Peter T. Daniels ran out of electrical outlets; states rewiring entire house to be the only feasible solution.
in [Physics]
|
Prev: Most meteorites contain fossil bone remains
Next: Will simple questions defeat Porat .. lets see if they do.
From: Glenn Knickerbocker on 27 Mar 2010 00:54 On Fri, 26 Mar 2010 08:06:21 +0000, Jonathan de Boyne Pollard wrote: >determined by the wattage, the length of the shock in seconds, and the >amount of tissue the shock is delivered to. Thinking that "the degree >of burns [...] is proportional to voltage squared" is missing out a fair >number of dimensions. Uh, but isn't that the point of saying "proportional to" in the first place? As long as those dimensions are orthogonal, you can describe how the effect varies with changes in any one of them by simply ignoring the others. �R Blood is worthless, outside its original container. http://users.bestweb.net/~notr/davidcar.html --Don Rauf
From: Mike Barnes on 27 Mar 2010 05:29 Hatunen <hatunen(a)cox.net>: >On Fri, 26 Mar 2010 08:06:21 +0000, Jonathan de Boyne Pollard ><J.deBoynePollard-newsgroups(a)NTLWorld.COM> wrote: >>[...] >>energy being delivered, the amount of which is >>determined by the wattage, > >I suppose one might casually say that, but in fact the power >(wattage) is a function of the current and resistance, not >vise-versa. How so? -- Mike Barnes Cheshire, England
From: Hatunen on 27 Mar 2010 14:25 On Sat, 27 Mar 2010 09:29:58 +0000, Mike Barnes <mikebarnes(a)bluebottle.com> wrote: >Hatunen <hatunen(a)cox.net>: >>On Fri, 26 Mar 2010 08:06:21 +0000, Jonathan de Boyne Pollard >><J.deBoynePollard-newsgroups(a)NTLWorld.COM> wrote: >>>[...] >>>energy being delivered, the amount of which is >>>determined by the wattage, >> >>I suppose one might casually say that, but in fact the power >>(wattage) is a function of the current and resistance, not >>vise-versa. > >How so? Power is a result of passing a current through a resistance; current and rsistance aren't a result of power. -- ************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen(a)cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
From: Mike Barnes on 27 Mar 2010 15:19 Hatunen <hatunen(a)cox.net>: >On Sat, 27 Mar 2010 09:29:58 +0000, Mike Barnes ><mikebarnes(a)bluebottle.com> wrote: > >>Hatunen <hatunen(a)cox.net>: >>>On Fri, 26 Mar 2010 08:06:21 +0000, Jonathan de Boyne Pollard >>><J.deBoynePollard-newsgroups(a)NTLWorld.COM> wrote: >>>>[...] >>>>energy being delivered, the amount of which is >>>>determined by the wattage, >>> >>>I suppose one might casually say that, but in fact the power >>>(wattage) is a function of the current and resistance, not >>>vise-versa. >> >>How so? > >Power is a result of passing a current through a resistance; >current and rsistance aren't a result of power. But it seems to me equally valid to say that current is the result of generating power in a resistance. You can't pass current without generating power, and you can't generate power without passing current. They are two sides of the same of coin. It seems wrong to me to insist (as you seemed to be doing) that one is the cause of the other. [X-posting to sci.physics with some trepidation] -- Mike Barnes Cheshire, England
From: jimp on 27 Mar 2010 20:07
In sci.physics Mike Barnes <mikebarnes(a)bluebottle.com> wrote: > Hatunen <hatunen(a)cox.net>: >>On Sat, 27 Mar 2010 09:29:58 +0000, Mike Barnes >><mikebarnes(a)bluebottle.com> wrote: >> >>>Hatunen <hatunen(a)cox.net>: >>>>On Fri, 26 Mar 2010 08:06:21 +0000, Jonathan de Boyne Pollard >>>><J.deBoynePollard-newsgroups(a)NTLWorld.COM> wrote: >>>>>[...] >>>>>energy being delivered, the amount of which is >>>>>determined by the wattage, >>>> >>>>I suppose one might casually say that, but in fact the power >>>>(wattage) is a function of the current and resistance, not >>>>vise-versa. >>> >>>How so? >> >>Power is a result of passing a current through a resistance; >>current and rsistance aren't a result of power. > > But it seems to me equally valid to say that current is the result of > generating power in a resistance. You can't pass current without > generating power, and you can't generate power without passing current. > They are two sides of the same of coin. It seems wrong to me to insist > (as you seemed to be doing) that one is the cause of the other. > > [X-posting to sci.physics with some trepidation] > A resistance can not generate power, it can only dissipate it. The power dissipated in a resistance is a function of the resistance and the externally generated voltage applied to the resistance. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |