From: Jamie on 22 Dec 2009 20:51 Ron wrote: > Jamie wrote: > >> The way I see it, you're not able to comprehend the vast complexity of >> the intellectually enhanced American! >> >> Did that just about sum it up? > > > An Oxymoron shirley? > > ;) > > Dives for cover > Ron (Merry Christmas) Yeah. Hail Marry!
From: Jamie on 22 Dec 2009 20:52 Ron wrote: > Jamie wrote: > >> The way I see it, you're not able to comprehend the vast complexity of >> the intellectually enhanced American! >> >> Did that just about sum it up? > > > An Oxymoron shirley? > > ;) > > Dives for cover > Ron (Merry Christmas) Oops Hail Mary!
From: lurch on 22 Dec 2009 20:39 On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 17:41:24 -0600, krw <krw(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote: >On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 16:34:42 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell" ><mike.terrell(a)earthlink.net> wrote: > >> >>John Fields wrote: >>> >>> On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 11:06:47 -0700, "bg" <bg(a)nospam.com> wrote: >>> > >>> >Metric is for people that have to count on their fingers ! >>> >>> I prefer base 21. > >The subject excites you? > >> Only because 42 is the second number in that base. :) > >Everyone knows that 42 is in base 13. ;-) 42 is "The answer to everything".
From: Spehro Pefhany on 22 Dec 2009 20:45 On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 10:35:18 -0800, the renowned Fred Abse <excretatauris(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: >On Mon, 21 Dec 2009 03:17:14 +0000, Eeyore wrote: > >> Any given wire gauge covers a wide range of >> cross-sectional areas. > >Rubbish Stranded wire does vary somewhat in total conductor cross-sectional area for a given gauge size, but I don't think that is unique to AWG wire. For example, depending on stranding, an AWG 24 wire can be 384 to 475 circular mils in x-sectional area. 404 is the nominal area for a solid AWG 24, so it's -5% to +18%. http://www.seas.gwu.edu/~ecelabs/appnotes/PDF/techdat/swc.pdf Best regards, Spehro Pefhany -- "it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward" speff(a)interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com
From: lurch on 22 Dec 2009 20:41
On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 19:32:12 -0600, John Fields <jfields(a)austininstruments.com> wrote: >On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 16:34:42 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell" ><mike.terrell(a)earthlink.net> wrote: > >> >>John Fields wrote: >>> >>> On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 11:06:47 -0700, "bg" <bg(a)nospam.com> wrote: >>> > >>> >Metric is for people that have to count on their fingers ! >>> >>> I prefer base 21. >> >> >> Only because 42 is the second number in that base. :) > >--- >Nope, it's because I can use all my "digits" to count with. ;) > >JF metacarpals? |