Silly question, AC power plugs

[krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz]

On Tue, 22 May 2012 06:07:37 -0500, John Fields
<jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 22:52:02 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 19:41:12 -0700, John Larkin
jjSNIPlarkin@highTHISlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 20:30:54 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 09:38:51 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 07:21:35 -0700, John Larkin
jjSNIPlarkin@highTHISlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 06:23:48 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 May 2012 15:13:30 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 May 2012 16:49:50 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 May 2012 09:18:07 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

You said this:


A blade made of brass with a width of 1/4", a thickness of 1/16" and a
length of about an inch is hardly flimsy, and serves us well when we
opt to go to 240V and eke out four times the power available from the
mains without changing plugs.

which is just wrong.

---
Right you are!

Changing just one word, though, would make it right.

Care to guess which one?

Easy. Change "four" to "two."

---
Wrong, but understandable since what I meant was "adding one word."

Mea culpa.

Wanna try again?

No. What you said was wrong and stupid, applying "Ohm's Law" without
thinking, as amateurs often do.

Weasel it out yourself.

---
Oh, my, Johnny's working himself up to a lather because he's missed
the point.

The word is 120V and it should be added before "mains".

Also, hardly wrong or stupid considering that, in the argument, if a
resistor is connected across 120V mains it'll dissipate a certain
power, while if connected across 240V mains the power dissipation will
quadruple.

Is that not correct, Mr Wizard?

The issue under discussion is how much power you can get from an
outlet, "eke out" in your words. You stated that a given plug, with a
rated current, can deliver 4x as much power at 240 than it can at 120.
You specifically said that's so without changing the plug. Wrong.

---
If a plug rated for 15A is plugged into 240V mains, then with a 16 ohm
resistor connected across the plug the resistor will dissipate 3600
watts.

Now unplug the plug from the 240V mains and plug it into 120V mains.
The dissipation will fall to 900 watts.

Isn't 3600 watts 4 times greater than 900 watts?

Which has *nothing* to do with the issue at hand, but you knew that. You're
just trying move the goal posts to hide your stupidity.

That's like trying to hide a mountain.

He just keeps showing us how stupid he's determined to be. You have to
kind of admire that sort of dedication.

AlwaysWrong comes to mind.

---
Another favorite target of the lynch mob.

With good reason. You're in line for an honorable mention, though.

 

[krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz]

On Tue, 22 May 2012 11:25:05 -0500, John Fields
<jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 08:22:47 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 06:06:21 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 19:41:12 -0700, John Larkin
jjSNIPlarkin@highTHISlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 20:30:54 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 09:38:51 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 07:21:35 -0700, John Larkin
jjSNIPlarkin@highTHISlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 06:23:48 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 May 2012 15:13:30 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 May 2012 16:49:50 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 May 2012 09:18:07 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

You said this:


A blade made of brass with a width of 1/4", a thickness of 1/16" and a
length of about an inch is hardly flimsy, and serves us well when we
opt to go to 240V and eke out four times the power available from the
mains without changing plugs.

A simple situation was posited, by you, where the correct answer was
"2". Your answer was "4."

---
Here's what I wrote, with the earlier "120V" omission included:

"A blade made of brass with a width of 1/4", a thickness of 1/16" and
a length of about an inch is hardly flimsy, and serves us well when we
opt to go to 240V and eke out four times the power available from the
^^^^^^^^^^ Wrong!
120V mains without changing plugs."
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Wrong!

Speaking of uneducable...

I thought that it would be obvious to anyone schooled in the art that
under the conditions I outlined the load resistance would remain
constant, but such turned out not to be the case.

Utter nonsense.

Oh well...
---

So you invented a completely different situation in which the correct
answer was indeed 4, and pretended that's what the question was.
call that stupid.

---
If that were true it would be more aptly labeled "Larkinese".

No, it's a perfect Fields answer.

---

Using a 120 volt outlet on a 240 volt circuit isn't too bright either.

---
Depends on who's doing it and why.

No, it's stupid in all cases. It's certainly not surprising that you'd think
it acceptable.

 

[krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz]

On Tue, 22 May 2012 12:53:26 -0500, John Fields
<jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 17:45:01 +0100, "Ian Field"
gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com> wrote:


"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:nsbnr7ps5nmd11bl6kg71rboglbnhknpsj@4ax.com...
On Tue, 22 May 2012 15:59:31 +0100, "Ian Field"
gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com> wrote:

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:2belr79vtl32eunldpnfnf2idunekeoj7o@4ax.com...
On Mon, 21 May 2012 16:42:01 +0100, "Ian Field"
gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com> wrote:


"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:3imkr7pjl1cr5c5smohnjc6db9kk097ph9@4ax.com...


---
When I post something technical it's usually written to avoid
ambiguities, to present the subject matter in enough detail to be
understood at the level of the querent and, if required, to provide
the mathematical underpinnings of the design.

In addition, I often provide schematics and simulations and, on
occasion, actually build a prototype to prove, without a doubt, that
the design is sound.

You, on the other hand, seem to content yourself by sitting on the
sidelines hurling insults

Only at tossers who deserve it.

---
And why are you a fit judge to determine who's a tosser and who isn't
and whether they "deserve" to be insulted?


Insulted?! - pointed out more like.

---
That hardly answers the question.

--
JF


It was neccessary to correct your error first.

---
Goodbye, mini-troll.

You have to hum louder after you stick your fingers in your ears.

 

[Ian Field]

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:8bknr7dq5rnrfc59ud37rrknf2nih6n819@4ax.com...

On Tue, 22 May 2012 17:45:01 +0100, "Ian Field"
gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com> wrote:


"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:nsbnr7ps5nmd11bl6kg71rboglbnhknpsj@4ax.com...
On Tue, 22 May 2012 15:59:31 +0100, "Ian Field"
gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com> wrote:

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:2belr79vtl32eunldpnfnf2idunekeoj7o@4ax.com...
On Mon, 21 May 2012 16:42:01 +0100, "Ian Field"
gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com> wrote:


"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:3imkr7pjl1cr5c5smohnjc6db9kk097ph9@4ax.com...


---
When I post something technical it's usually written to avoid
ambiguities, to present the subject matter in enough detail to be
understood at the level of the querent and, if required, to provide
the mathematical underpinnings of the design.

In addition, I often provide schematics and simulations and, on
occasion, actually build a prototype to prove, without a doubt, that
the design is sound.

You, on the other hand, seem to content yourself by sitting on the
sidelines hurling insults

Only at tossers who deserve it.

---
And why are you a fit judge to determine who's a tosser and who isn't
and whether they "deserve" to be insulted?


Insulted?! - pointed out more like.

---
That hardly answers the question.

--
JF


It was neccessary to correct your error first.

---
Goodbye, mini-troll.

--
JF

Promises promises!

 

[Ian Field]

"Fred Abse" <excretatauris@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
newsan.2012.05.22.18.23.01.907288@invalid.invalid...

On Mon, 21 May 2012 04:04:09 -0700, fungus wrote:


When you have two devices with transformers the difference between what
each device considers "0V" can be huge depending on which way around you
plug them into the mains.

Care to explain how, with diagrams?



In Europe you have no idea how much power can be drawn from any given
socket. Plug in a heater on the "wrong" side of the room and you can be
plunged into darkness because it was on the same circuit breaker as the
lighting.

In what European countries is it legal to feed both sockets and lighting
circuits from the same breaker?

The garden shed?

 

[Jamie]

John Fields wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 20:54:16 -0400, Jamie
jamie_ka1lpa_not_valid_after_ka1lpa_@charter.net> wrote:


John Fields wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 18:24:18 -0400, Jamie
jamie_ka1lpa_not_valid_after_ka1lpa_@charter.net> wrote:



John Fields wrote:


On Mon, 21 May 2012 12:43:00 -0700, John Larkin
jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:




On Mon, 21 May 2012 10:17:51 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:



When I post something technical it's usually written to avoid
ambiguities, to present the subject matter in enough detail to be
understood at the level of the querent and, if required, to provide
the mathematical underpinnings of the design.

The only math I've ever seen you post is permutations of Ohm's Law.
Which is what you got wrong here.


---
Only "wrong" because you refuse to accept my point of view as being
valid, even though I iterate it over and over and offer the circuit
and the math to prove it right.

But no matter.

Yeah, a cattle prod normally gets any one to say and do as you please!

jamie


---
And yet you demur?


Ha, really. Your use of "demur" does not impress me nor does it fit in
the context of the statement I made.


---
Do you know what "demur" means?
---


Before visiting the "WORD" buffets, you may want to know the
ingredients before ingestation.


---
"ingestion".

Better look that up, bud!

jamie

 

[John Larkin]

On Tue, 22 May 2012 11:30:05 -0500, John Fields
<jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 08:30:21 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:


You have said that you're not an engineer, and that your electronics
is self-taught. Unless you forced yourself to learn the math, that
puts you at a disadvantage when discussing theory.

One good thing about EE school is that we were forced to learn the
theory and do the math. And we were taught to be careful and check our
work before turning it in. A lot of engineering is about avoiding
risk, and the more complex a system, the more careful you have to be
if it's ever going to work. One reason we can build a very complex
laser controller, and get it to work first-rev, is that we check the
hell out of our stuff before we etch boards. It's a lot of grunt work,
but it pays off.

---
You never miss a chance to spout platitudes and pat yourself on the
back, do you?

There's nothing glorious about grunt-level checking your work. I can
see why you don't do it.


--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

Precision electronic instrumentation
Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators
Custom laser drivers and controllers
Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links
VME thermocouple, LVDT, synchro acquisition and simulation

 

[John Fields]

On Tue, 22 May 2012 15:15:26 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
<krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 11:25:05 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 08:22:47 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 06:06:21 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 19:41:12 -0700, John Larkin
jjSNIPlarkin@highTHISlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 20:30:54 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 09:38:51 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 07:21:35 -0700, John Larkin
jjSNIPlarkin@highTHISlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 06:23:48 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 May 2012 15:13:30 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 May 2012 16:49:50 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 May 2012 09:18:07 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

You said this:


A blade made of brass with a width of 1/4", a thickness of 1/16" and a
length of about an inch is hardly flimsy, and serves us well when we
opt to go to 240V and eke out four times the power available from the
mains without changing plugs.

A simple situation was posited, by you, where the correct answer was
"2". Your answer was "4."

---
Here's what I wrote, with the earlier "120V" omission included:

"A blade made of brass with a width of 1/4", a thickness of 1/16" and
a length of about an inch is hardly flimsy, and serves us well when we
opt to go to 240V and eke out four times the power available from the
^^^^^^^^^^ Wrong!
120V mains without changing plugs."
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Wrong!

Speaking of uneducable...

---
A likely contender blindly jumps right in.
---

I thought that it would be obvious to anyone schooled in the art that
under the conditions I outlined the load resistance would remain
constant, but such turned out not to be the case.

Utter nonsense.

---
I said: "Anyone skilled in the art" which, as you've demonstrated,
obviously excludes you.

How else would what I posted have been true if that wasn't the case?
---

Oh well...
---

So you invented a completely different situation in which the correct
answer was indeed 4, and pretended that's what the question was.
call that stupid.

---
If that were true it would be more aptly labeled "Larkinese".

No, it's a perfect Fields answer.

---
Ignoratio elenchi.
---

Using a 120 volt outlet on a 240 volt circuit isn't too bright either.

---
Depends on who's doing it and why.

No, it's stupid in all cases.

---
Fallacy of hasty generalization.
---


It's certainly not surprising that you'd think it acceptable.

---
Ad hominem

--
JF

 

[John Fields]

On Tue, 22 May 2012 15:11:24 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
<krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 06:07:37 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 22:52:02 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 19:41:12 -0700, John Larkin
jjSNIPlarkin@highTHISlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 20:30:54 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 09:38:51 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 07:21:35 -0700, John Larkin
jjSNIPlarkin@highTHISlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 06:23:48 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 May 2012 15:13:30 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 May 2012 16:49:50 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 May 2012 09:18:07 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

You said this:


A blade made of brass with a width of 1/4", a thickness of 1/16" and a
length of about an inch is hardly flimsy, and serves us well when we
opt to go to 240V and eke out four times the power available from the
mains without changing plugs.

which is just wrong.

---
Right you are!

Changing just one word, though, would make it right.

Care to guess which one?

Easy. Change "four" to "two."

---
Wrong, but understandable since what I meant was "adding one word."

Mea culpa.

Wanna try again?

No. What you said was wrong and stupid, applying "Ohm's Law" without
thinking, as amateurs often do.

Weasel it out yourself.

---
Oh, my, Johnny's working himself up to a lather because he's missed
the point.

The word is 120V and it should be added before "mains".

Also, hardly wrong or stupid considering that, in the argument, if a
resistor is connected across 120V mains it'll dissipate a certain
power, while if connected across 240V mains the power dissipation will
quadruple.

Is that not correct, Mr Wizard?

The issue under discussion is how much power you can get from an
outlet, "eke out" in your words. You stated that a given plug, with a
rated current, can deliver 4x as much power at 240 than it can at 120.
You specifically said that's so without changing the plug. Wrong.

---
If a plug rated for 15A is plugged into 240V mains, then with a 16 ohm
resistor connected across the plug the resistor will dissipate 3600
watts.

Now unplug the plug from the 240V mains and plug it into 120V mains.
The dissipation will fall to 900 watts.

Isn't 3600 watts 4 times greater than 900 watts?

Which has *nothing* to do with the issue at hand, but you knew that. You're
just trying move the goal posts to hide your stupidity.

That's like trying to hide a mountain.

He just keeps showing us how stupid he's determined to be. You have to
kind of admire that sort of dedication.

AlwaysWrong comes to mind.

---
Another favorite target of the lynch mob.

With good reason.

---
Sounds like: "We'll give 'em a fair trial and hang 'em in the
morning."

Don't those white sheets and pointy hats get uncomfortable sometimes?
---

You're in line for an honorable mention, though.

---
I'll be waiting for ya.

--
JF

 

[John Fields]

On Tue, 22 May 2012 15:16:34 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
<krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 12:53:26 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 17:45:01 +0100, "Ian Field"
gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com> wrote:


"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:nsbnr7ps5nmd11bl6kg71rboglbnhknpsj@4ax.com...
On Tue, 22 May 2012 15:59:31 +0100, "Ian Field"
gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com> wrote:

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:2belr79vtl32eunldpnfnf2idunekeoj7o@4ax.com...
On Mon, 21 May 2012 16:42:01 +0100, "Ian Field"
gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com> wrote:


"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:3imkr7pjl1cr5c5smohnjc6db9kk097ph9@4ax.com...


---
When I post something technical it's usually written to avoid
ambiguities, to present the subject matter in enough detail to be
understood at the level of the querent and, if required, to provide
the mathematical underpinnings of the design.

In addition, I often provide schematics and simulations and, on
occasion, actually build a prototype to prove, without a doubt, that
the design is sound.

You, on the other hand, seem to content yourself by sitting on the
sidelines hurling insults

Only at tossers who deserve it.

---
And why are you a fit judge to determine who's a tosser and who isn't
and whether they "deserve" to be insulted?


Insulted?! - pointed out more like.

---
That hardly answers the question.

--
JF


It was neccessary to correct your error first.

---
Goodbye, mini-troll.

You have to hum louder after you stick your fingers in your ears.

---
Getting rid of sources of meaningless noise means that I can spend
more time enjoying what matters.

--
JF

 

[krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz]

On Tue, 22 May 2012 17:10:04 -0500, John Fields
<jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 15:11:24 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 06:07:37 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 22:52:02 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 19:41:12 -0700, John Larkin
jjSNIPlarkin@highTHISlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 20:30:54 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 09:38:51 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 07:21:35 -0700, John Larkin
jjSNIPlarkin@highTHISlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 06:23:48 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 May 2012 15:13:30 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 May 2012 16:49:50 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 May 2012 09:18:07 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

You said this:


A blade made of brass with a width of 1/4", a thickness of 1/16" and a
length of about an inch is hardly flimsy, and serves us well when we
opt to go to 240V and eke out four times the power available from the
mains without changing plugs.

which is just wrong.

---
Right you are!

Changing just one word, though, would make it right.

Care to guess which one?

Easy. Change "four" to "two."

---
Wrong, but understandable since what I meant was "adding one word."

Mea culpa.

Wanna try again?

No. What you said was wrong and stupid, applying "Ohm's Law" without
thinking, as amateurs often do.

Weasel it out yourself.

---
Oh, my, Johnny's working himself up to a lather because he's missed
the point.

The word is 120V and it should be added before "mains".

Also, hardly wrong or stupid considering that, in the argument, if a
resistor is connected across 120V mains it'll dissipate a certain
power, while if connected across 240V mains the power dissipation will
quadruple.

Is that not correct, Mr Wizard?

The issue under discussion is how much power you can get from an
outlet, "eke out" in your words. You stated that a given plug, with a
rated current, can deliver 4x as much power at 240 than it can at 120.
You specifically said that's so without changing the plug. Wrong.

---
If a plug rated for 15A is plugged into 240V mains, then with a 16 ohm
resistor connected across the plug the resistor will dissipate 3600
watts.

Now unplug the plug from the 240V mains and plug it into 120V mains.
The dissipation will fall to 900 watts.

Isn't 3600 watts 4 times greater than 900 watts?

Which has *nothing* to do with the issue at hand, but you knew that. You're
just trying move the goal posts to hide your stupidity.

That's like trying to hide a mountain.

He just keeps showing us how stupid he's determined to be. You have to
kind of admire that sort of dedication.

AlwaysWrong comes to mind.

---
Another favorite target of the lynch mob.

With good reason.

---
Sounds like: "We'll give 'em a fair trial and hang 'em in the
morning."

Good Lord, you're as stupid as DimBulb! I didn't know it was possible.

Don't those white sheets and pointy hats get uncomfortable sometimes?

You must be Obama. Anything you don't like is "racist". Keep going, you're
proving the point.

---

You're in line for an honorable mention, though.

---
I'll be waiting for ya.

Is that a threat?

 

[krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz]

On Tue, 22 May 2012 17:04:08 -0500, John Fields
<jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 15:15:26 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 11:25:05 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 08:22:47 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 06:06:21 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 19:41:12 -0700, John Larkin
jjSNIPlarkin@highTHISlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 20:30:54 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 09:38:51 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 07:21:35 -0700, John Larkin
jjSNIPlarkin@highTHISlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 06:23:48 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 May 2012 15:13:30 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 May 2012 16:49:50 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 May 2012 09:18:07 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

You said this:


A blade made of brass with a width of 1/4", a thickness of 1/16" and a
length of about an inch is hardly flimsy, and serves us well when we
opt to go to 240V and eke out four times the power available from the
mains without changing plugs.

A simple situation was posited, by you, where the correct answer was
"2". Your answer was "4."

---
Here's what I wrote, with the earlier "120V" omission included:

"A blade made of brass with a width of 1/4", a thickness of 1/16" and
a length of about an inch is hardly flimsy, and serves us well when we
opt to go to 240V and eke out four times the power available from the
^^^^^^^^^^ Wrong!
120V mains without changing plugs."
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Wrong!

Speaking of uneducable...

---
A likely contender blindly jumps right in.

IKWYABWAI is about your speed.

---

I thought that it would be obvious to anyone schooled in the art that
under the conditions I outlined the load resistance would remain
constant, but such turned out not to be the case.

Utter nonsense.

---
I said: "Anyone skilled in the art" which, as you've demonstrated,
obviously excludes you.

Wrong again, AlwaysWrong Jr. You said "four times the power available", which
is FALSE. It might deliver four times the power to a small resistive load,
but there is *NOT* "four times the power available". Now go back and take
grade school electricity.

How else would what I posted have been true if that wasn't the case?

It was *NOT* true, moron.

---

Oh well...
---

So you invented a completely different situation in which the correct
answer was indeed 4, and pretended that's what the question was.
call that stupid.

---
If that were true it would be more aptly labeled "Larkinese".

No, it's a perfect Fields answer.

---
Ignoratio elenchi.

Good grief, you're a stupid shit!

---


Using a 120 volt outlet on a 240 volt circuit isn't too bright either.

---
Depends on who's doing it and why.

No, it's stupid in all cases.

---
Fallacy of hasty generalization.

Wrong again, Jr.

---


It's certainly not surprising that you'd think it acceptable.

---
Ad hominem

The truth sometimes hurts, idiot.

 

[krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz]

On Tue, 22 May 2012 17:14:54 -0500, John Fields
<jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 15:16:34 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 12:53:26 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 17:45:01 +0100, "Ian Field"
gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com> wrote:


"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:nsbnr7ps5nmd11bl6kg71rboglbnhknpsj@4ax.com...
On Tue, 22 May 2012 15:59:31 +0100, "Ian Field"
gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com> wrote:

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:2belr79vtl32eunldpnfnf2idunekeoj7o@4ax.com...
On Mon, 21 May 2012 16:42:01 +0100, "Ian Field"
gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com> wrote:


"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:3imkr7pjl1cr5c5smohnjc6db9kk097ph9@4ax.com...


---
When I post something technical it's usually written to avoid
ambiguities, to present the subject matter in enough detail to be
understood at the level of the querent and, if required, to provide
the mathematical underpinnings of the design.

In addition, I often provide schematics and simulations and, on
occasion, actually build a prototype to prove, without a doubt, that
the design is sound.

You, on the other hand, seem to content yourself by sitting on the
sidelines hurling insults

Only at tossers who deserve it.

---
And why are you a fit judge to determine who's a tosser and who isn't
and whether they "deserve" to be insulted?


Insulted?! - pointed out more like.

---
That hardly answers the question.

--
JF


It was neccessary to correct your error first.

---
Goodbye, mini-troll.

You have to hum louder after you stick your fingers in your ears.

---
Getting rid of sources of meaningless noise means that I can spend
more time enjoying what matters.

See, I told you that you have to hum louder and stick your fingers in your
ears.

 

[krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz]

On Tue, 22 May 2012 20:43:53 +0100, "Ian Field"
<gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com> wrote:

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:8bknr7dq5rnrfc59ud37rrknf2nih6n819@4ax.com...
On Tue, 22 May 2012 17:45:01 +0100, "Ian Field"
gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com> wrote:


"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:nsbnr7ps5nmd11bl6kg71rboglbnhknpsj@4ax.com...
On Tue, 22 May 2012 15:59:31 +0100, "Ian Field"
gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com> wrote:

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:2belr79vtl32eunldpnfnf2idunekeoj7o@4ax.com...
On Mon, 21 May 2012 16:42:01 +0100, "Ian Field"
gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com> wrote:


"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:3imkr7pjl1cr5c5smohnjc6db9kk097ph9@4ax.com...


---
When I post something technical it's usually written to avoid
ambiguities, to present the subject matter in enough detail to be
understood at the level of the querent and, if required, to provide
the mathematical underpinnings of the design.

In addition, I often provide schematics and simulations and, on
occasion, actually build a prototype to prove, without a doubt, that
the design is sound.

You, on the other hand, seem to content yourself by sitting on the
sidelines hurling insults

Only at tossers who deserve it.

---
And why are you a fit judge to determine who's a tosser and who isn't
and whether they "deserve" to be insulted?


Insulted?! - pointed out more like.

---
That hardly answers the question.

--
JF


It was neccessary to correct your error first.

---
Goodbye, mini-troll.

--
JF


Promises promises!

Isn't it rather childish for someone to announce that he's not listening to

someone? It's just so 2nd grade. OTOH, it would be nice if he, and a few
others, would killfile the whole group.

 

[krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz]

On Tue, 22 May 2012 14:49:48 -0700, John Larkin
<jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 11:30:05 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 08:30:21 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:


You have said that you're not an engineer, and that your electronics
is self-taught. Unless you forced yourself to learn the math, that
puts you at a disadvantage when discussing theory.

One good thing about EE school is that we were forced to learn the
theory and do the math. And we were taught to be careful and check our
work before turning it in. A lot of engineering is about avoiding
risk, and the more complex a system, the more careful you have to be
if it's ever going to work. One reason we can build a very complex
laser controller, and get it to work first-rev, is that we check the
hell out of our stuff before we etch boards. It's a lot of grunt work,
but it pays off.

---
You never miss a chance to spout platitudes and pat yourself on the
back, do you?

There's nothing glorious about grunt-level checking your work. I can
see why you don't do it.

Because he's incapable of checking anything more complicated than a 555?
....even a 240V plug?

 

[John Fields]

On Tue, 22 May 2012 21:15:07 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
<krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 17:10:04 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 15:11:24 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 06:07:37 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 22:52:02 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 19:41:12 -0700, John Larkin
jjSNIPlarkin@highTHISlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 20:30:54 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 09:38:51 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 07:21:35 -0700, John Larkin
jjSNIPlarkin@highTHISlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 06:23:48 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 May 2012 15:13:30 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 May 2012 16:49:50 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 May 2012 09:18:07 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

You said this:


A blade made of brass with a width of 1/4", a thickness of 1/16" and a
length of about an inch is hardly flimsy, and serves us well when we
opt to go to 240V and eke out four times the power available from the
mains without changing plugs.

which is just wrong.

---
Right you are!

Changing just one word, though, would make it right.

Care to guess which one?

Easy. Change "four" to "two."

---
Wrong, but understandable since what I meant was "adding one word."

Mea culpa.

Wanna try again?

No. What you said was wrong and stupid, applying "Ohm's Law" without
thinking, as amateurs often do.

Weasel it out yourself.

---
Oh, my, Johnny's working himself up to a lather because he's missed
the point.

The word is 120V and it should be added before "mains".

Also, hardly wrong or stupid considering that, in the argument, if a
resistor is connected across 120V mains it'll dissipate a certain
power, while if connected across 240V mains the power dissipation will
quadruple.

Is that not correct, Mr Wizard?

The issue under discussion is how much power you can get from an
outlet, "eke out" in your words. You stated that a given plug, with a
rated current, can deliver 4x as much power at 240 than it can at 120.
You specifically said that's so without changing the plug. Wrong.

---
If a plug rated for 15A is plugged into 240V mains, then with a 16 ohm
resistor connected across the plug the resistor will dissipate 3600
watts.

Now unplug the plug from the 240V mains and plug it into 120V mains.
The dissipation will fall to 900 watts.

Isn't 3600 watts 4 times greater than 900 watts?

Which has *nothing* to do with the issue at hand, but you knew that. You're
just trying move the goal posts to hide your stupidity.

That's like trying to hide a mountain.

He just keeps showing us how stupid he's determined to be. You have to
kind of admire that sort of dedication.

AlwaysWrong comes to mind.

---
Another favorite target of the lynch mob.

With good reason.

---
Sounds like: "We'll give 'em a fair trial and hang 'em in the
morning."


Good Lord, you're as stupid as DimBulb! I didn't know it was possible.

---
Ad hominem.
---

Don't those white sheets and pointy hats get uncomfortable sometimes?

You must be Obama. Anything you don't like is "racist".

---
Non sequitur.
---

Keep going, you're proving the point.

---
So, it's filtering down through that thick skull of yours and into
your hateful brain and you're finally "getting" it?

Be still, my heart, there may yet be hope for the spiritually
disenfranchised.
---

You're in line for an honorable mention, though.

---
I'll be waiting for ya.

Is that a threat?

---
Not at all, but I understand why you thought it might be since your
rhetoric is often hostile and, more often, hostile without reason.

Can you explain why?

--
JF

 

[krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz]

On Tue, 22 May 2012 21:02:03 -0500, John Fields
<jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 21:15:07 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 17:10:04 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 15:11:24 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 06:07:37 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 22:52:02 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 19:41:12 -0700, John Larkin
jjSNIPlarkin@highTHISlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 20:30:54 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 09:38:51 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 07:21:35 -0700, John Larkin
jjSNIPlarkin@highTHISlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 06:23:48 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 May 2012 15:13:30 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 May 2012 16:49:50 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 May 2012 09:18:07 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

You said this:


A blade made of brass with a width of 1/4", a thickness of 1/16" and a
length of about an inch is hardly flimsy, and serves us well when we
opt to go to 240V and eke out four times the power available from the
mains without changing plugs.

which is just wrong.

---
Right you are!

Changing just one word, though, would make it right.

Care to guess which one?

Easy. Change "four" to "two."

---
Wrong, but understandable since what I meant was "adding one word."

Mea culpa.

Wanna try again?

No. What you said was wrong and stupid, applying "Ohm's Law" without
thinking, as amateurs often do.

Weasel it out yourself.

---
Oh, my, Johnny's working himself up to a lather because he's missed
the point.

The word is 120V and it should be added before "mains".

Also, hardly wrong or stupid considering that, in the argument, if a
resistor is connected across 120V mains it'll dissipate a certain
power, while if connected across 240V mains the power dissipation will
quadruple.

Is that not correct, Mr Wizard?

The issue under discussion is how much power you can get from an
outlet, "eke out" in your words. You stated that a given plug, with a
rated current, can deliver 4x as much power at 240 than it can at 120.
You specifically said that's so without changing the plug. Wrong.

---
If a plug rated for 15A is plugged into 240V mains, then with a 16 ohm
resistor connected across the plug the resistor will dissipate 3600
watts.

Now unplug the plug from the 240V mains and plug it into 120V mains.
The dissipation will fall to 900 watts.

Isn't 3600 watts 4 times greater than 900 watts?

Which has *nothing* to do with the issue at hand, but you knew that. You're
just trying move the goal posts to hide your stupidity.

That's like trying to hide a mountain.

He just keeps showing us how stupid he's determined to be. You have to
kind of admire that sort of dedication.

AlwaysWrong comes to mind.

---
Another favorite target of the lynch mob.

With good reason.

---
Sounds like: "We'll give 'em a fair trial and hang 'em in the
morning."


Good Lord, you're as stupid as DimBulb! I didn't know it was possible.

---
Ad hominem.

Fact. ...which you continually demonstrate.

---

Don't those white sheets and pointy hats get uncomfortable sometimes?

You must be Obama. Anything you don't like is "racist".

---
Non sequitur.

Fact. You used the race card where there was no racial content at all. That's
really despicable.

---

Keep going, you're proving the point.

---
So, it's filtering down through that thick skull of yours and into
your hateful brain and you're finally "getting" it?

That you're a moron? I got that long ago.

Be still, my heart, there may yet be hope for the spiritually
disenfranchised.

Perhaps there is hope for the intellectually disenfranchised, too. You could
use some hope. What you have isn't working.

---

You're in line for an honorable mention, though.

---
I'll be waiting for ya.

Is that a threat?

---
Not at all, but I understand why you thought it might be since your
rhetoric is often hostile and, more often, hostile without reason.

Hostile? You're a dope, that's a statement of fact. No hostility at all.

Can you explain why?

You act like a dope? Nope, I guess that's what you are.

 

[John Larkin]

On Tue, 22 May 2012 21:24:50 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
<krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 14:49:48 -0700, John Larkin
jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 11:30:05 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 08:30:21 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:


You have said that you're not an engineer, and that your electronics
is self-taught. Unless you forced yourself to learn the math, that
puts you at a disadvantage when discussing theory.

One good thing about EE school is that we were forced to learn the
theory and do the math. And we were taught to be careful and check our
work before turning it in. A lot of engineering is about avoiding
risk, and the more complex a system, the more careful you have to be
if it's ever going to work. One reason we can build a very complex
laser controller, and get it to work first-rev, is that we check the
hell out of our stuff before we etch boards. It's a lot of grunt work,
but it pays off.

---
You never miss a chance to spout platitudes and pat yourself on the
back, do you?

There's nothing glorious about grunt-level checking your work. I can
see why you don't do it.

Because he's incapable of checking anything more complicated than a 555?
...even a 240V plug?

I think he's used to doing simple stuff, like 555s and 4000-series
hairball async logic. If it's just a few chips, you can take some
risks and eventually get it to work most of the time. If you've got an
8-layer board with, say, 500 parts, and simulation isn't feasible, and
you allow a 1% risk of messing any one up, let's see, the chance of it
working is 0.99^500, which is under 1%. It might work on the third or
fourth board spin, maybe.

 

[Ian Field]

<krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote in message
news:rnior7td7ob0pbhpt4d77vubqr9eftj748@4ax.com...

On Tue, 22 May 2012 21:02:03 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 21:15:07 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 17:10:04 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 15:11:24 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 06:07:37 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 22:52:02 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 19:41:12 -0700, John Larkin
jjSNIPlarkin@highTHISlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 20:30:54 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 09:38:51 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 07:21:35 -0700, John Larkin
jjSNIPlarkin@highTHISlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 06:23:48 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 May 2012 15:13:30 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 May 2012 16:49:50 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 May 2012 09:18:07 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

You said this:


A blade made of brass with a width of 1/4", a
thickness of 1/16" and a
length of about an inch is hardly flimsy, and serves
us well when we
opt to go to 240V and eke out four times the power
available from the
mains without changing plugs.

which is just wrong.

---
Right you are!

Changing just one word, though, would make it right.

Care to guess which one?

Easy. Change "four" to "two."

---
Wrong, but understandable since what I meant was "adding one
word."

Mea culpa.

Wanna try again?

No. What you said was wrong and stupid, applying "Ohm's Law"
without
thinking, as amateurs often do.

Weasel it out yourself.

---
Oh, my, Johnny's working himself up to a lather because he's
missed
the point.

The word is 120V and it should be added before "mains".

Also, hardly wrong or stupid considering that, in the argument,
if a
resistor is connected across 120V mains it'll dissipate a
certain
power, while if connected across 240V mains the power
dissipation will
quadruple.

Is that not correct, Mr Wizard?

The issue under discussion is how much power you can get from an
outlet, "eke out" in your words. You stated that a given plug,
with a
rated current, can deliver 4x as much power at 240 than it can at
120.
You specifically said that's so without changing the plug. Wrong.

---
If a plug rated for 15A is plugged into 240V mains, then with a 16
ohm
resistor connected across the plug the resistor will dissipate
3600
watts.

Now unplug the plug from the 240V mains and plug it into 120V
mains.
The dissipation will fall to 900 watts.

Isn't 3600 watts 4 times greater than 900 watts?

Which has *nothing* to do with the issue at hand, but you knew
that. You're
just trying move the goal posts to hide your stupidity.

That's like trying to hide a mountain.

He just keeps showing us how stupid he's determined to be. You have
to
kind of admire that sort of dedication.

AlwaysWrong comes to mind.

---
Another favorite target of the lynch mob.

With good reason.

---
Sounds like: "We'll give 'em a fair trial and hang 'em in the
morning."


Good Lord, you're as stupid as DimBulb! I didn't know it was possible.

---
Ad hominem.

Fact. ...which you continually demonstrate.

---

Don't those white sheets and pointy hats get uncomfortable sometimes?

You must be Obama. Anything you don't like is "racist".

---
Non sequitur.

Fact. You used the race card where there was no racial content at all.
That's
really despicable.

Is subhuman even a race?!

 

[krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz]

On Wed, 23 May 2012 15:24:24 +0100, "Ian Field"
<gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com> wrote:

krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote in message
news:rnior7td7ob0pbhpt4d77vubqr9eftj748@4ax.com...
On Tue, 22 May 2012 21:02:03 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 21:15:07 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 17:10:04 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 15:11:24 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 06:07:37 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 22:52:02 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 19:41:12 -0700, John Larkin
jjSNIPlarkin@highTHISlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 20:30:54 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 09:38:51 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 07:21:35 -0700, John Larkin
jjSNIPlarkin@highTHISlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 06:23:48 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 May 2012 15:13:30 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 May 2012 16:49:50 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 May 2012 09:18:07 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

You said this:


A blade made of brass with a width of 1/4", a
thickness of 1/16" and a
length of about an inch is hardly flimsy, and serves
us well when we
opt to go to 240V and eke out four times the power
available from the
mains without changing plugs.

which is just wrong.

---
Right you are!

Changing just one word, though, would make it right.

Care to guess which one?

Easy. Change "four" to "two."

---
Wrong, but understandable since what I meant was "adding one
word."

Mea culpa.

Wanna try again?

No. What you said was wrong and stupid, applying "Ohm's Law"
without
thinking, as amateurs often do.

Weasel it out yourself.

---
Oh, my, Johnny's working himself up to a lather because he's
missed
the point.

The word is 120V and it should be added before "mains".

Also, hardly wrong or stupid considering that, in the argument,
if a
resistor is connected across 120V mains it'll dissipate a
certain
power, while if connected across 240V mains the power
dissipation will
quadruple.

Is that not correct, Mr Wizard?

The issue under discussion is how much power you can get from an
outlet, "eke out" in your words. You stated that a given plug,
with a
rated current, can deliver 4x as much power at 240 than it can at
120.
You specifically said that's so without changing the plug. Wrong.

---
If a plug rated for 15A is plugged into 240V mains, then with a 16
ohm
resistor connected across the plug the resistor will dissipate
3600
watts.

Now unplug the plug from the 240V mains and plug it into 120V
mains.
The dissipation will fall to 900 watts.

Isn't 3600 watts 4 times greater than 900 watts?

Which has *nothing* to do with the issue at hand, but you knew
that. You're
just trying move the goal posts to hide your stupidity.

That's like trying to hide a mountain.

He just keeps showing us how stupid he's determined to be. You have
to
kind of admire that sort of dedication.

AlwaysWrong comes to mind.

---
Another favorite target of the lynch mob.

With good reason.

---
Sounds like: "We'll give 'em a fair trial and hang 'em in the
morning."


Good Lord, you're as stupid as DimBulb! I didn't know it was possible.

---
Ad hominem.

Fact. ...which you continually demonstrate.

---

Don't those white sheets and pointy hats get uncomfortable sometimes?

You must be Obama. Anything you don't like is "racist".

---
Non sequitur.

Fact. You used the race card where there was no racial content at all.
That's
really despicable.


Is subhuman even a race?!

No matter the race, Fields is despicable.