Prev: Transocean says rig wellhead passed tests ahead of Gulf blast
Next: Standard Model In Trouble
From: deadrat on 31 May 2010 19:14
jimp(a)specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:

> In sci.physics deadrat <a(a)b.com> wrote:
>> jimp(a)specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>
>>> In sci.physics Bret Cahill <BretCahill(a)peoplepc.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Pressure sensors are good to five or 6 decimal places.
>>>>
>>>> Instead BP was off by several _orders of magnitude_.
>>>>
>>>> The excuse for that "error" or "omission" does not exist.
>>>
>>> Even if true, why should anyone be spending any effort whatsoever to
>>> instrument the flow?
>>>
>>> The problem is that it IS flowing and the objective is to STOP it as soon
>>> as possible, not do science experiments.
>>
>> Do ya suppose that the flow rate might have something to do with engineering
>> the proper solution for stopping (or even STOPPING) the leak, genius?
>
> Little to none, drooler.
>
>>> I suppose if your house catches fire you are going to be running around
>>> installing sensors to quantify the fire instead of working on putting it
>>> out?
>>
>> Do ya suppose that the leak might be nothing like a fire at your house,
>> genius?
>
> Do you suppose you have totally missed the point, drooler?

Oh, look! An ignoramus calls me a name.

No, I don't think I've missed the point. Determining the physics of the flow at
the leak might just be important in determining how to stop the leak.

Or do you think an oil leak one mile below the Gulf of Mexico is like a house
fire, genius?


 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: Transocean says rig wellhead passed tests ahead of Gulf blast
Next: Standard Model In Trouble