Getting electrocuted in bathtub

Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in news:4b10aa91-dfb3-4789-
8df3-92c02ed76888@googlegroups.com:

> I'll wager that no one else here saw it either.

You are an idiot. A for "wagering" and B because anyone here that
watched the series would have seen it, and YOU have ZERO clue as to
'the mix' present here. You have not been in the group long enough.
It is a stupid assertion on your part. Nice try though.
Real simple. Go watch it, dipshit.

 

[Whoey Louie]

On Friday, November 8, 2019 at 12:31:21 PM UTC-5, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:4b10aa91-dfb3-4789-8df3-92c02ed76888@googlegroups.com:

And the fact that
you can't tell us what you claim was wrong with what they did,
speaks for itself.

You are the dumbfuck who said "can't".

Well, so far you can't. I just asked a simple question, as to what
you claim you saw on Myth Busters that was wrong. And here you are
all hot and bothered as usual. Normal people would just answer the
question.

You and your retarded statement speaks for nothing other than the
fact that you are full of shit.

Are you as sure about that as you were about
defibrillators using 30ma?

The amount that makes it through the heart, idiot.

ROFL.

Sure, try to change what you said and we all saw.

Much of the current pathway is through the body mass, and getting
the amount needed across the heart itself requires a huge amount be
passed through the entire body.

You are out of your class, child.

You were only off by three orders of
magnitude on that one.

No, I was not.

Yes you were. Defibrillators don't use 30MA, they use three orders
of magnitude more current.

Wrong, always wrong. And unable to support what you claim.

I made no claim. They made a claim, and all I did was state that
it was not a correct experiment.

You're unable to support why what MB did was wrong, stupid.
You claimed it was wrong. I simply asked why. Geez, you really do
need help.

 

[Rick C]

On Friday, November 8, 2019 at 10:48:37 AM UTC-5, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:62095817-cc9c-4834-99ec-e6e06d5b8cb3@googlegroups.com:

On Friday, November 8, 2019 at 12:18:07 AM UTC-5,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:b9a54ff7-5852-45d4-89b6-6bc3646c10b6@googlegroups.com:

On Wednesday, November 6, 2019 at 6:52:02 PM UTC-5,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote in
news:a3fd0127-5e10-4a1e-ae47-c40ce37ba5bd@googlegroups.com:

Myth Busters did a piece on this and showed it very much
WOULD produce a current that would kill a person.

I saw it and it was wrong.

You could at least enlighten us by saying what you think was
wrong with what they did. I didn't see that particular one,
but I've seen many others and MB have been scientific and
reasonable.



I never said they were not. I said they were wrong on this.

Do you ever actually read what people post before typing? I
didn't comment on what you thought about the credibility of Myth
Busters. I commented on you not providing anything about what you
think they did that was wrong, incorrect, etc. with their bathtub
electrocution analysis. And that question obviously remains.


You already stated that you have not seen the piece.

You do not even warrant a response.

Just like the California overnor's response to Trump on 'forest
fires' and climate change.

I did see the Myth Busters piece. What do you think was wrong about it and why?

--

Rick C.

-- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Jeroen Belleman]

On 2019-11-08 19:27, Whoey Louie wrote:
[Snip!]

Yes you were. Defibrillators don't use 30MA, they use three orders
of magnitude more current.

Seriously, 30 PA? Wow!

[Duck]

Jeroen Belleman

 

[Sjouke Burry]

On 08.11.19 19:27, Whoey Louie wrote:

On Friday, November 8, 2019 at 12:31:21 PM UTC-5, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:4b10aa91-dfb3-4789-8df3-92c02ed76888@googlegroups.com:

And the fact that
you can't tell us what you claim was wrong with what they did,
speaks for itself.

You are the dumbfuck who said "can't".

Well, so far you can't. I just asked a simple question, as to what
you claim you saw on Myth Busters that was wrong. And here you are
all hot and bothered as usual. Normal people would just answer the
question.




You and your retarded statement speaks for nothing other than the
fact that you are full of shit.

Are you as sure about that as you were about
defibrillators using 30ma?

The amount that makes it through the heart, idiot.

ROFL.

Sure, try to change what you said and we all saw.




Much of the current pathway is through the body mass, and getting
the amount needed across the heart itself requires a huge amount be
passed through the entire body.

You are out of your class, child.

You were only off by three orders of
magnitude on that one.

No, I was not.

Yes you were. Defibrillators don't use 30MA, they use three orders
of magnitude more current.




Wrong, always wrong. And unable to support what you claim.

I made no claim. They made a claim, and all I did was state that
it was not a correct experiment.

You're unable to support why what MB did was wrong, stupid.
You claimed it was wrong. I simply asked why. Geez, you really do
need help.

last time i was shocked for fibrillation was 150 Joules.
When I woke up, I had on front and back a 4 inch by 4 inch
electrode rash on my torso.
That was certainly more than 34 milliamp.......

 

[Whoey Louie]

On Friday, November 8, 2019 at 2:11:15 PM UTC-5, Rick C wrote:

On Friday, November 8, 2019 at 10:48:37 AM UTC-5, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:62095817-cc9c-4834-99ec-e6e06d5b8cb3@googlegroups.com:

On Friday, November 8, 2019 at 12:18:07 AM UTC-5,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:b9a54ff7-5852-45d4-89b6-6bc3646c10b6@googlegroups.com:

On Wednesday, November 6, 2019 at 6:52:02 PM UTC-5,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote in
news:a3fd0127-5e10-4a1e-ae47-c40ce37ba5bd@googlegroups.com:

Myth Busters did a piece on this and showed it very much
WOULD produce a current that would kill a person.

I saw it and it was wrong.

You could at least enlighten us by saying what you think was
wrong with what they did. I didn't see that particular one,
but I've seen many others and MB have been scientific and
reasonable.



I never said they were not. I said they were wrong on this.

Do you ever actually read what people post before typing? I
didn't comment on what you thought about the credibility of Myth
Busters. I commented on you not providing anything about what you
think they did that was wrong, incorrect, etc. with their bathtub
electrocution analysis. And that question obviously remains.


You already stated that you have not seen the piece.

You do not even warrant a response.

Just like the California overnor's response to Trump on 'forest
fires' and climate change.

I did see the Myth Busters piece. What do you think was wrong about it and why?

--

Rick C.

-- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

Don;t hold your breath for an answer. I asked that and got the usual
angry, vile response and no answer. No surprise there.

 

[Rick C]

On Friday, November 8, 2019 at 8:00:51 PM UTC-5, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote in
news:52726049-f39a-475d-a4b1-ec79c06f53e6@googlegroups.com:

On Friday, November 8, 2019 at 10:48:37 AM UTC-5,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:62095817-cc9c-4834-99ec-e6e06d5b8cb3@googlegroups.com:

On Friday, November 8, 2019 at 12:18:07 AM UTC-5,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:b9a54ff7-5852-45d4-89b6-6bc3646c10b6@googlegroups.com:

On Wednesday, November 6, 2019 at 6:52:02 PM UTC-5,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote in
news:a3fd0127-5e10-4a1e-ae47-c40ce37ba5bd@googlegroups.com:

Myth Busters did a piece on this and showed it very much
WOULD produce a current that would kill a person.

I saw it and it was wrong.

You could at least enlighten us by saying what you think was
wrong with what they did. I didn't see that particular one,
but I've seen many others and MB have been scientific and
reasonable.



I never said they were not. I said they were wrong on this.

Do you ever actually read what people post before typing? I
didn't comment on what you thought about the credibility of
Myth Busters. I commented on you not providing anything about
what you think they did that was wrong, incorrect, etc. with
their bathtub electrocution analysis. And that question
obviously remains.


You already stated that you have not seen the piece.

You do not even warrant a response.

Just like the California overnor's response to Trump on 'forest
fires' and climate change.

I did see the Myth Busters piece. What do you think was wrong
about it and why?


They modeled it wrong, and did not (propeperly) capture the way the
current distribution weighs in.

I don't recall the details. Did they use Buster? Or a more appropriate mannequin?

--

Rick C.

-+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in news:1cb64341-5765-4697-
9593-b2c25c9fe567@googlegroups.com:

Don;t hold your breath for an answer.

You're a goddamned retard. I wish you would hold your breath...
until you cannot hold it for even a second longer. Do so while
submerged about 30 feet down. That way when you are out of breath,
and your urge to breathe will kick in, and you will inhale about a
cup of liquid, just as you die!

I asked that and got the usual
angry, vile response and no answer.

You're a goddamned idiot. YOU get no response. You get it yet,
boy?

YOU get no quarter.

YOU get no credence, though you did that to yourself.

YOU deserve whatever most vile response I can muster at any given
time.

No surprise there.

Yeah... since you are not within baseball bat bludgeoning
distance. You little pussified punk fuck. Or should I say 380 pound
lard assed, fat faced fucktard.

 

Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote in
news:52726049-f39a-475d-a4b1-ec79c06f53e6@googlegroups.com:

On Friday, November 8, 2019 at 10:48:37 AM UTC-5,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:62095817-cc9c-4834-99ec-e6e06d5b8cb3@googlegroups.com:

On Friday, November 8, 2019 at 12:18:07 AM UTC-5,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:b9a54ff7-5852-45d4-89b6-6bc3646c10b6@googlegroups.com:

On Wednesday, November 6, 2019 at 6:52:02 PM UTC-5,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote in
news:a3fd0127-5e10-4a1e-ae47-c40ce37ba5bd@googlegroups.com:

Myth Busters did a piece on this and showed it very much
WOULD produce a current that would kill a person.

I saw it and it was wrong.

You could at least enlighten us by saying what you think was
wrong with what they did. I didn't see that particular one,
but I've seen many others and MB have been scientific and
reasonable.



I never said they were not. I said they were wrong on this.

Do you ever actually read what people post before typing? I
didn't comment on what you thought about the credibility of
Myth Busters. I commented on you not providing anything about
what you think they did that was wrong, incorrect, etc. with
their bathtub electrocution analysis. And that question
obviously remains.


You already stated that you have not seen the piece.

You do not even warrant a response.

Just like the California overnor's response to Trump on 'forest
fires' and climate change.

I did see the Myth Busters piece. What do you think was wrong
about it and why?

They modeled it wrong, and did not (propeperly) capture the way the
current distribution weighs in.

 

[Jasen Betts]

On 2019-11-09, Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote:

On Friday, November 8, 2019 at 8:00:51 PM UTC-5, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote in
news:52726049-f39a-475d-a4b1-ec79c06f53e6@googlegroups.com:

On Friday, November 8, 2019 at 10:48:37 AM UTC-5,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:62095817-cc9c-4834-99ec-e6e06d5b8cb3@googlegroups.com:

On Friday, November 8, 2019 at 12:18:07 AM UTC-5,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:b9a54ff7-5852-45d4-89b6-6bc3646c10b6@googlegroups.com:

On Wednesday, November 6, 2019 at 6:52:02 PM UTC-5,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote in
news:a3fd0127-5e10-4a1e-ae47-c40ce37ba5bd@googlegroups.com:

Myth Busters did a piece on this and showed it very much
WOULD produce a current that would kill a person.

I saw it and it was wrong.

You could at least enlighten us by saying what you think was
wrong with what they did. I didn't see that particular one,
but I've seen many others and MB have been scientific and
reasonable.



I never said they were not. I said they were wrong on this.

Do you ever actually read what people post before typing? I
didn't comment on what you thought about the credibility of
Myth Busters. I commented on you not providing anything about
what you think they did that was wrong, incorrect, etc. with
their bathtub electrocution analysis. And that question
obviously remains.


You already stated that you have not seen the piece.

You do not even warrant a response.

Just like the California overnor's response to Trump on 'forest
fires' and climate change.

I did see the Myth Busters piece. What do you think was wrong
about it and why?


They modeled it wrong, and did not (propeperly) capture the way the
current distribution weighs in.

I don't recall the details. Did they use Buster? Or a more appropriate mannequin?

they used a form made of ballistic jelly with added electrolytes.
not haing any gross structure (like lungs or blood vessels) there
was likely less current concentration than there would be IRL.

--
When I tried casting out nines I made a hash of it.

 

[Lasse Langwadt Christense]

lørdag den 9. november 2019 kl. 04.31.06 UTC+1 skrev Jasen Betts:

On 2019-11-09, Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, November 8, 2019 at 8:00:51 PM UTC-5, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote in
news:52726049-f39a-475d-a4b1-ec79c06f53e6@googlegroups.com:

On Friday, November 8, 2019 at 10:48:37 AM UTC-5,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:62095817-cc9c-4834-99ec-e6e06d5b8cb3@googlegroups.com:

On Friday, November 8, 2019 at 12:18:07 AM UTC-5,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
news:b9a54ff7-5852-45d4-89b6-6bc3646c10b6@googlegroups.com:

On Wednesday, November 6, 2019 at 6:52:02 PM UTC-5,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote in
news:a3fd0127-5e10-4a1e-ae47-c40ce37ba5bd@googlegroups.com:

Myth Busters did a piece on this and showed it very much
WOULD produce a current that would kill a person.

I saw it and it was wrong.

You could at least enlighten us by saying what you think was
wrong with what they did. I didn't see that particular one,
but I've seen many others and MB have been scientific and
reasonable.



I never said they were not. I said they were wrong on this.

Do you ever actually read what people post before typing? I
didn't comment on what you thought about the credibility of
Myth Busters. I commented on you not providing anything about
what you think they did that was wrong, incorrect, etc. with
their bathtub electrocution analysis. And that question
obviously remains.


You already stated that you have not seen the piece.

You do not even warrant a response.

Just like the California overnor's response to Trump on 'forest
fires' and climate change.

I did see the Myth Busters piece. What do you think was wrong
about it and why?


They modeled it wrong, and did not (propeperly) capture the way the
current distribution weighs in.

I don't recall the details. Did they use Buster? Or a more appropriate mannequin?

they used a form made of ballistic jelly with added electrolytes.
not haing any gross structure (like lungs or blood vessels) there
was likely less current concentration than there would be IRL.

https://youtu.be/SU7xkYmWwmQ

 

[Diesel]

DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org
news:qpu93v$c72$1@gioia.aioe.org Wed, 06 Nov 2019 11:00:15 GMT in
alt.home.repair, wrote:

Mike Coon <gravity@mjcoon.plus.com> wrote in
news:MPG.382ca430f2d4a5889@news.plus.net:

In article <i5p4sellk9em404vc6ffha55blv4ot9v6g@4ax.com>,
unlisted@nomail.com says...

However, modern tubs and the pipes connected to them are
plastic. Thus not grounded. Is it still possible to get
electrocuted in an ungrounded bathtub, if an appliance falls in
the water?

Errm, why do you want to know?...

Mike.


Just an appliance in the water is not going to make a path through
the body in either tub.

Uhh, I wouldn't bet my life on that by trying...Pure water is a lousy
conductor, but, most people's water has minerals in it; which makes a
pretty good conductor. Doesn't matter if your house is using plastic
pipes, at some point, that water supply is going back to a metal line
which is going to provide a nice path to ground. If you're in the tub,
you're in the way, part of the circuit, not good to be you.



--
He disappeared, like the cat in that Russian story.- Chekov

 

[Diesel]

DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org
news:qpvkku$qdq$1@gioia.aioe.org Wed, 06 Nov 2019 23:23:10 GMT in
alt.home.repair, wrote:

The lightning travels across miles because it is at millions of
volts potential.

It's not just voltage, it's amperage. It's got kick behind it too.

Residential service voltages will not even travel trough a bread
bag, much less your PVC plumbing.

That's not necessarily true...


--
The early bird who catches the worm works for someone who comes in late
and owns the worm farm.

 

[Diesel]

DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org
news:qpvn2d$15gc$1@gioia.aioe.org Thu, 07 Nov 2019 00:04:30 GMT in
alt.home.repair, wrote:

micky <NONONOaddressee@rushpost.com> wrote in
news:1566se5c5tipkgms3jrvbi7ccr7gp7e7hr@4ax.com:

In alt.home.repair, on Wed, 06 Nov 2019 00:14:16 -0600, Unlisted
unlisted@nomail.com> wrote:

In the old days when plumbing was made of metal, people were
electrocuted in bathtubs if an electric appliance such as a hair
dryer or plug in radio fell into the tub while a person was in
it.

However, modern tubs and the pipes connected to them are plastic.
Thus not grounded. Is it still possible to get electrocuted in an
ungrounded bathtub, if an appliance falls in the water?

Also, I remember being told to never take a bath when it's
lightning outside. Is that still valid today in a plastic
plumbing system?

I don't know much about the rest but i know that lightning
doesn't need a continuous path to ground. After all, it jumps
1000's of feet from the sky to the earth and it will also jump
iirc a foot or more from one conductor to another. There are
still grounded electrical outlets and afaik copper water pipes
are very common. I have them.


Basic physics.

It takes a 77kV voltage source to bridge a 1 inch gap with 3kV
per mm at sea level as the reference standard.

The smallest lightning bolt is over 6 Million Volts.

I think that AND the mostly even bigger mo fos can jump
considerable gaps of several miles.

Your information isn't accurate.

This is a high voltage demonstration using an inexpensive car
ignition coil being driven by a variable frequency, duty cycle and
amplitude 555 based mosfet circuit.


Circuit schematic:

https://www.imgpaste.net/image/r0tKi

Video of circuit in action:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KcWrrlTRFdM

I'm not generating 75k or more, but I am arcing well over an inch
before and after I shorten the length. As you can see in the
beginning, it's more than happy to exceed the barrier I already setup
for it by using the metal of the device holding the wires as another
route. No camera tricks of any kind, either. That's really doing what
you're seeing in the video; and that particular coil will not
generate 75kv on a cold snowy day in hell on 12 volts. Infact, it
doesn't even like being driven on 12; it actually prefers 9.

A microwave over transformer makes around 2kv ac voltage, several
amps. It can generate a very impressive arc which is well over
6inches or more. Easily. A fucking dangerous one. The one in my video
is higher voltage, but far less kick behind it. The microwave oven
transformer, oth, because it's tied into mains power, can kill you
dead as a door nail far easier than the one in my video would - it
could potentially kill you too, but... less likely to do so than a
microwave oven transformer.

Residential pole pigs (line transformers) aren't being fed 75kv or
more either; but can make an impressive arc (several feet that will
try to chase the wire [g]; and yes, it'll kill you fucking dead if
you come into contact with it in many cases) on the input side if
disconnected from a hot line, even more so if under load at the time
of disconnect. They're typically being fed by 7.2kv or 14.7kv; so
again, nowhere near the 75kv you claimed was needed.

The moral, it's not just the voltage, it's the amperage too that
decides how much distance the arc can travel at such and such voltage
level.



--
OK, I'm weird ! But I'm saving up to be eccentric.

 

[Diesel]

Diesel <nobody@haph.org>
news:XnsAB021D5997E22HT1@t77x7AkL7.Fb1FosET2wF3v4w9z7iKzgi4G03HI9mL2a
hBdF99av Sat, 09 Nov 2019 06:43:33 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org
news:qpvn2d$15gc$1@gioia.aioe.org Thu, 07 Nov 2019 00:04:30 GMT in
alt.home.repair, wrote:

micky <NONONOaddressee@rushpost.com> wrote in
news:1566se5c5tipkgms3jrvbi7ccr7gp7e7hr@4ax.com:

In alt.home.repair, on Wed, 06 Nov 2019 00:14:16 -0600, Unlisted
unlisted@nomail.com> wrote:

In the old days when plumbing was made of metal, people were
electrocuted in bathtubs if an electric appliance such as a hair
dryer or plug in radio fell into the tub while a person was in
it.

However, modern tubs and the pipes connected to them are
plastic. Thus not grounded. Is it still possible to get
electrocuted in an ungrounded bathtub, if an appliance falls in
the water?

Also, I remember being told to never take a bath when it's
lightning outside. Is that still valid today in a plastic
plumbing system?

I don't know much about the rest but i know that lightning
doesn't need a continuous path to ground. After all, it jumps
1000's of feet from the sky to the earth and it will also jump
iirc a foot or more from one conductor to another. There are
still grounded electrical outlets and afaik copper water pipes
are very common. I have them.


Basic physics.

It takes a 77kV voltage source to bridge a 1 inch gap with 3kV
per mm at sea level as the reference standard.

The smallest lightning bolt is over 6 Million Volts.

I think that AND the mostly even bigger mo fos can jump
considerable gaps of several miles.


Your information isn't accurate.

This is a high voltage demonstration using an inexpensive car
ignition coil being driven by a variable frequency, duty cycle and
amplitude 555 based mosfet circuit.


Circuit schematic:

https://www.imgpaste.net/image/r0tKi

Video of circuit in action:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KcWrrlTRFdM

I'm not generating 75k or more, but I am arcing well over an inch
before and after I shorten the length. As you can see in the
beginning, it's more than happy to exceed the barrier I already
setup for it by using the metal of the device holding the wires as
another route. No camera tricks of any kind, either. That's really
doing what you're seeing in the video; and that particular coil
will not generate 75kv on a cold snowy day in hell on 12 volts.
Infact, it doesn't even like being driven on 12; it actually
prefers 9.

A microwave over transformer makes around 2kv ac voltage, several
amps. It can generate a very impressive arc which is well over
6inches or more. Easily. A fucking dangerous one. The one in my
video is higher voltage, but far less kick behind it. The
microwave oven transformer, oth, because it's tied into mains
power, can kill you dead as a door nail far easier than the one in
my video would - it could potentially kill you too, but... less
likely to do so than a microwave oven transformer.

Residential pole pigs (line transformers) aren't being fed 75kv or
more either; but can make an impressive arc (several feet that
will try to chase the wire [g]; and yes, it'll kill you fucking
dead if you come into contact with it in many cases) on the input
side if disconnected from a hot line, even more so if under load
at the time of disconnect. They're typically being fed by 7.2kv or
14.7kv; so again, nowhere near the 75kv you claimed was needed.

The moral, it's not just the voltage, it's the amperage too that
decides how much distance the arc can travel at such and such
voltage level.

And of course, I'd forget to mention another variable. frequency. The
lower the frequency, the longer the arc at xxx voltage. The higher
the frequency, the shorter the arc at xxx voltage. You have to factor
in ac or dc, voltage, current and frequency in order to determine how
far it can jump an open air gap. Moisture is also another variable
you have to consider if you're working around HV that has real
current behind it - as that kind of HV arc over if you're in the way
is much much more likely to kill you.

Along how much power the resulting arc is going to have. What's known
as a 'hot spark' or 'hot arc' has some meat behind it, it's not
something you want to come into contact with. Nasty shock or much
much worse if you do. You can have a weak spark jump over an inch
same as you can a hot one. A hot one though can pass through things
you get in it's way; plastic, etc. And you won't interrupt it with a
shot of compressed air. A weak one you can, with ease.

The arc I mentioned in all three examples above generate hot arcs
ranging from a nasty shock (much worse than some BS 'taser') to
closed casket funeral. All three are capable of starting fires with
ease; which is why the video description clearly mentions not to try
to use the circuit as is to make an electric fence. None of the three
above examples are being fed by or generate anywhere near the 75kv
you claimed was necessary. Two of the three aren't even getting 300
volts; but they are certainly putting out a hell of a lot more than
that; just not 75kv worth. And I'm not even factoring in high
humidity/moisture as an added bonus to make it easier for the arc.

Oh, and incidently, one generates atleast a kilovolt under the 3kv
you claimed was necessary to jump a mm. That would be the microwave
oven transformer. It typically generates no more than 2 to 2.5kv. It
uses a voltage doubler to generate the 5kv dc necessary to run the
magnetron; but the transformer itself isn't making 5kv. [g]

So anyways, your statement is flatout wrong. Sorry.


--
Useless Invention: Inflatable PC -- The Ultimate Laptop!

 

Diesel <nobody@haph.org> wrote in news:XnsAB0221B6FC6A3HT1
@t77x7AkL7.Fb1FosET2wF3v4w9z7iKzgi4G03HI9mL2ahBdF99av:

Oh, and incidently, one generates atleast a kilovolt under the 3kv
you claimed was necessary to jump a mm.

You are a goddamned retard. The number I gave is the accepted
number from the scientific community.

I'll go with that over your layman ramblings any day.

That would be the microwave
oven transformer. It typically generates no more than 2 to 2.5kv.

The differ from maker to maker, and you are clueless about any
other than the one you toyed with. Unless you are a service tech,
and then I will start laughing all over again.

It
uses a voltage doubler to generate the 5kv dc necessary to run the
magnetron; but the transformer itself isn't making 5kv. [g]

Wow. you know fuck all next to nothing about microwave ovens too.

> So anyways, your statement is flatout wrong. Sorry.

Yeah, you are one sorry layman mother fucker.

 

Diesel <nobody@haph.org> wrote in
news:XnsAB021D5997E22HT1@t77x7AkL7.Fb1FosET2wF3v4w9z7iKzgi4G03HI9mL2a
hBdF99av:

The moral, it's not just the voltage, it's the amperage too that
decides how much distance the arc can travel at such and such
voltage level.

The moral? You'r an idiot. The FACT is that you are full of shit.

Arc initiation and arc continuation are two diferent things. Once a
carbon path has been established arcing can crawl to and from other
than the initial gap breach nodes.

You really should refrain from further 'pontification' because you do
not know what you are talking about.

 

Diesel <nobody@haph.org> wrote in news:XnsAB021D591D922HT1
@t77x7AkL7.Fb1FosET2wF3v4w9z7iKzgi4G03HI9mL2ahBdF99av:

DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org
news:qpvkku$qdq$1@gioia.aioe.org Wed, 06 Nov 2019 23:23:10 GMT in
alt.home.repair, wrote:

The lightning travels across miles because it is at millions of
volts potential.

It's not just voltage, it's amperage. It's got kick behind it too.

You ain't real bright. If it builds enough to reach the ground due
to having the voltage to breach the gap, the ensuing connection will
have high current for the moment of the event. Current does not flow
at all until the event, so it is voltage that is required to do the
job. The current is just the result of the job being done.

So, it is JUST THE VOLTAGE.

Residential service voltages will not even travel trough a bread
bag, much less your PVC plumbing.

That's not necessarily true...

Bullshit. A bread bag has the strength to withstand household
voltages. Period. PVC has even greater withstand capacity. So you
also do not know much about polymers, films, or dielectric strength
either.

 

Diesel <nobody@haph.org> wrote in
news:XnsAB021D589AE7EHT1@t77x7AkL7.Fb1FosET2wF3v4w9z7iKzgi4G03HI9mL2a
hBdF99av:

DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org
news:qpu93v$c72$1@gioia.aioe.org Wed, 06 Nov 2019 11:00:15 GMT in
alt.home.repair, wrote:

Mike Coon <gravity@mjcoon.plus.com> wrote in
news:MPG.382ca430f2d4a5889@news.plus.net:

In article <i5p4sellk9em404vc6ffha55blv4ot9v6g@4ax.com>,
unlisted@nomail.com says...

However, modern tubs and the pipes connected to them are
plastic. Thus not grounded. Is it still possible to get
electrocuted in an ungrounded bathtub, if an appliance falls in
the water?

Errm, why do you want to know?...

Mike.


Just an appliance in the water is not going to make a path
through the body in either tub.


Uhh, I wouldn't bet my life on that by trying...

Uhh... You a basic electronics guy, eh?

Pure water is a
lousy conductor, but, most people's water has minerals in it;
which makes a pretty good conductor.

We do not need a primer on water conductivity in an electronics
newsgroup. Pretty much common sense around here. The question was
about a tub. We ALL already know that it is assumed that the water
conducts. There is very little pure water around to fill bathtubs
with.

Doesn't matter if your house
is using plastic pipes, at some point, that water supply is going
back to a metal line which is going to provide a nice path to
ground.

The tub of water is NOT connected to "the water supply" once the
tub is filled. You have logic flaws in your argument.

If you're in the tub, you're in the way, part of the
circuit, not good to be you.

OK, so I thought you were a basic electronics guy, but you even
fail on that.

You have to get the current path logic right, before you can start
arguing about folks being part of a circuit. Your argument is
flawed.

 

[Tauno Voipio]

On 8.11.19 23:27, Jeroen Belleman wrote:

On 2019-11-08 19:27, Whoey Louie wrote:
[Snip!]


Yes you were. Defibrillators don't use 30MA, they use three orders
of magnitude more current.

Seriously, 30 PA? Wow!

[Duck]

Jeroen Belleman

When we made hospital-quality defibrillators, they
put 400 Ws as a 3 kV pulse into 50 ohms load.

And yes, it leaves nasty 4 inch diameter burns,
despite of the contact lube used.

--

-TV