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: PaulJK on 26 Mar 2010 02:26 Jonathan de Boyne Pollard wrote: >>> But the danger of a shock is a function of the current, not the >>> power, and a 240 shock will only be twice as bad as a 120 shock. But >>> that still makes you tougher than us Yanks. >>> >> It depends. A degree of damage to cardio vascular system is related to >> voltage and body conductivity (i.e. current through the heart). You >> are right, this type of damage is directly related to voltage. >> >> However, the other kind of damage, the degree of burns one receives, >> corresponds to a product of voltage and current, i.e. it's >> proportional to voltage squared. >> > That's an interesting and idiosyncratic spelling of "Wattage" that you > have, there. (-: You've missed the point. And now after you've snipped the relevant texts, you'll never know what it really was. Try to be more ept. pjk
From: Nick on 26 Mar 2010 15:01 Jonathan de Boyne Pollard <J.deBoynePollard-newsgroups(a)NTLWorld.COM> writes: >> >> >> And now after you've snipped the relevant texts, you'll never know >> what it really was. Try to be more ept. >> > You didn't write anything more than what was quoted, kiddo. You're > playing from the Peter T. Daniels playbook. Who is? -- Online waterways route planner | http://canalplan.eu Plan trips, see photos, check facilities | http://canalplan.org.uk
From: tony cooper on 26 Mar 2010 15:44 On Fri, 26 Mar 2010 19:01:24 +0000, Nick <3-nospam(a)temporary-address.org.uk> wrote: >Jonathan de Boyne Pollard <J.deBoynePollard-newsgroups(a)NTLWorld.COM> >writes: > >>> >>> >>> And now after you've snipped the relevant texts, you'll never know >>> what it really was. Try to be more ept. >>> >> You didn't write anything more than what was quoted, kiddo. You're >> playing from the Peter T. Daniels playbook. > >Who is? \ Jonathon de Boyne Pollard doesn't show any more Usenet posting savvy than PTD. He hasn't yet figured out that replies that don't provide attributes are often meaningless. -- Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
From: Hatunen on 26 Mar 2010 19:19 On Fri, 26 Mar 2010 08:06:21 +0000, Jonathan de Boyne Pollard <J.deBoynePollard-newsgroups(a)NTLWorld.COM> wrote: >> >> >> And now after you've snipped the relevant texts, you'll never know >> what it really was. Try to be more ept. >> >You didn't write anything more than what was quoted, kiddo. You're >playing from the Peter T. Daniels playbook. If you want to take a >better approach, instead, have a look at some of the medical texts on >electrical shock that there are. They relate thermal injury to current >density, the general foundation for this being that thermal injury is a >direct consequence of 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. >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. Yes. It should have been "current squared" although "voltage squared" is also correct, the voltage being the voltage across the damaged area, not necessarily the voltage of the source. -- ************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen(a)cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
From: Hatunen on 26 Mar 2010 19:21
On Fri, 26 Mar 2010 21:42:33 +0000, Adam Funk <a24061(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >On 2010-03-26, Nick wrote: > >>>> And now after you've snipped the relevant texts, you'll never know >>>> what it really was. Try to be more ept. >>>> >>> You didn't write anything more than what was quoted, kiddo. You're >>> playing from the Peter T. Daniels playbook. >> >> Who is? > >on first? Correct. -- ************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen(a)cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps * |