxygen than it was getting in pretty short order. By some
number of percentage points. Do you deny this?

Leave the inside door open and it will fill the entire house.

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Saturday, February 8, 2020 at 3:43:30 PM UTC+11, Phil Allison wrote:

bitrex wrote:

-------------



Some kind of Australian courtship ritual? "Paid" in antipodal women
dropping their bloomers?


** Now, now, I did not actually say that .....



The consensus among American men "in the know" is we have little chance
of catching the eye of an Australian woman, much less surviving the
experience if we did.


** The opposite is true.

Aussie gals go nuts for American men, cos their accents makes them all sound like film stars. If they happen to be wearing a uniform, the effect is doubled.

A major reason Aussie men are jealous and despise Yanks.

During WW2, the saying went that US servicemen were: " over sexed, over paid and over here ".

Resulted in the famous Brisbane riot in 1942.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Brisbane

Phil is just envious. I don't remember American male post-graduates doing that well back when I was a graduate student.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Saturday, February 8, 2020 at 2:03:16 PM UTC+11, bitrex wrote:

On 2/7/20 5:02 AM, Phil Allison wrote:
boB wrote:

----------


Yes, those fires down there are terrible !

I hope they contain them soon. I mean, I like warm wether and all but
it's getting rediculous now.

Good point that he might be fighting fires




** The gents that do that job live in rural ( therefor fire prone) areas and are mostly much younger and rather fitter than myself.

They all refuse to accept any payment, the motivation behind which is an interesting topic for another forum.

Some kind of Australian courtship ritual? "Paid" in antipodal women
dropping their bloomers?

No. It's a service to the community by members of the community, who get brownie points for being particularly good neighours.

Women definitely take part, and the bigger and more muscular ones take on the same jobs as the men. The ones that show up on TV include a fair number of middle-aged people, and when our 62-year-old ex-prime minster got himself photographed in full fire-fighting rig-out he didn't look out of place.

https://9now.nine.com.au/today/australia-bushfires-tony-abbott-volunteering-on-the-firefront/6ab132bf-5b50-4906-9822-51ce848ade26

He's a prat, which is one of the reasons that he is now an ex-prime-minister, but he's been a volunteer for some fifteen years now.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Saturday, February 8, 2020 at 9:19:52 PM UTC+11, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in news:570a341a-70c6-4288-
916e-0ce4955ae969@googlegroups.com:

so the combustion process degrades in the
engine and MORE unburned fuels enter the exhaust system and MORE
carbon MONoxide is generated.

Twaddle.

Bullshit. Look it up, punk.

An engine does not produce much CO. Especially when run lean.

It doesn't have to produce much to kill you. Haemoglobin latches onto CO much more avidly than it latches onto oxygen, and it doesn't let it go.

SO. DECIDEDLY. The CO producing motor is the one running rich or
the one running with reduced oxygen. The motors of the sixties had
very high compression but let out more than they burned.

Fat chance of reducing oxygen levels enough to make a difference.

And as was also stated, if it has a good catalytic converter in it,
it will burn the waste gas and there will be little or no CO.

Not much, but still quite enough to kill you eventually.

Your haemoglobin collects every last scrap of carbon monoxide it sees, and loses interest in bringing in oxygen and taking out CO2. You die when you haven't got enough working red blood cells left, even if there is plenty of oxygen around.

The problem with the garage is that even a catalytic converter
fails because it cannot catalyze unless oxygen is present and the air
injection system is injecting foul air. So deeper into the CO
producing rabbit hole goes the car.

The air is foul because it has enough contaminants for you to notice.

It isn't foul because there's a big enough oxygen deficit to measure - if it were somebody would have measured it (though the tools you need to do it accurately aren't cheap).

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Saturday, February 8, 2020 at 9:12:36 PM UTC+11, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in news:570a341a-70c6-4288-
916e-0ce4955ae969@googlegroups.com:

No garage is that closed.

Running a car in a garage with the door closed means the engine will
get less oxygen than it was getting in pretty short order. By some
number of percentage points. Do you deny this?

The oxygen level in the air is about 20.95%. Burning gasoline converts some of that oxygen to CO2 and water, so the oxygen level in a closed garage will be reduced. Garages aren't hermitically sealed, and oxygen diffuses through walls remarkably fast, so if it dropped more than a few percent I'd be surprised.

Nobody seems to have measured it.

Cars do seem to put out enough carbon monoxide - even if they have catalytic converters - to make the exhaust gases lethally dangerous, even if car is stationary in open air - and I did give you a link to an example of that situation, which you've snipped without marking the snip.

> Leave the inside door open and it will fill the entire house.

With enough carbon monoxide to kill you (which isn't all that much).

Depleting the oxygen is a much more demanding job.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[John S]

On 2/7/2020 3:20 AM, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote in
news:f8d04178-6975-4f07-8f46-b9786de7d8dd@googlegroups.com:

There are more technologies in mil-spec gear Horatio than are
dreamt of in your philosophy.

My philosophy?

Hey, whore of the ratio... you know nothing of my experiences,
much less my fucking dreams.

Those kind of dreams are nice. Enjoy!

 

Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
news:44d971a7-8705-408d-8521-0d1c27d1e7c4@googlegroups.com:

SO. DECIDEDLY. The CO producing motor is the one running rich
or
the one running with reduced oxygen. The motors of the sixties
had very high compression but let out more than they burned.

Fat chance of reducing oxygen levels enough to make a difference.

It DOES make a difference, dingledorf. That is WHY pollution
controls were adopted and WHY gasoline got reduced in octane and WHY
engines were made more efficient, as opposed to the muscle car era
where they were overboard for power at the expense of combustion
completion.

You are clueless.

 

[Lasse Langwadt Christense]

lørdag den 8. februar 2020 kl. 15.01.39 UTC+1 skrev DecadentLinux...@decadence.org:

Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
news:44d971a7-8705-408d-8521-0d1c27d1e7c4@googlegroups.com:

SO. DECIDEDLY. The CO producing motor is the one running rich
or
the one running with reduced oxygen. The motors of the sixties
had very high compression but let out more than they burned.

Fat chance of reducing oxygen levels enough to make a difference.

It DOES make a difference, dingledorf. That is WHY pollution
controls were adopted and WHY gasoline got reduced in octane and WHY
engines were made more efficient, as opposed to the muscle car era
where they were overboard for power at the expense of combustion
completion.

You are clueless.

modern engines run closed loop

octane reduced? if anything it has been increased to take advantage of the
improved efficiency of higher compression in modern engines

The muscle car era was the sledge hammer approach, make it bigger instead
of better. They had giant inefficient carbureted engines

 

[bitrex]

On 2/8/20 5:31 AM, Bill Sloman wrote:

On Saturday, February 8, 2020 at 3:43:30 PM UTC+11, Phil Allison wrote:
bitrex wrote:

-------------



Some kind of Australian courtship ritual? "Paid" in antipodal women
dropping their bloomers?


** Now, now, I did not actually say that .....



The consensus among American men "in the know" is we have little chance
of catching the eye of an Australian woman, much less surviving the
experience if we did.


** The opposite is true.

Aussie gals go nuts for American men, cos their accents makes them all sound like film stars. If they happen to be wearing a uniform, the effect is doubled.

A major reason Aussie men are jealous and despise Yanks.

During WW2, the saying went that US servicemen were: " over sexed, over paid and over here ".

Resulted in the famous Brisbane riot in 1942.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Brisbane

Phil is just envious. I don't remember American male post-graduates doing that well back when I was a graduate student.

There are plenty of very attractive and friendly single women in America
we don't need to go to Australia for 'em thankfully!

It's also convenient because we speak the same language.

Also in America there aren't 150 types of highly deadly venomous or
poisonous creatures waiting to murder you every time you step outside to
go on a date or take a swim in the ocean.

 

[whit3rd]

On Saturday, February 8, 2020 at 6:01:39 AM UTC-8, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
news:44d971a7-8705-408d-8521-0d1c27d1e7c4@googlegroups.com:

[about an automobile idling in a garage]

Fat chance of reducing oxygen levels enough to make a difference.

It DOES make a difference, dingledorf. That is WHY pollution
controls were adopted and...

Not remotely true; pollution controls date back to episodes like the black
fog in London (killed thousands).
<https://www.history.com/news/the-killer-fog-that-blanketed-london-60-years-ago>

and the problem wasn't air depletion, it was excessive... contaminants.

CO poisoning causes your blood to pass less oxygen to your cells, it doesn't matter
how much oxygen is in the air if it doesn't interact with normal hemoglobin and
become oxygen available to power your brain.

You can live on oxygen partial pressures of 2 psi (like La Paz, Bolivia) or the
sealevel normal 3 psi. But breathe CO at 0.001 psi concentrations, and everything goes dark.