Soda Maker: How long does it take carbon dioxide to diffuse

On Fri, 15 Sep 2017 16:28:00 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote:

ggherold@gmail.com wrote on 9/15/2017 3:25 PM:
On Friday, September 15, 2017 at 2:41:36 PM UTC-4, rickman wrote:
etpm@whidbey.com wrote on 9/14/2017 11:48 AM:
The only problem with the saw was when the oiler stopped working. I
called the local Stihl dealer for advice and he said to pour out the
bar oil, replace with fuel mix, run the saw without the bar attached
until the fuel mix starts coming out, and the dump the fuel and
replace with bar oil. His advice was good.

How do you tell when the bar lube is blocked?
You blow through a tank of gas and the oil reservoir is still full.

There's a problem. I would never fill the oil reservoir because I would
never use it enough to empty it and it would leak everywhere the saw sat.

When you cleaned the oiler by filling with gas and dumping it, where did you
dump it? That was my other problem, emptying the tank when I was done with
it for the year or two...

The bar oil that was in the tank went back into the bar oil jug. The
fuel mix that I dumped was used as fire starter for the pile of small
branches and leaves that are too small to stack for firewood. Every
time I cut up trees there are lots of small branches to get rid of and
they get burned in our fire ring. As do the blackberry and salmon
berry canes. We live on 10 wooded acres and have only about 1 acre
cleared. But keeping that one acre free of berry canes means lots of
canes get burned every year. And I never run out of firewood because
it seems like there is always a hemlock or two that blows down or an
alder or three that needs to be cut down because the tree(s) has
become dangerous.
Eric

 

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Fri, 15 Sep 2017 08:44:03 -0700, etpm@whidbey.com wrote:

My saw must be the -BE model. It just has 180C printed on the starter
cover. I am pretty sure the Ez2Start assembly can be added to your
saw. It looks like you just swap the starter cover without the EZ
start with the EZ start caover assembly.

It won't work. Apparently it also requires a new flywheel and starter
assembly. There's no conversion kit available. Here's an article (2
pages) with the details on how it went on a Stihl MS250 saw.
<http://www.arboristsite.com/community/threads/converting-stihl-ms250-to-ez-start.231966/>
Account required to view the PDF's.

Starting the saw is kinda
strange. You just pull the starter handle slowly and when it has wound
up enough it turns the engine over. So it takes a little getting used
to. But I love it. Both of my wrists are bone on bone joints now so
stuff like starting high compression engines is hard on them. But I
also live on 10 wooded acres and need to saw stuff up, like when a
tree blows down and blocks the driveway.

Glad it works for you. I'm still in fairly good shape so hopefully
that won't be a requirement for me. However, I'm lazy and would
probably buy an electric start conversion if there were such a thing.
I've often thought a removable ratcheting hand crank start, like in my
former Land Rover Series IIa might be easier than a string pull.

I live in an overgrown redwood and douglas fir forest. However, my
days of dropping trees are in the distant past. These days it's
construction scrap, clearing smaller trees, brush clearing, and
trimming oversized firewood. I probably spend more time repairing
other people's saws than using my own.

Sigh. I big branch came down in the last storm. While cleaning off
the roof today, I noticed it had bashed in the 2x6 T&G roof and split
one board. Tomorrow will be dedicated to gluing the mess back
together. Yet another normal day in the deep dark forest.
<http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/pics/home/>

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

 

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Fri, 15 Sep 2017 14:41:31 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote:

>How do you tell when the bar lube is blocked?

Remove the bar and chain. Chain oil comes out of a hole that mates
with a corresponding hole in the bar that only goes half way through
the bar (i.e. the hole is only on one side of the bar). Run the saw
without the bar, chain, or cover, for about 60 seconds. You should
see oil slowly dripping or exiting as a small mist out of the hole in
the body. If nothing comes out, it's clogged further upstream or the
pump is trashed. Lots of YouTube videos on testing and fixing
chainsaw oilers:
<https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=chainsaw+oiler>

More common is that the oil hole in the bar is clogged with a mixture
of oil, dirt, and sawdust. This would probably be a good time to
clean out the bar groove, dress the bar, remove the sharp edges,
flatten any dings, lube the sprocket, etc.
<https://www.google.com/search?q=chainsaw+bar+maintenance>
No need for the specialized tools. Just a scraper that fits in the
groove, hand file, and trisquare. If the lack of oil has caused the
bottom of the side plates on the chain to wear and the edges of the
bar to mushroom into sharp edges, you may need to have the bar squared
and the groove deepened.

Also, it helps to flip over the bar to extend the wear life. Most
people don't like the way the saw looks with the manufacturers name
inverted on the bar, but that's a small price to pay for extending the
life of the bar.



--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

 

Jeff Liebermann wrote:

On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 03:08:01 -0700 (PDT), bruce2...@gmail.com
wrote:

Either way, its nothing that a chemistry book can't fix. (They don't actually bite)

Book? This is the 21st century. Today, we do web pages, blogs,
forums, wikis, YouTube tutorials, online courses, and online reading.
Books are an anachronism.

What do you think still keeps Barnes and Noble and all of the classrooms still churning? Ask about them when you go by the applied sciences dept. at the local college.

(you are familiar with continuing ed., right?)

 

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Sun, 17 Sep 2017 01:01:54 -0700 (PDT), bruce2bowser@gmail.com
wrote:

Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 03:08:01 -0700 (PDT), bruce2...@gmail.com
wrote:

Either way, its nothing that a chemistry book can't fix. (They don't actually bite)

Book? This is the 21st century. Today, we do web pages, blogs,
forums, wikis, YouTube tutorials, online courses, and online reading.
Books are an anachronism.

What do you think still keeps Barnes and Noble and all of the
classrooms still churning? Ask about them when you go by the
applied sciences dept. at the local college.

Barnes and Noble stock has dropped -34% in the last year. 11 years
ago, the stock peaked at $30.31 but is currently at $7.15. They might
be churning for a few years more, but if the present trend continues,
they would not be a great investment opportunity.

Why they're still in business and why colleges prefer paper books to
electronic media is a messy question. I have a Kindle paper white
reader, a Google Nexus 7 tablet, and several Chromebooks, all of which
have the Kindle reader software installed, along with various other
eBook readers and converters. I'm a prolific reader of technical
publications and reports. The electronic readers have several
advantages over paper books. They take up less space, the documents
can be searched, and they don't get moldy when my roof leaks directly
over my bookshelf:
<http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/pics/home/slides/bookshelf.html>
Yet, I prefer to read on paper instead of LCD and have to force myself
to read the eBook equivalent. The is reason is the same as why Barnes
and Noble is still in business... tradition, inertia, habit, and
resistance to change. The present trend towards digitized books will
continue until all the dinosaurs, like me, are gone.

Of course, the skools are even more conservative, even bordering on
reactionary. Electronic textbooks really cut into the textbook
vendors profits. The skools are always looking for ways to save
money, but textbook sales are a sacred cow, where the complex
financial arrangements between the skools and the vendors has
stabilized into a mutual beneficial arrangement. Never mind what's
good for the students. That arrangement has created abominations such
as Elsevier, Springer, etc,
<http://www.vocativ.com/culture/science/five-corporations-control-academic-publishing/>
which will gladly sell research papers, that were originally paid for
by public funds, for exorbitant prices (Paywall). Much of that goes
back to the copyright holding skools. When that cozy arrangement
finally breaks down, as I'm sure it will, I suspect electronic books
and papers will magically become far more popular. Meanwhile, there's
Sci-Hub:
<https://scihub.org>
<https://www.sciencealert.com/this-woman-has-illegally-uploaded-millions-of-journal-articles-in-an-attempt-to-open-up-science>

>(you are familiar with continuing ed., right?)

Never heard of it. I'm too busy reading, writing, designing, and
repairing to bother with any formal education program.


--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

 

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Sun, 17 Sep 2017 09:53:14 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
wrote:

Meanwhile, there's Sci-Hub:
https://scihub.org

Ooops. Wrong URL for Sci-Hub. This should be the right one.
<https://sci-hub.io>
--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

 

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Sat, 16 Sep 2017 20:23:21 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
wrote:
(...)

Forgive me, for I have splurged. My shiny new Stihl MS180 is a nice
saw but has a weakness. The chain 0.043 gauge instead of the more
common 0.050. The stock narrow chain cuts nicely and fast, but needs
to be sharpened too often. In cutting up some scrap lumber today, I
had to sharpen it after only about 30 min run time. My other saws can
go for hours between sharpenings.

I found this YouTube video on how to fix the problem:
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DrFM-8C-qV0>
A little digging found a replacement bar and chain on eBay:
<http://www.ebay.com/itm/192054090789>
For $19 and a 4-6 week wait, it seems like a tolerable risk.

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

 

On Sun, 17 Sep 2017 19:55:50 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
wrote:

On Sat, 16 Sep 2017 20:23:21 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com
wrote:
(...)

Forgive me, for I have splurged. My shiny new Stihl MS180 is a nice
saw but has a weakness. The chain 0.043 gauge instead of the more
common 0.050. The stock narrow chain cuts nicely and fast, but needs
to be sharpened too often. In cutting up some scrap lumber today, I
had to sharpen it after only about 30 min run time. My other saws can
go for hours between sharpenings.

I found this YouTube video on how to fix the problem:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DrFM-8C-qV0
A little digging found a replacement bar and chain on eBay:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/192054090789
For $19 and a 4-6 week wait, it seems like a tolerable risk.

The guy at the Stihl store told me I can put a different and longer
bar on mine. So I'm gonna do what you did. The skinny chain also does
not cut as fast as the .05 chain because of the safety anti-kickback
feature in the skinny chain. I bought the fastest cutting .043 chain I
could find but it still doesn't cut as fast as the non-kickback chain
does.
BTW, I have been using chain saws for about 40 years and have always
tried to be safe. I always tried hard to avoid kickback after I saw
the scars on a fellow worker's arm from a saw kicking back. I never,
until this last summer, had a saw kick back hard enough that it got
even close to a body part. But it finally happened and the chain brake
worked just like it was supposed to. Even if the chain had hit me it
would have been stopped. Those brakes are a great idea. I never set
the saw down without first engaging the brake.
Eric

 

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Mon, 18 Sep 2017 09:57:41 -0700, etpm@whidbey.com wrote:

On Sun, 17 Sep 2017 19:55:50 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com
wrote:

On Sat, 16 Sep 2017 20:23:21 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com
wrote:
(...)

Forgive me, for I have splurged. My shiny new Stihl MS180 is a nice
saw but has a weakness. The chain 0.043 gauge instead of the more
common 0.050. The stock narrow chain cuts nicely and fast, but needs
to be sharpened too often. In cutting up some scrap lumber today, I
had to sharpen it after only about 30 min run time. My other saws can
go for hours between sharpenings.

I found this YouTube video on how to fix the problem:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DrFM-8C-qV0
A little digging found a replacement bar and chain on eBay:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/192054090789
For $19 and a 4-6 week wait, it seems like a tolerable risk.

The guy at the Stihl store told me I can put a different and longer
bar on mine. So I'm gonna do what you did.

The stock bar is 16" while the most common replacements mentioned are
14". There seems to be some variation in the way the bars are
measured. If you look at the video above, the 14" bar appears to be
only about 1" shorter, not 2". I ordered a 14" bar because I couldn't
find a cheap 16" bar and chain and I have a big saw with a 24" bar.
Trying to drive a long bar with only a 32cc engine is not going to
work well.

The skinny chain also does
not cut as fast as the .05 chain because of the safety anti-kickback
feature in the skinny chain. I bought the fastest cutting .043 chain I
could find but it still doesn't cut as fast as the non-kickback chain
does.

Thanks. I've never tried a low-kickback chain. I have a bar nose
kickback protection plate on some of my bars. They work, but prevents
me from cutting oversized logs. Otherwise, I'm just careful not to
dig the nose into the ground or notch in the cut.

BTW, I have been using chain saws for about 40 years and have always
tried to be safe.

My involvement with chainsaws started when I bought this house in
1973. That would be 44 years. However, I'm getting too old for doing
my own firewood and have been buying my firewood for exorbitant
prices.

I always tried hard to avoid kickback after I saw
the scars on a fellow worker's arm from a saw kicking back. I never,
until this last summer, had a saw kick back hard enough that it got
even close to a body part. But it finally happened and the chain brake
worked just like it was supposed to. Even if the chain had hit me it
would have been stopped. Those brakes are a great idea. I never set
the saw down without first engaging the brake.

I've been lucky so far but have had a few close calls. The chain
brake saved me once, but that was enough. Oddly, I have had more near
accidents when starting a chainsaw than running one. I tend to get
sloppy when tired and it shows when starting. These days, I always
start a saw on the ground, not tree climber style in the air. I
should lock the brake more often, but often forget.

Good luck and I'll let you know how the bar and chain transplant work.

>Eric

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

ggherold@gmail.com wrote:

Hmm and yet I feel we are fighting in a 'security screw'
arms race. I've got my ~100 piece set from harbor freight,
https://www.harborfreight.com/100-pc-security-bit-set-with-case-68457.html
When I went to take apart my latest coffee maker, I found that the
driver tripoint screw was down a long narrow tunnel, such that the
screw bit holder was to wide to fit. Curses!
Fortunately I fixed the no hot water problem, by running vinegar
through the machine several times. But still it does not bode well
for future failures.

I braze the security tips onto a piece of 1/4" drill rod, or an old
screwdriver. With the 1/4" rod, you can make them as log as you want them.


--
Never piss off an Engineer!

They don't get mad.

They don't get even.

They go for over unity! ;-)

 

[rickman]

Jeff Liebermann wrote on 9/17/2017 12:53 PM:

On Sun, 17 Sep 2017 01:01:54 -0700 (PDT), bruce2bowser@gmail.com
wrote:

Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 03:08:01 -0700 (PDT), bruce2...@gmail.com
wrote:

Either way, its nothing that a chemistry book can't fix. (They don't actually bite)

Book? This is the 21st century. Today, we do web pages, blogs,
forums, wikis, YouTube tutorials, online courses, and online reading.
Books are an anachronism.

What do you think still keeps Barnes and Noble and all of the
classrooms still churning? Ask about them when you go by the
applied sciences dept. at the local college.

Barnes and Noble stock has dropped -34% in the last year. 11 years
ago, the stock peaked at $30.31 but is currently at $7.15. They might
be churning for a few years more, but if the present trend continues,
they would not be a great investment opportunity.

Why they're still in business and why colleges prefer paper books to
electronic media is a messy question. I have a Kindle paper white
reader, a Google Nexus 7 tablet, and several Chromebooks, all of which
have the Kindle reader software installed, along with various other
eBook readers and converters. I'm a prolific reader of technical
publications and reports. The electronic readers have several
advantages over paper books. They take up less space, the documents
can be searched, and they don't get moldy when my roof leaks directly
over my bookshelf:
http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/pics/home/slides/bookshelf.html
Yet, I prefer to read on paper instead of LCD and have to force myself
to read the eBook equivalent. The is reason is the same as why Barnes
and Noble is still in business... tradition, inertia, habit, and
resistance to change. The present trend towards digitized books will
continue until all the dinosaurs, like me, are gone.

LCD sucks because it gives eyestrain over longer reading sessions. ePaper
is better with much higher contrast, not unlike paper, hence the name.

That said, I don't read much longer than a magazine article these days. So
LCD is mostly fine for me. I would like to have an ePaper screen, but I'm
not willing to give up ownership of my reading material, so no Kindle for me.

Of course, the skools are even more conservative, even bordering on
reactionary. Electronic textbooks really cut into the textbook
vendors profits.

Nonsense. Electronic media *increases* profits due to lower production costs.

One thing that caught my attention when reading about the differences is the
idea of connecting emotionally with a book. I realized that I have done
this. The act of picking up a book to read creates a strong association
between a book and its contents. This doesn't happen with ebooks because
the reader is connected to so many other books and if the reader is a
laptop, so many other tasks.

--

Rick C

Viewed the eclipse at Wintercrest Farms,
on the centerline of totality since 1998

 

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Thu, 21 Sep 2017 11:38:20 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote:

Jeff Liebermann wrote on 9/17/2017 12:53 PM:

LCD sucks because it gives eyestrain over longer reading sessions. ePaper
is better with much higher contrast, not unlike paper, hence the name.

Agreed and good timing. I just bought an ancient (2009) Kindle DX
reader (with a very dead battery) for $40:
<https://www.google.com/search?tbm=isch&q=kindle+dxg>
It has a 150 dpi (1200x824) 9.7" diag Perl e-paper screen which looks
great for MOBI or AZW formatted documents. However, for viewing PDF
formatted documents, it's barely readable. I'm investigating the
cause and cure as time permits.

ePaper is certainly easier on the eyes (and battery) but the Perl
e-paper display is only good for 10:1 contrast ratio. The more recent
Carta displays have twice the resolution (300 dpi) and somewhat better
15:1 contrast.
<http://blog.the-ebook-reader.com/2013/11/11/screen-comparison-e-ink-carta-vs-e-ink-pearl/>
Meanwhile, a TN LCD display is good for 1000:1 contrast ratio, and the
latest IPS display can do 1,000,000:1.
<https://www.anandtech.com/show/10874/panasonic-develops-ips-panel-with-10000001-contrast-ratio-1000-nits-brightness>
So, it's not the contrast ratio that makes e-paper easier on the eyes.
It's the dot resolution that makes e-paper easier on the eyes.
I'm currently writing this on a 24" diagonal 1920x1200 LCD display.
<http://lcdtech.info/en/data/pixel.size.htm>
That's only 94.3 pixels/inch while my Kindle DX is 150 dpi and the
latest e-paper is 300 dpi.

I've somewhat confirmed this by spending a few days behind one of the
newer high resolution displays. At 21" and 3840x2160 dots, that works
out to 210 pixels/inch. It was very easy on my eyes and there was no
sign of eyestrain (except when I stupidly sat at the machine for a 3hr
session and forgot to occasionally focus on some distant object).

Also, I use an Acer Chromebook 14 (CB3-431-C5EX) for reading. It's
advertised as a 1920x1080 IPS display, but will do a much higher
resolution:
dots pixels/inch
1536x864 126
1920x1080 157
2400x1350 197
These are far better than the 94.3 pixels/inch of my 24" desktop
monitor. Despite the tiny size of the characters in the highest
resolution, everything is perfectly readable with minimal eye strain.
It's the pixels/inch, not the contrast ratio that makes things more
readable.

However, there's a fly in the ointment. The industry's addiction to
semi-transparent desktops results in low contrast text, especially
when displayed in faded pastel colors. Despite the improved pixel
density, such text is a PITA to read. I find myself using the high
contrast color schemes and using "reader view" in the browsers, just
to defeat this latest assault on my eyes by the screen artists. Blah.

That said, I don't read much longer than a magazine article these days. So
LCD is mostly fine for me. I would like to have an ePaper screen, but I'm
not willing to give up ownership of my reading material, so no Kindle for me.

I just plug my various Kindle's into a USB port. The Kindle shows up
as a drive letter. I copy the file from my desktop to the Kindle
documents directory. I turn off auto-sync. The files magically
appear on the reading list without ever seeing the Amazon servers. I
can also send a file directly to a Kindle via email, but that could be
read by Amazon, which seems to intercept the file, and instead send me
an email informing me that the file is ready to download. It wasn't
always that way and I'm suspicious.

Of course, the skools are even more conservative, even bordering on
reactionary. Electronic textbooks really cut into the textbook
vendors profits.

Nonsense. Electronic media *increases* profits due to lower production costs.

Rubbish. The problem is piracy by students. No sooner does a book
become available, that it's scanned, converted to various formats, and
distributed:
"How to Digitize Your Textbooks"
<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hack-college/how-to-digitize-your-text_b_730879.html>
Here's a video of a Canon Imagerunner 5000 scanning one of my manuals
on both sides of the page in one pass.
<http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/crud/CanonImageRunner5000.wmv> (4.1MB)

One thing that caught my attention when reading about the differences is the
idea of connecting emotionally with a book. I realized that I have done
this. The act of picking up a book to read creates a strong association
between a book and its contents. This doesn't happen with ebooks because
the reader is connected to so many other books and if the reader is a
laptop, so many other tasks.

That also happened to me for many years. I had a small collection of
my favorite references that I would go to for everything. However, as
I moved away from books and into electronic media, the attachment went
away because electronic media was electronically searchable, while
paper media was a painful slog through the index and table of
contents. I didn't realize how far away I had gotten from paper books
until I had to look something up in one, and realized what a painful
exercise searching for content in a paper book really was.

There's also a question of size. I have a few file cabinets and
bookshelves full of books and magazine clippings. I also have a few
flash drives and a USB hard disk full of scanned (and searchable)
eBooks, captured web pages, and images. Basically, much of my working
library in my pocket. As more of what I have on my bookshelf becomes
available in electronic format, more of my paper books will become
donated or recycled.


--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

 

[rickman]

Jeff Liebermann wrote on 9/21/2017 10:53 PM:

On Thu, 21 Sep 2017 11:38:20 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote:
Jeff Liebermann wrote on 9/17/2017 12:53 PM:

LCD sucks because it gives eyestrain over longer reading sessions. ePaper
is better with much higher contrast, not unlike paper, hence the name.

Agreed and good timing. I just bought an ancient (2009) Kindle DX
reader (with a very dead battery) for $40:
https://www.google.com/search?tbm=isch&q=kindle+dxg
It has a 150 dpi (1200x824) 9.7" diag Perl e-paper screen which looks
great for MOBI or AZW formatted documents. However, for viewing PDF
formatted documents, it's barely readable. I'm investigating the
cause and cure as time permits.

ePaper is certainly easier on the eyes (and battery) but the Perl
e-paper display is only good for 10:1 contrast ratio. The more recent
Carta displays have twice the resolution (300 dpi) and somewhat better
15:1 contrast.
http://blog.the-ebook-reader.com/2013/11/11/screen-comparison-e-ink-carta-vs-e-ink-pearl/
Meanwhile, a TN LCD display is good for 1000:1 contrast ratio, and the
latest IPS display can do 1,000,000:1.
https://www.anandtech.com/show/10874/panasonic-develops-ips-panel-with-10000001-contrast-ratio-1000-nits-brightness
So, it's not the contrast ratio that makes e-paper easier on the eyes.
It's the dot resolution that makes e-paper easier on the eyes.
I'm currently writing this on a 24" diagonal 1920x1200 LCD display.
http://lcdtech.info/en/data/pixel.size.htm
That's only 94.3 pixels/inch while my Kindle DX is 150 dpi and the
latest e-paper is 300 dpi.

I've somewhat confirmed this by spending a few days behind one of the
newer high resolution displays. At 21" and 3840x2160 dots, that works
out to 210 pixels/inch. It was very easy on my eyes and there was no
sign of eyestrain (except when I stupidly sat at the machine for a 3hr
session and forgot to occasionally focus on some distant object).

Also, I use an Acer Chromebook 14 (CB3-431-C5EX) for reading. It's
advertised as a 1920x1080 IPS display, but will do a much higher
resolution:
dots pixels/inch
1536x864 126
1920x1080 157
2400x1350 197
These are far better than the 94.3 pixels/inch of my 24" desktop
monitor. Despite the tiny size of the characters in the highest
resolution, everything is perfectly readable with minimal eye strain.
It's the pixels/inch, not the contrast ratio that makes things more
readable.

However, there's a fly in the ointment. The industry's addiction to
semi-transparent desktops results in low contrast text, especially
when displayed in faded pastel colors. Despite the improved pixel
density, such text is a PITA to read. I find myself using the high
contrast color schemes and using "reader view" in the browsers, just
to defeat this latest assault on my eyes by the screen artists. Blah.

That said, I don't read much longer than a magazine article these days. So
LCD is mostly fine for me. I would like to have an ePaper screen, but I'm
not willing to give up ownership of my reading material, so no Kindle for me.

I just plug my various Kindle's into a USB port. The Kindle shows up
as a drive letter. I copy the file from my desktop to the Kindle
documents directory. I turn off auto-sync. The files magically
appear on the reading list without ever seeing the Amazon servers. I
can also send a file directly to a Kindle via email, but that could be
read by Amazon, which seems to intercept the file, and instead send me
an email informing me that the file is ready to download. It wasn't
always that way and I'm suspicious.

Of course, the skools are even more conservative, even bordering on
reactionary. Electronic textbooks really cut into the textbook
vendors profits.

Nonsense. Electronic media *increases* profits due to lower production costs.

Rubbish. The problem is piracy by students. No sooner does a book
become available, that it's scanned, converted to various formats, and
distributed:
"How to Digitize Your Textbooks"
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hack-college/how-to-digitize-your-text_b_730879.html
Here's a video of a Canon Imagerunner 5000 scanning one of my manuals
on both sides of the page in one pass.
http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/crud/CanonImageRunner5000.wmv> (4.1MB)

One thing that caught my attention when reading about the differences is the
idea of connecting emotionally with a book. I realized that I have done
this. The act of picking up a book to read creates a strong association
between a book and its contents. This doesn't happen with ebooks because
the reader is connected to so many other books and if the reader is a
laptop, so many other tasks.

That also happened to me for many years. I had a small collection of
my favorite references that I would go to for everything. However, as
I moved away from books and into electronic media, the attachment went
away because electronic media was electronically searchable, while
paper media was a painful slog through the index and table of
contents. I didn't realize how far away I had gotten from paper books
until I had to look something up in one, and realized what a painful
exercise searching for content in a paper book really was.

There's also a question of size. I have a few file cabinets and
bookshelves full of books and magazine clippings. I also have a few
flash drives and a USB hard disk full of scanned (and searchable)
eBooks, captured web pages, and images. Basically, much of my working
library in my pocket. As more of what I have on my bookshelf becomes
available in electronic format, more of my paper books will become
donated or recycled.

Too much here to respond to, but also consider that ePaper displays don't
flicker. Even if you don't notice the flicker, moving your eyes creates
distortion while the ePaper display is fixed.

--

Rick C

Viewed the eclipse at Wintercrest Farms,
on the centerline of totality since 1998

 

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Fri, 22 Sep 2017 04:26:52 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote:

>Too much here to respond to,

Sorry. I was in a hurry and didn't have time to be brief.
Actually, I got interested in the topic and decided that it was worth
expounding in detail. Enjoy.

but also consider that ePaper displays don't
flicker. Even if you don't notice the flicker, moving your eyes creates
distortion while the ePaper display is fixed.

Flicker doesn't bother me much, so I don't notice it. The usual
method of reducing LCD flicker is to use any vertical refresh rate
that's not 60 Hz. However, on my desktop (Samsung SyncMaster 243T
1920x1200), I'm running 60 Hz because higher refresh rates (72 and
75Hz) result in a blurred image. I can't really see it with graphics,
but with high contrast text, it's really obvious. I've also noticed
this on some other monitors but not on all monitors.

I don't know about eye movement causing distortion. The problem is
that on an LCD, each pixel is a combination of different color dots.
<https://www.google.com/search?q=lcd+magnified&tbm=isch>
To produce a white pixel, all the color dots need to be turned on
resulting in a large and potentially blurry pixel. That's not a
problem with e-paper, which only has to deal with turning one B&W dot
on and off.
<http://www.bit-101.com/blog/?p=2722>
Try a magnifier on your devices and see for yourself.
More on this (time permitting) if you're interested.

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

 

[rickman]

Jeff Liebermann wrote on 9/22/2017 12:54 PM:

On Fri, 22 Sep 2017 04:26:52 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote:

Too much here to respond to,

Sorry. I was in a hurry and didn't have time to be brief.
Actually, I got interested in the topic and decided that it was worth
expounding in detail. Enjoy.

but also consider that ePaper displays don't
flicker. Even if you don't notice the flicker, moving your eyes creates
distortion while the ePaper display is fixed.

Flicker doesn't bother me much, so I don't notice it. The usual
method of reducing LCD flicker is to use any vertical refresh rate
that's not 60 Hz. However, on my desktop (Samsung SyncMaster 243T
1920x1200), I'm running 60 Hz because higher refresh rates (72 and
75Hz) result in a blurred image. I can't really see it with graphics,
but with high contrast text, it's really obvious. I've also noticed
this on some other monitors but not on all monitors.

I don't know about eye movement causing distortion. The problem is
that on an LCD, each pixel is a combination of different color dots.
https://www.google.com/search?q=lcd+magnified&tbm=isch
To produce a white pixel, all the color dots need to be turned on
resulting in a large and potentially blurry pixel. That's not a
problem with e-paper, which only has to deal with turning one B&W dot
on and off.
http://www.bit-101.com/blog/?p=2722
Try a magnifier on your devices and see for yourself.
More on this (time permitting) if you're interested.

Not sure what you mean when you say flicker doesn't bother you. You don't
have to see the flicker for it to cause a problem. The point is your eyes
don't adjust to a flickering screen as well as one that isn't flickering.
Your eyes constantly readjusting is what makes them tired.

--

Rick C

Viewed the eclipse at Wintercrest Farms,
on the centerline of totality since 1998