Post deleted by Wordwind - 10/24/01 09:03 AM
Re: Dynamo - 10/24/01 10:23 AM
To me, dynamo has always meant a generator, first and foremost. It's use to denote a person of extreme energy and drive I have aways regard as an analogy to the original meaning.
My prized possesion, as an eleven-year-old, was a bicycle whose lights were powered by a dynamo, rather than by batteries like thise of most of my contemporaries.
Most motor cars also had dynamos to re-charge their batteries, up until the '60s when they were replaced by the more efficient alternator.
I assume that the latest developments in clockwork radio sets use the mechanism to drive a dynamo which powers the receiver and speakers.
My prized possesion, as an eleven-year-old, was a bicycle whose lights were powered by a dynamo, rather than by batteries like thise of most of my contemporaries.
Most motor cars also had dynamos to re-charge their batteries, up until the '60s when they were replaced by the more efficient alternator.
I assume that the latest developments in clockwork radio sets use the mechanism to drive a dynamo which powers the receiver and speakers.
Re: Dynamo - 10/25/01 12:05 AM
(in ref to RC's post....) wot 'e said.
stales
(PS Dynamo is laundry powder in Oz - and presumably elsewhere)
stales
(PS Dynamo is laundry powder in Oz - and presumably elsewhere)
Re: Dynamo - 10/25/01 01:03 PM
Good 'ol Chambers:
dynamo, the contraction for dynamo-electric machine, a machine for generating electric currents by means of the relative movement of conductors and magnets. [Gr. dynamis, power]
Learned about dynamos in Year 5 physics. I reckon you guys should get away from your PC and into the workshop more often.
stales
dynamo, the contraction for dynamo-electric machine, a machine for generating electric currents by means of the relative movement of conductors and magnets. [Gr. dynamis, power]
Learned about dynamos in Year 5 physics. I reckon you guys should get away from your PC and into the workshop more often.
stales
Re: Dynamo - 10/25/01 01:26 PM
Most motor cars also had dynamos to re-charge their batteries, up until the '60s when they were replaced by the more efficient alternator.
Us'ns, who refer to our motor cars as autos, or just cars, have always used the term generator for the dynamo.
Us'ns, who refer to our motor cars as autos, or just cars, have always used the term generator for the dynamo.
Re: Dynamo - 10/25/01 01:37 PM
And marvelous to me is the phenomenon of wind-up radios that play for quite remarkable lengths of time when wound up like an old-fashioned clock. Wonderful for the third world people or long term boondockized USns.
Magneto - 10/27/01 09:19 PM
...have always used the term generator for the dynamo.
I know this is *different technology, but there was a time when neither was the case.
http://www.old-engine.com/maghma.htm
I know this is *different technology, but there was a time when neither was the case.
http://www.old-engine.com/maghma.htm
Re: DC vs AC - 10/27/01 10:13 PM
Why not go back to a few fundamentals? When a wire is moved through a magnetic field, a current is generated in the wire. In physics the prof had a large permanent magnet shaped like a horseshoe. When he moved a plain wire between the two ends of the magnet, it made a big very sensitive meter needle move, and the faster he moved the wire, the further the needle moved proving he was making a weak electric current in the wire. If he made a bundle out of the wire and passed it between the North and South pole, the needle moved much more. So a generator is just a very long wire wound into an "armature". When this is made to spin very rapidly between two magnetic poles, you have a generator or dynamo. With different ways of winding the armature and placement of magnets, either direct current or alternating current can be produced. In the early days, Thomas Edison favored direct current, because it would drive a motor with more power, such as those used in elevators. But the direct current generated at Niagara Falls had its voltage drop so fast in the transmission lines that it could not be sent to New York City. Along came a Hungarian, Nikola Tesla, who showed that alternating current was more desirable because its voltage could be raised or lowered by transformers, and so it could be transmitted for great distances. So alternating current became the widely used system of today. When semi-conductors became available, it became possible to raise voltages of direct current, and now direct current can be transmitted long distances with very low losses, and then turned back into alternating current to use in the home. The early automobiles used direct current generators to charge the battery. But when motor was idling, current output was insufficient to keep battery charged. When semiconductors became available, alternators in cars could keep battery charged even when idling. So cars now all have alternators. Dynamo and generator mean essentially the same thing, a means of turning rotatory motion into electricity. Alternator just specifies that it produces alternating current.
There will be a quiz.
There will be a quiz.
Post deleted by Wordwind - 10/27/01 10:31 PM
Re: DC vs AC - 10/27/01 11:34 PM
In the early days, Thomas Edison favored direct current, because it would drive a motor with more power, such as those used in elevators. But the direct current generated at Niagara Falls had its voltage drop so fast in the transmission lines that it could not be sent to New York City. Along came a Hungarian, Nikola Tesla, who showed that alternating current was more desirable because its voltage could be raised or lowered by transformers, and so it could be transmitted for great distances. So alternating current became the widely used system of today.
An addition to this excellent explication.
In the earliest days there was serious debate whether electricity should best be provided by a large "central station" serving a wide area, or by multiple smaller generators each serving a smaller area. In the latter case a single large building, for example a department store, might have its private own generator to power its own lights (selling any excess capacity to its neighbors).
This latter was the dominant concept, for "central station" made little sense when even the largest generators produced only a very limited amount of power. And indded, shortly after the turn of the century generator-technology had reached its maximum: if piston and shaft were built any bigger, the machine would simply tear itself apart by the force of its own vibration.
At that point Insul of Chicago Edison (formerly of GE) acquired a large site ideal for a large generator (ample access for coal to fuel it). He demanded from GE a turbine-driven generator with 5,000 kwh capacity -- five times the largest prior turbine. They pushed the envelope to 5,000 -- and within a few years of experience using it, Insul's engineers had pushed it up to 9,000 kwh. This huge jump in capacity was decisive in favor of the central-station model.
This turbine was such a breakthrough that when it was finally retired decades later, it was placed on display at GE's site in Schnectady, NY.
An addition to this excellent explication.
In the earliest days there was serious debate whether electricity should best be provided by a large "central station" serving a wide area, or by multiple smaller generators each serving a smaller area. In the latter case a single large building, for example a department store, might have its private own generator to power its own lights (selling any excess capacity to its neighbors).
This latter was the dominant concept, for "central station" made little sense when even the largest generators produced only a very limited amount of power. And indded, shortly after the turn of the century generator-technology had reached its maximum: if piston and shaft were built any bigger, the machine would simply tear itself apart by the force of its own vibration.
At that point Insul of Chicago Edison (formerly of GE) acquired a large site ideal for a large generator (ample access for coal to fuel it). He demanded from GE a turbine-driven generator with 5,000 kwh capacity -- five times the largest prior turbine. They pushed the envelope to 5,000 -- and within a few years of experience using it, Insul's engineers had pushed it up to 9,000 kwh. This huge jump in capacity was decisive in favor of the central-station model.
This turbine was such a breakthrough that when it was finally retired decades later, it was placed on display at GE's site in Schnectady, NY.
Re: DC vs AC - 10/27/01 11:51 PM
Dear WW: I remember having a lot of fun with static electricity. At Christmas air in house was very dry because there was not provision for humidifying it. Bouncing a air inflated ball perhaps ten inches in diameter on wool rug would build up quite a charge. Holding finger out to unsuspecting patsy would make spark almost an inch long jump to him. When I worked nights in high priced mental hospital, and with rubber soled shoes scuffed along very expensive rug whole length of corridor, and then touched my massive door key to one of my buddies, he would jump a mile. I once made a fairly good Vandegraf generator after seeing one at Science Museum. If you know a youngster likely to be interested, instructions can be found on Internet by typing "Vandegraf static electricity generator" into Yahoo! search box.
Re: DC vs AC - 10/28/01 12:01 PM
Wow, thanks, Dr. Bill, and Keiva too. Electricity is something I have always shied away from, including learning about it. Really learning, I mean. Isn't it amazing how our interest in a subject affects our learning of it?(hi, N)
Re: DC vs AC - 10/28/01 01:48 PM
Dear Keiva: One of the unsung heroes or our modern electrical industry was a Brit named Samuel Insull. He first worked with Edison, but later with his own money got General Electric to build in Chicago a much larger power station than had been thought possible. He deserves the credit for making electricity in the home possible. I read a book that said he was wrongfully charged with fraudulent stock dealings that caused millions of dollars to be lost by investors. The book says the real culprit was J.P. Morgan, who was trying to get control of the industry.Insull also turned General Electric into the giant we know today.
Re: DC vs AC - 10/28/01 02:15 PM
Dr bill--re:Insull also turned General Electric into the giant we know today. Neutron Jack (Welsh) of GE might take some issue with this. and those of us who live near the Hudson, and have a case against GE poisoning our river with PCB's would be just as happy if GE wasn't such a giant.
Insul might have been a good man, Neutron Jack and GE are not good neighbors.
Insul might have been a good man, Neutron Jack and GE are not good neighbors.
Re: Insul - 10/28/01 03:41 PM
dr. bill (and anyone else interested): Electric City is a pretty good book, currently in print I believe, on Insul and the development of the electric-generating industry. It does get a bit wordily thick at times, however.
Re: DC vs AC - 10/28/01 05:20 PM
Dear of troy: The tragic thing about the PCBs is that it took so many years to discover their dangers. It is so inert chemically it was quite reasonably assumed to be harmless.
Re: DC vs AC - 10/29/01 12:03 AM
Thinking about Mr Insul/Insull. Tell me his name is a coincidence - nothing to do with insulation.....
stales
stales
Re: DC vs AC - 10/29/01 12:22 AM
Dear stales: shame on you. Insull really got a dirty deal. J.P.Morgan so diddled the stock market, where crookedness was very easy in those days, that investors panicked and sold out, causing Insull to go into bankruptcy, and as a crowning insult (sic) be labelled a crook. My enclopedia practically calls him a swindler. When I first heard of him fifty years ago he was called a swindler. He made a contribution of monumental proportions, and gets no credit.
Keiva spoke of early advocacy of a generator in every home. Terrible idea, inefficient, massive pollution, even dangerous. There is talk now of home generators run by fuel cells. Great for boondocks and third world, but suggesting it in big cities is insane.
Keiva spoke of early advocacy of a generator in every home. Terrible idea, inefficient, massive pollution, even dangerous. There is talk now of home generators run by fuel cells. Great for boondocks and third world, but suggesting it in big cities is insane.
Re: DC vs AC - 10/29/01 05:31 AM
In reply to:There is talk now of home generators run by fuel cells. Great for boondocks and third world, but suggesting it in big cities is insane.
Where do you think the big cities are, Dr. Bill? Jakarta Raya (Greater Jakarta) had a population of 10 million last I heard.
Bingley
Re: DC vs AC - 10/29/01 11:43 AM
By the way, isn't the word armature also the term used by sculptors for the wire frame they sometimes construct to hold whatever materials they may lay upon the armature to flesh out their forms?
I suppose a lot of you know that packaging on all products in Canada is bilingual. When you go bra shopping, boxes labelled underwire in English are labelled armature in French. This causes my mother and me no end of giggles!
It sure feels like "armature" is a better word for it sometimes!
I suppose a lot of you know that packaging on all products in Canada is bilingual. When you go bra shopping, boxes labelled underwire in English are labelled armature in French. This causes my mother and me no end of giggles!
It sure feels like "armature" is a better word for it sometimes!
Re: DC vs AC - 10/29/01 12:28 PM
When you go bra shopping, boxes labelled underwire in English are labelled armature in French. This causes my mother and me no end of giggles! It sure feels like "armature" is a better word for it sometimes!
But what about the word, "brassiere" itself? You've got the word "bras" in it, so you've already got the "arm"-ature implied, n'est-ce- pas? Of course, we men would prefer that they had les mains avec les bras, but that's not an uplifting subject, now, is it?
But what about the word, "brassiere" itself? You've got the word "bras" in it, so you've already got the "arm"-ature implied, n'est-ce- pas? Of course, we men would prefer that they had les mains avec les bras, but that's not an uplifting subject, now, is it?
Re: Dynamo - 10/29/01 12:40 PM
As regards alternatiors vs. generators, an alternator IS a generator, but it produces alternating current which is rectified to half-wave alternating current which can be used to charge a storage battery. The armature and field parts are reversed from their positions in an old-fashioned direct current generator, which also produces alternating current, but is internally rectified by the commutator. Since the heavy current is not carried by the commmutator and brushes, electrical and mechanical losses are far lower in the alternator type of dynamo.
For an alternative usage, read Alexis de Toqueville's description of the United States, wherein he describes the entire country as a dynamo.
For an alternative usage, read Alexis de Toqueville's description of the United States, wherein he describes the entire country as a dynamo.
Re: Dynamo - 10/29/01 02:26 PM
" half-wave alternating current"
Dear Geoff: Forgive my saying it, but you will confuse readers with that phrase. When the negative wave has been blocked, you have a pulsating direct current.
I still remember how horrid it could be to have a battery a couple years old suddenly quit in stop-and-go heavy commuter traffic because old generator could not charge battery under those conditions.
Dear Geoff: Forgive my saying it, but you will confuse readers with that phrase. When the negative wave has been blocked, you have a pulsating direct current.
I still remember how horrid it could be to have a battery a couple years old suddenly quit in stop-and-go heavy commuter traffic because old generator could not charge battery under those conditions.
Re: Dynamo - 10/29/01 02:54 PM
RE:When the negative wave has been blocked, you have a pulsating direct current.
Yes, but nowday, with the use of rectifiers and diodes, it a rather simple operation to convert a pulsating direct current into a rather stable direct current.
zener diodes are used to limit the upper portion off the wave, and (okay, so i don't remember all my physics!) something else controls the lower half of the wave form.
the same sort of thing is used all the time in analog to digitital conversion.. the analog signal is converted into a pulsating direct current, which is further refined into digital pulses--frequentcy modulation, -- with all sort of circutry built in to comp for dopler effects.
(a long ago standard for hard drives was Modified Frequency Modulation.. MFM, aka mother f****** magic), details from the dredges of my mind..
Yes, but nowday, with the use of rectifiers and diodes, it a rather simple operation to convert a pulsating direct current into a rather stable direct current.
zener diodes are used to limit the upper portion off the wave, and (okay, so i don't remember all my physics!) something else controls the lower half of the wave form.
the same sort of thing is used all the time in analog to digitital conversion.. the analog signal is converted into a pulsating direct current, which is further refined into digital pulses--frequentcy modulation, -- with all sort of circutry built in to comp for dopler effects.
(a long ago standard for hard drives was Modified Frequency Modulation.. MFM, aka mother f****** magic), details from the dredges of my mind..
Re: DC vs AC - 10/29/01 03:47 PM
Keiva spoke of early advocacy of a generator in every home. Terrible idea, inefficient, massive pollution, even dangerous. Great for boondocks and third world, but suggesting it in big cities is insane. uh, dr. bill, are you adjudging past positions as "terrible" based on the technology of the present?
In those days (before Insul/GE's breakthrough with the turbine generator, in roughly 1905) one simply could not build a generator big enough to produce enough power to serve a large area. So long as that was the case, any power sources would have to be diffused -- as indeed they had been throughout history. Given that, the advocacy of localized power-plants made a good deal of sense. Consider which would you prefer: for each building or small group of buildings to have:
(1) its own coal-fired generator, producing electrical power to be distributed by wire through the building; or
(2) its own coal-fired generator, producing mechanical power (a turning driveshaft), to be distributed by a series of belts and gears (more power-loss, by friction; plus danger of mechanical injury to person from whirring driveas and belt); or
(3) no power source other than muscle power -- human or animal -- with which to produce?
Post-edit: words in red above were added, as clarification, reflecting dr. bill's point below.
In those days (before Insul/GE's breakthrough with the turbine generator, in roughly 1905) one simply could not build a generator big enough to produce enough power to serve a large area. So long as that was the case, any power sources would have to be diffused -- as indeed they had been throughout history. Given that, the advocacy of localized power-plants made a good deal of sense. Consider which would you prefer: for each building or small group of buildings to have:
(1) its own coal-fired generator, producing electrical power to be distributed by wire through the building; or
(2) its own coal-fired generator, producing mechanical power (a turning driveshaft), to be distributed by a series of belts and gears (more power-loss, by friction; plus danger of mechanical injury to person from whirring driveas and belt); or
(3) no power source other than muscle power -- human or animal -- with which to produce?
Post-edit: words in red above were added, as clarification, reflecting dr. bill's point below.
centralize or distributed systems - 10/29/01 04:38 PM
the recent events in NY show the problem with centralized systems.. there is no direct power in over 1 square mile of NYC, since a substation was destroyed.. only facilities with back up generators didn't lose/have power. (there are giant "extention cords" all over the place bringing power into the area)
Telephone service (centralized sytem) has still not been restored to many, many places, both in and out of the no go zone. but the internet (a distributed system!) never went down.. i was unable to call my son, my phone had a dial tone, but i couldn't make anything but local calls. but 6PM on the 11th, i was able to get on line..
one of the underling causes of the conflict in mid east, is our (USA!) dependence on oil. maybe we should be using a distributed system, for power, and locally harnessing available resources. for me, there is almost a 10 year payback for a wind generating system, (and yes, i think my house, on top of hill gets enough of a breeze to power a wind generator) but if oil/natural gas where more expensive, my payback time might be shorter, and i might make the investment. I have too many trees on the south side, and live too far north to think of solar panels as an alternate energy source. but electricty has gotten expensive enough in CA to make them viable. in many sub urban areas, there are old, unused wells these could be used for geothermal energy conversion.
our centralize, power distributions monopolys have often pressured for laws to discourage distributed systems. maybe its time we rethought this. we have great infrastructure in US.. but like our old smokestack industries, maybe our investment in this technology is now becoming a hindrence.
Telephone service (centralized sytem) has still not been restored to many, many places, both in and out of the no go zone. but the internet (a distributed system!) never went down.. i was unable to call my son, my phone had a dial tone, but i couldn't make anything but local calls. but 6PM on the 11th, i was able to get on line..
one of the underling causes of the conflict in mid east, is our (USA!) dependence on oil. maybe we should be using a distributed system, for power, and locally harnessing available resources. for me, there is almost a 10 year payback for a wind generating system, (and yes, i think my house, on top of hill gets enough of a breeze to power a wind generator) but if oil/natural gas where more expensive, my payback time might be shorter, and i might make the investment. I have too many trees on the south side, and live too far north to think of solar panels as an alternate energy source. but electricty has gotten expensive enough in CA to make them viable. in many sub urban areas, there are old, unused wells these could be used for geothermal energy conversion.
our centralize, power distributions monopolys have often pressured for laws to discourage distributed systems. maybe its time we rethought this. we have great infrastructure in US.. but like our old smokestack industries, maybe our investment in this technology is now becoming a hindrence.
Re: DC vs AC - 10/29/01 05:00 PM
1
" In those days one simply could not build a generator big enough to produce enough power
to serve a large area"
Dear Keiva: But Insull did it, and has never been adequately honored.
" In those days one simply could not build a generator big enough to produce enough power
to serve a large area"
Dear Keiva: But Insull did it, and has never been adequately honored.
Re: DC vs AC - 10/30/01 02:23 AM
I goofed when I said Tesla was a Hungarian. He was a Croat. Here is URL containing 25K biographies.
http://search.biography.com/cgi-bin/frameit.cgi?p=http://search.biography.com/print_record.pl?id=11301 It is too long . Try edit,copy,,edit,paste You have to do a bit of navigating to find Tesla.
http://search.biography.com/cgi-bin/frameit.cgi?p=http://search.biography.com/print_record.pl?id=11301 It is too long . Try edit,copy,,edit,paste You have to do a bit of navigating to find Tesla.
arms and the (wo)man - 10/30/01 04:49 AM
In reply to:Of course, we men would prefer that they had les mains avec les bras
Well, there's always the Venus de Milo....
Bingley
Re: DC vs AC - 10/30/01 06:23 AM
Dear Keiva: But Insull did it, and has never been adequately honored.
Okay, Bill, I take your point. "More power to him then". There, will that do?
Okay, Bill, I take your point. "More power to him then". There, will that do?
Re: DC vs AC - 10/30/01 01:46 PM
"More power to him then"
Ah, yes, those were the words of the prison priest upon hearing that Clancy, who was about to be electrocuted, had gotten religion.
Ah, yes, those were the words of the prison priest upon hearing that Clancy, who was about to be electrocuted, had gotten religion.
Re: DC vs AC - 10/30/01 02:03 PM
Electrocution is stupid. I cannot understand why no government I know of has used carbon monoxide, which would be far more humane. The victim feels nothing, as witness the many accidents from it. Far better than lethal injections too.
Re: DC vs AC - 10/30/01 02:42 PM
[nerve touch warning: Anti-death penalty rhetoric follows]
Helen may not like the discussion of rape, but I have my own bete noir.
wwh opined that the (US) government should use carbon monoxide to carry out executions. Well it had to be the US, didn't it? No one else in the semi-civilised world is executing people anymore. The Arab countries do a lot of it, of course. But I did qualify "world", didn't I? Here are some very, very American reasons (to my way of thinking) why they wouldn't use carbon monoxide to execute the guilty and innocent alike with such gay abandon:
It'd take too long. You couldn't have the executions taking two hours. It's simply not sound-bite material. The prison governor or whoever needs to be able to come out within a few minutes and say "Hey, we did it again!". There's no rope, no drop and jerk, no needles, no electrodes, no clouds of potassium cyanide gas rising from the little can under the chair, no hiss as the pellets hit the water, no crackle as the power hits the electrodes, no visibile and audible punishment. Justice and injustice alike being seen to be done, and all that.
The outcome: The witnesses at the execution - and by extension the rest of the nation - wouldn't get their vicarious buzz. And there must be one, since the majority of Americans seem to accept the death penalty. The prison employees wouldn't get to feel all virtuous and wouldn't be able to say things afterwards like "S/he wasn't such a bad person, but we simply carry out the sentence of the court". There's no pizzazz or razzamatazz in that kind of execution. No drama. No proactivity. No market. No potential television rights. And McDonald's, that other great killer of people the world over, wouldn't buy the advertising rights if it were possible. All of which won't be very far away now that the former Governor of Texas is the President, and the President is currently riding on a surge of popularity.
Oh, I suppose you could colour the carbon monoxide, but the Supreme Court might see that as a cruel and unusual punishment and we couldn't have the death machine stopped, now could we? The moral majority would never stand for it, and think of all the unemployment it would create. Why, Huntsville in Texas might have to lose its McDonalds, it being the busiest of the death factories in the land of the free. And that could never be allowed. You can't have an insignificant thing like people's lives standing between a hamburger and its consumer, can you?
Besides, the FDA might never approve the colouring agent. Could turn out to be dangerous to the health ...
And worst of all in a way, no students on a journalism course would get to prove how nearly all of the executions carried out in one state for the past umpteen years had been miscarriages of justice. And one was one too many however you look at it.
Better to have no executions, eh? Especially since your (in)justice system seems so ready to condemn the wrong people and to do it with such consistent regularity ...
[/rant]
Helen may not like the discussion of rape, but I have my own bete noir.
wwh opined that the (US) government should use carbon monoxide to carry out executions. Well it had to be the US, didn't it? No one else in the semi-civilised world is executing people anymore. The Arab countries do a lot of it, of course. But I did qualify "world", didn't I? Here are some very, very American reasons (to my way of thinking) why they wouldn't use carbon monoxide to execute the guilty and innocent alike with such gay abandon:
It'd take too long. You couldn't have the executions taking two hours. It's simply not sound-bite material. The prison governor or whoever needs to be able to come out within a few minutes and say "Hey, we did it again!". There's no rope, no drop and jerk, no needles, no electrodes, no clouds of potassium cyanide gas rising from the little can under the chair, no hiss as the pellets hit the water, no crackle as the power hits the electrodes, no visibile and audible punishment. Justice and injustice alike being seen to be done, and all that.
The outcome: The witnesses at the execution - and by extension the rest of the nation - wouldn't get their vicarious buzz. And there must be one, since the majority of Americans seem to accept the death penalty. The prison employees wouldn't get to feel all virtuous and wouldn't be able to say things afterwards like "S/he wasn't such a bad person, but we simply carry out the sentence of the court". There's no pizzazz or razzamatazz in that kind of execution. No drama. No proactivity. No market. No potential television rights. And McDonald's, that other great killer of people the world over, wouldn't buy the advertising rights if it were possible. All of which won't be very far away now that the former Governor of Texas is the President, and the President is currently riding on a surge of popularity.
Oh, I suppose you could colour the carbon monoxide, but the Supreme Court might see that as a cruel and unusual punishment and we couldn't have the death machine stopped, now could we? The moral majority would never stand for it, and think of all the unemployment it would create. Why, Huntsville in Texas might have to lose its McDonalds, it being the busiest of the death factories in the land of the free. And that could never be allowed. You can't have an insignificant thing like people's lives standing between a hamburger and its consumer, can you?
Besides, the FDA might never approve the colouring agent. Could turn out to be dangerous to the health ...
And worst of all in a way, no students on a journalism course would get to prove how nearly all of the executions carried out in one state for the past umpteen years had been miscarriages of justice. And one was one too many however you look at it.
Better to have no executions, eh? Especially since your (in)justice system seems so ready to condemn the wrong people and to do it with such consistent regularity ...
[/rant]
Re: DC vs AC - 10/30/01 02:55 PM
Dear CK: you repeatedly refer to "the system". The government simply applies the law which has been passed. People on juries make horrible mistakes. But until the people change the law, executions will take place. And I would not swap our "system" for yours.
Re: DC vs AC - 10/30/01 03:29 PM
Bill, I used the word "system" precisely once. And you could have "ours". I don't want yours!
Re: DC vs AC - 10/30/01 04:24 PM
Dear CK: when enough of the people of the US feel the death penalty should be revoked, it will be. I do not feel that the death penalty is excessive for the worst forms of murder. You bleeding hearts ought to volunteer to provide the millions of dollars it costs to keep a murderer in very comfortable surroundings for the rest of his life. I think the money could better be spent doing more to help the poor. And I'd rather get back to discussing words.
Re: DC vs AC - 10/30/01 07:07 PM
Without jumping into politics too much, which is my historical wont, I have to comment on a few things. I don't think the general American get's a "buzz" from knowing someone has been executed. Most Americans just feel that justice has been done and the convicted has received what he deserves for committing a crime. The reason we still have the death penalty is because most Americans stand firmly by their Christian roots and conclude that "an eye for an eye" is fair. I can understand how it would be hard to feel normal if I know that the murderer of my sister is a free man. I agree with you that innocent people have unfortunately been victim to an imperfect justice system, but you can't claim that any other system is perfect. Plus, how do you purport to know more about the flaws of the American justice system than we do? I'm a product of our public schools and I know that they teach facts, not propaganda. There aren't national laws requiring teachers to say certain things.
Also, how in the world is McDonalds a death factory?
Also, how in the world is McDonalds a death factory?
Re: DC vs AC - 10/30/01 07:26 PM
actually Jazzo, Americans stand firmly by their Christian roots and conclude that "an eye for an eye", is fair., this is from the old testament, and (EDIT if someone, (Keiva, or Fr. Steve, or someone a better classical knowledge of the OT, (including Keiva's rabbi!) -end of edit can get us details on this particular phrase, as i recall, it is has a specific context, and most of the OT supports the idea "Vengeance is mine" sayeth the Lord.. (see the story of Cain and Abel, and the mark of Cain, etc)
one of the tenet of Christianity, is "turn the other cheek". the Christian thing to do, is to forgive. Not necessarily let them walk the street free to harm others, but there is no justification in Christianity (and almost none in Judaism) for the death penalty. i ain't much of Christian, but i am enough of one, that i can't let that slide..
one of the tenet of Christianity, is "turn the other cheek". the Christian thing to do, is to forgive. Not necessarily let them walk the street free to harm others, but there is no justification in Christianity (and almost none in Judaism) for the death penalty. i ain't much of Christian, but i am enough of one, that i can't let that slide..
Re: DC vs AC - 10/30/01 07:54 PM
careful, ladies and gentlemen .... careful....
A Last Word ... Ha! - 10/30/01 08:23 PM
Muted apologies (only muted) for my rant above. If people don't understand the place of McDonald's (and its ilk) in the growing obesity problem around the world, far be it from me to enlighten them. However, you could spare the time to read "Fast Food Nation" by Eric Schlosser.
I don't actually remember criticising any part of the American justice system other than the death penalty and the apparent American attitude towards it. And no, it's not sufficient for people to will something to change. It won't on that basis alone. Inertia is a wonderful thing.
I certainly said nothing about the American education system. I will if you like!
You would be surprised just how much people from outside America pick up about your institutions. The TV people endlessly make documentaries on them, the legal system being a firm favourite.
Neither do I favour people walking around free if they have committed murder or any other really heinous crime. I just don't think that judicial murder is a legitimate alternative when considering penalties.
fin.
I don't actually remember criticising any part of the American justice system other than the death penalty and the apparent American attitude towards it. And no, it's not sufficient for people to will something to change. It won't on that basis alone. Inertia is a wonderful thing.
I certainly said nothing about the American education system. I will if you like!
You would be surprised just how much people from outside America pick up about your institutions. The TV people endlessly make documentaries on them, the legal system being a firm favourite.
Neither do I favour people walking around free if they have committed murder or any other really heinous crime. I just don't think that judicial murder is a legitimate alternative when considering penalties.
fin.
Re: DC vs AC - 10/31/01 04:43 AM
Exodus 21: 22-25 (New International Version) "If men who are fighting hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman's husband demands and the court allows.
But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.
You can read the whole chapter here: http://bible.gospelcom.net/bible?passage=Exodus+21&version=NIV&showfn=yes&showxref=yes&language=english .
Matthew 5: 38-42 (New International Version) Jesus is speaking:
You have heard that it was said, `Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.'But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.
Complete chapter here: http://bible.gospelcom.net/bible?passage=Matthew+5&version=NIV&showfn=yes&showxref=yes&language=english
Bingley
But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.
You can read the whole chapter here: http://bible.gospelcom.net/bible?passage=Exodus+21&version=NIV&showfn=yes&showxref=yes&language=english .
Matthew 5: 38-42 (New International Version) Jesus is speaking:
You have heard that it was said, `Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.'But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.
Complete chapter here: http://bible.gospelcom.net/bible?passage=Matthew+5&version=NIV&showfn=yes&showxref=yes&language=english
Bingley
Re: DC vs AC - 10/31/01 07:53 AM
>The reason we still have the death penalty is because most Americans stand firmly by their Christian roots and conclude that "an eye for an eye" is fair.
Thank you Mr Bingley for your research. It ocurred to me that I can't think of a European country which has been so keen to follow its "Christian" roots: Italy, Germany, Spain, France, Vatican City, or maybe we just aint "Christian" enough.
In checking my facts, I came across the following article in Time Magazine:
Concerning the question of capital punishment, the U.S. and its allies stand on opposite sides of a great divide. All 15 members of the European Union have banned the death penalty, and the organization actively promotes its abolition throughout the world. Brussels has made abolition a precondition to E.U. membership, as has the 41-member Council of Europe, thereby spurring most East and Central European aspirants to do away with capital punishment.
http://www.time.com/time/europe/eu/magazine/0,9868,109552,00.html
Thank you Mr Bingley for your research. It ocurred to me that I can't think of a European country which has been so keen to follow its "Christian" roots: Italy, Germany, Spain, France, Vatican City, or maybe we just aint "Christian" enough.
In checking my facts, I came across the following article in Time Magazine:
Concerning the question of capital punishment, the U.S. and its allies stand on opposite sides of a great divide. All 15 members of the European Union have banned the death penalty, and the organization actively promotes its abolition throughout the world. Brussels has made abolition a precondition to E.U. membership, as has the 41-member Council of Europe, thereby spurring most East and Central European aspirants to do away with capital punishment.
http://www.time.com/time/europe/eu/magazine/0,9868,109552,00.html
Post deleted by Wordwind - 10/31/01 09:58 AM
Re: Inertia - 10/31/01 11:14 AM
of a body in motion to stay in motion while undisturbed.
Not quite. The body will remain as it was, while undisturbed - meaning in motion, if it was already in motion, or immobile, if it was already immobile.
Not quite. The body will remain as it was, while undisturbed - meaning in motion, if it was already in motion, or immobile, if it was already immobile.
Re: DC vs AC - 10/31/01 01:24 PM
re: "shame on you. Insull really got a dirty deal. J.P.Morgan so diddled the stock market"
You are reading wwaayy too much into my post! I have NO idea at what you're getting at with your reply - simply wanted to know if "insulation" was named after Mr Insull? And if not - what a coincidence - him being in the electrical game and all.
stales
You are reading wwaayy too much into my post! I have NO idea at what you're getting at with your reply - simply wanted to know if "insulation" was named after Mr Insull? And if not - what a coincidence - him being in the electrical game and all.
stales
Re: DC vs AC - 10/31/01 02:16 PM
Dear Stales: you have to be kidding. Insulation is from "insula=island". Actually reading encyclopedia bio of Insull, I wonder if J.P.Morgan's maneuver to force price of Insull's stock down was not one of the triggers of the Great Depression.
Re: Inertia - 10/31/01 09:17 PM
Forgive my twenty-five year old physics, but isn't inertia measured by the amount of force required to bring about a change of velocity or direction?
Re: Inertia - 10/31/01 11:00 PM
Here is a guide to inertia that appears to be less than 25 years old:
Newton's first law of motion states that "An object at rest tends to stay at rest and an object in motion tends to stay in motion with the same speed and in the same direction unless acted upon by an unbalanced force." Objects "tend to keep on doing what they're doing." In fact, it is the natural tendency of objects to resist changes in their state of motion. This tendency to resist changes in their state of motion is described as inertia.
Inertia = the resistance an object has to a change in its state of motion.
http://www.physicsclassroom.com/Class/newtlaws/u2l1b.html
Newton's first law of motion states that "An object at rest tends to stay at rest and an object in motion tends to stay in motion with the same speed and in the same direction unless acted upon by an unbalanced force." Objects "tend to keep on doing what they're doing." In fact, it is the natural tendency of objects to resist changes in their state of motion. This tendency to resist changes in their state of motion is described as inertia.
Inertia = the resistance an object has to a change in its state of motion.
http://www.physicsclassroom.com/Class/newtlaws/u2l1b.html
Re: Dynamo - 11/01/01 11:42 AM
DD started this thread with these words --
Well, here's a little thread starter that will probably go nowhere...
It's already gone quite a way, hasn't it?
Who would have guessed it? Dud dub, our dynamo!
Well, here's a little thread starter that will probably go nowhere...
It's already gone quite a way, hasn't it?
Who would have guessed it? Dud dub, our dynamo!
Re: Inertia - 11/01/01 12:40 PM
Thanks Jo. I thought I had it right.
Re: Inertia - 11/01/01 02:32 PM
My inertia defies definition. I am exhausted by effort required for four words.
Direct - vs - Alternating - 11/03/01 05:22 AM
...most Americans stand firmly...
When the day comes the we do actually® have most of Americans represented, I'll jump into this discussion... until then, y'all just "playing tennis" with words... except maybe CapK, who, hasn't had a history of such *gaming.
When the day comes the we do actually® have most of Americans represented, I'll jump into this discussion... until then, y'all just "playing tennis" with words... except maybe CapK, who, hasn't had a history of such *gaming.
Re: Direct - vs - Alternating - 11/03/01 06:25 AM
When the day comes the we do actually® have most of Americans represented, I'll jump into this discussion... until then, y'all just "playing tennis" with words... except maybe CapK, who, hasn't had a history of such *gaming.
Quoi?
Quoi?
Re: Direct - vs - Alternating - 11/03/01 03:10 PM
Dear CK: "Quoi" sounds very much like a racquet hitting the ball.
Re: Direct - vs - Alternating - 11/03/01 03:48 PM
Am I being served?
When it comes to 'humanics', I've *always perceived our exozzie® as more of a quoit player than an inflated "ping-ponger".
... but my patience still *seems to be askew.
When it comes to 'humanics', I've *always perceived our exozzie® as more of a quoit player than an inflated "ping-ponger".
... but my patience still *seems to be askew.
Re: Direct - vs - Alternating - 11/03/01 05:33 PM
Am I being served?
Cute, musick! That's the second 3-way play on words today!
But, my Dear, if by "exozzie" you are referring to Capital
Kiwi, may I strongly recommend that you post a correction/retraction/abject apology asap? Or he may just serve you up something quite unpalatable...
Cute, musick! That's the second 3-way play on words today!
But, my Dear, if by "exozzie" you are referring to Capital
Kiwi, may I strongly recommend that you post a correction/retraction/abject apology asap? Or he may just serve you up something quite unpalatable...
Re: Direct - vs - Alternating - 11/03/01 06:05 PM
But, my Dear, if by "exozzie" you are referring to Capital
Kiwi, may I strongly recommend that you post a correction/retraction/abject apology asap? Or he may just serve you up something quite unpalatable...
Hello, hello, thicko CapK here. What the hell are you both talking about?
And BTW, balls, Bill, balls. That's all I'm serving.
Kiwi, may I strongly recommend that you post a correction/retraction/abject apology asap? Or he may just serve you up something quite unpalatable...
Hello, hello, thicko CapK here. What the hell are you both talking about?
And BTW, balls, Bill, balls. That's all I'm serving.
Re: Direct - vs - Alternating - 11/03/01 06:47 PM
As I retract to a grovelic position of my own miscreance, I remain confident in the forgiving nature of the roaming Kiwi *species...
...as it's my geographics that now *seem to be askew.
...as it's my geographics that now *seem to be askew.
Re: Direct - vs - Alternating - 11/03/01 06:52 PM
Somebody gets "Zildch" on the geography quiz.
Re: Direct - vs - Alternating - 11/03/01 07:34 PM
Your lenient ways are profound, oh, larger-than-life *northern wing-challenged bird... but Shirley you've spied the tele to the extent that you are familiar with the *service to which "the kaintuck" and I have spouted as triptych?
... but Shirley you've spied the tele to the extent that you are familiar with the *service to which "the kaintuck" and I have spouted as triptych?
Re: Direct - vs - Alternating - 11/03/01 09:54 PM
Shirley you've spied the tele to the extent that you are familiar with the *service to which "the kaintuck" and I have spouted as triptych?
No, I don't think he has,
O cryptical one.
That hint, he missed, as
Another old pun.
Crying, are you, she said?
Let's not call him Shirley
Unless serving abed
Each night and plum early.
No, I don't think he has,
O cryptical one.
That hint, he missed, as
Another old pun.
Crying, are you, she said?
Let's not call him Shirley
Unless serving abed
Each night and plum early.
Re: Direct - vs - Alternating - 11/03/01 10:01 PM
j, thanks a bunch for up-clearing *that. now, where's ww's list of obfuscatory words when we could really use them....
Re: Direct - vs - Alternating - 11/03/01 10:40 PM
I'm *officially down-grading this from obfuciary to ancillary... (and don't forget my current *sense of direction)
...fwiw, "abed each night" is about the same time as "plum early"!
PBS teleported a sit-com from BBC titled "Are you being served?"... any more hints necessary and I'm moving to Jakarta. BTW, how are you, Bingley? Safe. I hope.
to ancillary... (and don't forget my current *sense of direction)...fwiw, "abed each night" is about the same time as "plum early"!
PBS teleported a sit-com from BBC titled "Are you being served?"... any more hints necessary and I'm moving to Jakarta. BTW, how are you, Bingley? Safe. I hope.
Re: Direct - vs - Alternating - 11/03/01 10:50 PM
As the Parthian stallions served ........
Re: Direct - vs - Alternating - 11/03/01 10:59 PM
For you, Dr. Bill... I'll stick by... but only with a little help...
Re: Direct - vs - Alternating - 11/04/01 12:58 AM
thanks a bunch for up-clearing *that.
You're welcome, Sweetie! Served up a bed of commentary on that racquet, didn't I? Did you like my numixmatic word, "cryptical"? [aside-whisper e] (Now watch, you-all, he'll up and tell me that's a real word.)
Dr. Bill, I forgot to tell you earlier: I LOVED your word,
"Zildtch"! Very apt, it were.
My Sweet musick, if you go to Jakarta, I'm coming with you.
You're welcome, Sweetie!
Served up a bed of commentary on that racquet, didn't I? Did you like my numixmatic word, "cryptical"? [aside-whisper e] (Now watch, you-all, he'll up and tell me that's a real word.)Dr. Bill, I forgot to tell you earlier: I LOVED your word,
"Zildtch"! Very apt, it were.
My Sweet musick, if you go to Jakarta, I'm coming with you.
Re: Direct - vs - Alternating - 11/04/01 01:38 AM
(Now watch, you-all, he'll up and tell me that's a real word.)
wouldn't want to disappoint...
1613 R. C. Table Alph. (ed. 3), Crupticall, hidden or secret. 1648 Boyle Seraph. Love xxiv. (1700) 145 That... cryptical Method and Stile of Scripture. 1844 De Quincey Greece under Romans Wks. VIII. 318 These cryptical or subterraneous currents of communication.
wouldn't want to disappoint...
1613 R. C. Table Alph. (ed. 3), Crupticall, hidden or secret. 1648 Boyle Seraph. Love xxiv. (1700) 145 That... cryptical Method and Stile of Scripture. 1844 De Quincey Greece under Romans Wks. VIII. 318 These cryptical or subterraneous currents of communication.
Re: Direct - vs - Alternating - 11/04/01 01:43 AM
Jakarta is not a destination I'd recommend at this time.
Post deleted by Wordwind - 11/04/01 02:02 AM
Re: Jakarta - 11/04/01 02:17 PM
Why nix Phoenix?
Post deleted by Wordwind - 11/04/01 03:19 PM
more damn(yankees)able sport talk - 11/04/01 04:17 PM
gonna be hard for those Nor'Easters to rise from that bed of ashes...
as they say during the basketball playoffs, it was just one game. i've heard some comparisons to the '60 world serious, in which the Yanks blew out the Pirates in a game or three only to lose the ultimate and seventh game to what these days is called a walkoff home run, by a weak-hitting infielder.
as they say during the basketball playoffs, it was just one game. i've heard some comparisons to the '60 world serious, in which the Yanks blew out the Pirates in a game or three only to lose the ultimate and seventh game to what these days is called a walkoff home run, by a weak-hitting infielder.
Zildch - 11/04/01 10:18 PM
It's hiding under the spelling "Z-i-l-d-c-h," Max.
see Dr Bill's post of 11/3/01 @ 13:52:04, Re: Direct - vs - Alternating, in this thread.
see Dr Bill's post of 11/3/01 @ 13:52:04, Re: Direct - vs - Alternating, in this thread.
Re: Zildch - 11/04/01 10:29 PM
Dear Max: Your interest in my jejune improvisation on "zilch"
is the high point of my day.
is the high point of my day.
Re: Zildch - 11/05/01 02:55 AM
I'm not sure that any one word would be adequate for describing such a heinous crime.
Sorry--next time I won't be so lazy, and I will liu!
Sorry--next time I won't be so lazy, and I will liu!
Re: Direct - vs - Alternating - 11/05/01 06:51 AM
In reply to:Jakarta is not a destination I'd recommend at this time.
Whyever not? Things here are much the same as ever. All the anti-bule (bule = albino, Caucasian) fuss has died down.
Bingley
Re: Zildch - 11/06/01 11:19 PM
I new it was possible to get it from both n's... I was onedering who wood take the most 'fence.