What's that black dust in monitors?

[Rod Speed]

Don Klipstein <don@manx.misty.com> wrote in
message news:slrnbnf9gg.1v7.don@manx.misty.com...

Rod Speed wrote
Don Klipstein <don@manx.misty.com> wrote

I see enough air that is fairly transparent but brownish.

Yeah, stands out like dogs balls when you fly into Sydney
in the right weather conditions. Its got the right conditions
for that sort of smog buildup and that brown haze is
utterly obscene in the right weather conditions.

And this isnt 'brown clouds', this is right down on the horizon.

So when brownish air looks like the "usual brown cloud"

Nope, nothing like a cloud at all. Just a brown haze on the
horizon. With it visibly decreasing with height above the horizon.

but is less opaque than usual

More than the usual haze effect outside big citys.

but has the nitrogen dioxide brown color,

Nope, much ligher than that.

you are going to say it's not brown cloud

Yep, no 'cloud' at all.

and therefore nitrogen dioxide does not cause visible air pollution?

I JUST said that its not NOx, its the just particles
in the air. Just like all haze effects are. And the
evidence for that is that it goes away after heavy rain.

If it really was due to NOx, it wouldnt.

I talk about air that is colored brown but transparent,
transparent enough for you to say, "Yep, no "cloud" at all"

You didnt, you waffled on about 'brown clouds', which just happen
to be completely and utterly irrelevant to what was being discussed,
where that jet black soot inside monitors comes from.

Air that is colored brown but transparent, in spades.

And you clearly originally said 'fairly transparent' and you
have now attempted to slither off to just 'transparent'

Even you should be able to grasp that that cant possibly
the be source of the jet black soot seen inside monitors.

and you say it's particles.

Crap. I said that the brown haze I WAS TALKING ABOUT is
particles and http://www.phoenixvis.net/causes.html clearly
says that particles are the 'principal' cause of 'brown clouds'

I am talking about brownish air that does not preferentially reflect blue.

Pity its completely and utterly irrelevant to what was being discussed,
WHERE THE JET BLACK SOOT SEEN IN MONITORS COMES FROM.

Brown tint more than haze, and not preferentially reflecting blue light.

Pity its completely and utterly irrelevant to what was being discussed,
WHERE THE JET BLACK SOOT SEEN IN MONITORS COMES FROM.

That's when nitrogen dioxide is a more significant factor than
dust particles large enough to easily scatter light when isolated.

Nope, it isnt mostly NOx

I see similar brownish but transparent air

And that stuff you see in Sydney is nothing like
'brownish but transparent air', its a nothing like
transparent smog/haze right down on the horizon.

And how does that disprove either sort of
brownish air being tinted by nitrogen dioxide,

YOU made the claim that its tinted by NOx, YOU
get to do the proving. Thats how science works.

What about that http://www.phoenixvis.net/causes.html that you toss at me?

It clearly says that the 'principal' cause of 'brown cloud' is particles.

If it was actually due to NOx it would be quite transparent.

And you have yet to refute my claims of the
existence of more transparent brownish air

Which just happens to be completely and utterly irrelevant
to what was being discussed, WHERE THE JET BLACK
SOOT SEEN IN MONITORS COMES FROM.

other than to say the brown tint is from particles

It clearly is with THE HAZE WAS TALKING ABOUT.

or that it didn't occur.

It aint, so its clearly due to particles in the air, not NOx.

Transparent tinted brown air = NO2

Wrong. And you initially said 'fairly transparent' anyway.

Hazy brown air = NO2 plus particles

The brown is just the particles.

And its all completely and utterly irrelevant to what
was being discussed, WHERE THE JET BLACK
SOOT SEEN IN MONITORS COMES FROM.

and how does that disprove presence
of fine soot particles in the air?

Never ever claimed that either.

I JUST rubbed your nose in the FACT that the jet black soot
seen inside monitors adjacent to the FBT is also seen in monitors
where there is fuck all soot in the air at all, most obviously with
pacific islands, and so that cant be where its coming from.

But soot does exist in the air over the Pacific islands.

Bullshit. And clearly at nothing like the levels seen
in major citys, so you should see significantly less
of that jet black soot inside monitors used on
pacific islands than in major citys, and you dont.

Basic logic.

Your terminally silly 'soot magnet' theory has blown up in your
face and covered you with black stuff very spectacularly indeed.

You point out Ken's claim of sooty monitors
there, and he mentions studies that say soot
exists in the air there and everywhere.

At nothing like the levels seen in major polluted citys.

And your http://www.phoenixvis.net/causes.html sure mentions
"PM2.5 particles containing carbon, like soot from tail pipes",

Pity the pacific islands dont even get those
'brown clouds' that it is clearly discussing.

and mentions that PM2.5 particles
can float in the atmosphere for days!

Pity the pacific islands dont even get those
'brown clouds' that it is clearly discussing.

flowing out of some thunderstorms when I ride airplanes.

It aint NOx. That never gets to anything like a high
enough density in the atmosphere for it to be that.

A layer of air 4 miles thick

You dont get that 'flowing out of some thunderstorms'

You sure as hell do; lightning is one source of the stuff!

I meant a layer of air 4 miles thick
doesnt 'flow out of some thunderstorms'

How about 4 miles wide, because I was viewing horizontally.

You dont get that either, and the PPM levels of NOx with
thunderstorms aint anything like that 1 PPM level anyway.

I did claim even less can make visible air coloration,

What matters is whether the concentrations that you
can get with thunderstorms are visible. They aint.

and thunderstorms are easily 4 miles wide.

Not the downdrafts out of them they aint. And while you
can certainly get some NOx formation in thunderstorms,
you certainly dont get entire 4 mile wide downdrafts from
thunderstorms with significant and visible NOx levels.

I was talking about updrafts that settled slightly downwards
after flowing from the top of the cloud. (Updrafts that move
outward hrizontally from the cloud top without any subsequent
downward motion are usually "anvil cloud".) I was talking about
big puffs of transparent brownish air that I have seen to the
sides of the upper portions of some thunderstorm clouds.

Pity the NOx levels seen in thunderstorm clouds aint even visible.

plus carbon particles fine enough to make things seen through
the cloud look brownish due to scattering preferentially of blue light.

Particles of many kinds, actually. Doesnt have to be carbon.

Its that that produces the spectacular red sunsets with major fires.

One source saying nitrogen dioxide plus fine carbon particles:
http://phoenix.about.com/library/weekly/uc051601a.htm

Its wrong. Basic physics. Steve clearly aint gotta clue and his
'credentials' are complete duds as far as physics is concerned.

Another source saying nitrogen dioxide is
responsible for "brown cloud" urban air pollution:
http://phoenix.about.com/library/weekly/uc051601a.htm

Thats the same one.

Just the first two hits of a Google search of "brown cloud" "nitrogen dioxide"!

Nope, just one actually. And plenty of pig ignorant shit turns up on the web.

A few other hits whose summaries reported by Google
appear to support nitrogen dioxide, whether alone or
with really fine carbon particles, making air look brownish:

We'll see.

http://www.phoenixvis.net/causes.html

The first para of that says

Extremely small particles are the principal cause of the brown cloud.
These tiny particles, too small to be seen without a microscope, are
measured in microns, with one micron equal to about one-seventieth
(1/70) of the diameter of a human hair. Particulate matter less than
2.5 microns, often referred to as PM2.5, is a significant cause of haze.
Each particle, about the size of a single grain of flour, can float in the
atmosphere for days, behaving much like a gas. Over half of the
PM2.5 in Phoenix is caused by the burning of gasoline and diesel fuel
in vehicles (sometimes referred to as on-road mobile sources) and in
off-road mobile sources, such as construction equipment like loaders
and bulldozers, locomotives, lawn mowers, leaf blowers, and other
devices that emit air pollution as they move1. PM2.5 particles containing
carbon, like soot from tail pipes, are particularly effective in reducing
visibility, because they both scatter and absorb light.

Which is exactly what I said, using a lot more words.

But it does say that nitrogen dioxide is also
present and gives that color to the cloud!

Bullshit it does. That para above clearly says 'Extremely
small particles are the principal cause of the brown cloud'

Look further down than the first paragraph then!

No point when the first para clearly says ARE THE PRINCIPAL CAUSE

If you still say that this document does not also say
that nitrogen dioxide gives "brown cloud" its color

The first para clearly says PARTICLES ARE THE PRINCIPAL CAUSE

Even you should be able to read and comprehend that in the first sentance.

than I will call you a liar!

You can do anything you like, including stand on your
head and whistle dixey if thats what turns you on.

The fourth para still says NO2 is what causes the color!

Pity about the first para.

Do you not comprehend that?

Pity about the first para.

And also mentions PM2.5 carbon!
Fine carbon particles do exist in the air!

No one ever said they didnt. What was clearly being
discussed was whether the HEAPS OF JET BLACK
SOOT SEEN WITH VERY BADLY SETUP DIESEL
ENGINES is at all common in the air even in a builtup area.

You are stuck on "badly setup" or "very badly setup"
ones, while ones not so badly set up make fine soot!

Wrong. Because that stuffs the fuel economy. Soot is
always the result of incomplete combustion and that
always indicates less than efficient use of the fuel.

You snip out my mention of only small fractional percentage of the
carbon remaining uncombusted not doing much damage to fuel economy.

I didnt snip it out, it was quoted where it appeared, much further down.

Heck, they sure tolerate some carbon monoxide coming
out the engine! Carbon monoxide has even been used
as a major component of some fuel gases in the past!

All completely and utterly irrelevant to where
the jet black soot seen inside monitors even on
pacific islands with fuck all diesel engines in use.

Basic logic.

In addition, there have gotta be plenty of engines somewhere between
"badly setup" and "maximum possible combustion efficiency". And surely
plenty of engines run richer than the ideal for maximum combustion
efficiency to get more power from a given size engine!

All completely and utterly irrelevant to where
the jet black soot seen inside monitors even on
pacific islands with fuck all diesel engines in use.

Basic logic.

Reams of your completely irrelevant crap
about 'brown clouds' flushed where it belongs.

Doesnt have a damned thing to do with what was
being discussed, WHERE THE JET BLACK SOOT
FOUND INSIDE MONITORS IS COMING FROM.

diesel makes realy fine soot

Yes, but you dont get much of that rising to any great extent.

Are you claiming that these fine particles don't go
where air goes and where other smoke particles go?

Yep, they're considerably bigger and fall rather than rise.
And they dont have the same hot air driving them either.

Have a look at a really badly setup diesel engine thats pouring
out lots of the black stuff some time and see where it goes.

And how about ones in not-so-bad tune that make finer soot?

You dont see that rising either.

Are you calling me a liar?

Nope, you just havent got a clue about the basics.
Those dont rise like say smoke from a fire does.

Sure as hell does,

Nope, fraid not.

I see it lots of times!

Getting completely silly now.

When it is visible, the finer stuff easily visibly rises!

Not far. THATS what matters.

Tell me why and how you think fine soot
does not rise the way other fine dust does,

Basically it aint got anything like the same volume
of hot air driving it as a fire, and the soot particles
are much larger and heavier, thats why they look
so bad. You dont get anything like that with a fire.

When sometimes they are small enough to preferentially scatter blue light?!

Diesel exhausts dont have anything like the same volume of hot
gases required to make it rise to anything like the same extent.

Besides, when smoke reaches 1,000 feet or a few thousand feet
it's usually mainly for reasons other than heat from the source.

Wrong. Thats why you get the inversion effect.

No,

Yep.

inversion effect is usually caused by the lowest
portion of the atmosphere being cooled by ground
that cooled overnight by radiating into space. Sometimes
also by warmer air at higher altitudes coming in from
aloft. And in high pressure areas where air is sinking, a stable air can
be exaggerated into an inversion. But mostly the lowest few thousand feet
cool overnight, and the lowest few hundred feet cool a lot overnight.
And a couple hours of sunlight can cause convection within a layer of
air that is below an inversion. Wind causes turbulence that can mix air
throughout all altitudes within a couple thousand feet of ground.

I didnt even comment on what CAUSES an inversion,
I was just saying that its the inversion that inversion
effect that produces smoke reaching only that level.

So, depending on time of day, smoke can rise a few
hundred to a few thousand feet whether it has no heat
to support it at all or has a 6-alarm fire under it.

Have fun explaining why it rises.

especially given web pages giving a cause of
"brown cloud"'s color other than or in addition
to nitrogen dioxide usually being carbon particles!

Even you must have noticed that brown aint jet black.

Of course a cloud of particles fine enough to
preferentially scatter blue light will look brown to
transmitted light, but how does that make carbon brown?

Never said it does. YOU were the one waffling on about
soot from diesel engines having a damned thing to do
with the completely irrelevant 'brown clouds' that dont
have a damned thing to do with THE JET BLACK
SOOT THAT CAN BE FOUND INSIDE MONITORS.

You said the brown clouds had to be particles other than diesel engine soot

Lie. I JUST said that diesel soot can only be a tiny part of
the total number of particles that produce a 'brown cloud'

in opposition to my claim that soot from diesel engines (and not
excluding other sources) can be what turns up inside monitors!

Pity it does even on pacific islands with fuck all diesel engines.

Basic logic.

Reams more completely irrelevant crap that has no relevance
what so ever to where the jet black soot found in monitors on
pacific islands with fuck all diesel engines, flushed where it belongs.

Where do you propose such carbon particles come from?

Most combustion of carbon based fuel.

I said diesel engines as an example and not as a limitation!

Pity its a trivial source of carbon particles, even in big citys,
and clearly cant be where the JET BLACK SOOT FOUND IN
MONITORS IN THE PACIFIC ISLANDS IS COMING FROM.

unlikely that many buildings in pacific islands are actually
heated with oil heaters, so you STILL HAVENT EXPLAINED
HOW MONITORS THERE HAVE THE SAME JET BLACK
SOOT SEEN IN THEIR MONITORS.

More basic logic.

I also said oil heated buildings as an example and not as a limitation.

Pity you STILL havent managed to propose where purported soot
in the atmosphere WITH PACIFIC ISLANDS is coming from.

And since whats seen inside monitors on pacific islands is
no different to whats seen in monitors in big citys, its just
a tad unlikely that its actually coming from the air at all.

Basic logic.

And your favored http://www.phoenixvis.net/causes.html
says that offending particles stay in the air for days!

Doesnt say a damned thing about PACIFIC ISLANDS
WHERE THE SAME SOOT IS FOUND INSIDE MONITORS.

Doesn't have to say "Pacific islands". It
does say the stuff stays in the air for days.

Where ITS CLEAR VISIBLE AS BROWN CLOUD.

It obviously aint with pacific islands that
dont even get the brown cloud effect.

Does that not indicate it can float in from populated/
industrial areas thousands of miles away?

Nope, because it clearly isnt a visible BROWN CLOUD there.

And that Ken that you liked to cite says that the air
in the Pacific islands does contain soot (and cited
studies, indicating jet engines as another source)

He didnt cite a single study and the OTHER individual that did,
didnt say a damned thing about the levels seen with pacific islands.

AND we just happen to have an atmospheric monitoring
station in Tasmania, whose primary role is to monitor
the levels of greenhouse gases AND THEY DONT
FIND SIGNIFICANT LEVELS IN THE AIR THERE.

So your terminally silly 'soot magnet' theory has blown up in your
face and covered you with black stuff very spectacularly indeed.

and he sure thinks that's probably where the monitor black dust comes from!

Doesnt matter a damn what he may or may not 'think'

What matters is that the measured soot levels are fuck all
compared with what is seen in major polluted industrial citys
and since the same effect with jet black soot seen inside
monitors happens in both, it cant be your terminally
silly 'soot magnet' theory that explains that.

Basic logic.

Reams of irrelevant crap about diesel engines flushed where it belongs.

Doesnt say a damned thing about PACIFIC ISLANDS
WHERE THE SAME SOOT IS FOUND INSIDE MONITORS.

Basic logic.

http://www.phoenixvis.net/causes.html mentions soot from tailpipes as a
major component of PM2.5 and says the stuff can stay in the air for days.

Pity pacific islands DONT GET THOSE BROWN CLOUDS ITS DISCUSSING THERE.

Above you say:
Pity about http://www.phoenixvis.net/causes.html
which does spell out the detail much
more and is in fact scientifically correct.

That page says over half your favored PM2.5

Taint 'my favoured PM2.5' That just
produces HAZE and aint SOOT.

is caused by gasoline and diesel vehicles.

Pity that aint SOOT thats as visibly
SOOT as is found inside monitors.

That page does give "soot from tailpipes" as a prime example of PM2.5!

Pity pacific islands DONT GET THOSE BROWN CLOUDS ITS DISCUSSING THERE.

Soot that fine is still soot and is still black when precipitated into a visible mass!

Pity pacific islands DONT GET THOSE BROWN CLOUDS ITS DISCUSSING THERE.

Other pages I already cited giving causes of "brown cloud"
color other than nitrogen dioxide say it's carbon particles.

Doesnt matter a damn what some pig ignorant repetition
claims, what matters is that its actually PARTICLES that
that the 'principal' cause of brown cloud, and that aint
anything like the SOOT found in monitors.

http://www.phoenixvis.net/causes.html says much of it is soot from
tailpipes (along with the brown color of "brown cloud" coming from NO2).

AND EVEN YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO GRASP THAT
PACIFIC ISLANDS DONT GET THAT POLLUTION
BROWN CLOUD EFFECT AT ALL, so it cant be that
thats getting into their monitors.

Basic logic .

http://www.phoenixvis.net/causes.html says fine soot stays in the air
for days, and that is long enough for it to travel thousands of miles.

Pity pacific islands DONT GET THOSE BROWN CLOUDS ITS DISCUSSING THERE.

If dust can come to Florida from the Sahara
Desert enough to affect air transparency,

Even you must have noticed that dust aint soot.

Soot of PM2.5 size is in the air according to
http://www.phoenixvis.net/causes.html and can surely travel just as far as
non-soot dust!

Pity pacific islands DONT GET THOSE BROWN CLOUDS ITS DISCUSSING THERE.

and if PM2.5 stays in the air for days,

And that aint soot either.
8

Your favored http://www.phoenixvis.net/causes.html says much of it is!

then how far does a monitor need to be from sources of
airborne carbon particles to disprove the stuff being carbon?

The pacific islands will do fine BECAUSE THEY DONT HAVE
THOSE BROWN CLOUDS DUE TO POLLUTION AT ALL.

Basic logic.

NO2 gets diluted to invisible concentrations before traveling that far,
and particles much larger than PM2.5 (PM10 is a major haze component) can
mostly fall out before traveling that far, and PM2.5 gets diluted to a
small fraction of its concentration in urban areas,

Pity pacific islands DONT GET THOSE BROWN CLOUDS ITS DISCUSSING THERE.

but there is still soot in the air there as Ken points out!

Pity about the scientific measurements, whatever Ken claims.

Or do you make some claim that monitors
in the Pacific islands accumulate black sooty
dust *as quickly* as they do in Philadelphia?

I doubt anyone has ever bothered to measure that.

 

[Steve]

Jackie <noreply@bigpond.com> wrote in message news:<3F696698.9050303@bigpond.com>...

What is that fine black 'dust' one sees inside monitors

wow, what a thread, congratulations Jackie, such an unassuming
question too!! Here's my $0.10. (can't get anything for 2 cents these
days!)

the "airflow" argument;
The air-con for our room is pumped in under the "computer flooring"
and the only outlet is through the holes in the top and bottom of the
racks. Hence, the air-con for our area is FORCED THROUGH all our
electronics out the top of the racks into the room.

Our monitors still get a good coating of black dust, despite constant
air flow. Albeit, probably a fairly low cu-ft/min rate.

the "adjacent parts" argument;
Black dust can be found on the following; the CRT, the anode cap and
HT leads, the FBT/Tripler, adjacent metal shields, adjacent circuit
boards... AND in LARGE QUANTITIES on the inside of the lid adjacent to
the anode cap. Some have suggested that the dust does not appear on
adjacent parts of the case. This is just plain wrong. Perhaps this
is related to the upward direction of the airflow in our area.

I have heard of "hermetically sealed" car ignition components being
opened to discover black dust. Where does it come from?!
(http://www.technologie-entwicklung.de/Gasturbines/Russian_APU/Ignition_Box/ignition_box.html)

Negative Ion argument; see
http://www.airpurifiers-uv.com/tech~negativeions.htm
They call it "Black Wall", I like that name!

The equipment I refer to is also two stories below ground in a purely
air-conditioned environment. No fresh air down here at all
(unfortunately), no mysterious brown clouds either.

My conclusion;
It's hard to clean, it smells funny, it gets all over the monitor and
you and it generally sucks. It's the excrement of HT-loving invisible
miniature Aliens for all I care.

It's black dust, get over it people.

niftydog

 

[Don Klipstein]

In article <bl8leb$9bmg2$1@ID-69072.news.uni-berlin.de>, Rod Speed wrote:

Don Klipstein <don@manx.misty.com> wrote in
message news:slrnbnf9gg.1v7.don@manx.misty.com...
Rod Speed wrote
Don Klipstein <don@manx.misty.com> wrote

I see enough air that is fairly transparent but brownish.

Yeah, stands out like dogs balls when you fly into Sydney
in the right weather conditions. Its got the right conditions
for that sort of smog buildup and that brown haze is
utterly obscene in the right weather conditions.

And this isnt 'brown clouds', this is right down on the horizon.

So when brownish air looks like the "usual brown cloud"

Nope, nothing like a cloud at all. Just a brown haze on the
horizon. With it visibly decreasing with height above the horizon.

but is less opaque than usual

More than the usual haze effect outside big citys.

but has the nitrogen dioxide brown color,

Nope, much ligher than that.

you are going to say it's not brown cloud

Yep, no 'cloud' at all.

and therefore nitrogen dioxide does not cause visible air pollution?

I JUST said that its not NOx, its the just particles
in the air. Just like all haze effects are. And the
evidence for that is that it goes away after heavy rain.

If it really was due to NOx, it wouldnt.

I talk about air that is colored brown but transparent,
transparent enough for you to say, "Yep, no "cloud" at all"

You didnt, you waffled on about 'brown clouds', which just happen
to be completely and utterly irrelevant to what was being discussed,
where that jet black soot inside monitors comes from.

Air that is colored brown but transparent, in spades.

And you clearly originally said 'fairly transparent' and you
have now attempted to slither off to just 'transparent'

Even you should be able to grasp that that cant possibly
the be source of the jet black soot seen inside monitors.

and you say it's particles.

Crap. I said that the brown haze I WAS TALKING ABOUT is
particles and http://www.phoenixvis.net/causes.html clearly
says that particles are the 'principal' cause of 'brown clouds'

I am talking about brownish air that does not preferentially reflect blue.

Pity its completely and utterly irrelevant to what was being discussed,
WHERE THE JET BLACK SOOT SEEN IN MONITORS COMES FROM.

Brown tint more than haze, and not preferentially reflecting blue light.

Pity its completely and utterly irrelevant to what was being discussed,
WHERE THE JET BLACK SOOT SEEN IN MONITORS COMES FROM.

That's when nitrogen dioxide is a more significant factor than
dust particles large enough to easily scatter light when isolated.

Nope, it isnt mostly NOx

I see similar brownish but transparent air

And that stuff you see in Sydney is nothing like
'brownish but transparent air', its a nothing like
transparent smog/haze right down on the horizon.

And how does that disprove either sort of
brownish air being tinted by nitrogen dioxide,

YOU made the claim that its tinted by NOx, YOU
get to do the proving. Thats how science works.

What about that http://www.phoenixvis.net/causes.html that you toss at me?

It clearly says that the 'principal' cause of 'brown cloud' is particles.

If it was actually due to NOx it would be quite transparent.

And you have yet to refute my claims of the
existence of more transparent brownish air

Which just happens to be completely and utterly irrelevant
to what was being discussed, WHERE THE JET BLACK
SOOT SEEN IN MONITORS COMES FROM.

other than to say the brown tint is from particles

It clearly is with THE HAZE WAS TALKING ABOUT.

or that it didn't occur.

It aint, so its clearly due to particles in the air, not NOx.

Transparent tinted brown air = NO2

Wrong. And you initially said 'fairly transparent' anyway.

Hazy brown air = NO2 plus particles

The brown is just the particles.

You claim particles and in the past claimed it's dust and not jet black
soot. You are ignoring my pointing out that your favored
http://www.phoenixvis.net/causes.html says as I claim that the brown color
is from nitrogen dioxide and that plenty of soot is present. You seem to
think that your favored web page saying particles are the principle cause
of the cloud negates that same page saying nitrogen dioxide gives the
cloud its color.

And its all completely and utterly irrelevant to what
was being discussed, WHERE THE JET BLACK
SOOT SEEN IN MONITORS COMES FROM.

Relevant to you saying brown cloud pollution is, depending on when you
said it, dust or particles, and other than jet black soot which I assert
and your favored http://www.phoenixvis.net/causes.html says is a major
component of "brown cloud" urban air pollution.

and how does that disprove presence
of fine soot particles in the air?

Never ever claimed that either.

I JUST rubbed your nose in the FACT that the jet black soot
seen inside monitors adjacent to the FBT is also seen in monitors
where there is fuck all soot in the air at all, most obviously with
pacific islands, and so that cant be where its coming from.

But soot does exist in the air over the Pacific islands.

Bullshit. And clearly at nothing like the levels seen
in major citys, so you should see significantly less
of that jet black soot inside monitors used on
pacific islands than in major citys, and you dont.

Basic logic.

Did anyone claim that it builds up as fast in the Pacific Islands as it
does in Philadelphia? No, only that it occurs there! Significantly less
than what I see in Philadelphia can easily be a black covering of the
stuff! Heck, I have seen the stuff a couple millimeters thick in
some trashed TV sets in Philadelphia! A hundredth as much is more than
enough to be quite a noticeable totally black coating!

Your terminally silly 'soot magnet' theory has blown up in your
face and covered you with black stuff very spectacularly indeed.

You point out Ken's claim of sooty monitors
there, and he mentions studies that say soot
exists in the air there and everywhere.

At nothing like the levels seen in major polluted citys.

And your http://www.phoenixvis.net/causes.html sure mentions
"PM2.5 particles containing carbon, like soot from tail pipes",

Pity the pacific islands dont even get those
'brown clouds' that it is clearly discussing.

I did not say they get brown clouds, and you don't need a brown cloud to
get a coating of black soot on things that attract it!

and mentions that PM2.5 particles
can float in the atmosphere for days!

Pity the pacific islands dont even get those
'brown clouds' that it is clearly discussing.

flowing out of some thunderstorms when I ride airplanes.

It aint NOx. That never gets to anything like a high
enough density in the atmosphere for it to be that.

A layer of air 4 miles thick

You dont get that 'flowing out of some thunderstorms'

You sure as hell do; lightning is one source of the stuff!

I meant a layer of air 4 miles thick
doesnt 'flow out of some thunderstorms'

How about 4 miles wide, because I was viewing horizontally.

You dont get that either, and the PPM levels of NOx with
thunderstorms aint anything like that 1 PPM level anyway.

I did claim even less can make visible air coloration,

What matters is whether the concentrations that you
can get with thunderstorms are visible. They aint.

and thunderstorms are easily 4 miles wide.

Not the downdrafts out of them they aint. And while you
can certainly get some NOx formation in thunderstorms,
you certainly dont get entire 4 mile wide downdrafts from
thunderstorms with significant and visible NOx levels.

I was talking about updrafts that settled slightly downwards
after flowing from the top of the cloud. (Updrafts that move
outward hrizontally from the cloud top without any subsequent
downward motion are usually "anvil cloud".) I was talking about
big puffs of transparent brownish air that I have seen to the
sides of the upper portions of some thunderstorm clouds.

Pity the NOx levels seen in thunderstorm clouds aint even visible.

Then what do you claim is the transparent brownish stuff that I saw
blowing out of the upper regions of some of them? You have yet to offer
any evidence that NO2 is invisible in air masses several miles wide better
than noting that a web page I have known you to favor says the principle
cause of "brown cloud" is particles, and you have yet to refute that same
web page saying that NO2 gives "brown cloud" its color!

<SNIP lead-up to this that reverts back to
http://www.phoenixvis.net/causes.html>

The fourth para still says NO2 is what causes the color!

Pity about the first para.

Do you not comprehend that?

Pity about the first para.

Need anyone say more?

And also mentions PM2.5 carbon!
Fine carbon particles do exist in the air!

No one ever said they didnt. What was clearly being
discussed was whether the HEAPS OF JET BLACK
SOOT SEEN WITH VERY BADLY SETUP DIESEL
ENGINES is at all common in the air even in a builtup area.

You are stuck on "badly setup" or "very badly setup"
ones, while ones not so badly set up make fine soot!

Wrong. Because that stuffs the fuel economy. Soot is
always the result of incomplete combustion and that
always indicates less than efficient use of the fuel.

You snip out my mention of only small fractional percentage of the
carbon remaining uncombusted not doing much damage to fuel economy.

I didnt snip it out, it was quoted where it appeared, much further down.

Heck, they sure tolerate some carbon monoxide coming
out the engine! Carbon monoxide has even been used
as a major component of some fuel gases in the past!

All completely and utterly irrelevant to where
the jet black soot seen inside monitors even on
pacific islands with fuck all diesel engines in use.

Basic logic.

Carbon particle output being totally not tolerated because it reduces
fuel economy according to you even while significant CO output is
tolerated, as an argument that engines can't be producing any fine carbon
particles, is relevant.

In addition, there have gotta be plenty of engines somewhere between
"badly setup" and "maximum possible combustion efficiency". And surely
plenty of engines run richer than the ideal for maximum combustion
efficiency to get more power from a given size engine!

All completely and utterly irrelevant to where
the jet black soot seen inside monitors even on
pacific islands with fuck all diesel engines in use.

Basic logic.

Relevant because they do make soot and relevant because the soot does
easily travel thousands of miles and relevant because Pacific islands do
get some of the stuff!

Reams of your completely irrelevant crap
about 'brown clouds' flushed where it belongs.

Doesnt have a damned thing to do with what was
being discussed, WHERE THE JET BLACK SOOT
FOUND INSIDE MONITORS IS COMING FROM.

diesel makes realy fine soot

Yes, but you dont get much of that rising to any great extent.

Are you claiming that these fine particles don't go
where air goes and where other smoke particles go?

Yep, they're considerably bigger and fall rather than rise.
And they dont have the same hot air driving them either.

Have a look at a really badly setup diesel engine thats pouring
out lots of the black stuff some time and see where it goes.

And how about ones in not-so-bad tune that make finer soot?

You dont see that rising either.

Are you calling me a liar?

Nope, you just havent got a clue about the basics.
Those dont rise like say smoke from a fire does.

Sure as hell does,

Nope, fraid not.

I see it lots of times!

Getting completely silly now.

When it is visible, the finer stuff easily visibly rises!

Not far. THATS what matters.

Tell me why and how you think fine soot
does not rise the way other fine dust does,

Basically it aint got anything like the same volume
of hot air driving it as a fire, and the soot particles
are much larger and heavier, thats why they look
so bad. You dont get anything like that with a fire.

When sometimes they are small enough to preferentially scatter blue light?!

Diesel exhausts dont have anything like the same volume of hot
gases required to make it rise to anything like the same extent.

Besides, when smoke reaches 1,000 feet or a few thousand feet
it's usually mainly for reasons other than heat from the source.

Wrong. Thats why you get the inversion effect.

No,

Yep.

inversion effect is usually caused by the lowest
portion of the atmosphere being cooled by ground
that cooled overnight by radiating into space. Sometimes
also by warmer air at higher altitudes coming in from
aloft. And in high pressure areas where air is sinking, a stable air can
be exaggerated into an inversion. But mostly the lowest few thousand feet
cool overnight, and the lowest few hundred feet cool a lot overnight.
And a couple hours of sunlight can cause convection within a layer of
air that is below an inversion. Wind causes turbulence that can mix air
throughout all altitudes within a couple thousand feet of ground.

I didnt even comment on what CAUSES an inversion,
I was just saying that its the inversion that inversion
effect that produces smoke reaching only that level.

And nearly enough the same level whether a smoke source has no heat
source under it all or a 6-alarm fire under it!

So, depending on time of day, smoke can rise a few
hundred to a few thousand feet whether it has no heat
to support it at all or has a 6-alarm fire under it.

Have fun explaining why it rises.

Turbulence in the air layer below the inversion due to wind (common to
extend upward hundreds of feet and sometimes extends up a couple thousand
feet), and convection within the air layer below the inversion if sunlight
is reaching the ground.

especially given web pages giving a cause of
"brown cloud"'s color other than or in addition
to nitrogen dioxide usually being carbon particles!

Even you must have noticed that brown aint jet black.

Of course a cloud of particles fine enough to
preferentially scatter blue light will look brown to
transmitted light, but how does that make carbon brown?

Never said it does. YOU were the one waffling on about
soot from diesel engines having a damned thing to do
with the completely irrelevant 'brown clouds' that dont
have a damned thing to do with THE JET BLACK
SOOT THAT CAN BE FOUND INSIDE MONITORS.

You said the brown clouds had to be particles other than diesel engine soot

Lie. I JUST said that diesel soot can only be a tiny part of
the total number of particles that produce a 'brown cloud'

And your favored http://www.phoenixvis.net/causes.html sure seems to
think that soot particles from tailpipes are a major part of the
particulate content of "brown cloud". Do you propose that it's all coming
from gasoline engines (I only said diesel as an example and not as a
limitation anyway)?

in opposition to my claim that soot from diesel engines (and not
excluding other sources) can be what turns up inside monitors!

Pity it does even on pacific islands with fuck all diesel engines.

Basic logic.

Reams more completely irrelevant crap that has no relevance
what so ever to where the jet black soot found in monitors on
pacific islands with fuck all diesel engines, flushed where it belongs.

Where do you propose such carbon particles come from?

Most combustion of carbon based fuel.

I said diesel engines as an example and not as a limitation!

Pity its a trivial source of carbon particles, even in big citys,

and clearly cant be where the JET BLACK SOOT FOUND IN
MONITORS IN THE PACIFIC ISLANDS IS COMING FROM.

unlikely that many buildings in pacific islands are actually
heated with oil heaters, so you STILL HAVENT EXPLAINED
HOW MONITORS THERE HAVE THE SAME JET BLACK
SOOT SEEN IN THEIR MONITORS.

More basic logic.

I also said oil heated buildings as an example and not as a limitation.

Pity you STILL havent managed to propose where purported soot
in the atmosphere WITH PACIFIC ISLANDS is coming from.

And since whats seen inside monitors on pacific islands is
no different to whats seen in monitors in big citys, its just
a tad unlikely that its actually coming from the air at all.

Basic logic.

And your favored http://www.phoenixvis.net/causes.html
says that offending particles stay in the air for days!

Doesnt say a damned thing about PACIFIC ISLANDS
WHERE THE SAME SOOT IS FOUND INSIDE MONITORS.

Doesn't have to say "Pacific islands". It
does say the stuff stays in the air for days.

Where ITS CLEAR VISIBLE AS BROWN CLOUD.

It doesn't magically precipitate when wind blows the air somewhere else
and dilutes it!

It obviously aint with pacific islands that
dont even get the brown cloud effect.

Does that not indicate it can float in from populated/
industrial areas thousands of miles away?

Nope, because it clearly isnt a visible BROWN CLOUD there.

And that Ken that you liked to cite says that the air
in the Pacific islands does contain soot (and cited
studies, indicating jet engines as another source)

He didnt cite a single study and the OTHER individual that did,
didnt say a damned thing about the levels seen with pacific islands.

AND we just happen to have an atmospheric monitoring
station in Tasmania, whose primary role is to monitor
the levels of greenhouse gases AND THEY DONT
FIND SIGNIFICANT LEVELS IN THE AIR THERE.

So you bring up greenhouse gases? And significant levels of what? And
what do you call significant - monitors accumulating whatever it is at 1%
of the rate I have seen TV sets get in Philadelphia would have no problem
accumulating a noticeable totally jet black layer of the stuff!

So your terminally silly 'soot magnet' theory has blown up in your
face and covered you with black stuff very spectacularly indeed.

and he sure thinks that's probably where the monitor black dust comes
from!

Doesnt matter a damn what he may or may not 'think'

What matters is that the measured soot levels are fuck all
compared with what is seen in major polluted industrial citys
and since the same effect with jet black soot seen inside
monitors happens in both, it cant be your terminally
silly 'soot magnet' theory that explains that.

Basic logic.

1% of what TV sets accumulate in Philadelphia is more than enough to
form a noticeable jet black layer of the stuff!

Doesnt say a damned thing about PACIFIC ISLANDS
WHERE THE SAME SOOT IS FOUND INSIDE MONITORS.

Basic logic.

http://www.phoenixvis.net/causes.html mentions soot from tailpipes as a
major component of PM2.5 and says the stuff can stay in the air for days.

Pity pacific islands DONT GET THOSE BROWN CLOUDS ITS DISCUSSING THERE.

You don't need brown clouds to get a fraction of a percent of the
average soot content of Philadelphia air!

Above you say:
Pity about http://www.phoenixvis.net/causes.html
which does spell out the detail much
more and is in fact scientifically correct.

That page says over half your favored PM2.5

Taint 'my favoured PM2.5' That just
produces HAZE and aint SOOT.

is caused by gasoline and diesel vehicles.

Pity that aint SOOT thats as visibly
SOOT as is found inside monitors.

That page does give "soot from tailpipes" as a prime example of PM2.5!

Pity pacific islands DONT GET THOSE BROWN CLOUDS ITS DISCUSSING THERE.

Soot that fine is still soot and is still black when precipitated into a visible mass!

Pity pacific islands DONT GET THOSE BROWN CLOUDS ITS DISCUSSING THERE.

You don't need brown cloud to get half a percent of the average soot
content of Philadelphia air, and a monitor getting half a percent as much
of whatever I have seen in TV sets in Philadelphia will get a noticeable
jet black layer of the stuff!

<SNIP a couple additional batches of back-and-forth that so far have ended
with Rod Speed closing with the like of "Pity pacific islands DONT GET
THOSE BROWN CLOUDS ITS DISCUSSING THERE".>

Or do you make some claim that monitors
in the Pacific islands accumulate black sooty
dust *as quickly* as they do in Philadelphia?

I doubt anyone has ever bothered to measure that.

- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)

 

[Don Klipstein]

In <3f7753e7$0$23595$5a62ac22@freenews.iinet.net.au>, Rod Speed wrote:

"Glen Walpert" <gwalpert@notaxs.com> wrote in message
news:eildnvg15gjbeevcaa3359qqd6gvk4mrl9@4ax.com...
On Sun, 28 Sep 2003 05:07:13 +0000 (UTC), don@manx.misty.com (Don
Klipstein) wrote:

clip

Or do you propose another source of carbom PM2.5 particles, which is
a primary alternative candidate to nitrogen dioxide for the "brown
cloud"?

Diesel engines are certainly a major source of carbon particles fine
enough to disperse for thousands of miles, as are fossil fuel power
plants, wood cooking fires, and jet engines.

According to a Sept 2003 article in Photonics Spectra, "particulate
matter in the form of soot is one of the most significant pollutants
from jet engines". A soot measurement system is described, and a 3D
time/position/concentration plot is shown where the soot concentation
in an engine peaks at 4 mg/m^3 during run up to full power with steady
state full power emissions of 0.3 mg/m^3. They do not identify which
engine but do state that the system is being used to test new engine
designs, so this is probably about as good as it gets today. Note
that this soot is essentially invisible to the eye; jet engine exhaust
normally looks perfectly clear. (The particles are detected optically
after heating them to incadesence with a laser).

I have also seen references stating that emissions from wood fires and
fossil fuel combustion in India, China and Indonesia block up to 10%
of sunlight from reaching the surface of the earth for around 1000
miles downwind, an effect believed significant enough to alter long
term weather, and that soot is found in all recent snow/ice deposits
in Antartica.

Bottom line is that if you live on planet earth you cannot get away
from fine soot in your air unless perhaps you work in a good cleanroom.

Or live on a pacific island.

He says that pollution can get bad enough to reduce sunlight by 10% a
thousand miles away and that soot turns up in all recent ice and snow
deposits in Antarctica.

Given that I have seen TV sets with jet black stuff a couple millimeters
thick (eyeball estimate) in Philadelphia and that half a percent as much
would be a noticeable totally jet black layer that puts a noticeable black
smudge on anything you use to wipe it off with...

- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)

 

[Rod Speed]

Don Klipstein <don@manx.misty.com> wrote in message
news:slrnbnk3gs.hgt.don@manx.misty.com...

Rod Speed wrote
Don Klipstein <don@manx.misty.com> wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Don Klipstein <don@manx.misty.com> wrote

Reams of completely irrelevant crap about
brown clouds flushed where it belongs.

and how does that disprove presence
of fine soot particles in the air?

Never ever claimed that either.

I JUST rubbed your nose in the FACT that the jet black soot
seen inside monitors adjacent to the FBT is also seen in monitors
where there is fuck all soot in the air at all, most obviously with
pacific islands, and so that cant be where its coming from.

But soot does exist in the air over the Pacific islands.

Bullshit. And clearly at nothing like the levels seen
in major citys, so you should see significantly less
of that jet black soot inside monitors used on
pacific islands than in major citys, and you dont.

Basic logic.

Did anyone claim that it builds up as fast in the Pacific Islands
as it does in Philadelphia? No, only that it occurs there!

If YOU are claiming that it builds up much slower
in the pacific islands than in a heavily polluted city,
YOU have to provide the evidence that thats so.

Basic logic.

Significantly less than what I see in Philadelphia can easily
be a black covering of the stuff! Heck, I have seen the stuff
a couple millimeters thick in some trashed TV sets in Philadelphia!

Dont believe it.

And when you cant do anything better than this pathetic effort,
here goes the chain on the rest of your completely irrelevant
waffling on about what doesnt have any relevance what so
ever to where that black soot INSIDE monitors is coming from.

And that Ken that you liked to cite says that the air
in the Pacific islands does contain soot (and cited
studies, indicating jet engines as another source)

He didnt cite a single study and the OTHER individual that did,
didnt say a damned thing about the levels seen with pacific islands.

AND we just happen to have an atmospheric monitoring
station in Tasmania, whose primary role is to monitor
the levels of greenhouse gases AND THEY DONT
FIND SIGNIFICANT LEVELS IN THE AIR THERE.

So you bring up greenhouse gases?

Nope, thats just the primary role of that sampling site.

And significant levels of what?

Soot in the air.

Reams of desperate attempts to claim that the jet black soot
found in monitors on pacific islands is much lower in volume
than seen in a major polluted city flushed where it belongs.

Pity you dont have a shred of evidence that there is any difference at all.

 

[Rod Speed]

"Steve" <niftydog@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:e28c5b43.0309301653.1cdf80e2@posting.google.com...

Jackie <noreply@bigpond.com> wrote in message news:<3F696698.9050303@bigpond.com>...
What is that fine black 'dust' one sees inside monitors

wow, what a thread, congratulations Jackie, such an unassuming
question too!! Here's my $0.10. (can't get anything for 2 cents these
days!)

the "airflow" argument;
The air-con for our room is pumped in under the "computer flooring"
and the only outlet is through the holes in the top and bottom of the
racks. Hence, the air-con for our area is FORCED THROUGH all our
electronics out the top of the racks into the room.

Our monitors still get a good coating of black dust, despite constant
air flow. Albeit, probably a fairly low cu-ft/min rate.

the "adjacent parts" argument;
Black dust can be found on the following; the CRT, the anode cap and
HT leads, the FBT/Tripler, adjacent metal shields, adjacent circuit
boards... AND in LARGE QUANTITIES on the inside of the lid adjacent to
the anode cap. Some have suggested that the dust does not appear on
adjacent parts of the case. This is just plain wrong.

Nope, none of mine have a uniform or anything like that distribution
of the jet black soot all over the inner surfaces of the case.

Perhaps this is related to the upward direction of the airflow in our area.

Or perhaps not when most dont use monitors in any airflow at all.

I have heard of "hermetically sealed" car ignition components
being opened to discover black dust. Where does it come from?!
(http://www.technologie-entwicklung.de/Gasturbines/Russian_APU/Ignition_Box/ignition_box.html)

If it really is hermetically sealed, it obviously must be coming
from whats hermetically sealed up in that component.

Basic logic.

Negative Ion argument; see
http://www.airpurifiers-uv.com/tech~negativeions.htm
They call it "Black Wall", I like that name!

Dont get that effect here, just dust colored.

The equipment I refer to is also two stories below ground
in a purely air-conditioned environment. No fresh air down
here at all (unfortunately), no mysterious brown clouds either.

My conclusion;
It's hard to clean, it smells funny,

Mine doesnt smell at all. You're clearly talking about
something other than the jet black soot being discussed.

it gets all over the monitor

Have fun explaining why it doesnt with any of my monitors.

and you and it generally sucks. It's the excrement
of HT-loving invisible miniature Aliens for all I care.

You have always been, and always will be, completely and utterly
irrelevant. What you may or may not care about in spades.

It's black dust, get over it people.

Or tell you to go shove your head up a dead bears arse and
rub your nose in the fact that no one is holding a gun to your
head and forcing you to read what you arent interested in.

 

[DarkMatter]

On Wed, 1 Oct 2003 15:15:16 +1000, "Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com>
Gave us:

Reams of completely irrelevant crap about
brown clouds flushed where it belongs.

You are as mature as a freshly pinched brown load of shit, boy.
That is where you belong. Flush yourself, retard boy.

 

[DarkMatter]

On Wed, 1 Oct 2003 15:23:20 +1000, "Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com>
Gave us:

You have always been, and always will be, completely and utterly
irrelevant. What you may or may not care about in spades.

Hell, if you call him the "size" of irrelevance, that would make you
4 orders of magnitude smaller than a point source!

 

[Steve]

If it really is hermetically sealed, it obviously must be coming
from whats hermetically sealed up in that component.

no kidding!

Mine doesnt smell at all. You're clearly talking about
something other than the jet black soot being discussed.

Clearly the fine, dry black dust that gets all over our HT equipment
is ENTIRELY UNRELATED to the fine, dry black dust that gets all over
everyone elses HT equipment. It might not EMIT a smell, but it
definately has an olfactory effect if it enters your nose.

it gets all over the monitor

Have fun explaining why it doesnt with any of my monitors.

Take the comment in context and you'll realise that I didn't literally
mean "all over the monitor." I had previously outlined precisely
where it accumulates in our monitors.

 

[Rod Speed]

Steve <niftydog@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:e28c5b43.0310011550.26bcf1a3@posting.google.com...

I have heard of "hermetically sealed" car ignition components
being opened to discover black dust. Where does it come from?!
(http://www.technologie-entwicklung.de/Gasturbines/Russian_APU/Ignition_Box/ignition_box.html)

If it really is hermetically sealed, it obviously must be coming
from whats hermetically sealed up in that component.

no kidding!

Pity it makes the rest of your waffle completely irrelevant if its correct.

All the rest of your puerile silly shit flushed where it belongs.