Driver to drive?

On Mon, 11 May 2009 05:56:59 -0700 (PDT), MooseFET
<kensmith@rahul.net> wrote:


China is working on putting a man on the moon. I think it is a case
of "We are doing it because they are. They are doing it because we
did." It is all about pride and ego. NASA isn't likely to put a
human onto Mars any time soon so repeating the moon trick will have to
do.

Yeah, but one hour after the Chinese put a man on the moon, they'll
want to do it over again.
 
On Mon, 11 May 2009 07:39:44 -0700 (PDT), bill.sloman@ieee.org wrote:


There will probably be more of them as global warming progresses, but
individual hurricanes, floods and tornados are just random events, and
blaming them on global warming is pure alarmism.

Nonsense!

Ever since Neil Armstrong set foot on the moon, hurricanes, floods and
tornadoes have increased exponentially, followed by muslim extremists.
We are all doomed.
 
On Sun, 10 May 2009 17:37:06 -0700, Smitty Two
<prestwhich@earthlink.net> wrote:

In article
1838bd41-e2b3-4f37-8320-780131843ff0@o27g2000vbd.googlegroups.com>,
"oparr@hotmail.com" <oparr@hotmail.com> wrote:

You're bound to get scratches and scrapes when you buy these in bulk.
Even handling/installing them can result in occasional scratches. What
are some good marker/paint brands for touching them up?

I suspect the particular black dye or concentration used for coloring
after anodizing may play a part in this so a perfect match would be
next to impossible in all cases. Nevertheless, something like a black
Sharpie marker would be way off in most cases since it has too much
purple in it. IOW, some blacks will be more suitable than others.
Thanks!

Aluminum oxide is as hard as diamond, fer christ's sake.
---
No, it isn't:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohs_scale_of_mineral_hardness
---

It's not all that easy to scratch if you're moderately careful.

And the color isn't something that's put on after anodizing, it's built in.
---
That's true for hard anodizing, but not for "normal" or decorative
anodizing, where the dye is applied after the part is anodized but
before the coating is sealed.

See:

http://www.wbdg.org/ccb/FEDMIL/a8625.pdf
---

There's some great colors available these days besides black, BTW.
---
There may be, but a hard anodized part is generally not dyed, but left
the with the color it acquires in the process.
---

You're right about one thing - a Sharpie doesn't match. But there is a
marker out there somewhere that comes pretty close; it's advertised to
match. Sorry I don't remember the name of it, though.

It might be careless design, but I've seen anodizing used as the sole
electrical insulator in some applications.
---
There's nothing wrong with it as long as the thickness of the Al2O3
layer has the proper dielectric strength.

JF
 
On Mon, 11 May 2009 08:05:42 -0700 (PDT), bill.sloman@ieee.org wrote:

On May 11, 2:56 pm, Raveninghorde <raveninghorde@invalid> wrote:
On Mon, 11 May 2009 05:37:11 -0700 (PDT), bill.slo...@ieee.org wrote:
On May 11, 4:32 am, "Andrew" <andyv...@yahoo.com> wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Instrumental_Temperature_Record.png

The data present there reflects real measurements, not models. The
most plausible explanation of the increase - an increasing greenhouse
effect driven by rising concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere - does
rely on layered models of the atmosphere to describe what's going on,
but that's what physics is about.
=============================

Funny, how temperature does not correlate with changes in hydrocarbon use.

- How much CO2 was generated by humanity in 1920 vs 1980? Temperature slope.
- What is the reason of the temeprature drop between 1940 and 1970 despite
rising use of hydrocarbon?

http://ginacobb.typepad.com/gina_cobb/images/2008/06/06/solarvsco2.jpg

The usual explanation is sulphur dioxide pollution from burning high-
sulphur oil, which also caused acid rain. Once we went over to
scrubbing the SO2 out of the chimney stacks of dirty-oil fired power
stations, acid rain went away, and with it the aerosols high in the
atmosphere which had been raising the earth's albedo and cooling the
planet.

Some people have also pointed the finger at the North Atlantic
Multidecadal Oscillation, which seems to have been in a cooling phase
back then, and may be in another such cooling phase at the moment.

A slightly longer temperature sequence puts your - cherry-picked -
data in context

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Instrumental_Temperature_Record.png

where one can see that the 1940 to 1980 feature is just a wiggle in a
longer term rising trend.

And up to date data that puts your cherry picked data in context:

http://hadobs.metoffice.com/hadcrut3/diagnostics/comparison.html- Hide quoted text -

An extra year or two of data changes the message?
"The lady dost protest too much, methinks."

You said "A slightly longer temperature sequence puts your -
cherry-picked - data in context." And link to a graph from 1880 to
about 2005, 125 years.

If I remember rightly, the curve I was objecting to

http://ginacobb.typepad.com/gina_cobb/images/2008/06/06/solarvsco2.jpg
Which goes from 1870 to 2000, a 130 years. You clearly objected to the
graph running out too soon. I provided a graph from 1850 to 2008, 158
years which is clearly a better timescale.

Your graph is chosen because it peaks at the end. You are ranting to
hide the fact that the more recent data in the met office graph
clearly shows that the peak was smaller and earlier and the trend is
now down.

I keep pulling you up on this because you are using old data to hide
the fact that the earth has been cooling for 6 years and continues to
do so.

If someone is kind enough to point out that I have unwittingly used
wrong data I stop using it. You on the other hand continue to proove
you are a blustering idiot by refusing to accept when you are in
error.

SNIP paranoid rant.
 
It might be careless design, but I've seen anodizing used as the sole
electrical insulator in some applications.

There's nothing wrong with it as long as the thickness of the Al2O3
layer has the proper dielectric strength.
I seem to remember seeing thin aluminum sheets with lots of oxide
that were used as insulators for TO-3 size transistors. Does
anybody else remember them or am I making things up?

--
These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's. I hate spam.
 
Aluminum oxide is as hard as diamond, fer christ's sake. It's not all
that easy to scratch if you're moderately careful.
Bottom line....I have several that arrived from the supplier scratched
and based on the bulk pricing I received it would be somewhat absurd
to request/ship for exchange. It is cheaper to just touch them up.
Also, I need to machine them....It is cheaper to buy bulk surplus and
machine than to open a new special order with the manufacturer.....Get
the picture now?

And the color isn't something that's put on after anodizing, it's built in..
Interesting....LOL!

There's some great colors available these days besides black, BTW.
Tell me about. I have an anodizing kit with several dyes and I know
how to use them.

But there is a marker out there somewhere that comes pretty close; it's advertised to
match.
Now you're talking....That's good to know and is exactly what I'm
looking for. Thanks!

It might be careless design, but I've seen anodizing used as the sole
electrical insulator in some applications.
The Gecko 320 servo motor drive is one.

Touching up a scratch with a marker is obviously inappropriate for those situations.
I'm aware of that. Thanks!

On May 10, 8:37 pm, Smitty Two <prestwh...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
 
On May 11, 4:17 am, Jim Yanik <jya...@abuse.gov> wrote:
Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-I...@My-Web-Site.com> wrote innews:nvqe051gl6h3ah6c17de8lni76icq9ho2e@4ax.com:





On Sun, 10 May 2009 19:57:57 -0400, Spehro Pefhany
speffS...@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote:

On Sun, 10 May 2009 14:53:10 -0700, the renowned John Larkin
jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

[snip]

Why do we want to put humans back on the moon?

Empire

John

Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany

To establish a settlement, so Sheriff Joe can have a tent city on the
moon, for incarcerating Democrats ;-)

                                        ...Jim Thompson

we should incarcerate them in a communist or Muslim country.Maybe both.
Seems a little redundant. Since - according to Jim Yanik's demented
logic - the US is already both communist and Muslim, Sheriff Joe is
already doing just that,

--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
 
Thanks all. It would be further appreciated if anyone knows the
details of the particular marker mentioned by Smitty Two above.

On May 10, 10:23 pm, Archimedes' Lever
<OneBigLe...@InfiniteSeries.Org> wrote:
>
 
On May 11, 2:00 am, "Joel Koltner" <zapwireDASHgro...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
"John Larkin" <jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in message

news:iqme051mv9gqriqoqp2k5prmra1ocmqunn@4ax.com...

For what? The most significant things men and women do in space is
die.

No, no, they're figuring out how to live in space, how to move to the next
planet, etc., for the coming climatic catastrophe that's surely no more than a
couple decades away now. :)

There's some outfit that runs ads on the radio about how the climate has
already changed for the worse (background sounds of
hurricanes/flooding/tornados) and it's posed to get far, far worse if we "do
nothing."  Scare tactics at their finest...
Newspapers need to get the attention of their readers, and scare
stories are a long-established methd for doing that. You don't want to
believe everything you read in the newspapers.

Hurricanes, floods and tornado's are weather rather than climate.

There will probably be more of them as global warming progresses, but
individual hurricanes, floods and tornados are just random events, and
blaming them on global warming is pure alarmism.

--
Bill sloman, Nijmegen
 
On May 11, 4:15 am, Jim Yanik <jya...@abuse.gov> wrote:
"Joel Koltner" <zapwireDASHgro...@yahoo.com> wrote innews:LUJNl.342664$PS5.39255@en-nntp-07.dc1.easynews.com:





"John Larkin" <jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in
messagenews:iqme051mv9gqriqoqp2k5prmra1ocmqunn@4ax.com...
For what? The most significant things men and women do in space is
die.

No, no, they're figuring out how to live in space, how to move to the
next planet, etc., for the coming climatic catastrophe that's surely
no more than a couple decades away now. :)

There's some outfit that runs ads on the radio about how the climate
has already changed for the worse (background sounds of
hurricanes/flooding/tornados) and it's posed to get far, far worse if
we "do nothing."  Scare tactics at their finest...

ever read James P. Hogan's Cradle of Saturn?

He's a great Sci-Fi author,IMO,a "hard" Sci-fi writer.
He does write "hard" science-fiction of a sort, but he's not "great"
or anything like it.
Neal Stephenson, Frederic Pohl, Ian Banks and Larry Niven are the
kinds of authors who write good stuff in that area, and Hogan doesn't
perform anywhere near their level.

--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
 
In message
<prestwhich-DE7773.17370610052009@newsfarm.iad.highwinds-media.com>,
Smitty Two <prestwhich@earthlink.net> writes
It might be careless design, but I've seen anodizing used as the sole
electrical insulator in some applications.
Me too, on a NiCd discharger/conditioner.
Touching up a scratch with a
marker is obviously inappropriate for those situations.
--
Clint Sharp
 
Archimedes' Lever <OneBigLever@infiniteseries.org> wrote:
: On Sun, 10 May 2009 15:56:54 -0700 (PDT), bill.sloman@ieee.org wrote:
: >We were, but cutting down on the chlorofluorocarbons seems to be doing
: >the trick.
: You've obviously never seen the hole.

www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/world_avoided.html

"...the team simulated 'what might have been' if chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs)
and similar chemicals were not banned through the treaty known as the
Montreal Protocol".

Regards,
Mikko
 
On May 11, 2:56 pm, Raveninghorde <raveninghorde@invalid> wrote:
On Mon, 11 May 2009 05:37:11 -0700 (PDT), bill.slo...@ieee.org wrote:
On May 11, 4:32 am, "Andrew" <andyv...@yahoo.com> wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Instrumental_Temperature_Record.png

The data present there reflects real measurements, not models. The
most plausible explanation of the increase - an increasing greenhouse
effect driven by rising concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere - does
rely on layered models of the atmosphere to describe what's going on,
but that's what physics is about.
============================
Funny, how temperature does not correlate with changes in hydrocarbon use.

- How much CO2 was generated by humanity in 1920 vs 1980? Temperature slope.
- What is the reason of the temeprature drop between 1940 and 1970 despite
rising use of hydrocarbon?

http://ginacobb.typepad.com/gina_cobb/images/2008/06/06/solarvsco2.jpg

The usual explanation is sulphur dioxide pollution from burning high-
sulphur oil, which also caused acid rain. Once we went over to
scrubbing the SO2 out of the chimney stacks of dirty-oil fired power
stations, acid rain went away, and with it the aerosols high in the
atmosphere which had been raising the earth's albedo and cooling the
planet.

Some people have also pointed the finger at the North Atlantic
Multidecadal Oscillation, which seems to have been in a cooling phase
back then, and may be in another such cooling phase at the moment.

A slightly longer temperature sequence puts your - cherry-picked -
data in context

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Instrumental_Temperature_Record.png

where one can see that the 1940 to 1980 feature is just a wiggle in a
longer term rising trend.

And up to date data that puts your cherry picked data in context:

http://hadobs.metoffice.com/hadcrut3/diagnostics/comparison.html- Hide quoted text -
An extra year or two of data changes the message?

If I remember rightly, the curve I was objecting to

http://ginacobb.typepad.com/gina_cobb/images/2008/06/06/solarvsco2.jpg

is the same duff data that I gave you a hard time about back in
January - it came from a paper that claimed a correlation between
solar activity and Arctic air temperatures that came under
sufficiently intense criticism in the literature that he authors had
to withdraw it and produce a graph where the most recent temperatures
looked distinctly different and the claimed correlation suddenly
became much less obvious.

No-one has actually accused the authors of fraud, but the error they
made - and had to correct - made their paper look very much better and
did change the message.

You have claimed that I gave you a hard time because the curve you
presented was out-of-date. In fact I gave you a hard time because the
graph you presented was deceptive, and the later version had been
corrected to make it less deceptive.

Your presentation of this story is no less deceptive - which makes you
either an idiot (the more likely explanation) or a crook (but a pretty
incompetent crook).

--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
 
On May 11, 2:53 pm, Raveninghorde <raveninghorde@invalid> wrote:
On Mon, 11 May 2009 05:41:34 -0700 (PDT), bill.slo...@ieee.org wrote:
On May 11, 1:13 pm, Raveninghorde <raveninghorde@invalid> wrote:
On Sun, 10 May 2009 16:06:51 -0700 (PDT), bill.slo...@ieee.org wrote:
On May 10, 4:58 pm, Ian Bell <ruffreco...@yahoo.com> wrote:
bill.slo...@ieee.org wrote:
On May 10, 3:03 pm, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...@hotmail.com
wrote:
In 30 years, the largest figure according to your choice of smoothing
etc and data source is about 0.2C.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/05/07/april-global-temperature-anomal...

Graham

So what? You keep on getting excited about short term noise, as if it
said anything about the long term trend generated by the build up in
C02 in the atmosphere.

--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

So where is the long term data necessary to demonstrate the long term trend?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Instrumental_Temperature_Record.png

for example.

Panicing Bill, who does not approve of people using obsolete data,  is
stilll trying to flog misleading and obsolete data.

For the real picture:

http://hadobs.metoffice.com/hadcrut3/diagnostics/comparison.html-Hide quoted text -

Same story, same point. As I've said before, I've got reservations
about the URL, not least because you are pushing it.

But no reservations when Don uses it? I'm "pushing" it beacause it is
up to date which is why you don't want to accept it.

So a. You are paranoid and b. You are happy to peddle misleading and
out of date data.
Since I'm trying to make a point about variation over a hundred year
period, a year or two's data doesn't make a signficant or misleading
difference.

The out-of-date graph that you peddled was outright wrong, and the
corrected graph that the authors were eventualy forced to produce told
a distinctly different story.

Your dishonest presentation of this particular tale reflects the main
reason that I shy away from any data that you produce - you simply
aren't to be trusted.

--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
 
On May 11, 12:27 pm, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
Andrew wrote:
bill.slo...@ieee.org> wrote
Eeyore wrote:
In 30 years, the largest figure according to your choice of smoothing
etc and data source is about 0.2C.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/05/07/april-global-temperature-anomal....

Graham

-So what? You keep on getting excited about short term noise, as if it
-said anything about the long term trend generated by the build up in
-C02 in the atmosphere.

The whole AGW hypothesis is based on short term data.
The Vostock ice-core data goes back some half a million years, but
since you don't see its relevance to AGW you probably aren't aware of
this.

--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
 
On Sun, 10 May 2009 14:39:07 -0700, John Larkin wrote:
On Sun, 10 May 2009 17:02:39 -0400, "Martin Riddle"

Apparently this will never happen again. Because of the Hubble service
mission, Endeavour is ready in case a rescue is needed since they are
not going to the space station.

see thumbnail 9 for a view of pads 39 A & B

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/shuttle/shuttlemissions/sts125/multimedia/gallery/gallery-index.html

Crazy. For the price of one repair trip, we could have funded dozens
of ground-based telescopes with resolution superior to Hubble and many
decades of lifetime each. Throw in a few expendable UV and gamma-ray
satellites too.

Pity the space station isn't usable as a telescope platform. At least
it might claim to have a use.
Yeah, but make it a really BIG one - say, a 10-25 meter mirror with maybe
a 100-meter focal length. That'd pull'em in! ;-)

Of course, if we cut the military down to a sane level, the savings would
pay for all of NASA, from its inception to now, many times over, not to
mention socialist security, medicare, and so on.

Another thought for getting humans safely into space and back - resurrect
the Mercury, Gemini, and/or Apollo capsules to get them to and from orbit,
and just use any clunky ol' unmanned rockets to send tons of supplies for
life support for while they're up there. Maybe even put a couple of escape
capsules on the station - or did the Russians already think of that?

Maybe enhance the capsule(s) with some kind of air bags or something, to
make a relatively soft landing on land. And a steerable winglike
parachute, of course. :)

Cheers!
Rich
 
On Sun, 10 May 2009 15:57:38 -0700, John Larkin wrote:
For what? The most significant things men and women do in space is
die.
Don't worry too much - I seriously doubt that they'll send you. ;-)

Albeit, I do agree on a point I'm reading between the lines - they're
taking your tax money and spending it on stuff you don't want it spent on.
That's why we all need to vote Libertarian; to ultimately restore the
individuals' right to spend their own money in the manner of their own
choosing.

Instead of funding bureaucracies with stolen money, they should be
supported by voluntary contributions - Do you like NASA? Send them a
check! Do you like the Pentagon? Send them a check! And so on, and so
on, and so on, and so on ...

With an outgo tax instead of an income tax, and a bureaucracy cut back
to the bone, people would have as much disposable income as they want!

Cheers!
Rich
 
On Sun, 10 May 2009 17:00:41 -0700, Joel Koltner wrote:
"John Larkin" <jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in message
news:iqme051mv9gqriqoqp2k5prmra1ocmqunn@4ax.com...
For what? The most significant things men and women do in space is
die.

No, no, they're figuring out how to live in space, how to move to the next
planet, etc., for the coming climatic catastrophe that's surely no more than a
couple decades away now. :)

There's some outfit that runs ads on the radio about how the climate has
already changed for the worse (background sounds of
hurricanes/flooding/tornados) and it's posed to get far, far worse if we "do
nothing." Scare tactics at their finest...
Problem is, they've already "done something", and the consequences have
been demonstrated to have been worse than the original problem, as they
usually do.

Thanks,
Rich
 
On Sun, 10 May 2009 14:53:10 -0700, John Larkin wrote:
Why do we want to put humans back on the moon?
To build the first of the Stepping Stones to the Galaxy; sort of a "way
station" if you will, with resources fetched from the asteriod belt or
Saturn's rings, whatever. ;-) There's lots of solar energy up there, you
know. ;-)

And what a telescope platform!

Heck, maybe if we go far out enough, we'll find where they hid Heaven! ;-P

Cheers!
Rich
 
On Sun, 10 May 2009 14:53:10 -0700, John Larkin wrote:
On Sun, 10 May 2009 17:42:15 -0400, Phil Hobbs

The whole space thing isn't a scientific endeavour, it's a military one
at bottom. That's why the scientists have been puzzled by the
priorities from day 1.

I don't even think it's military.
Sure it is!
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/milspace-03p.html
first hit "of about 449,000"* at
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Space%3A+The+ultimate+high+ground

* 774 with quotes ;-)

Hope This Helps!
Rich
 

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top