Toshiba TV29C90 problem; Image fades to black...

[Pig Bladder]

On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 11:00:00 -0800, Floyd L. Davidson wrote:

John Fields <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:
[some stuff]
You've proven that you aren't the first twit that I've poked
enough to cause erruption of tantrums. You can't say I didn't
warn you not to try a flame war...

Problem is, you're losing miserably... ;-P
--
The Pig Bladder from Uranus

 

[NSM]

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:8q01b1p1rgln3d1ghrqc3tla2quqfpl08u@4ax.com...

I guess you missed the part about that I was disagreeing with Pig
Bladder about his contention that it wasn't just contradiction.

next...

http://neptune.spaceports.com/~words/beavis.html

N

 

[Floyd L. Davidson]

John Larkin <jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 09:30:33 -0800, floyd@barrow.com (Floyd L.
Davidson) wrote:
John Larkin wrote:
On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 00:41:47 -0700, Don Bowey <dbowey@comcast.net
wrote:

He [Don Lancaster] has tutorials? You've got to be kidding.

John


The quoted posts were not as you have posted them. They did not include the
"[Don Lancaster)."

Shame on you, Bud.

The standard English syntax for inserting edited text into a
quote, usually to show meaning that deleted context made clear,
is to enclose it between said square brackets.

Nothing was deleted!

So? Did anyone claim there was?

Which is to say that, while not commonly used on Usenet, Bud's
quote is proper style. If you read newspapers or news magazines
you will see it used often.

The style may be proper by your standards - certainly not mine - but

Bud's useage meets widely accepted and well known English.
What *you* think about it is immaterial.

is dead wrong. Nowhere did I refer to Don. We were
talking about The Phantom.

Provide some context that demonstrates it then, because it doesn't
appear to be what you are now claiming.

--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://web.newsguy.com/floyd_davidson>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd@barrow.com

 

[DaveM]

That's a convergence problem. My big screen Hitachi has the convergence
adjustment in the video setup section of the menu. Look around in the video
setup and see if there's aconvergence menu item, select it, and you should
be able to adjust it with the buttons on your remote. Mine has a crosshair
on the screen for this adjustment. You just make the line a solid white
line with no color shadows.

--
Dave M
MasonDG44 at comcast dot net (Just subsitute the appropriate characters in
the address)

Never take a laxative and a sleeping pill at the same time!!
"Raventy" <ano316gamer@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:1118848508.987098.132400@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

Hey guys, I have a 50" projection screen arcade machine but one of the
things I noticed with the screen is that these red and blue outlines
appear around things(see image) anyone know whats up with that and how
to fix it? PICTURE OF SCREEN: http://home.comcast.net/~ano316gamer/gl.JPG Thanks!

 

[John Larkin]

On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 13:01:02 -0800, floyd@barrow.com (Floyd L.
Davidson) wrote:

John Larkin <jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 09:30:33 -0800, floyd@barrow.com (Floyd L.
Davidson) wrote:
John Larkin wrote:
On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 00:41:47 -0700, Don Bowey <dbowey@comcast.net
wrote:

He [Don Lancaster] has tutorials? You've got to be kidding.

John


The quoted posts were not as you have posted them. They did not include the
"[Don Lancaster)."

Shame on you, Bud.

The standard English syntax for inserting edited text into a
quote, usually to show meaning that deleted context made clear,
is to enclose it between said square brackets.

Nothing was deleted!

So? Did anyone claim there was?

Which is to say that, while not commonly used on Usenet, Bud's
quote is proper style. If you read newspapers or news magazines
you will see it used often.

The style may be proper by your standards - certainly not mine - but

Bud's useage meets widely accepted and well known English.
What *you* think about it is immaterial.

the [content] is dead wrong. Nowhere did I refer to Don. We were
talking about The Phantom.

Provide some context that demonstrates it then, because it doesn't
appear to be what you are now claiming.

The only person that matters here is Don, and that he knows I didn't
insult him.

Get a life.

John

 

[CRaSH]

NSM wrote:

never reads the newsgroup. Maybe we should copy all our messages to
every religion NG in case one of the readers needs to fix his TV or
coffee maker.

Screw'm - let'm have a prayer circle and see how far they get.........

 

[John Fields]

On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 11:21:21 -0800, floyd@barrow.com (Floyd L.
Davidson) wrote:

The idea that water boils at 100C and freezes at 0C, without
some mention of pressure, has little meaning. Water can "boil"
at 0C too.

---
Since, by your own admission, the boiling and freezing point
temperatures of water are pressure dependent, I invite you to state
what pressure would be required to be exerted on a volume of liquid
water in order to cause it to boil at 0°C.

--
John Fields
Professional Circuit Designer

 

[Sam Goldwasser]

"moonlite" <elect21st@aol.com> writes:

Hi- Model is AT2402. It is about 4 years old but extremely clean.
Customer said it went dead after a few months but he did not bother to
fix it. Horizontal output is shorted but main fuse is ok. It won't
come on. When I press the power button I could only hear a very faint
tic sound. I know I have to change the horiz. output eventually, but
here is the weird part: I can't find any standby voltages anywhere
when the set is plugged in. The power supply board is very clean and
so far I have not been able to find a single pad part on it, and all
connections are fine ! Has anyone worked on this set before ? Why is
the power supply so dead ? Thanks

Did he pay more than $99 for it?

--- sam | Sci.Electronics.Repair FAQ Mirror: http://repairfaq.ece.drexel.edu/
Repair | Main Table of Contents: http://repairfaq.ece.drexel.edu/REPAIR/
+Lasers | Sam's Laser FAQ: http://repairfaq.ece.drexel.edu/sam/lasersam.htm
| Mirror Sites: http://repairfaq.ece.drexel.edu/REPAIR/F_mirror.html

Note: These links are hopefully temporary until we can sort out the excessive
traffic on Repairfaq.org.

Important: Anything sent to the email address in the message header above is
ignored unless my full name is included in the subject line. Or, you can
contact me via the Feedback Form in the FAQs.

 

[Don Bowey]

On 6/15/05 10:30 AM, in article 87k6kvmssm.fld@barrow.com, "Floyd L.
Davidson" <floyd@barrow.com> wrote:

Don Bowey <dbowey@comcast.net> wrote:
On 6/15/05 7:23 AM, in article 3ccc5$42b037cc$4304c63c$490@DIALUPUSA.NET,
"Bud" <remove.BudNews@isp.com> wrote:

Don Lancaster has written many articles for electronics magazines. Also
regular columns for several electronics magazines (probably still
running). One of his books (CMOS cookbook) was a standard for many
years. You might be able to learn something from him too.

Bud--

John Larkin wrote:
On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 00:41:47 -0700, Don Bowey <dbowey@comcast.net
wrote:

He [Don Lancaster] has tutorials? You've got to be kidding.

John


The quoted posts were not as you have posted them. They did not include the
"[Don Lancaster)."

Shame on you, Bud.

The standard English syntax for inserting edited text into a
quote, usually to show meaning that deleted context made clear,
is to enclose it between said square brackets.

Which is to say that, while not commonly used on Usenet, Bud's
quote is proper style. If you read newspapers or news magazines
you will see it used often.

I apparently did not make myself clear. My comment was not about Don
Lancaster, nor did my post in any way allude to Don Lancaster, nor did the
post I WAS commenting on refer to Don Lancaster.

Bud's post did not make a damned thing clear by screwing up and adding
adding "[Don Lancaster]."

Did I make it abundantly clear?

On the other hand, it's nice to hear he did it using proper style.

Don

 

[John Fields]

On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 13:01:02 -0800, floyd@barrow.com (Floyd L.
Davidson) wrote:

John Larkin <jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 09:30:33 -0800, floyd@barrow.com (Floyd L.
Davidson) wrote:
John Larkin wrote:
On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 00:41:47 -0700, Don Bowey <dbowey@comcast.net
wrote:

He [Don Lancaster] has tutorials? You've got to be kidding.

John


The quoted posts were not as you have posted them. They did not include the
"[Don Lancaster)."

Shame on you, Bud.

The standard English syntax for inserting edited text into a
quote, usually to show meaning that deleted context made clear,
is to enclose it between said square brackets.

Nothing was deleted!

So? Did anyone claim there was?

Which is to say that, while not commonly used on Usenet, Bud's
quote is proper style. If you read newspapers or news magazines
you will see it used often.

The style may be proper by your standards - certainly not mine - but

Bud's useage meets widely accepted and well known English.
What *you* think about it is immaterial.

the [content] is dead wrong. Nowhere did I refer to Don. We were
talking about The Phantom.

Provide some context that demonstrates it then, because it doesn't
appear to be what you are now claiming.

---
So, you miserable, troublemaking piece of shit, you've decided to take
on John Larkin?

Big mistake.

There's no way you can even begin to think about getting close to his
track record, let alone even get into the stadium, so why don't you
just quit before you embarrass yourself by not even being able to
leave the starting blocks?

--
John Fields
Professional Circuit Designer

 

[Tom MacIntyre]

On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 18:01:25 -0500, John Fields
<jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 11:21:21 -0800, floyd@barrow.com (Floyd L.
Davidson) wrote:


The idea that water boils at 100C and freezes at 0C, without
some mention of pressure, has little meaning. Water can "boil"
at 0C too.

---
Since, by your own admission, the boiling and freezing point
temperatures of water are pressure dependent, I invite you to state
what pressure would be required to be exerted on a volume of liquid
water in order to cause it to boil at 0°C.

The boiling and freezing points are pressure dependent. Not only that,
a certain amount of heat must be lost or gained (latent heat, I
believe, is the term) before the change of state occurs. I am simply
going by memory of my old Physics classes, and I have no idea what
pressure would be required to allow water to boil at 0 C. I think
other substances have boiled at lower temperatures than that at STP
though.

Tom

 

[Larry Brasfield]

"Tom MacIntyre" <tom__macintyre@hotmail.com> wrote in
message news:6je1b1tk8ap2tg8e6dcilav9q6m4aq8ggt@4ax.com...

On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 18:01:25 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 11:21:21 -0800, floyd@barrow.com (Floyd L.
Davidson) wrote:

The idea that water boils at 100C and freezes at 0C, without
some mention of pressure, has little meaning. Water can "boil"
at 0C too.

Since, by your own admission, the boiling and freezing point
temperatures of water are pressure dependent, I invite you to state
what pressure would be required to be exerted on a volume of liquid
water in order to cause it to boil at 0°C.

The boiling and freezing points are pressure dependent. Not only that,
a certain amount of heat must be lost or gained (latent heat, I
believe, is the term) before the change of state occurs.

Strictly speaking, the change of state occurs as the
latent heat is transferred, not after.

I am simply
going by memory of my old Physics classes, and I have no idea what
pressure would be required to allow water to boil at 0 C. I think
other substances have boiled at lower temperatures than that at STP
though.

If you peruse the phase space of water at
http://www.lsbu.ac.uk/water/phase.html
you will see that there is no liquid/vapor boundary
at 0 oC. At a range of pressure well below standard
atmospheric, it could happen near 0.01 oC.

John's challenge is a bit of a trick and appears
to show he knows how to read that graph and
accompanying table.

--
--Larry Brasfield
email: donotspam_larry_brasfield@hotmail.com
Above views may belong only to me.

 

[Spehro Pefhany]

On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 18:01:25 -0500, the renowned John Fields
<jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 11:21:21 -0800, floyd@barrow.com (Floyd L.
Davidson) wrote:


The idea that water boils at 100C and freezes at 0C, without
some mention of pressure, has little meaning. Water can "boil"
at 0C too.

---
Since, by your own admission, the boiling and freezing point
temperatures of water are pressure dependent, I invite you to state
what pressure would be required to be exerted on a volume of liquid
water in order to cause it to boil at 0°C.

Good one, John!


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com

 

[John Fields]

On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 23:37:49 GMT, Tom MacIntyre
<tom__macintyre@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 18:01:25 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 11:21:21 -0800, floyd@barrow.com (Floyd L.
Davidson) wrote:


The idea that water boils at 100C and freezes at 0C, without
some mention of pressure, has little meaning. Water can "boil"
at 0C too.

---
Since, by your own admission, the boiling and freezing point
temperatures of water are pressure dependent, I invite you to state
what pressure would be required to be exerted on a volume of liquid
water in order to cause it to boil at 0°C.

The boiling and freezing points are pressure dependent. Not only that,
a certain amount of heat must be lost or gained (latent heat, I
believe, is the term) before the change of state occurs.

---
At one atmosphere of pressure, the "latent heat of vaporization" of
water is 540 calories per gram and is the amount of heat required to
change liquid water at 100°C into steam at 100°C. That's used to
great advantage, in reverse, in steam heating systems where steam
which has been generated in a boiler is forced to condense into liquid
water in a remotely located radiator and release that heat into the
environment surrounding the radiator when it (the steam) changes
state.
---

I am simply
going by memory of my old Physics classes, and I have no idea what
pressure would be required to allow water to boil at 0 C. I think
other substances have boiled at lower temperatures than that at STP
though.

---
Yes. Liquefied gases, in particular, do that, and I'm anxiously
awaiting Floyd Davidson's response which will nail down the pressure
required to allow water to boil at 0°C.

--
John Fields
Professional Circuit Designer

 

[Don Bowey]

On 6/15/05 2:01 PM, in article 87y89bl4hd.fld@barrow.com, "Floyd L.
Davidson" <floyd@barrow.com> wrote:

Provide some context that demonstrates it then, because it doesn't
appear to be what you are now claiming.

Why should he or I? The error wasn't ours and I for one don't need to prove
it to anyone. You are out of line for asking for it.

In other words, go research it yourself.

Don (B)

 

[John Fields]

On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 19:52:15 -0400, Spehro Pefhany
<speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote:

Good one, John!

---


--
John

 

[Floyd L. Davidson]

"Larry Brasfield" <donotspam_larry_brasfield@hotmail.com> wrote:

"Tom MacIntyre" <tom__macintyre@hotmail.com> wrote in
message news:6je1b1tk8ap2tg8e6dcilav9q6m4aq8ggt@4ax.com...
On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 18:01:25 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 11:21:21 -0800, floyd@barrow.com (Floyd L.
Davidson) wrote:

The idea that water boils at 100C and freezes at 0C, without
some mention of pressure, has little meaning. Water can "boil"
at 0C too.

Since, by your own admission, the boiling and freezing point
temperatures of water are pressure dependent, I invite you to state
what pressure would be required to be exerted on a volume of liquid
water in order to cause it to boil at 0°C.

The boiling and freezing points are pressure dependent. Not only that,
a certain amount of heat must be lost or gained (latent heat, I
believe, is the term) before the change of state occurs.

Strictly speaking, the change of state occurs as the
latent heat is transferred, not after.

I am simply
going by memory of my old Physics classes, and I have no idea what
pressure would be required to allow water to boil at 0 C. I think
other substances have boiled at lower temperatures than that at STP
though.

If you peruse the phase space of water at
http://www.lsbu.ac.uk/water/phase.html
you will see that there is no liquid/vapor boundary
at 0 oC. At a range of pressure well below standard
atmospheric, it could happen near 0.01 oC.

John's challenge is a bit of a trick and appears
to show he knows how to read that graph and
accompanying table.

Are you saying that it could happen at 0.01C but not at 0.00C,
because you see something in that chart which says water is liquid
at 0.01C and not at 0.00C?

I don't see that in the chart at all. The chart does not have
sufficient resolution. It doesn't discuss that in the text
either.

Did you mean something else?

--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://web.newsguy.com/floyd_davidson>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd@barrow.com

 

[Floyd L. Davidson]

John Fields <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 11:21:21 -0800, floyd@barrow.com (Floyd L.
Davidson) wrote:

The idea that water boils at 100C and freezes at 0C, without
some mention of pressure, has little meaning. Water can "boil"
at 0C too.

---
Since, by your own admission, the boiling and freezing point
temperatures of water are pressure dependent, I invite you to state
what pressure would be required to be exerted on a volume of liquid
water in order to cause it to boil at 0°C.

The answer of course is: not much.

--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://web.newsguy.com/floyd_davidson>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd@barrow.com

 

[ehsjr]

Rich The Philosophizer wrote:

Er..the gospels are the biggest pile of erroneous nonsense one can come
up with. Its all about those imaginary beings, that can do anything, be
everywhere at once, knows everything etc...


Hey! Let's not knock the imaginary!

Where would electronics be today without sqrt(-1)? ;-)

Up the paddle without a creek? ;-}

Ed

 

[Rich Grise]

On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 19:35:17 -0500, John Fields wrote:

On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 23:37:49 GMT, Tom MacIntyre

The boiling and freezing points are pressure dependent. Not only that,
a certain amount of heat must be lost or gained (latent heat, I
believe, is the term) before the change of state occurs.

At one atmosphere of pressure, the "latent heat of vaporization" of
water is 540 calories per gram and is the amount of heat required to
change liquid water at 100°C into steam at 100°C. That's used to
great advantage, in reverse, in steam heating systems where steam
which has been generated in a boiler is forced to condense into liquid
water in a remotely located radiator and release that heat into the
environment surrounding the radiator when it (the steam) changes
state.

Well, it takes one calorie per gram to raise liquid water one degree
centigrade - I wonder if, at an ambient pressure of, say, 10^3 Pa, it
still takes 540 calories per gram to transform a gram of liquid water at
0degC to a gram of gaseous steam at 0degC.

I am simply
going by memory of my old Physics classes, and I have no idea what
pressure would be required to allow water to boil at 0 C. I think other
substances have boiled at lower temperatures than that at STP though.

Yes. Liquefied gases, in particular, do that, and I'm anxiously awaiting
Floyd Davidson's response which will nail down the pressure required to
allow water to boil at 0°C.

According to the graph at http://www.lsbu.ac.uk/water/phase.html ,
approx. 10^3 Pa, whatever the hell that means. Obviously, an atmosphere
is up there near the "annoying point", ;-) , between 10^8 and 10^9 Pa.

Hope This Helps!
Rich