Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: Eeyore on 2 Feb 2007 09:23 jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > So, if it's on its own circuit, how can the stove affect the > wiring of the plug of the radio? You clearly don't understand how RF energy propagates. It doesn't matter which circuit it's on. Graham
From: jmfbahciv on 2 Feb 2007 09:16 In article <4c267$45c1fd48$4fe767a$25790(a)DIALUPUSA.NET>, unsettled <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote: >Eeyore wrote: >> >> jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> >> >>>MassiveProng <MassiveProng(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote: >>> >>>>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com Gave us: >>>> >>>>> MassiveProng <MassiveProng(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Device off, sensors read baseline noise reading. >>>>>> >>>>>> Device on, sensors read local differential. Extrapolations get >>>>>>made, figures get arrived at. Task complete. >>>>> >>>>>No wonder my stove doesn't work. >>>> >>>>It is your brain that isn't working. >>> >>>Most devices these days are in warm start mode. Instead >>>of measuring before and after power-on, the tests need >>>to measure before and after _plug-in_. >> >> >> Nothing is measured when it isn't plugged in ! > >You display your ignorance. The background is measured. > >When's that brain transplant? That assumption those two have (eeyore and watshisname) is why the stove passed. If all techs are making this error during their compliance testing, the stove could pass. /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 2 Feb 2007 09:21 In article <45C1FCF9.C6D1E2F0(a)hotmail.com>, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> >> MassiveProng <MassiveProng(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote: >> >> > jmfbahciv(a)aol.com Gave us: >> >> > >> >> >>> You don't need an anechoic chamber btw. >> >> >> >> >> >>How do you measure the EMF in "noisy" environments? >> >> >>Or don't you need numbers anymore? >> >> > >> >> > Device off, sensors read baseline noise reading. >> >> > >> >> > Device on, sensors read local differential. Extrapolations get >> >> >made, figures get arrived at. Task complete. >> >> >> >> Your test has a big huge unfixable flaw. >> > >> >Perhaps you'd like to elaborate on that assertion ? >> >> The device has to be unplugged to get the baseline reading. > >That's what "device off" MEANS ! No, it doesn't. > >Good Lord ! How daft are you ? Not very. Now that I have finally figured out how this all could happened, I've ticked off another mystery. /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 2 Feb 2007 09:24 In article <45C20FE6.BA64EFD5(a)hotmail.com>, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > >krw wrote: > >> rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com says... >> > unsettled wrote: >> > > Eeyore wrote: >> > > > jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> > > >>Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> > > >>>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> > > >>>>MassiveProng <MassiveProng(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote: >> > > >>>>>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com Gave us: >> > > >>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>You don't need an anechoic chamber btw. >> > > >>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>How do you measure the EMF in "noisy" environments? >> > > >>>>>>Or don't you need numbers anymore? >> > > >>>>> >> > > >>>>> Device off, sensors read baseline noise reading. >> > > >>>>> >> > > >>>>> Device on, sensors read local differential. Extrapolations get >> > > >>>>>made, figures get arrived at. Task complete. >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>>Your test has a big huge unfixable flaw. >> > > >>> >> > > >>>Perhaps you'd like to elaborate on that assertion ? >> > > >> >> > > >>The device has to be unplugged to get the baseline reading. >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > That's what "device off" MEANS ! >> > > > >> > > > Good Lord ! How daft are you ? >> > > >> > > LOL >> > > >> > > These days "device off" isn't really off. >> > >> > It is when the power cord isn't plugged in you cretin. >> >> Dumb donkey, that's what "unplugged" means. Wow, you are dense! > >The standards do not use the word 'unplugged'. Exactly. So the techs measure an incorrect baseline. [gleeful emoticon] Man! I've figured out the procedure bug. /BAH
From: Eeyore on 2 Feb 2007 09:32
jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >> >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >> >> MassiveProng <MassiveProng(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote: > >> >> > jmfbahciv(a)aol.com Gave us: > >> >> > > >> >> >>> You don't need an anechoic chamber btw. > >> >> >> > >> >> >>How do you measure the EMF in "noisy" environments? > >> >> >>Or don't you need numbers anymore? > >> >> > > >> >> > Device off, sensors read baseline noise reading. > >> >> > > >> >> > Device on, sensors read local differential. Extrapolations get > >> >> >made, figures get arrived at. Task complete. > >> >> > >> >> Your test has a big huge unfixable flaw. > >> > > >> >Perhaps you'd like to elaborate on that assertion ? > >> > >> The device has to be unplugged to get the baseline reading. > > > >That's what "device off" MEANS ! > > No, it doesn't. Yes it does. > >Good Lord ! How daft are you ? > > Not very. Now that I have finally figured out how this all > could happened, I've ticked off another mystery. Have you even contemplated the thought that this stove might be defective ? Graham |