Was Black Dust - Nobody knows

[Harry Conover]

"The real Andy" <ihatehifitrolls@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message news:<3f72a349$0$6529$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au>...

Damn thats a huge thread. They only get that big when nobody has any idea of
what is really going on.

Like most of the really long threads, the correct explanation was
posted quite a few times, but as with some of the easily resolved
urban legends, there will be always people who will believe something
utterly incredible to be going on, then proceed to debate their
fantastic belief to an almost comical extent.

Take a look at soume of the UFO threads for an example of this, or
"The Philadelphia Incident" as another.

Early in the game some of these threads can be fun, but they do tend
to grow stale very fast...particularly when people that cannot support
their point with science based arguments resort to a series of ad
hominem attacks directed against anyone challenging their "knowledge".

Harry C.

 

[DarkMatter]

On 30 Sep 2003 12:24:36 -0700, hhc314@yahoo.com (Harry Conover) Gave
us:

Like most of the really long threads, the correct explanation was
posted quite a few times, but as with some of the easily resolved
urban legends, there will be always people who will believe something
utterly incredible to be going on, then proceed to debate their
fantastic belief to an almost comical extent.

Take a look at soume of the UFO threads for an example of this, or
"The Philadelphia Incident" as another.

Early in the game some of these threads can be fun, but they do tend
to grow stale very fast...particularly when people that cannot support
their point with science based arguments resort to a series of ad
hominem attacks directed against anyone challenging their "knowledge".


If you are so informed, why don't you declare for us all who was

correct, when and who was incorrect as well?

I say it is airborne particulate, corona, and non-conductive "moist"
substances that do it.

It certainly isn't some "soot" exuding from a component in the
cabinet, or from the cabinet itself, as some have claimed.

 

[Don Klipstein]

I tried some web searching to settle this. The web seems to be
unexpectedly lacking an explanation of this one!.

A significant hit of a page attempting to explain scientifically what
causes this is
http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/Feb2003/1045667618.Ph.r.html

Although written by someone claiming impressive scientific credentials,
the author seems to be seriously grasping at straws in terms of the
science of the subject at hand. As an example, he claims that TV
screens are negatively charged, while in actuality they are positively
charged in order to accelerate electrons toward themselves.
The author of that page proposes that this dust is metallic oxides.

However, it is to be noted that the author of that page notes that
sometimes the dust accumulating on the outer surface of a TV screen is
pitch black, in a thread on a "Mad Sci Network" message board about "Why
the dust on the TV screen is jet black?".

Along with that 2-message thread's previous message,
http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/Feb2003/1045667618.Ph.q.html
noting that black dust accumulates on TV screens in three different homes.

That should weigh against arguments in "The Big Thread" that the black
stuff normally only occurs on the inside (of TV sets and monitors), and
specifically is found at/near and therefore formed by the flyback
transformer, in order to support a claim that the black dust is carbonized
outgassed fumes of interior parts.

I will soon collect some from a TV that I was about to toss so that I
can analyze it in various ways. I will post results, even if such results
weigh against arguments that I have made in the "Big Thread". For one
thing, I am expecting the stuff to be somewhat of an insulator, which
indicates that soot content (which I propose gives the stuff its color) is
not the whole story.

Tests I will do:

1. Burn the stuff in an electric arc. I have diffraction gratings, and I
am familiar with the spectra of the common metals, so if there is a
significant amount of any common metal or oxides or other compounds
thereof, I will see it.

2. See if a clump of the stuff burns and does so with a yellow flame.
If that happens, then it means organic compounds are a major component. I
have at times proposed grease/tarry particles being part of this stuff.

3. Dump the stuff into acetone and filter it with a coffee filter and see
if there is a black component that does not pass through the coffee filter
and is somewhat electrically conductive when bunched up. If that happens,
carbon is a candidate, although such an experiment would not support nor
weigh against various arguments as to how carbon would accumulate there.

Maybe use a solution of lye to remove food grease from a possible
mixture of food grease (or similar stuff) and whatever else such as maybe
carbon particles.

I will post results!

- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)

 

[Rod Speed]

"Harry Conover" <hhc314@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:7ce4e226.0309301124.73cf918b@posting.google.com...

"The real Andy" <ihatehifitrolls@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message news:<3f72a349$0$6529$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au>...
Damn thats a huge thread. They only get that big when nobody has any idea of
what is really going on.

Like most of the really long threads, the correct explanation was
posted quite a few times, but as with some of the easily resolved
urban legends, there will be always people who will believe something
utterly incredible to be going on, then proceed to debate their
fantastic belief to an almost comical extent.

Take a look at soume of the UFO threads for an example of this, or
"The Philadelphia Incident" as another.

Early in the game some of these threads can be fun, but they do tend
to grow stale very fast...particularly when people that cannot support
their point with science based arguments resort to a series of ad
hominem attacks directed against anyone challenging their "knowledge".

Pity you never managed to produce a shred of evidence
to substantiate your claim about the explanation yourself.

Just proclaimed it.

And you never did manage to explain why electrostatic precipators used
in the same environment dont end up with just the JET BLACK SOOT
seen inside monitors. They end up with just the common dust instead.

Thats nothing like science.

 

[Rod Speed]

"DarkMatter" <DarkMatter@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message news:kl9knvg6opf0nle5ch1obvvqig1kgg7r09@4ax.com...

On 30 Sep 2003 12:24:36 -0700, hhc314@yahoo.com (Harry Conover) Gave
us:


Like most of the really long threads, the correct explanation was
posted quite a few times, but as with some of the easily resolved
urban legends, there will be always people who will believe something
utterly incredible to be going on, then proceed to debate their
fantastic belief to an almost comical extent.

Take a look at soume of the UFO threads for an example of this, or
"The Philadelphia Incident" as another.

Early in the game some of these threads can be fun, but they do tend
to grow stale very fast...particularly when people that cannot support
their point with science based arguments resort to a series of ad
hominem attacks directed against anyone challenging their "knowledge".

If you are so informed, why don't you declare for us all
who was correct, when and who was incorrect as well?

He did say that it was absolutely certainly just collecting what
was in the air. Pity he studiously avoided even commenting on why
electrostatic precipitators which are designed to do just that dont
end up with JUST THE JET BLACK SOOT SEEN IN MONITORS.

There's a reason why he didnt, he cant
explain that obvious problem with his theory.

I say it is airborne particulate, corona, and
non-conductive "moist" substances that do it.

Pity you cant explain why electrostatic precipitators
which are designed to do just that dont end up with
JUST THE JET BLACK SOOT SEEN IN MONITORS.

And you have never been able to explain why
its seen in monitors everywhere, not just where
there can be quite at bit of carbon in the air.

It certainly isn't some "soot" exuding from a component in
the cabinet, or from the cabinet itself, as some have claimed.

Easy to proclaim. Pity about you not actually having
a shred of evidence to substantiate your claim.

 

[Rod Speed]

Don Klipstein <don@manx.misty.com> wrote in
message news:slrnbnk6av.hgt.don@manx.misty.com...

I tried some web searching to settle this. The web seems
to be unexpectedly lacking an explanation of this one!.

And it wouldnt be lacking if you 'soot
magnet' theory was the correct explanation.

A significant hit of a page attempting
to explain scientifically what causes this is
http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/Feb2003/1045667618.Ph.r.html

Pity we aint even discussing whats on the TV glass at all and
whats on mine is nothing like jet black. Its just dust colored.

Although written by someone claiming impressive scientific
credentials, the author seems to be seriously grasping
at straws in terms of the science of the subject at hand.

Corse you never ever do anything like that yourself, eh ?

No completely irrelevant side tracks on brown clouds at all eh ?

As an example, he claims that TV screens are negatively
charged, while in actuality they are positively charged in
order to accelerate electrons toward themselves.

Irrelevant to his basic claim about it being charged.

The author of that page proposes that this dust is metallic oxides.

Pity it aint even what was being discussed at all.

However, it is to be noted that the author of that
page notes that sometimes the dust accumulating
on the outer surface of a TV screen is pitch black,

Pity we were discussing what ends up on the INSIDE
OF THE MONITOR CASE ADJACENT TO THE FBT.

And what ends up on the outer glass tube face
is nothing like black here, its just dust colored,
which happens to be reddish brown here.

in a thread on a "Mad Sci Network" message board about "Why

the dust on the TV screen is jet black?".

Along with that 2-message thread's previous message,
http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/Feb2003/1045667618.Ph.q.html
noting that black dust accumulates on TV screens in three different homes.

Pity we werent even discussing TV screens at all.

That should weigh against arguments in "The Big Thread" that the black
stuff normally only occurs on the inside (of TV sets and monitors),

No one ever said anything like that. The original poster
ASKED WHERE THAT BLACK DUST/SOOT ON THE
INSIDE OF THE MONITOR CASE IS COMING FROM.

The original question asked

What is that fine black 'dust' one sees
inside monitors when the case is removed?

and specifically is found at/near and therefore formed by
the flyback transformer, in order to support a claim that the
black dust is carbonized outgassed fumes of interior parts.

In order to answer the question asked, actually.

I will soon collect some from a TV that I was about
to toss so that I can analyze it in various ways. I will
post results, even if such results weigh against arguments
that I have made in the "Big Thread". For one thing,
I am expecting the stuff to be somewhat of an insulator,
which indicates that soot content (which I propose
gives the stuff its color) is not the whole story.

Completely trivial for anyone with a clue to prove that for
themselves on the insulator claim. And doesnt prove anything
much regardless of whether its an insulator or not anyway.

Tests I will do:

1. Burn the stuff in an electric arc. I have diffraction
gratings, and I am familiar with the spectra of the common
metals, so if there is a significant amount of any common
metal or oxides or other compounds thereof, I will see it.

There are much less primitive ways of seeing if its other than carbon soot.

2. See if a clump of the stuff burns and does so with a yellow flame.
If that happens, then it means organic compounds are a major component.

Its more complicated than that too.

I have at times proposed grease/tarry particles being part of this stuff.

How odd that it doesnt feel greasy or tarry.

3. Dump the stuff into acetone and filter it with a coffee filter and see
if there is a black component that does not pass through the coffee
filter and is somewhat electrically conductive when bunched up.

That proves little when coffee filters clearly let an awful lot of grung
thru the filter and just stops the big particles of ground coffee beans.

If that happens, carbon is a candidate,

It still is even if its fine enough to get thru the filter.

although such an experiment would not support nor weigh against
various arguments as to how carbon would accumulate there.

Yep, but the fact that you get that jet black soot in
monitors where there is bugger all soot in the air is the
most compelling evidence against the 'soot magnet' theory.

Maybe use a solution of lye to remove food grease
from a possible mixture of food grease (or similar
stuff) and whatever else such as maybe carbon particles.

The acetone will dissolve the food grease, as will petrol.

> I will post results!

 

[Phil Allison]

"Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com>

No one ever said anything like that. The original poster
ASKED WHERE THAT BLACK DUST/SOOT ON THE
INSIDE OF THE MONITOR CASE IS COMING FROM.

** WRONG:

" What is that fine black 'dust' one sees inside monitors when the case
is
removed? "


** The OP is asking about black dust inside the monitor - not on the
inside surface of the case.



........... Phil

 

[The real Andy]

"Phil Allison" <philallison@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:3f7a6123$0$2818$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...

"Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com

No one ever said anything like that. The original poster
ASKED WHERE THAT BLACK DUST/SOOT ON THE
INSIDE OF THE MONITOR CASE IS COMING FROM.


** WRONG:

" What is that fine black 'dust' one sees inside monitors when the case
is
removed? "


** The OP is asking about black dust inside the monitor - not on the
inside surface of the case.

I think more to the point is, Who really gives a flying fuck? Other than
people who have nothing better to do with their lives than try and work out
what it is.

 

[Phil Allison]

"The real Andy" <ihatehifitrolls@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:3f7a7b64$0$6528$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...

"Phil Allison" <philallison@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:3f7a6123$0$2818$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...


** The OP is asking about black dust inside the monitor - not on
the
inside surface of the case.

I think more to the point is,

** The only point you have ever got is the one your head peaks to.

Who really gives a flying fuck?

** Standard cop out line for the ignorati.




......... Phil

 

[DarkMatter]

On Wed, 1 Oct 2003 14:36:38 +1000, "Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com>
Gave us:

Pity you never managed to produce a shred of evidence
to substantiate your claim about the explanation yourself.

Just proclaimed it.

You're an idiot. How's that for a proclamation?

And you never did manage to explain why electrostatic precipators used
in the same environment dont end up with just the JET BLACK SOOT
seen inside monitors.

It is NOT the same environment. Electrostatic dust accumulators
operate in a forced air environ. Doh!

They do NOT operate by way of a corona. The field is electrostatic.
Doh!

If one touches the dust in the accumulator, it turns JET BLACK where
it adheres to the skin. Doh!

If one moisturizes the dust, whether it be with water or non-aqueous
mist or smoke, it turns JET BLACK. Doh!







They end up with just the common dust instead.

Thats nothing like science.

 

[DarkMatter]

On Wed, 1 Oct 2003 14:41:54 +1000, "Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com>
Gave us:

Easy to proclaim. Pity about you not actually having
a shred of evidence to substantiate your claim.

Evidence? You are a retard.

I make the supply which goes into a very large industrial
electrostatic accumulator. Several models, actually. We have said
accumulators in house for testing purposes. It is 40 plates over a
couple square feet each, at about a 5/8 inch spacing. It is excited
at 11kV. That is about HALF what a CRT gets excited at.

I have been there, done that. You have not.

You are just a dweeb retard that was last month trying to hawk
"faster than light" communication gear off on people.

 

[Rod Speed]

DarkMatter <DarkMatter@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote
in message news:cg6lnv0pk28bnkjqdijioahgovmk9n6409@4ax.com...

Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote

Reams of your puerile shit flushed where it belongs.

Pity you never managed to produce a shred of evidence
to substantiate your claim about the explanation yourself.

Just proclaimed it.

And you never did manage to explain why electrostatic
precipators used in the same environment dont end up
with just the JET BLACK SOOT seen inside monitors.

It is NOT the same environment.

I said IN the same environment, fuckwit child.

Electrostatic dust accumulators operate in a forced air environ.

Got sweet fuck all to do with whats in the air, fuckwit child.

They do NOT operate by way of a corona.

Neither do monitors, fuckwit child.

The field is electrostatic.

Just as true of monitors, fuckwit child.

If one touches the dust in the accumulator, it
turns JET BLACK where it adheres to the skin.

Pigs arse it does, fuckwit child.

If one moisturizes the dust, whether it be with water
or non-aqueousmist or smoke, it turns JET BLACK.

Pigs arse it does, fuckwit child.

Try again, fuckwit child.

 

[Rod Speed]

Phil Allison <philallison@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:3f7a6123$0$2818$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...

Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote

The original poster ASKED WHERE THAT BLACK DUST/SOOT
ON THE INSIDE OF THE MONITOR CASE IS COMING FROM.

WRONG:

" What is that fine black 'dust' one sees
inside monitors when the case is removed? "

Same thing, completely unemployable fuckwit.

The OP is asking about black dust inside the monitor

Same thing as inside the monitor when the case
is removed, completely unemployable fuckwit.

- not on the inside surface of the case.

Didnt even use the word surface there,
completely unemployable fuckwit.

 

[Phil Allison]

"Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ble70j$b3k0c$1@ID-69072.news.uni-berlin.de...

Didnt even use the word surface there,

ON THE INSIDE OF THE MONITOR CASE IS COMING FROM.

** Go get a gallon of WD40 and drink it - you fuckwit Robot




................ Phil

 

[Rod Speed]

Some completely unemployable fuckwit claiming to be
Phil Allison <philallison@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:3f7aa089$0$12033$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...

Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote

Didnt even use the word surface there,

ON THE INSIDE OF THE MONITOR CASE IS COMING FROM.

Even someone as stupid as you should be able to work out that the
word surface doesnt even get a mention, if someone was stupid
enough to lend you a seeing eye dog and a white cane, fuckwit.

 

[DarkMatter]

On Wed, 1 Oct 2003 19:29:23 +1000, "Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com>
Gave us:

It is NOT the same environment.

I said IN the same environment, fuckwit child.

What part of "monitors do NOT have forced air" do you not
understand? Doh! Different environment there, I'd say.

Talk about puerile shit. You so full of shit, your eyes are brown,
and there is a foul stench emanating from your ears, right above that
brown oooze.

 

[DarkMatter]

On Wed, 1 Oct 2003 19:29:23 +1000, "Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com>
Gave us:

Got sweet fuck all to do with whats in the air, fuckwit child.

It has everything to do with what adheres, dipshit.

An e-field plays a different game on dust in Standing air.

D O H !!!

 

[DarkMatter]

On Wed, 1 Oct 2003 19:29:23 +1000, "Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com>
Gave us:

Pigs arse it does, fuckwit child.

You are about as mature as a fresh turd.