Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #638597 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-07-03 08:31 -0400 |
| Last post | 2017-07-26 14:08 -0400 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 337 — 28 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-03 08:31 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. bitrex <bitrex@de.lete.earthlink.net> - 2017-07-03 09:04 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-07-03 06:31 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Sегg io <innvalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-03 08:37 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-06 15:21 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-06 13:14 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-07-07 08:00 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-07 15:34 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-07 14:03 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-07 17:22 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-07-07 15:19 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-07 17:01 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-09 12:49 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Sегg io <innvalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-09 23:26 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Lofty Goat <rlwatkins@gmail.com> - 2017-07-08 20:04 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-07-10 07:32 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Sегg io <innvalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-10 12:21 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-10 17:35 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-10 16:10 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-10 17:40 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Sегg io <innvalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-10 17:22 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-10 19:49 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2017-07-13 20:17 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-13 21:42 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-13 20:53 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-14 02:05 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-13 23:25 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-03 17:04 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2017-07-03 14:04 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-03 18:28 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2017-07-03 16:14 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-03 20:57 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-03 16:14 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-04 00:45 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-03 20:11 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-04 04:55 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-04 02:29 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-04 06:49 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-04 18:02 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2017-07-04 22:59 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-05 04:51 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2017-07-04 21:33 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-05 07:16 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-05 16:47 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-05 11:08 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-05 21:02 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-05 19:12 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-05 22:16 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-05 23:30 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-06 09:35 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-06 10:05 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-06 21:20 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Sегg io <innvalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-07 08:03 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-06 21:19 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Sегg io <innvalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-06 13:09 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-04 23:05 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-07-05 10:52 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-05 18:07 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Sегg io <innvalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-05 14:21 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-05 19:34 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-07-05 15:32 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-05 23:00 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-07-06 10:12 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Sегg io <innvalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-06 13:15 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-07-07 06:20 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Sегg io <innvalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-07 09:39 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-07-07 08:11 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Sегg io <innvalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-07 14:13 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-06 20:04 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2017-07-04 20:08 -0600
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2017-07-04 09:11 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2017-07-04 11:47 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-04 18:19 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2017-07-04 23:04 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-05 04:56 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-04 23:16 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-04 18:12 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-05 07:20 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-05 16:54 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2017-07-05 18:42 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-05 23:07 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-06 09:30 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2017-07-06 06:35 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-06 16:34 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-06 21:25 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-07 04:56 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-07 02:09 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-07 20:18 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-07 06:19 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-07 17:13 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-08 06:49 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-08 17:13 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-09 07:12 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-09 17:44 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-09 12:48 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Sегg io <innvalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-09 23:27 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-10 07:11 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-10 16:30 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-11 06:49 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-11 17:47 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-11 13:15 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-11 16:27 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-11 14:46 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-11 18:36 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-11 18:20 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-11 21:31 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-11 22:12 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> - 2017-07-11 19:01 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-12 02:24 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-11 22:44 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-12 10:24 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-13 20:57 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-13 23:17 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-14 17:42 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-14 16:11 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-11 18:21 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2017-07-12 07:28 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-12 05:10 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-12 17:45 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-12 18:39 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-12 21:29 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-13 20:27 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-13 23:22 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-14 11:55 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-13 21:01 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-14 02:11 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-13 22:56 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-14 05:03 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-14 17:50 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-14 23:49 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-14 23:04 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-15 05:02 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-15 08:51 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-15 17:23 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-15 18:08 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-16 02:02 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2017-07-16 12:53 -0600
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-17 13:04 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2017-07-16 09:51 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-16 11:04 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-16 17:55 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2017-07-16 16:15 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-16 20:26 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2017-07-16 15:32 -0600
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-16 22:08 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2017-07-16 15:21 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-16 22:53 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-16 17:00 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-17 09:06 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-17 20:23 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2017-07-16 15:27 -0600
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2017-07-16 17:39 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> - 2017-07-17 09:46 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-16 22:16 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Lofty Goat <rlwatkins@gmail.com> - 2017-07-16 13:04 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-12 07:04 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-12 17:48 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-13 06:50 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-13 17:29 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-14 05:51 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-14 05:11 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-15 06:36 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2017-07-15 00:27 -0600
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-15 08:52 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-16 06:40 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-16 16:02 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-17 06:02 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-17 20:31 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-18 06:32 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-18 21:10 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-19 05:08 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-19 20:17 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-20 01:11 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-20 06:23 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-20 03:35 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-20 05:56 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-20 10:18 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> - 2017-07-20 11:34 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-20 16:25 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-20 20:42 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-20 16:40 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-20 19:54 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-20 19:15 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-20 20:38 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2017-07-21 07:01 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-20 16:24 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-15 17:26 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Lofty Goat <rlwatkins@gmail.com> - 2017-07-15 11:33 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-15 17:39 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-13 21:03 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-13 23:19 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-14 17:52 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-14 16:12 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-14 19:54 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-14 09:43 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2017-07-13 09:30 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-13 17:37 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-13 21:07 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-14 02:18 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-13 22:59 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-14 05:07 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-07-14 11:19 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-07-14 13:59 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-14 17:55 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-14 23:53 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-14 23:07 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-15 05:06 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-14 23:17 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-15 08:57 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-15 17:53 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-15 18:12 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-16 02:07 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-16 03:13 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2017-07-14 07:14 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-14 17:11 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2017-07-14 20:09 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-15 02:14 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2017-07-14 23:09 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-15 05:13 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-14 23:19 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-15 06:57 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-15 18:19 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-16 07:06 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2017-07-16 14:06 -0600
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-16 20:29 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2017-07-15 00:33 -0600
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-15 16:11 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-15 21:27 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-15 18:17 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-15 22:30 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2017-07-15 22:07 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-16 03:15 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-16 07:16 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-16 11:45 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-16 18:13 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-16 16:33 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-16 18:09 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-17 06:11 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-17 16:46 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-17 22:24 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-17 21:53 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-18 06:38 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-18 17:35 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-18 20:26 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-18 20:12 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-18 22:12 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-19 00:49 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-19 05:30 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-19 04:54 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-19 06:34 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-19 16:14 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-19 17:24 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2017-07-19 00:00 -0600
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-19 20:21 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-21 08:00 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-21 09:08 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-21 17:14 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2017-07-16 13:21 -0600
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2017-07-14 09:01 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-14 17:15 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-14 16:10 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2017-07-15 22:11 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-16 03:23 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2017-07-16 09:58 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-16 12:05 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-16 18:15 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2017-07-16 10:56 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-16 18:19 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-16 16:36 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2017-07-05 08:19 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2017-07-05 10:39 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-05 16:59 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-05 11:11 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-05 21:11 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-05 19:28 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-06 21:32 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-06 19:38 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2017-07-09 21:55 -0600
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-10 12:31 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Sегg io <innvalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-10 12:25 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2017-07-11 13:00 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-10 12:44 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-10 18:21 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-10 16:44 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-10 19:52 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-06 09:33 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-06 03:29 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-05 21:04 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-06 01:22 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-05 22:18 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-06 05:06 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-06 21:36 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-07 05:00 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-07 20:25 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-08 00:40 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-07 17:53 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2017-07-09 21:56 -0600
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-10 05:08 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-09 23:06 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-10 12:38 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-10 17:31 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-10 12:47 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-10 18:22 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-10 22:35 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2017-07-07 13:41 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2017-07-05 17:47 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2017-07-03 22:55 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-03 20:16 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Peter Stickney <p_stickney@verizon.net> - 2017-07-13 19:01 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2017-07-04 20:04 -0600
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2017-07-05 08:20 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2017-07-05 05:43 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-04 20:04 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-06 06:21 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Robert Baer <robertbaer@localnet.com> - 2017-07-03 18:35 -0800
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-06 05:01 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Sегg io <innvalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-06 13:38 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-06 05:10 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-10 17:16 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-06 05:13 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-06 08:35 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-07 10:31 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2017-07-09 22:15 -0600
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2017-07-10 10:43 +0300
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2017-07-10 21:32 -0600
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-10 12:39 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-12 10:58 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-12 17:54 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-12 15:18 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-12 20:00 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-12 11:42 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-13 04:17 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2017-07-16 14:05 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2017-07-16 15:08 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-26 13:33 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-26 17:58 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-26 14:08 -0400
Page 14 of 17 — ← Prev page 1 … 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 Next page →
| From | Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-14 16:10 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <3pjimch4j1u0lnghc4iqcs2e8998vejaoa@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #640467 |
jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>In sci.physics "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> wrote:
>> wrote in message news:nonk3e-pk9.ln1@mail.specsol.com...
>>>
>>>In sci.physics "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>> "David Mitchell" wrote in message
>>>> news:r5mdnSw3tNBsJvjEnZ2dnUU78S_NnZ2d@brightview.co.uk...
>>>>>
>>>>>jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>> In sci.physics David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> OK, what "stuff" would people be making at home?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jewellry, utilities, tools, gadgets.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Could you be any more vague?
>>>>>
>>>>>Yes. Yes I could.
>>>>>
>>>>>Things. People will make things. All of the things.
>>>>
>>>> I suspect 3D printing at home will be as successful as the personal
>>>> computer. I mean everyone knows they're useless at home and we'll only
>>>> need
>>>> a few major mainframes.
>>>
>>>Personal computer use in the home is dropping with increased use of smart
>>>phones for those important tasks such as posting on twitter and facebook.
>>>
>>
>> This actually hurts your point. A dozen or more years ago, no one would have
>> imagined using phones for what we use them for now.
>>
>> And really a smart phone is just a tiny computer that happens to make phone
>> calls. Again, it's the same argument made decades ago but folks not needing
>> computers in the home.
>
>Very few people want a computer in their home, most people want an
>entertainment device.
>
>>>> Which reminds me, I need to tell my friends who own 3D printers and
>>>> printing
>>>> parts to fix things at homes, tools, and tool holders and all manner of
>>>> things that I never would have thought of myself that they're wrong and
>>>> no
>>>> one will effectively use a 3D printer at home.
>>>
>>>How many people do you know that own 3D printers?
>>
>> I'd have to poll, but at least 2 I'm sure of, and I think the number is
>> closer to 6. And if I include access to them at libraries, workerspaces,
>> etc. then easily dozens.
>>
>>>
>>>I know about a dozen people that own things like welders, milling machines,
>>>drill presses, and lathes but no one that owns a 3D printer.
>>
>> Really? You need to get out more. I'd say the number of folks I know who own
>> 3D printers is about the same as those who own the other items you mention.
>
>I will admit I know very few teenagers.
>
>>>> Honestly, it's pretty damn presumptuous to claim that there's no future
>>>> to
>>>> 3D printing at home. I suspect 10-20 years from now we'll be laughing at
>>>> such claims. Like computers, it will continue to improve. It'll get
>>>> faster,
>>>> more capable, capable of using more materials, etc.
>>>
>>>Since no one in this thread has made that claim, your post is nonsense.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> That is basically your claim.
>
>Yet another knee jerker that reads what they think was written and not
>what was actually written.
>
Chimp, when everyone sees you saying something you insist you haven't
said, the problem is not everyone else...
--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-15 22:11 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <4JSdnQo8fZ_KVvfEnZ2dnUU7-b3NnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #640467 |
wrote in message news:vpan3e-dhi.ln1@mail.specsol.com... > >In sci.physics "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> >wrote: >> wrote in message news:nonk3e-pk9.ln1@mail.specsol.com... >>> >>>In sci.physics "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> >>>wrote: >>>> "David Mitchell" wrote in message >>>> news:r5mdnSw3tNBsJvjEnZ2dnUU78S_NnZ2d@brightview.co.uk... >>>>> >>>>>jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>> In sci.physics David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>> OK, what "stuff" would people be making at home? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Jewellry, utilities, tools, gadgets. >>>>>> >>>>>> Could you be any more vague? >>>>> >>>>>Yes. Yes I could. >>>>> >>>>>Things. People will make things. All of the things. >>>> >>>> I suspect 3D printing at home will be as successful as the personal >>>> computer. I mean everyone knows they're useless at home and we'll only >>>> need >>>> a few major mainframes. >>> >>>Personal computer use in the home is dropping with increased use of smart >>>phones for those important tasks such as posting on twitter and facebook. >>> >> >> This actually hurts your point. A dozen or more years ago, no one would >> have >> imagined using phones for what we use them for now. >> >> And really a smart phone is just a tiny computer that happens to make >> phone >> calls. Again, it's the same argument made decades ago but folks not >> needing >> computers in the home. > >Very few people want a computer in their home, most people want an >entertainment device. Exactly. Because people who claimed that "no one needs a computer in their homes" was basing the usage model on a very limited viewpoint of how computers were being used. But those "entertainment devices" are at their heart computers. > >>>> Which reminds me, I need to tell my friends who own 3D printers and >>>> printing >>>> parts to fix things at homes, tools, and tool holders and all manner of >>>> things that I never would have thought of myself that they're wrong and >>>> no >>>> one will effectively use a 3D printer at home. >>> >>>How many people do you know that own 3D printers? >> >> I'd have to poll, but at least 2 I'm sure of, and I think the number is >> closer to 6. And if I include access to them at libraries, workerspaces, >> etc. then easily dozens. >> >>> >>>I know about a dozen people that own things like welders, milling >>>machines, >>>drill presses, and lathes but no one that owns a 3D printer. >> >> Really? You need to get out more. I'd say the number of folks I know who >> own >> 3D printers is about the same as those who own the other items you >> mention. > >I will admit I know very few teenagers. > Which has jacksquat to do with what I said? What do teenagers have to do with my reply? >>>> Honestly, it's pretty damn presumptuous to claim that there's no future >>>> to >>>> 3D printing at home. I suspect 10-20 years from now we'll be laughing >>>> at >>>> such claims. Like computers, it will continue to improve. It'll get >>>> faster, >>>> more capable, capable of using more materials, etc. >>> >>>Since no one in this thread has made that claim, your post is nonsense. >>> >>> >> >> That is basically your claim. > >Yet another knee jerker that reads what they think was written and not >what was actually written. > > You keep doing that. I suggest you stop. -- Greg D. Moore http://greenmountainsoftware.wordpress.com/ CEO QuiCR: Quick, Crowdsourced Responses. http://www.quicr.net IT Disaster Response - https://www.amazon.com/Disaster-Response-Lessons-Learned-Field/dp/1484221834/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-16 03:23 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <0q2r3e-gp1.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #640719 |
In sci.physics "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> wrote: > wrote in message news:vpan3e-dhi.ln1@mail.specsol.com... >> >>In sci.physics "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> >>wrote: >>> wrote in message news:nonk3e-pk9.ln1@mail.specsol.com... >>>> >>>>In sci.physics "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> >>>>wrote: >>>>> "David Mitchell" wrote in message >>>>> news:r5mdnSw3tNBsJvjEnZ2dnUU78S_NnZ2d@brightview.co.uk... >>>>>> >>>>>>jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>> In sci.physics David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> OK, what "stuff" would people be making at home? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Jewellry, utilities, tools, gadgets. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Could you be any more vague? >>>>>> >>>>>>Yes. Yes I could. >>>>>> >>>>>>Things. People will make things. All of the things. >>>>> >>>>> I suspect 3D printing at home will be as successful as the personal >>>>> computer. I mean everyone knows they're useless at home and we'll only >>>>> need >>>>> a few major mainframes. >>>> >>>>Personal computer use in the home is dropping with increased use of smart >>>>phones for those important tasks such as posting on twitter and facebook. >>>> >>> >>> This actually hurts your point. A dozen or more years ago, no one would >>> have >>> imagined using phones for what we use them for now. >>> >>> And really a smart phone is just a tiny computer that happens to make >>> phone >>> calls. Again, it's the same argument made decades ago but folks not >>> needing >>> computers in the home. >> >>Very few people want a computer in their home, most people want an >>entertainment device. > > Exactly. Because people who claimed that "no one needs a computer in their > homes" was basing the usage model on a very limited viewpoint of how > computers were being used. > But those "entertainment devices" are at their heart computers. Irrelevant to the point. >>>>> Which reminds me, I need to tell my friends who own 3D printers and >>>>> printing >>>>> parts to fix things at homes, tools, and tool holders and all manner of >>>>> things that I never would have thought of myself that they're wrong and >>>>> no >>>>> one will effectively use a 3D printer at home. >>>> >>>>How many people do you know that own 3D printers? >>> >>> I'd have to poll, but at least 2 I'm sure of, and I think the number is >>> closer to 6. And if I include access to them at libraries, workerspaces, >>> etc. then easily dozens. >>> >>>> >>>>I know about a dozen people that own things like welders, milling >>>>machines, >>>>drill presses, and lathes but no one that owns a 3D printer. >>> >>> Really? You need to get out more. I'd say the number of folks I know who >>> own >>> 3D printers is about the same as those who own the other items you >>> mention. >> >>I will admit I know very few teenagers. >> > > Which has jacksquat to do with what I said? What do teenagers have to do > with my reply? It would be primarily teenagers that would be interested in making essentially useless gadgets and jewelry. Again, I know about a dozen people that own things like welders, milling machines, drill presses, and lathes but no one that owns a 3D printer. All of these are middle aged or older adults. >>>>> Honestly, it's pretty damn presumptuous to claim that there's no future >>>>> to >>>>> 3D printing at home. I suspect 10-20 years from now we'll be laughing >>>>> at >>>>> such claims. Like computers, it will continue to improve. It'll get >>>>> faster, >>>>> more capable, capable of using more materials, etc. >>>> >>>>Since no one in this thread has made that claim, your post is nonsense. >>>> >>>> >>> >>> That is basically your claim. >> >>Yet another knee jerker that reads what they think was written and not >>what was actually written. >> >> > > You keep doing that. I suggest you stop. When you stop knee jerking and read what was actually written. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-16 09:58 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.33d53b1ef8329f7a989991@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #640731 |
In article <0q2r3e-gp1.ln1@mail.specsol.com>, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com says... > >> > >>I will admit I know very few teenagers. > >> > > > > Which has jacksquat to do with what I said? What do teenagers have to do > > with my reply? > > It would be primarily teenagers that would be interested in making > essentially useless gadgets and jewelry. > > Again, I know about a dozen people that own things like welders, milling > machines, drill presses, and lathes but no one that owns a 3D printer. > > All of these are middle aged or older adults. > Do they have turntables and tube amps becuase of the "warm sound" because CDs are "harsh"? VHS tapes for movies? No? Then do they also have huge collections of CDs and DVDs? HD audio discs and BluRay discs? These days, I keep most of my media on a 2TB server, and that is considered antiquated by people younger than me who simply use their phones coupled with streaming services to listen to music and watch movies and TV shows. The idea of "owning" music and movies is outdated to quite a few younger people. Why would anyone clutter their house with that crap when the Internet can provide anything you want, anywhere you want, anytime you want. Technologies improve, costs go down, times change. Jeff -- All opinions posted by me on Usenet News are mine, and mine alone. These posts do not reflect the opinions of my family, friends, employer, or any organization that I am a member of.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-16 12:05 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <okg6cl$1d6s$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #640783 |
On 7/16/2017 8:58 AM, Jeff Findley wrote: > In article <0q2r3e-gp1.ln1@mail.specsol.com>, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com > says... >>>> >>>> I will admit I know very few teenagers. >>>> >>> >>> Which has jacksquat to do with what I said? What do teenagers have to do >>> with my reply? >> >> It would be primarily teenagers that would be interested in making >> essentially useless gadgets and jewelry. >> >> Again, I know about a dozen people that own things like welders, milling >> machines, drill presses, and lathes but no one that owns a 3D printer. >> >> All of these are middle aged or older adults. >> > > Do they have turntables and tube amps becuase of the "warm sound" > because CDs are "harsh"? VHS tapes for movies? No? Then do they also > have huge collections of CDs and DVDs? HD audio discs and BluRay discs? > > These days, I keep most of my media on a 2TB server, and that is > considered antiquated by people younger than me who simply use their > phones coupled with streaming services to listen to music and watch > movies and TV shows. The idea of "owning" music and movies is outdated > to quite a few younger people. Why would anyone clutter their house > with that crap when the Internet can provide anything you want, anywhere > you want, anytime you want. > > Technologies improve, costs go down, times change. > > Jeff > heads up, digital storage has *major long term storage problems*, HDs last 5 to 7 years at best, they have many failure modes. the technology improved, but the reliability went down. Too easy to lose files now, or erase them. silicon storage is not mature enough yet, it could last a long time, but many thumb drives get blown out as power comes on or goes off. CDs are Al foil on plastic, and a drop of ketchup will eat a hole in the AL layer, making the disk usless. (my kid this this) Also, heat, age, UV will all seperate the AL from the plastic, destroying data. Very poor long term stuff, the AL layer also will oxidize on you. (archival CDs disks have protective layer of plastic on it.) storing it in the cloud is another problem, read the T+C's they are not responcable for your data, the company can go out of business, no data, or get sold and teh new company sells your files, as you gave them to them, so they own it, you gave that right up, like those photos you uploaded to Facebook, are not yours anymore.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-16 18:15 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <u2ns3e-me7.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #640783 |
In sci.physics Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> wrote: > In article <0q2r3e-gp1.ln1@mail.specsol.com>, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com > says... >> >> >> >>I will admit I know very few teenagers. >> >> >> > >> > Which has jacksquat to do with what I said? What do teenagers have to do >> > with my reply? >> >> It would be primarily teenagers that would be interested in making >> essentially useless gadgets and jewelry. >> >> Again, I know about a dozen people that own things like welders, milling >> machines, drill presses, and lathes but no one that owns a 3D printer. >> >> All of these are middle aged or older adults. >> > > Do they have turntables and tube amps becuase of the "warm sound" > because CDs are "harsh"? VHS tapes for movies? No? Then do they also > have huge collections of CDs and DVDs? HD audio discs and BluRay discs? No. <snip irrelevant crap about media> -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-16 10:56 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <4LqdnfYUHL4B4_bEnZ2dnUU7-TnNnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #640731 |
wrote in message news:0q2r3e-gp1.ln1@mail.specsol.com... > >In sci.physics "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> >wrote: >> wrote in message news:vpan3e-dhi.ln1@mail.specsol.com... >>> >>>In sci.physics "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> >>>wrote: >>>> wrote in message news:nonk3e-pk9.ln1@mail.specsol.com... >>>>> >>>>>In sci.physics "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> >>>>>wrote: >>>>>> "David Mitchell" wrote in message >>>>>> news:r5mdnSw3tNBsJvjEnZ2dnUU78S_NnZ2d@brightview.co.uk... >>>>>>> >>>>>>>jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>>> In sci.physics David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> OK, what "stuff" would people be making at home? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Jewellry, utilities, tools, gadgets. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Could you be any more vague? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Yes. Yes I could. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Things. People will make things. All of the things. >>>>>> >>>>>> I suspect 3D printing at home will be as successful as the personal >>>>>> computer. I mean everyone knows they're useless at home and we'll >>>>>> only >>>>>> need >>>>>> a few major mainframes. >>>>> >>>>>Personal computer use in the home is dropping with increased use of >>>>>smart >>>>>phones for those important tasks such as posting on twitter and >>>>>facebook. >>>>> >>>> >>>> This actually hurts your point. A dozen or more years ago, no one would >>>> have >>>> imagined using phones for what we use them for now. >>>> >>>> And really a smart phone is just a tiny computer that happens to make >>>> phone >>>> calls. Again, it's the same argument made decades ago but folks not >>>> needing >>>> computers in the home. >>> >>>Very few people want a computer in their home, most people want an >>>entertainment device. >> >> Exactly. Because people who claimed that "no one needs a computer in >> their >> homes" was basing the usage model on a very limited viewpoint of how >> computers were being used. >> But those "entertainment devices" are at their heart computers. > >Irrelevant to the point. No, that's exactly the point and you keep missing it. > >>>>>> Which reminds me, I need to tell my friends who own 3D printers and >>>>>> printing >>>>>> parts to fix things at homes, tools, and tool holders and all manner >>>>>> of >>>>>> things that I never would have thought of myself that they're wrong >>>>>> and >>>>>> no >>>>>> one will effectively use a 3D printer at home. >>>>> >>>>>How many people do you know that own 3D printers? >>>> >>>> I'd have to poll, but at least 2 I'm sure of, and I think the number is >>>> closer to 6. And if I include access to them at libraries, >>>> workerspaces, >>>> etc. then easily dozens. >>>> >>>>> >>>>>I know about a dozen people that own things like welders, milling >>>>>machines, >>>>>drill presses, and lathes but no one that owns a 3D printer. >>>> >>>> Really? You need to get out more. I'd say the number of folks I know >>>> who >>>> own >>>> 3D printers is about the same as those who own the other items you >>>> mention. >>> >>>I will admit I know very few teenagers. >>> >> >> Which has jacksquat to do with what I said? What do teenagers have to do >> with my reply? > >It would be primarily teenagers that would be interested in making >essentially useless gadgets and jewelry. > >Again, I know about a dozen people that own things like welders, milling >machines, drill presses, and lathes but no one that owns a 3D printer. As I've said, your experience is not mine. > >All of these are middle aged or older adults. And same with all the folks I know that own 3D printers. > >>>>>> Honestly, it's pretty damn presumptuous to claim that there's no >>>>>> future >>>>>> to >>>>>> 3D printing at home. I suspect 10-20 years from now we'll be laughing >>>>>> at >>>>>> such claims. Like computers, it will continue to improve. It'll get >>>>>> faster, >>>>>> more capable, capable of using more materials, etc. >>>>> >>>>>Since no one in this thread has made that claim, your post is nonsense. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> That is basically your claim. >>> >>>Yet another knee jerker that reads what they think was written and not >>>what was actually written. >>> >>> >> >> You keep doing that. I suggest you stop. > >When you stop knee jerking and read what was actually written. > I'm not the one knee-jerking or making unsubstantiated claims (such as only teenagers buying 3D printers). -- Greg D. Moore http://greenmountainsoftware.wordpress.com/ CEO QuiCR: Quick, Crowdsourced Responses. http://www.quicr.net IT Disaster Response - https://www.amazon.com/Disaster-Response-Lessons-Learned-Field/dp/1484221834/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-16 18:19 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <9ans3e-me7.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #640788 |
In sci.physics "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> wrote: > wrote in message news:0q2r3e-gp1.ln1@mail.specsol.com... <snip> > I'm not the one knee-jerking or making unsubstantiated claims (such as only > teenagers buying 3D printers). All hail and glory to the 3D printer, savior of humanity. Happy? -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-16 16:36 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <f2unmc12sinh13osc527jhha3i7v52otdh@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #640826 |
jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>In sci.physics "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> wrote:
>> wrote in message news:0q2r3e-gp1.ln1@mail.specsol.com...
>
><snip>
>
>> I'm not the one knee-jerking or making unsubstantiated claims (such as only
>> teenagers buying 3D printers).
>
>All hail and glory to the 3D printer, savior of humanity.
>
>Happy?
>
No, because you're still just acting like an anachronistic dickhead.
--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-05 08:19 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.33c6a35f792303bc989987@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #638785 |
In article <vd2t2e-erf.ln1@mail.specsol.com>, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com says... > > Landing gear, and all other structural moving parts, is surely another > > area on aircraft which could use this technology. Landing gear make up > > a significant percentage of an aircraft's total dry mass, so this would > > be a likely candidate for shape optimization and 3D printing. > > Again, you are talking about niche applications and landing gear are not > that big a part of an aircrafts weight. From Wikipedia (because I don't have time to look up a "better" source): The undercarriage is typically 4-5% of the takeoff mass and can even reach 7%. That's significant in aerospace. > >> Have you ever looked at the interior structures of an aircraft? > > > > Yes, many times. I've got a b.s. in aerospace engineering, so I know > > the basics. Many of our customers are aerospace, so I have to > > understand the domain. > > > >> 3D printing is, and always will be, a niche manufacturing method. > >> > >> Handy at times, but certainly not a world changer. > > > > This is quite short sighted. I'm sure the same was said about > > composites when they were in their infancy. Today it would be quite > > hard (i.e. likely impossible) to point to something commercial that > > flies and carries people commercially that has absolutely zero composite > > content. > > An irrelevant red herring to the subject of 3D printing. There are a HUGE > number of different composite materials out there and it has taken well > over half a century for most aircraft to have even a small fraction of > composite materials in their construction. > > Note the word "most". How is an example of the adoption of new materials/manufacturing processes not applicable to 3D printing which is another example of the same thing? Are you deliberately being intellectually dishonest? > > I can say that shape optimization coupled with 3D printing is one of the > > "bleeding edge" topics in my industry. It's really no secret, you can > > surely Google hundreds of articles on the topic. I really can't go into > > further details, but my profession is in writing engineering software, > > so I ought to know. > > Whoopee. It is still niche. You're posting to sci.space groups. It's quite significant to the aerospace industry. If you don't like it, find another group to pester. > Does anyone care about a shape optimized 4 slice toaster or filing cabinet? This isn't sci.toaster. Jeff -- All opinions posted by me on Usenet News are mine, and mine alone. These posts do not reflect the opinions of my family, friends, employer, or any organization that I am a member of.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-05 10:39 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <595cfa20$0$31207$c3e8da3$a9097924@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #638891 |
On 2017-07-05 08:19, Jeff Findley wrote: > The undercarriage is typically 4-5% of the takeoff mass and can > even reach 7%. > > That's significant in aerospace. And it was a HUGE challenge to make the A380 a reality, one which delayed the project a number of years. To not punch holes onto runways, they had to spread the A380s' weight over more wheels, which means more landing gear assemblies. it has 5 instead of the usual 3. And that meant reducing the weight of each landing gear. Otherwise the plane wouldn't be commercially viable.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-05 16:59 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <8giv2e-m1p.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #638891 |
In sci.physics Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> wrote: > In article <vd2t2e-erf.ln1@mail.specsol.com>, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com > says... >> > Landing gear, and all other structural moving parts, is surely another >> > area on aircraft which could use this technology. Landing gear make up >> > a significant percentage of an aircraft's total dry mass, so this would >> > be a likely candidate for shape optimization and 3D printing. >> >> Again, you are talking about niche applications and landing gear are not >> that big a part of an aircrafts weight. > > From Wikipedia (because I don't have time to look up a "better" source): > > The undercarriage is typically 4-5% of the takeoff mass and can > even reach 7%. > > That's significant in aerospace. > >> >> Have you ever looked at the interior structures of an aircraft? >> > >> > Yes, many times. I've got a b.s. in aerospace engineering, so I know >> > the basics. Many of our customers are aerospace, so I have to >> > understand the domain. >> > >> >> 3D printing is, and always will be, a niche manufacturing method. >> >> >> >> Handy at times, but certainly not a world changer. >> > >> > This is quite short sighted. I'm sure the same was said about >> > composites when they were in their infancy. Today it would be quite >> > hard (i.e. likely impossible) to point to something commercial that >> > flies and carries people commercially that has absolutely zero composite >> > content. >> >> An irrelevant red herring to the subject of 3D printing. There are a HUGE >> number of different composite materials out there and it has taken well >> over half a century for most aircraft to have even a small fraction of >> composite materials in their construction. >> >> Note the word "most". > > How is an example of the adoption of new materials/manufacturing > processes not applicable to 3D printing which is another example of the > same thing? Are you deliberately being intellectually dishonest? Well, if you want to compare composite materials and 3D printing, composite materials have been around for over a half century and the usage is still trivial compared to traditional materials in just about all products other than camper shells and ski boats. So we can expect 3D printers to still be niche in 50 years. >> > I can say that shape optimization coupled with 3D printing is one of the >> > "bleeding edge" topics in my industry. It's really no secret, you can >> > surely Google hundreds of articles on the topic. I really can't go into >> > further details, but my profession is in writing engineering software, >> > so I ought to know. >> >> Whoopee. It is still niche. > > You're posting to sci.space groups. It's quite significant to the > aerospace industry. If you don't like it, find another group to pester. I didn't choose the groups and it is being posted to other groups as well. In the overall scheme of things, aerospace is a niche industry. >> Does anyone care about a shape optimized 4 slice toaster or filing cabinet? > > This isn't sci.toaster. Nor is is sci.niche. > > Jeff -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-05 11:11 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <vpaqlc57jamgdas2f4809e2u0rdq68fn8o@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #638916 |
jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>In sci.physics Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> wrote:
>> In article <vd2t2e-erf.ln1@mail.specsol.com>, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
>> says...
>>> > Landing gear, and all other structural moving parts, is surely another
>>> > area on aircraft which could use this technology. Landing gear make up
>>> > a significant percentage of an aircraft's total dry mass, so this would
>>> > be a likely candidate for shape optimization and 3D printing.
>>>
>>> Again, you are talking about niche applications and landing gear are not
>>> that big a part of an aircrafts weight.
>>
>> From Wikipedia (because I don't have time to look up a "better" source):
>>
>> The undercarriage is typically 4-5% of the takeoff mass and can
>> even reach 7%.
>>
>> That's significant in aerospace.
>>
>>> >> Have you ever looked at the interior structures of an aircraft?
>>> >
>>> > Yes, many times. I've got a b.s. in aerospace engineering, so I know
>>> > the basics. Many of our customers are aerospace, so I have to
>>> > understand the domain.
>>> >
>>> >> 3D printing is, and always will be, a niche manufacturing method.
>>> >>
>>> >> Handy at times, but certainly not a world changer.
>>> >
>>> > This is quite short sighted. I'm sure the same was said about
>>> > composites when they were in their infancy. Today it would be quite
>>> > hard (i.e. likely impossible) to point to something commercial that
>>> > flies and carries people commercially that has absolutely zero composite
>>> > content.
>>>
>>> An irrelevant red herring to the subject of 3D printing. There are a HUGE
>>> number of different composite materials out there and it has taken well
>>> over half a century for most aircraft to have even a small fraction of
>>> composite materials in their construction.
>>>
>>> Note the word "most".
>>
>> How is an example of the adoption of new materials/manufacturing
>> processes not applicable to 3D printing which is another example of the
>> same thing? Are you deliberately being intellectually dishonest?
>
>Well, if you want to compare composite materials and 3D printing, composite
>materials have been around for over a half century and the usage is still
>trivial compared to traditional materials in just about all products other
>than camper shells and ski boats.
>
Jesus, get back to your trailer park until you gain some experience in
the real world.
>
>So we can expect 3D printers to still be niche in 50 years.
>
Well, YOU can no doubt expect that, but you're pretty well known for
having your head up and locked.
>>> > I can say that shape optimization coupled with 3D printing is one of the
>>> > "bleeding edge" topics in my industry. It's really no secret, you can
>>> > surely Google hundreds of articles on the topic. I really can't go into
>>> > further details, but my profession is in writing engineering software,
>>> > so I ought to know.
>>>
>>> Whoopee. It is still niche.
>>
>> You're posting to sci.space groups. It's quite significant to the
>> aerospace industry. If you don't like it, find another group to pester.
>
>I didn't choose the groups and it is being posted to other groups as
>well.
>
You didn't? Do you not know how your newsreader works, or what?
--
"Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the
truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong."
-- Thomas Jefferson
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | krw@notreal.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-05 21:11 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <3c3rlc9a8s3caeugvlgboing0o6dt5sk36@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #638937 |
On Wed, 05 Jul 2017 11:11:31 -0700, Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> wrote: >jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > >>In sci.physics Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> wrote: >>> In article <vd2t2e-erf.ln1@mail.specsol.com>, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com >>> says... >>>> > Landing gear, and all other structural moving parts, is surely another >>>> > area on aircraft which could use this technology. Landing gear make up >>>> > a significant percentage of an aircraft's total dry mass, so this would >>>> > be a likely candidate for shape optimization and 3D printing. >>>> >>>> Again, you are talking about niche applications and landing gear are not >>>> that big a part of an aircrafts weight. >>> >>> From Wikipedia (because I don't have time to look up a "better" source): >>> >>> The undercarriage is typically 4-5% of the takeoff mass and can >>> even reach 7%. >>> >>> That's significant in aerospace. >>> >>>> >> Have you ever looked at the interior structures of an aircraft? >>>> > >>>> > Yes, many times. I've got a b.s. in aerospace engineering, so I know >>>> > the basics. Many of our customers are aerospace, so I have to >>>> > understand the domain. >>>> > >>>> >> 3D printing is, and always will be, a niche manufacturing method. >>>> >> >>>> >> Handy at times, but certainly not a world changer. >>>> > >>>> > This is quite short sighted. I'm sure the same was said about >>>> > composites when they were in their infancy. Today it would be quite >>>> > hard (i.e. likely impossible) to point to something commercial that >>>> > flies and carries people commercially that has absolutely zero composite >>>> > content. >>>> >>>> An irrelevant red herring to the subject of 3D printing. There are a HUGE >>>> number of different composite materials out there and it has taken well >>>> over half a century for most aircraft to have even a small fraction of >>>> composite materials in their construction. >>>> >>>> Note the word "most". >>> >>> How is an example of the adoption of new materials/manufacturing >>> processes not applicable to 3D printing which is another example of the >>> same thing? Are you deliberately being intellectually dishonest? >> >>Well, if you want to compare composite materials and 3D printing, composite >>materials have been around for over a half century and the usage is still >>trivial compared to traditional materials in just about all products other >>than camper shells and ski boats. >> > >Jesus, get back to your trailer park until you gain some experience in >the real world. Precisely what do you disagree with in the sentence? "composite materials have been around for over a half century and the usage is still trivial compared to traditional materials" >>So we can expect 3D printers to still be niche in 50 years. >> > >Well, YOU can no doubt expect that, but you're pretty well known for >having your head up and locked. Seems like someone insulted your binkie.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-05 19:28 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <gc7rlchbfacijjk8k2np5fvdbcrf6ljmqc@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #639037 |
krw@notreal.com wrote: >On Wed, 05 Jul 2017 11:11:31 -0700, Fred J. McCall ><fjmccall@gmail.com> wrote: > >>jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> >>>In sci.physics Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> wrote: >>>> In article <vd2t2e-erf.ln1@mail.specsol.com>, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com >>>> says... >>>>> > Landing gear, and all other structural moving parts, is surely another >>>>> > area on aircraft which could use this technology. Landing gear make up >>>>> > a significant percentage of an aircraft's total dry mass, so this would >>>>> > be a likely candidate for shape optimization and 3D printing. >>>>> >>>>> Again, you are talking about niche applications and landing gear are not >>>>> that big a part of an aircrafts weight. >>>> >>>> From Wikipedia (because I don't have time to look up a "better" source): >>>> >>>> The undercarriage is typically 4-5% of the takeoff mass and can >>>> even reach 7%. >>>> >>>> That's significant in aerospace. >>>> >>>>> >> Have you ever looked at the interior structures of an aircraft? >>>>> > >>>>> > Yes, many times. I've got a b.s. in aerospace engineering, so I know >>>>> > the basics. Many of our customers are aerospace, so I have to >>>>> > understand the domain. >>>>> > >>>>> >> 3D printing is, and always will be, a niche manufacturing method. >>>>> >> >>>>> >> Handy at times, but certainly not a world changer. >>>>> > >>>>> > This is quite short sighted. I'm sure the same was said about >>>>> > composites when they were in their infancy. Today it would be quite >>>>> > hard (i.e. likely impossible) to point to something commercial that >>>>> > flies and carries people commercially that has absolutely zero composite >>>>> > content. >>>>> >>>>> An irrelevant red herring to the subject of 3D printing. There are a HUGE >>>>> number of different composite materials out there and it has taken well >>>>> over half a century for most aircraft to have even a small fraction of >>>>> composite materials in their construction. >>>>> >>>>> Note the word "most". >>>> >>>> How is an example of the adoption of new materials/manufacturing >>>> processes not applicable to 3D printing which is another example of the >>>> same thing? Are you deliberately being intellectually dishonest? >>> >>>Well, if you want to compare composite materials and 3D printing, composite >>>materials have been around for over a half century and the usage is still >>>trivial compared to traditional materials in just about all products other >>>than camper shells and ski boats. >>> >> >>Jesus, get back to your trailer park until you gain some experience in >>the real world. > >Precisely what do you disagree with in the sentence? > > "composite materials have been around for over a half century and > the usage is still trivial compared to traditional materials" > I disagree that you have included his entire thought. Given his sphere of knowledge of the use of composites, which he calls out as "camper shells and ski boats", he's obviously trailer trash. Composites are widely used all over the place. Many of them the Chimp probably thinks of as 'traditional materials'. Both concrete and mortar are composite materials and we've been using that stuff since the Romans. Composites of various types are used all over the place, from piping to appliances to aircraft to construction materials. >>>So we can expect 3D printers to still be niche in 50 years. >>> >> >>Well, YOU can no doubt expect that, but you're pretty well known for >>having your head up and locked. > >Seems like someone insulted your binkie. > Every time we see the Chimp around here he is arguing a stupid position adamantly. Perhaps you and he should get a room? -- You are What you do When it counts.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | krw@notreal.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-06 21:32 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <0qotlc1740uuipr084v67qhs57j37cqbos@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #639049 |
On Wed, 05 Jul 2017 19:28:43 -0700, Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> wrote: >krw@notreal.com wrote: > >>On Wed, 05 Jul 2017 11:11:31 -0700, Fred J. McCall >><fjmccall@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>> >>>>In sci.physics Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> wrote: >>>>> In article <vd2t2e-erf.ln1@mail.specsol.com>, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com >>>>> says... >>>>>> > Landing gear, and all other structural moving parts, is surely another >>>>>> > area on aircraft which could use this technology. Landing gear make up >>>>>> > a significant percentage of an aircraft's total dry mass, so this would >>>>>> > be a likely candidate for shape optimization and 3D printing. >>>>>> >>>>>> Again, you are talking about niche applications and landing gear are not >>>>>> that big a part of an aircrafts weight. >>>>> >>>>> From Wikipedia (because I don't have time to look up a "better" source): >>>>> >>>>> The undercarriage is typically 4-5% of the takeoff mass and can >>>>> even reach 7%. >>>>> >>>>> That's significant in aerospace. >>>>> >>>>>> >> Have you ever looked at the interior structures of an aircraft? >>>>>> > >>>>>> > Yes, many times. I've got a b.s. in aerospace engineering, so I know >>>>>> > the basics. Many of our customers are aerospace, so I have to >>>>>> > understand the domain. >>>>>> > >>>>>> >> 3D printing is, and always will be, a niche manufacturing method. >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> Handy at times, but certainly not a world changer. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > This is quite short sighted. I'm sure the same was said about >>>>>> > composites when they were in their infancy. Today it would be quite >>>>>> > hard (i.e. likely impossible) to point to something commercial that >>>>>> > flies and carries people commercially that has absolutely zero composite >>>>>> > content. >>>>>> >>>>>> An irrelevant red herring to the subject of 3D printing. There are a HUGE >>>>>> number of different composite materials out there and it has taken well >>>>>> over half a century for most aircraft to have even a small fraction of >>>>>> composite materials in their construction. >>>>>> >>>>>> Note the word "most". >>>>> >>>>> How is an example of the adoption of new materials/manufacturing >>>>> processes not applicable to 3D printing which is another example of the >>>>> same thing? Are you deliberately being intellectually dishonest? >>>> >>>>Well, if you want to compare composite materials and 3D printing, composite >>>>materials have been around for over a half century and the usage is still >>>>trivial compared to traditional materials in just about all products other >>>>than camper shells and ski boats. >>>> >>> >>>Jesus, get back to your trailer park until you gain some experience in >>>the real world. >> >>Precisely what do you disagree with in the sentence? >> >> "composite materials have been around for over a half century and >> the usage is still trivial compared to traditional materials" >> > >I disagree that you have included his entire thought. Given his >sphere of knowledge of the use of composites, which he calls out as >"camper shells and ski boats", he's obviously trailer trash. So, because camper shells and ski boats are made out of composites, he's trailer trash. Got it. > >Composites are widely used all over the place. Many of them the Chimp >probably thinks of as 'traditional materials'. Both concrete and >mortar are composite materials and we've been using that stuff since >the Romans. Composites of various types are used all over the place, >from piping to appliances to aircraft to construction materials. Oh, good grief. I suppose you're going to tell me that a concrete pump is a 3-D printer, too. >>>>So we can expect 3D printers to still be niche in 50 years. >>>> >>> >>>Well, YOU can no doubt expect that, but you're pretty well known for >>>having your head up and locked. >> >>Seems like someone insulted your binkie. >> > >Every time we see the Chimp around here he is arguing a stupid >position adamantly. Perhaps you and he should get a room? You should look in a mirror, kid.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-06 19:38 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <jnstlc9gn7tsblea84t2njkg1vvcfumqp5@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #639236 |
krw@notreal.com wrote:
>On Wed, 05 Jul 2017 19:28:43 -0700, Fred J. McCall
><fjmccall@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>krw@notreal.com wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 05 Jul 2017 11:11:31 -0700, Fred J. McCall
>>><fjmccall@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>In sci.physics Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> wrote:
>>>>>> In article <vd2t2e-erf.ln1@mail.specsol.com>, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
>>>>>> says...
>>>>>>> > Landing gear, and all other structural moving parts, is surely another
>>>>>>> > area on aircraft which could use this technology. Landing gear make up
>>>>>>> > a significant percentage of an aircraft's total dry mass, so this would
>>>>>>> > be a likely candidate for shape optimization and 3D printing.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Again, you are talking about niche applications and landing gear are not
>>>>>>> that big a part of an aircrafts weight.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> From Wikipedia (because I don't have time to look up a "better" source):
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The undercarriage is typically 4-5% of the takeoff mass and can
>>>>>> even reach 7%.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's significant in aerospace.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >> Have you ever looked at the interior structures of an aircraft?
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > Yes, many times. I've got a b.s. in aerospace engineering, so I know
>>>>>>> > the basics. Many of our customers are aerospace, so I have to
>>>>>>> > understand the domain.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >> 3D printing is, and always will be, a niche manufacturing method.
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> Handy at times, but certainly not a world changer.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > This is quite short sighted. I'm sure the same was said about
>>>>>>> > composites when they were in their infancy. Today it would be quite
>>>>>>> > hard (i.e. likely impossible) to point to something commercial that
>>>>>>> > flies and carries people commercially that has absolutely zero composite
>>>>>>> > content.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> An irrelevant red herring to the subject of 3D printing. There are a HUGE
>>>>>>> number of different composite materials out there and it has taken well
>>>>>>> over half a century for most aircraft to have even a small fraction of
>>>>>>> composite materials in their construction.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Note the word "most".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How is an example of the adoption of new materials/manufacturing
>>>>>> processes not applicable to 3D printing which is another example of the
>>>>>> same thing? Are you deliberately being intellectually dishonest?
>>>>>
>>>>>Well, if you want to compare composite materials and 3D printing, composite
>>>>>materials have been around for over a half century and the usage is still
>>>>>trivial compared to traditional materials in just about all products other
>>>>>than camper shells and ski boats.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Jesus, get back to your trailer park until you gain some experience in
>>>>the real world.
>>>
>>>Precisely what do you disagree with in the sentence?
>>>
>>> "composite materials have been around for over a half century and
>>> the usage is still trivial compared to traditional materials"
>>>
>>
>>I disagree that you have included his entire thought. Given his
>>sphere of knowledge of the use of composites, which he calls out as
>>"camper shells and ski boats", he's obviously trailer trash.
>
>So, because camper shells and ski boats are made out of composites,
>he's trailer trash. Got it.
>
Wow, you're just remarkably stupid. Because those are the only things
he can find that are made out of composites he's trailer trash.
>>
>>Composites are widely used all over the place. Many of them the Chimp
>>probably thinks of as 'traditional materials'. Both concrete and
>>mortar are composite materials and we've been using that stuff since
>>the Romans. Composites of various types are used all over the place,
>>from piping to appliances to aircraft to construction materials.
>
>Oh, good grief. I suppose you're going to tell me that a concrete
>pump is a 3-D printer, too.
>
So are you disagreeing that concrete is a composite? Why do you think
there is a connection between 'composite' and '3-D printer'? If you
don't, were you just compelled to say something stupid?
>>>>>So we can expect 3D printers to still be niche in 50 years.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Well, YOU can no doubt expect that, but you're pretty well known for
>>>>having your head up and locked.
>>>
>>>Seems like someone insulted your binkie.
>>>
>>
>>Every time we see the Chimp around here he is arguing a stupid
>>position adamantly. Perhaps you and he should get a room?
>
>You should look in a mirror, kid.
>
You should pull your head out of your ass, old and moldering one.
--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-09 21:55 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <esgc5iF2fvqU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #639236 |
krw@notreal.com wrote: >>Composites are widely used all over the place. Many of them the Chimp >>probably thinks of as 'traditional materials'. Both concrete and >>mortar are composite materials and we've been using that stuff since >>the Romans. Composites of various types are used all over the place, >>from piping to appliances to aircraft to construction materials. > >Oh, good grief. I suppose you're going to tell me that a concrete >pump is a 3-D printer, too. Hook it to the right controller and it is. I saw a youtube of someone printing a kid's playcastle using a concrete pump device of some kind. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQ5Elbvvr1M -- We are geeks. Resistance is voltage over current.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | krw@notreal.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-10 12:31 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <lpa7mchbd22d1iso3v1beo0j8ni36udcnl@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #639690 |
On Sun, 09 Jul 2017 21:55:19 -0600, Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> wrote: >krw@notreal.com wrote: > >>>Composites are widely used all over the place. Many of them the Chimp >>>probably thinks of as 'traditional materials'. Both concrete and >>>mortar are composite materials and we've been using that stuff since >>>the Romans. Composites of various types are used all over the place, >>>from piping to appliances to aircraft to construction materials. >> >>Oh, good grief. I suppose you're going to tell me that a concrete >>pump is a 3-D printer, too. > >Hook it to the right controller and it is. I saw a youtube of someone >printing a kid's playcastle using a concrete pump device of some kind. >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQ5Elbvvr1M Don't be an idiot. The thread is clearly about modern marvels, like carbon fiber, not concrete. Geez, people turn intentionally stupid when they run out of ideas (like leftists).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sегg io <innvalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-10 12:25 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ok0db7$1k8l$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #639746 |
On 7/10/2017 11:31 AM, krw@notreal.com wrote: > On Sun, 09 Jul 2017 21:55:19 -0600, Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> wrote: > >> krw@notreal.com wrote: >> >>>> Composites are widely used all over the place. Many of them the Chimp >>>> probably thinks of as 'traditional materials'. Both concrete and >>>> mortar are composite materials and we've been using that stuff since >>>> the Romans. Composites of various types are used all over the place, >>> >from piping to appliances to aircraft to construction materials. >>> >>> Oh, good grief. I suppose you're going to tell me that a concrete >>> pump is a 3-D printer, too. >> >> Hook it to the right controller and it is. I saw a youtube of someone >> printing a kid's playcastle using a concrete pump device of some kind. >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQ5Elbvvr1M > > Don't be an idiot. The thread is clearly about modern marvels, like > carbon fiber, not concrete. Geez, people turn intentionally stupid > when they run out of ideas (like leftists). > whoa! "print" a garden using dirt ! "Print" a wood framed House ! "Print" sand castles at the beach !! "Print" new teeth in place, (dentists) "Print" new shoes onto your feet !!! (leftist will run with that, also CNN)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 14 of 17 — ← Prev page 1 … 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web