harnessing lightning, or not
in [Design]
|
From: Greegor on 13 Jun 2010 15:25 G > This "reverse lightning" might possibly G > be of some value if you want to harmess G > atmospheric static electricity. Archimedes' Lever 72.197.137.141 Cox Oceanside AL > ALL lighting, and certainly any that you AL > would end up capturing, regardless of AL > what direction it was shot or where you AL > caught it at, is 'atmospheric static electricity', AL > silly man. Then what are you arguing about? http://amasci.com/static/what_is_static.html
From: Greegor on 13 Jun 2010 15:42 G > This "reverse lightning" might possibly G > be of some value if you want to harmess G > atmospheric static electricity. Archimedes' Lever 72.197.137.141 Cox Oceanside AL > ALL lighting, and certainly any that you AL > would end up capturing, regardless of AL > what direction it was shot or where you AL > caught it at, is 'atmospheric static electricity', AL > silly man. G > Then what are you arguing about? http://amasci.com/static/what_is_static.html http://amasci.com/emotor/stmiscon.html#one
From: krw on 13 Jun 2010 16:40 On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 11:55:53 -0700, BlindBaby <BlindMelonChitlin(a)wellnevergetthatonethealbumcover.org> wrote: >On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 02:51:18 -0700 (PDT), Greegor <greegor47(a)gmail.com> >wrote: > >>This "reverse lightning" might possibly >>be of some value if you want to harmess >>atmospheric static electricity. > > ALL lighting, and certainly any that you would end up capturing, ^^^^^^^^ Lighting? What a putz, DimBulb. >regardless of what direction it was shot or where you caught it at, is >'atmospheric static electricity', silly man.
From: Joerg on 13 Jun 2010 17:06 John Larkin wrote: > On 12 Jun 2010 07:16:54 -0700, Winfield Hill > <Winfield_member(a)newsguy.com> wrote: > >> My Maxwell capacitors hard at work energy from harnessing lightning, see my post >> with photo, at the CR4 forum. >> >> http://cr4.globalspec.com/thread/55751/Lightning-Arrestor#comment579837 > > > You rate 3 "good" answers out of 14. That site has very high > standards! > > Why not use the lightning to heat water? The impedance match is > potentially better, and it's easy to store hot water. We could throw a > neighborhood hot-tub party after every strike, every 40 years or so. > > We don't get lightning here. I kind of miss it. > I don't miss it, seen to much electronics come to grief from it. Hey, why don't engineers at RF module manufacturers get it into their heads that the first part after the antenna jack has got to be an inductor to ground? Anything else will eventually go *PHUT*. -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ "gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam. Use another domain or send PM.
From: Michael A. Terrell on 13 Jun 2010 17:37
Joerg wrote: > > John Larkin wrote: > > On 12 Jun 2010 07:16:54 -0700, Winfield Hill > > <Winfield_member(a)newsguy.com> wrote: > > > >> My Maxwell capacitors hard at work energy from harnessing lightning, see my post > >> with photo, at the CR4 forum. > >> > >> http://cr4.globalspec.com/thread/55751/Lightning-Arrestor#comment579837 > > > > > > You rate 3 "good" answers out of 14. That site has very high > > standards! > > > > Why not use the lightning to heat water? The impedance match is > > potentially better, and it's easy to store hot water. We could throw a > > neighborhood hot-tub party after every strike, every 40 years or so. > > > > We don't get lightning here. I kind of miss it. > > > > I don't miss it, seen to much electronics come to grief from it. Hey, > why don't engineers at RF module manufacturers get it into their heads > that the first part after the antenna jack has got to be an inductor to > ground? Anything else will eventually go *PHUT*. Yawn. -- Anyone wanting to run for any political office in the US should have to have a DD214, and a honorable discharge. |