Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #425054 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Garfield Dieter <igdle@rdlge.rf> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-07-15 18:57 +0000 |
| Last post | 2017-07-22 17:58 -0500 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 148 — 14 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Garfield Dieter <igdle@rdlge.rf> - 2017-07-15 18:57 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-15 19:36 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Garfield Dieter <igdle@rdlge.rf> - 2017-07-15 19:52 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-15 20:11 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2017-07-16 00:49 -0400
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-16 18:25 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-07-17 22:34 +0200
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Winfred Plumer <lewru@pulwr.cn> - 2017-07-17 14:53 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-17 10:49 -0500
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Winfred Plumer <lewru@pulwr.cn> - 2017-07-17 16:05 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-07-16 12:24 +1000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Garfield Dieter <igdle@rdlge.rf> - 2017-07-16 11:14 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Garfield Dieter <igdle@rdlge.rf> - 2017-07-16 11:18 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-07-16 12:35 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-16 10:07 -0500
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Winfred Plumer <lewru@pulwr.cn> - 2017-07-16 18:09 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-16 13:24 -0500
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Winfred Plumer <lewru@pulwr.cn> - 2017-07-16 18:36 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-16 19:22 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-16 18:47 -0500
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2017-07-17 00:48 -0400
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Winfred Plumer <lewru@pulwr.cn> - 2017-07-17 14:56 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-17 10:50 -0500
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-07-17 22:37 +0200
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Winfred Plumer <lewru@pulwr.cn> - 2017-07-16 18:08 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-16 13:26 -0500
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Winfred Plumer <lewru@pulwr.cn> - 2017-07-16 18:36 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-16 16:55 -0500
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2017-07-17 01:09 -0400
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Winfred Plumer <lewru@pulwr.cn> - 2017-07-17 14:59 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-17 10:51 -0500
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Winfred Plumer <lewru@pulwr.cn> - 2017-07-17 16:01 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-17 11:59 -0500
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-17 16:52 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-17 14:33 -0500
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-17 20:05 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-07-17 18:10 -0400
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-17 23:59 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-07-17 22:33 -0400
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-18 04:03 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-07-17 18:23 -0400
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-18 00:00 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-07-17 22:33 -0400
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-18 04:04 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-07-19 20:03 -0400
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-20 01:14 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Ustin Veterre <utve@nauoe.ct> - 2017-07-18 17:08 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-18 12:38 -0500
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Ustin Veterre <utve@nauoe.ct> - 2017-07-18 17:44 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-18 12:47 -0500
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Ustin Veterre <utve@nauoe.ct> - 2017-07-18 17:54 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-07-19 20:25 -0400
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-19 21:19 -0500
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-07-19 20:22 -0400
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Ustin Veterre <utve@nauoe.ct> - 2017-07-20 16:55 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-18 17:36 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Ustin Veterre <utve@nauoe.ct> - 2017-07-18 17:55 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-18 15:36 -0500
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Ustin Veterre <utve@nauoe.ct> - 2017-07-18 21:36 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Ustin Veterre <utve@nauoe.ct> - 2017-07-19 20:21 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-07-19 20:32 -0400
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Ustin Veterre <utve@nauoe.ct> - 2017-07-20 16:52 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Winfred Plumer <lewru@pulwr.cn> - 2017-07-17 14:58 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-17 10:52 -0500
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-16 18:40 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Winfred Plumer <lewru@pulwr.cn> - 2017-07-16 18:49 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-16 19:13 -0500
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Winfred Plumer <lewru@pulwr.cn> - 2017-07-17 15:03 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-17 10:53 -0500
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Winfred Plumer <lewru@pulwr.cn> - 2017-07-16 18:53 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-16 16:56 -0500
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2017-07-17 00:57 -0400
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Winfred Plumer <lewru@pulwr.cn> - 2017-07-17 15:11 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-17 10:55 -0500
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2017-07-16 20:35 +0200
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Winfred Plumer <lewru@pulwr.cn> - 2017-07-16 18:40 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2017-07-16 21:19 +0200
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Winfred Plumer <lewru@pulwr.cn> - 2017-07-16 19:30 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-16 16:59 -0500
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Winfred Plumer <lewru@pulwr.cn> - 2017-07-17 15:14 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-17 10:56 -0500
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-07-17 02:02 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2017-07-17 02:02 -0400
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Winfred Plumer <lewru@pulwr.cn> - 2017-07-17 15:21 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-17 10:59 -0500
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Winfred Plumer <lewru@pulwr.cn> - 2017-07-17 15:17 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-07-17 15:55 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-17 11:01 -0500
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Winfred Plumer <lewru@pulwr.cn> - 2017-07-17 16:09 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-17 11:58 -0500
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2017-07-17 01:01 -0400
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Winfred Plumer <lewru@pulwr.cn> - 2017-07-17 15:22 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2017-07-17 01:45 -0400
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Winfred Plumer <lewru@pulwr.cn> - 2017-07-17 15:33 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-17 11:04 -0500
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-16 19:25 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Winfred Plumer <lewru@pulwr.cn> - 2017-07-16 20:11 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-16 17:01 -0500
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-16 22:19 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2017-07-17 01:10 -0400
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-17 08:41 -0500
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Winfred Plumer <lewru@pulwr.cn> - 2017-07-17 15:34 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-17 11:05 -0500
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Winfred Plumer <lewru@pulwr.cn> - 2017-07-17 16:07 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-17 11:56 -0500
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Ustin Veterre <utve@nauoe.ct> - 2017-07-17 22:06 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-17 18:01 -0500
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-07-17 22:27 -0400
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-17 16:58 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-16 18:26 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Winfred Plumer <lewru@pulwr.cn> - 2017-07-16 18:47 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-16 17:01 -0500
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2017-07-17 00:46 -0400
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-17 08:43 -0500
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Winfred Plumer <lewru@pulwr.cn> - 2017-07-17 15:35 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-17 11:06 -0500
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-17 16:59 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-07-17 18:15 -0400
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-18 00:02 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-07-17 22:35 -0400
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-18 04:05 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-07-19 20:04 -0400
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-20 01:15 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-07-19 21:43 -0400
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-19 21:23 -0500
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-20 03:42 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2017-07-20 11:29 -0400
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-20 17:27 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-07-20 19:17 -0400
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-21 00:15 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-07-20 21:20 -0400
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-21 01:41 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-21 09:55 -0500
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-15 21:46 -0400
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-16 02:13 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-07-21 05:49 -0400
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-21 15:26 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-07-21 12:45 -0400
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-21 17:10 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-07-21 13:43 -0400
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-21 18:07 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-07-21 15:10 -0400
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-21 19:32 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-07-21 17:32 -0400
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-21 22:11 +0000
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-22 10:51 -0400
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Lofty Goat <rlwatkins@gmail.com> - 2017-07-22 17:55 -0500
Re: Question about power capacity of electrical motors. Lofty Goat <rlwatkins@gmail.com> - 2017-07-22 17:58 -0500
Page 6 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 Next page →
| From | Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-17 08:41 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <okier1$q03$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #425266 |
On 7/17/2017 12:10 AM, benj wrote: > On 07/16/2017 06:01 PM, Serg io wrote: >> On 7/16/2017 3:11 PM, Winfred Plumer wrote: >>> jimp wrote: >>> >>>>> Because of the skin effect, RF coils are very often made of silver >>>>> plated copper wire. >>>>> And wave-guides for microwave frequencies are almost always silver >>>>> plated on the inside. >>>> >>>> Next he will claim the plating is silver alloy (cough). >>> >>> You seemingly are totally uneducated to know anything about wave-guides. >>> When did you last time modelled such one, zzZZzzz.. never. >>> >> >> want to buy some waveguide, silver plated inside ? I have some for sale. > > Feh! Silver-colored alloy! Worthless! :-) I had a lot of older microwave stuff in the garage, sold most of it, I still have a "nice" spectrum analizer, 1980? vintage, weighs 110# goes from 100hz to 18Ghz. I think it was used for EMI testing, Eaton (or AI) 757, it let out some smoke a while back, which was from the power supply, I found schematics for it in Europe, but they did not include the chassis wiring (nor power supply) anyhow it ended up being a cold solder joint in the power supply. It works fine except it has extra birdies about 2.5Mhz off off a mixer. I know the mixer, may change it out, not sure if I can find an origional part there, I think it is in a 500 Mhz mixer. AND there are NO Processors! about 3 boards of discrete logic, I think HP orgionally designed it. about 18 boards, and the display is a module. yes, it is a true "working" boat anchor.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Winfred Plumer <lewru@pulwr.cn> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-17 15:34 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <okilef$11ho$7@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #425296 |
Serg io wrote: > On 7/17/2017 12:10 AM, benj wrote:. >> Feh! Silver-colored alloy! Worthless! > > I had a lot of older microwave stuff in the garage, sold most of it, > I still have a "nice" spectrum analizer, 1980? vintage, weighs 110# goes Please don't talk with benj, he is openly stupid.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-17 11:05 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <okin7o$19g1$5@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #425318 |
On 7/17/2017 10:34 AM, Winfred Plumer wrote: > Serg io wrote: > >> On 7/17/2017 12:10 AM, benj wrote:. >>> Feh! Silver-colored alloy! Worthless! >> >> I had a lot of older microwave stuff in the garage, sold most of it, >> I still have a "nice" spectrum analizer, 1980? vintage, weighs 110# goes > > Please don't talk with benj, he is openly stupid. > you want to buy analiser ? Impress Womens with it, for sure. and you can go boating...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Winfred Plumer <lewru@pulwr.cn> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-17 16:07 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <okince$11ho$17@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #425339 |
Serg io wrote: >>> I had a lot of older microwave stuff in the garage, sold most of it, >>> I still have a "nice" spectrum analizer, 1980? vintage, weighs 110# >>> goes >> >> Please don't talk with benj, he is openly stupid. >> > you want to buy analiser ? Impress Womens with it, for sure. > and you can go boating... Network analyser? The fewest know how to use it correctly. You need good probes, without which is useless.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-17 11:56 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <okiq81$1f19$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #425343 |
On 7/17/2017 11:07 AM, Winfred Plumer wrote: > Serg io wrote: > >>>> I had a lot of older microwave stuff in the garage, sold most of it, >>>> I still have a "nice" spectrum analizer, 1980? vintage, weighs 110# >>>> goes >>> >>> Please don't talk with benj, he is openly stupid. >>> >> you want to buy analiser ? Impress Womens with it, for sure. >> and you can go boating... > > Network analyser? The fewest know how to use it correctly. You need good > probes, without which is useless. > probes are cheap on ebay, and you need good matching, probes will load too much in the higher bands. use SMA gold plated price $0.37, the Gold costs $0.0001 https://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/Wholesale-Gold-Plated-SMA-Female-Pcb_60662499154.html?s=p
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ustin Veterre <utve@nauoe.ct> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-17 22:06 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <okjccg$ckv$3@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #425351 |
Serg io wrote: >> Network analyser? The fewest know how to use it correctly. You need >> good probes, without which is useless. > > probes are cheap on ebay, and you need good matching, > probes will load too much in the higher bands. You are not very clever buying network analyser probes on ebay. Seemingly inexperienced and uneducated.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-17 18:01 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <okjfkk$krv$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #425391 |
On 7/17/2017 5:06 PM, Ustin Veterre wrote: > Serg io wrote: > >>> Network analyser? The fewest know how to use it correctly. You need >>> good probes, without which is useless. >> >> probes are cheap on ebay, and you need good matching, >> probes will load too much in the higher bands. > > You are not very clever buying network analyser probes on ebay. Seemingly > inexperienced and uneducated. > Winfred is talking network analyzer, I'm talking spectrum analyzer, probes not that useful above 2GHz or so, and you can test probes using spectrum analyzer, if you experienced. so Ustin, why you say ebay probes no good ?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj@nobody.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-17 22:27 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <596d7208$0$11304$b1db1813$e2fc9064@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #425403 |
On 7/17/2017 7:01 PM, Serg io wrote: > On 7/17/2017 5:06 PM, Ustin Veterre wrote: >> Serg io wrote: >> >>>> Network analyser? The fewest know how to use it correctly. You need >>>> good probes, without which is useless. >>> >>> probes are cheap on ebay, and you need good matching, >>> probes will load too much in the higher bands. >> >> You are not very clever buying network analyser probes on ebay. Seemingly >> inexperienced and uneducated. >> > > Winfred is talking network analyzer, Winfred is obviously totally ignorant of all technology. > I'm talking spectrum analyzer, probes not that useful above 2GHz or so, > and you can test probes using spectrum analyzer, if you experienced. Analyzer-Schamalyzer! To Winfred it's all the same. > so Ustin, why you say ebay probes no good ? Only if you use paypal so as not to get burned.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-17 16:58 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <9u6v3e-s4g.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #425296 |
In sci.physics Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> wrote: > On 7/17/2017 12:10 AM, benj wrote: >> On 07/16/2017 06:01 PM, Serg io wrote: >>> On 7/16/2017 3:11 PM, Winfred Plumer wrote: >>>> jimp wrote: >>>> >>>>>> Because of the skin effect, RF coils are very often made of silver >>>>>> plated copper wire. >>>>>> And wave-guides for microwave frequencies are almost always silver >>>>>> plated on the inside. >>>>> >>>>> Next he will claim the plating is silver alloy (cough). >>>> >>>> You seemingly are totally uneducated to know anything about wave-guides. >>>> When did you last time modelled such one, zzZZzzz.. never. >>>> >>> >>> want to buy some waveguide, silver plated inside ? I have some for sale. >> >> Feh! Silver-colored alloy! Worthless! :-) > > I had a lot of older microwave stuff in the garage, sold most of it, > > I still have a "nice" spectrum analizer, 1980? vintage, weighs 110# goes > from 100hz to 18Ghz. I think it was used for EMI testing, Eaton (or AI) > 757, it let out some smoke a while back, which was from the power > supply, I found schematics for it in Europe, but they did not include > the chassis wiring (nor power supply) anyhow it ended up being a cold > solder joint in the power supply. It works fine except it has extra > birdies about 2.5Mhz off off a mixer. I know the mixer, may change it > out, not sure if I can find an origional part there, I think it is in a > 500 Mhz mixer. > AND there are NO Processors! about 3 boards of discrete logic, I think > HP orgionally designed it. about 18 boards, and the display is a module. > yes, it is a true "working" boat anchor. So no waveguide? -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-16 18:26 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <9ons3e-me7.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #425123 |
In sci.physics Garfield Dieter <igdle@rdlge.rf> wrote: > Sylvia Else wrote: > >>>> Nope. Resistivity at 20 C in Ohm meter Silver 1.59 X 10-8 Copper 1.68 >>>> X 10-8 Gold 2.44 X 10-8 >>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrical_resistivity_and_conductivity >>>> Gold is only used in electrical applications because of it's corrosion >>>> resistance. >>> >>> That's the idea, silver corrodes easily, its conductivity decreases >>> exponentially. Go to school. >> >> Rather weak attempt to weasel out of a mistake caused by a strange >> popular notion that because silver is a better conductor than copper, >> and costs most, gold must be better then silver because it costs more. >> Sylvia. > > You are an imbecile mam. Not only that, but uneducated and inexperienced. > Silver is strict avoided in electronics also because the capacitance and > induction induced in circuitry by that corrosion. Use your brain before > you post, lady mam. Babbling gibberish. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Winfred Plumer <lewru@pulwr.cn> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-16 18:47 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <okgcbt$1ksj$5@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #425190 |
jimp wrote: >>> Rather weak attempt to weasel out of a mistake caused by a strange >>> popular notion that because silver is a better conductor than copper, >>> and costs most, gold must be better then silver because it costs more. >>> Sylvia. >> >> You are an imbecile mam. Not only that, but uneducated and >> inexperienced. >> Silver is strict avoided in electronics also because the capacitance >> and induction induced in circuitry by that corrosion. Use your brain >> before you post, lady mam. > > Babbling gibberish. You are confusing silver alloys with silver, my friend. If I read you properly.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-16 17:01 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <okgnob$9qh$5@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #425200 |
On 7/16/2017 1:47 PM, Winfred Plumer wrote: > jimp wrote: > >>>> Rather weak attempt to weasel out of a mistake caused by a strange >>>> popular notion that because silver is a better conductor than copper, >>>> and costs most, gold must be better then silver because it costs more. >>>> Sylvia. >>> >>> You are an imbecile mam. Not only that, but uneducated and >>> inexperienced. >>> Silver is strict avoided in electronics also because the capacitance >>> and induction induced in circuitry by that corrosion. Use your brain >>> before you post, lady mam. >> >> Babbling gibberish. > > You are confusing silver alloys with silver, my friend. If I read you > properly. > jimp is right, your gibberish is babbling....
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <nobody@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-17 00:46 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <596c412a$0$21689$b1db1813$65575428@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #425190 |
On 07/16/2017 02:26 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > In sci.physics Garfield Dieter <igdle@rdlge.rf> wrote: >> Sylvia Else wrote: >> >>>>> Nope. Resistivity at 20 C in Ohm meter Silver 1.59 X 10-8 Copper 1.68 >>>>> X 10-8 Gold 2.44 X 10-8 >>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrical_resistivity_and_conductivity >>>>> Gold is only used in electrical applications because of it's corrosion >>>>> resistance. >>>> >>>> That's the idea, silver corrodes easily, its conductivity decreases >>>> exponentially. Go to school. >>> >>> Rather weak attempt to weasel out of a mistake caused by a strange >>> popular notion that because silver is a better conductor than copper, >>> and costs most, gold must be better then silver because it costs more. >>> Sylvia. >> >> You are an imbecile mam. Not only that, but uneducated and inexperienced. >> Silver is strict avoided in electronics also because the capacitance and >> induction induced in circuitry by that corrosion. Use your brain before >> you post, lady mam. > > Babbling gibberish. > For once Chimp is correct, however he will still reply that this is an ad hominem troll seeking attention. So sad.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-17 08:43 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <okieth$q03$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #425260 |
On 7/16/2017 11:46 PM, benj wrote: > On 07/16/2017 02:26 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> In sci.physics Garfield Dieter <igdle@rdlge.rf> wrote: >>> Sylvia Else wrote: >>> >>>>>> Nope. Resistivity at 20 C in Ohm meter Silver 1.59 X 10-8 Copper 1.68 >>>>>> X 10-8 Gold 2.44 X 10-8 >>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrical_resistivity_and_conductivity >>>>>> Gold is only used in electrical applications because of it's >>>>>> corrosion >>>>>> resistance. >>>>> >>>>> That's the idea, silver corrodes easily, its conductivity decreases >>>>> exponentially. Go to school. >>>> >>>> Rather weak attempt to weasel out of a mistake caused by a strange >>>> popular notion that because silver is a better conductor than copper, >>>> and costs most, gold must be better then silver because it costs more. >>>> Sylvia. >>> >>> You are an imbecile mam. Not only that, but uneducated and >>> inexperienced. >>> Silver is strict avoided in electronics also because the capacitance and >>> induction induced in circuitry by that corrosion. Use your brain before >>> you post, lady mam. >> >> Babbling gibberish. >> > For once Chimp is correct, however he will still reply that this is an > ad hominem troll seeking attention. So sad. the "ad hominem"s were a midget tribe in southern Europe that lived in holes in the woods.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Winfred Plumer <lewru@pulwr.cn> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-17 15:35 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <okilft$11ho$8@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #425260 |
benj wrote: >>> You are an imbecile mam. Not only that, but uneducated and >>> inexperienced. >>> Silver is strict avoided in electronics also because the capacitance >>> and induction induced in circuitry by that corrosion. Use your brain >>> before you post, lady mam. >> >> Babbling gibberish. >> > For once Chimp is correct, Not at all, you both are stupid. Incapable.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-17 11:06 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <okina7$19g1$6@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #425319 |
On 7/17/2017 10:35 AM, Winfred Plumer wrote: > benj wrote: > >>>> You are an imbecile mam. Not only that, but uneducated and >>>> inexperienced. >>>> Silver is strict avoided in electronics also because the capacitance >>>> and induction induced in circuitry by that corrosion. Use your brain >>>> before you post, lady mam. >>> >>> Babbling gibberish. >>> >> For once Chimp is correct, > > Not at all, you both are stupid. Incapable. > they are right; babbling: "Not at all, you both are..." gibberish: "stupid. Incapable." see ?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-17 16:59 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <f07v3e-s4g.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #425260 |
In sci.physics benj <nobody@gmail.com> wrote: > On 07/16/2017 02:26 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> In sci.physics Garfield Dieter <igdle@rdlge.rf> wrote: >>> Sylvia Else wrote: >>> >>>>>> Nope. Resistivity at 20 C in Ohm meter Silver 1.59 X 10-8 Copper 1.68 >>>>>> X 10-8 Gold 2.44 X 10-8 >>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrical_resistivity_and_conductivity >>>>>> Gold is only used in electrical applications because of it's corrosion >>>>>> resistance. >>>>> >>>>> That's the idea, silver corrodes easily, its conductivity decreases >>>>> exponentially. Go to school. >>>> >>>> Rather weak attempt to weasel out of a mistake caused by a strange >>>> popular notion that because silver is a better conductor than copper, >>>> and costs most, gold must be better then silver because it costs more. >>>> Sylvia. >>> >>> You are an imbecile mam. Not only that, but uneducated and inexperienced. >>> Silver is strict avoided in electronics also because the capacitance and >>> induction induced in circuitry by that corrosion. Use your brain before >>> you post, lady mam. >> >> Babbling gibberish. >> > For once Chimp <snip> Ad hominem by the attention seeking troll noted. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj@nobody.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-17 18:15 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <596d36fb$0$60138$c3e8da3$66d3cc2f@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #425356 |
On 7/17/2017 12:59 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > In sci.physics benj <nobody@gmail.com> wrote: >> On 07/16/2017 02:26 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>> In sci.physics Garfield Dieter <igdle@rdlge.rf> wrote: >>>> Sylvia Else wrote: >>>> >>>>>>> Nope. Resistivity at 20 C in Ohm meter Silver 1.59 X 10-8 Copper 1.68 >>>>>>> X 10-8 Gold 2.44 X 10-8 >>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrical_resistivity_and_conductivity >>>>>>> Gold is only used in electrical applications because of it's corrosion >>>>>>> resistance. >>>>>> >>>>>> That's the idea, silver corrodes easily, its conductivity decreases >>>>>> exponentially. Go to school. >>>>> >>>>> Rather weak attempt to weasel out of a mistake caused by a strange >>>>> popular notion that because silver is a better conductor than copper, >>>>> and costs most, gold must be better then silver because it costs more. >>>>> Sylvia. >>>> >>>> You are an imbecile mam. Not only that, but uneducated and inexperienced. >>>> Silver is strict avoided in electronics also because the capacitance and >>>> induction induced in circuitry by that corrosion. Use your brain before >>>> you post, lady mam. >>> >>> Babbling gibberish. >>> >> For once Chimp <snip> > > Ad hominem by the attention seeking troll noted. > Didn't I predict it? I said that even when I praised chimp for his keen insight and technical knowledge in recognizing babbling gibberish, he would respond to my my post just as he did calling it "troll" and Ad Hominem. I doubt senile chimp knows the meaning of either word. The chimps aren't talking they are simply imitation humans! He even sniped my praise so as to keep his insane pointless posts going. What a loser. Poor old geezer.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-18 00:02 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <oovv3e-kri.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #425393 |
In sci.physics benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: > On 7/17/2017 12:59 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> In sci.physics benj <nobody@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On 07/16/2017 02:26 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>> In sci.physics Garfield Dieter <igdle@rdlge.rf> wrote: >>>>> Sylvia Else wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>>> Nope. Resistivity at 20 C in Ohm meter Silver 1.59 X 10-8 Copper 1.68 >>>>>>>> X 10-8 Gold 2.44 X 10-8 >>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrical_resistivity_and_conductivity >>>>>>>> Gold is only used in electrical applications because of it's corrosion >>>>>>>> resistance. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> That's the idea, silver corrodes easily, its conductivity decreases >>>>>>> exponentially. Go to school. >>>>>> >>>>>> Rather weak attempt to weasel out of a mistake caused by a strange >>>>>> popular notion that because silver is a better conductor than copper, >>>>>> and costs most, gold must be better then silver because it costs more. >>>>>> Sylvia. >>>>> >>>>> You are an imbecile mam. Not only that, but uneducated and inexperienced. >>>>> Silver is strict avoided in electronics also because the capacitance and >>>>> induction induced in circuitry by that corrosion. Use your brain before >>>>> you post, lady mam. >>>> >>>> Babbling gibberish. >>>> >>> For once Chimp <snip> >> >> Ad hominem by the attention seeking troll noted. >> > > Didn't I predict it? I said that even when I praised chimp <snip troll drool> The troll starts his search for attention with an ad hominem. The only thing the troll has ever posted worth reading: "Sorry, Looperji, but while I do love to troll and lie" -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj@nobody.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-17 22:35 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <596d73d7$0$11353$b1db1813$e2fc9064@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #425407 |
On 7/17/2017 8:02 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com drooled: > In sci.physics benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: >> On 7/17/2017 12:59 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>> In sci.physics benj <nobody@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> On 07/16/2017 02:26 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>> In sci.physics Garfield Dieter <igdle@rdlge.rf> wrote: >>>>>> Sylvia Else wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Nope. Resistivity at 20 C in Ohm meter Silver 1.59 X 10-8 Copper 1.68 >>>>>>>>> X 10-8 Gold 2.44 X 10-8 >>>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrical_resistivity_and_conductivity >>>>>>>>> Gold is only used in electrical applications because of it's corrosion >>>>>>>>> resistance. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> That's the idea, silver corrodes easily, its conductivity decreases >>>>>>>> exponentially. Go to school. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Rather weak attempt to weasel out of a mistake caused by a strange >>>>>>> popular notion that because silver is a better conductor than copper, >>>>>>> and costs most, gold must be better then silver because it costs more. >>>>>>> Sylvia. >>>>>> >>>>>> You are an imbecile mam. Not only that, but uneducated and inexperienced. >>>>>> Silver is strict avoided in electronics also because the capacitance and >>>>>> induction induced in circuitry by that corrosion. Use your brain before >>>>>> you post, lady mam. >>>>> >>>>> Babbling gibberish. >>>>> >>>> For once Chimp <snip> >>> >>> Ad hominem by the attention seeking troll noted. >>> >> >> Didn't I predict it? I said that even when I praised chimp <snip troll drool> > > The troll starts his search for attention with an ad hominem. > > The only thing the troll has ever posted worth reading: > > "Sorry, Looperji, but while I do love to troll and lie" > > Anyone know where the reset button is on this geezer? I think his brain is stuck in some kind of loop. Perhaps Winfred can help.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 6 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web