Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #553766 > unrolled thread

Re: 3 phase teaser

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

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.

Contents

  Re: 3 phase teaser Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-17 06:17 +0100
    Re: 3 phase teaser "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-02-17 00:40 -0500
      Re: 3 phase teaser Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-17 18:30 +0100
        Re: 3 phase teaser "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-02-17 12:55 -0500
          Re: 3 phase teaser Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-18 07:20 +0100
            Re: 3 phase teaser "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-02-18 09:45 -0500
              Re: 3 phase teaser Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-18 07:58 -0700
                Re: 3 phase teaser "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-02-18 10:17 -0500
              Re: 3 phase teaser Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-02-19 03:27 +0800
                Re: 3 phase teaser "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-02-18 15:03 -0500
                  Re: 3 phase teaser Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-20 05:20 +0100
                    Re: 3 phase teaser Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-02-20 22:37 +0800
                      Re: 3 phase teaser Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-20 20:10 +0100
                      Re: 3 phase teaser "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-02-20 15:22 -0500
                Re: 3 phase teaser Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-20 06:09 +0100
                  Re: 3 phase teaser Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-02-20 23:19 +0800
                    Re: 3 phase teaser Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-20 08:47 -0700
                    Re: 3 phase teaser "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-02-20 09:51 -0800
                      Re: 3 phase teaser Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-20 10:55 -0700
                        Re: 3 phase teaser "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-02-20 11:00 -0800
                          Re: 3 phase teaser Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-20 12:38 -0700
                    Re: 3 phase teaser Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-20 20:05 +0100
                      Re: 3 phase teaser Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-20 12:38 -0700
                        Re: 3 phase teaser snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe, DoW #2) - 2016-02-20 22:05 +0000
                      Re: 3 phase teaser Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-02-21 14:23 +0800
                        Re: 3 phase teaser Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-22 06:45 +0100
                          Re: 3 phase teaser Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-02-22 16:15 +0800
                            Re: 3 phase teaser Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-22 20:01 +0100
                              Re: 3 phase teaser Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-02-23 03:42 +0800
                                Re: 3 phase teaser "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-02-22 15:42 -0500
                                  Re: 3 phase teaser Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-23 07:27 +0100
                                    Re: 3 phase teaser Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-23 01:27 -0700
                                    Re: 3 phase teaser Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-23 09:55 +0100
                                    Re: 3 phase teaser "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-02-23 09:54 -0500
                                      Re: 3 phase teaser Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-23 17:10 +0100
                                        Re: 3 phase teaser "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-02-23 11:56 -0500
                                          Re: 3 phase teaser Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-23 22:45 +0100
                                            Re: 3 phase teaser "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-02-23 16:56 -0500
                                              Re: 3 phase teaser Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-24 06:38 +0100
                                            Re: 3 phase teaser kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> - 2016-02-27 02:14 -0500
                                              Re: 3 phase teaser "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-02-26 23:50 -0800
                                              Re: 3 phase teaser Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-27 20:28 +0100
                                                Re: 3 phase teaser Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-27 12:53 -0700
                                                  Re: 3 phase teaser kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> - 2016-02-28 02:32 -0500
                                                  Re: 3 phase teaser Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-28 19:05 +0100
                                      Re: 3 phase teaser Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-23 22:30 +0100
                                        Re: 3 phase teaser Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-23 14:48 -0700
                                          Re: 3 phase teaser "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-02-23 16:53 -0500
                                      Re: 3 phase teaser Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-23 22:30 +0100
                                        Re: 3 phase teaser "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-02-23 16:52 -0500
                                          Re: 3 phase teaser "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-02-23 16:55 -0500
                                          Re: 3 phase teaser Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-24 07:07 +0100
                                            Re: 3 phase teaser Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-25 08:19 +0100
                                              Re: 3 phase teaser Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-25 19:26 +0100
                                            Re: 3 phase teaser Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-25 08:24 +0100
                                              Re: 3 phase teaser "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-02-25 03:12 -0500
                                                Re: 3 phase teaser Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-25 18:05 +0100
                                                  Re: 3 phase teaser "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-02-25 13:03 -0500
                                                    Re: 3 phase teaser Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-26 06:28 +0100
                                                  Re: 3 phase teaser Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-25 12:08 -0700
                                                    Re: 3 phase teaser "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-02-25 15:01 -0500
                                            Re: 3 phase teaser "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-02-25 04:14 -0500
                                              Re: 3 phase teaser Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-25 18:00 +0100
                                                Re: 3 phase teaser "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-02-25 13:01 -0500
                                                  Re: 3 phase teaser Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-26 06:44 +0100
                                    Re: 3 phase teaser Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-23 22:35 +0100
                                      Re: 3 phase teaser Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-23 14:50 -0700
                                      Re: 3 phase teaser Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-24 18:53 +0100
                                        Re: 3 phase teaser Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-24 11:52 -0700
                                    Re: 3 phase teaser Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-24 07:47 +0100
                                      Re: 3 phase teaser "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-02-23 23:43 -0800
                                        Re: 3 phase teaser Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-24 18:48 +0100
                                          Re: 3 phase teaser "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-02-24 13:03 -0500
                                            Re: 3 phase teaser Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-02-25 10:12 +0800
                                              Re: 3 phase teaser "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-02-24 19:13 -0800
                                              Re: 3 phase teaser "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-02-24 22:23 -0500
                                                Re: 3 phase teaser Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-25 07:06 +0100
                                Re: 3 phase teaser Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-23 07:27 +0100
                                  Re: 3 phase teaser Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-23 01:26 -0700
                                    Re: 3 phase teaser "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-02-23 00:32 -0800
                                  Re: 3 phase teaser Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-23 19:42 +0100
                                    Re: 3 phase teaser Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-24 07:37 +0100
                                  Re: 3 phase teaser Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-23 20:19 +0100
              Re: 3 phase teaser Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-18 22:03 +0100
                Re: 3 phase teaser Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-18 14:20 -0700
                Re: 3 phase teaser "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-02-18 18:13 -0500
                  Re: 3 phase teaser Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-18 16:22 -0700
                    Re: 3 phase teaser "%" <persent@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 16:24 -0700
                      Re: 3 phase teaser Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-18 16:33 -0700
                      Re: 3 phase teaser "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-02-18 18:37 -0500
                    Re: 3 phase teaser snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-02-19 05:43 +0000
                    Re: 3 phase teaser "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-02-19 11:15 -0500
                      Re: 3 phase teaser Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-19 10:16 -0700
                        Re: 3 phase teaser "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-02-19 12:29 -0500
                  Re: 3 phase teaser Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-20 05:48 +0100
        Re: 3 phase teaser kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> - 2016-02-17 15:49 -0500
          Re: 3 phase teaser "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-02-17 13:26 -0800
          Re: 3 phase teaser Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-18 06:52 +0100
    Re: 3 phase teaser Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-17 02:57 -0700

Page 5 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5]

#555930

Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>

Bite My Shiny Metal Ass, in
<news:it0pcb9lkr67elomcb5uslib9fa3d3o1n9@4ax.com> did thusly jump head
first into the wood chipper again:

Froups desnecked, Coward.

> Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus
> <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:

>> Bite My Shiny Metal Ass, in
>> <news:rdomcb169mq5csebugqrbj9ganol8je5s1@4ax.com> did thusly jump head
>> first into the wood chipper again:

>>> FNVWe jumped up & down on Shiny Tinfoil Brain's skull
>>> while winning:

>>>> But we're not talking about frequency response,

>>> LOL!  Fakey, we're talking about fourier & laplace
>>> transforms.  You don't know anything about them, do you?

>> Says the moron who's demonstrated he doesn't know much about anything.
>> LOL

> You were the one who brought up fourier & laplace
> transforms, and without understanding even what they are
> for.

Shiny Tinfoil Brain didn't even know the Euler equation is a subset of
equations known as the Euler-Fourier Formulas, thus that a sinewave is
a transformation of a circle (which should have been intuitive, given
that generators *rotate* to create *sinusoids*); that cross
correlation is used with Fourier transforms; that superposition is the
same as wave interference; that wave interference works the same for
standing or traveling waves; that RMS and peak-to-peak voltage are two
different things; that 170 volt peak, 120.208 volt RMS L-N 3-phase
service gives 208.207 volts RMS L-L; and the moron continues to
demonstrate his inability to read a graph. He's more clueless than
even Chimpy when it comes to electrics.

You were saying, Spankard? LOL

> Let me get this straight.  You think the FT & LT are about
> graphing sinewaves, and not output/input frequency resonses?

Let me get this straight... you're the moron who's already
demonstrated his inability to distinguish between peak-to-peak and RMS
when you blathered that the graph I posted was actually a graph of 85
volt RMS.

Shiny Tinfoil Brain wrote:
<MID:rdomcb169mq5csebugqrbj9ganol8je5s1@4ax.com>
"You graphed sines with 85v RMS and 147v RMS amplitude."

Yeah, you *are* the moron who demonstrated that you don't know the
difference between RMS and peak-to-peak. No idea where you're getting
147 volts, maybe you're just a moron.

SPNAK!

>>> Did you pick up the topic because you thought it would make
>>> you look smart and nobody would ever contradict you?  You
>>> googled up on it for a week, and thought you were an instant
>>> expert.
>>> 
>>> What a maroon.

>> You're projecting, Moron. LOL

>>>> we're talking about properly graphing a sinewave, which you've
>>>> demonstrated you lack the
>>>> clue to accomplish. LOL

>>> YOU'RE still talking about graphing a simple sine, which you
>>> still can't do!

>> You mean which I did, but you're too much of a moron to figure out.
>> 
>> In fact, I've already demonstrated that fact by properly graphing the
>> 170 volt peak of each hot leg, graphed along with the 120.208 volt RMS
>> L-N first-resultants

> Uh, fakey...
> A sinusoid of 170v peak IS, in fact, 120.208v RMS.

No shit! And if you'll look at the equations along the left-hand side
of my graphs, you'll see they *all* operate on the 170 volt peak L-N
voltage, and convert that to 120.208 volts RMS L-N _and_ 208.207 volt
RMS L-L... something DildoRider thus far has failed to accomplish with
his kooky sinewave subtraction program. In fact, that moron k'lames a
120/208 volt 3-phase electric service is fed by 240 volts! LOL!

> -- 
> "...a sinewave is a Fourier transformation of a circle."
>   --Fakey

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phasor>
<https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/89/Unfasor.gif>

Message-ID: <80d61a6928a9e7df316c519affcf3838@dizum.com>
=========================================================
<http://betterexplained.com/articles/an-interactive-guide-to-the-fourier-transform/>
See the animations about 1/4th down the page? Yeah, those are Fourier
transforms transforming circles to sine waves in real time... and in
the process smearing egg on your stoooopid face. LOL

<http://muller.research.engineering.cornell.edu/sites/WEELS/summer06/Fourier%20Transforms-2D.pdf>
2D Fourier transform of a circularly symmetric function translates to 
Bessinc shape in 2-D, translates in 1-D to a sinewave.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourier_transform>
"Still further generalization is possible to functions on groups, 
which, besides the original Fourier transform on R or R" (viewed as 
groups under addition), notably includes the discrete-time Fourier 
transform (DTFT, group = Z), the discrete Fourier transform (DFT, 
group = Z mod N) and the Fourier series or *circular* *Fourier* 
*transform* (group = S^1, the unit circle ~ closed finite interval 
with endpoints identified). The latter is routinely employed to handle 
periodic functions."

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Periodic_function>
You know, periodic functions... like sinewaves.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sine_and_cosine_transforms>
"In mathematics, the Fourier sine and cosine transforms are forms of 
the Fourier integral transform that do not use complex numbers."

Gee.. that *Fourier* *sine* *transform* sure looks familiar, doesn't 
it?

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sine_and_cosine_transforms>
"Relation with complex exponentials:
The form of the Fourier transform used more often today is... Euler's 
Formula"

Why, that's the exact equation I used to properly graph 170 volt peak 
3-phase, which translates to 120.208 volt RMS L-N and 208.207 volt RMS 
L-L. I guess that's why they're called the Euler-Fourier Formulas.

<http://i.imgur.com/NrZzxlb.png>

SPNAK!
=========================================================

Aren't you the *moron* who k'lamed that Fourier transforms had nothing
to do with the Euler sinewave summation equation? Yeah... yeah you
are.

Spankard. Moron. LOL

-- 

Kensi the moron wrote:
================================
The sphere's Gaussian curvature is 1/r^2, and its area is 4*pi*r^2, so
the curvature is 4*pi
================================

Kensi the moron said the Gaussian curvature = 1 / r^2 *and* the
Gaussian curvature = 4 * pi.

Therefore, 1 / r^2 = 4 * pi
Therefore, r = 0.28209479176

Kensi the moron says every sphere in the entire universe has a radius
of 0.28209479176. Of course, being a moron, kensi didn't specify the
units.

The moron also said the Gaussian curvature of a sphere is dependent
upon that sphere's radius. Wholly incorrect.

Kensi the moron was corrected:
================================
Did... did you just say "the Gaussian curvature = 1/r^2" *and* "the
Gaussian curvature = 4*pi" therefore "1/r^2 = 4*pi"? Now you
backpedal, LunkHead.

You mean the Gaussian curvature = 1/r^2 * (4*pi*r^2) therefore =
(4*pi), and therefore the Gaussian curvature of a sphere is
independent of r due to its symmetry, thereby proving your original
"The sphere's Gaussian curvature is 1/r^2" blather *wrong*?
================================

But Kensi the moron persists in insisting that what he wrote isn't
fucked up, and that the Gaussian curvature of a sphere *does* depend
upon its radius, because he doesn't understand the equations he's
trying to use, he doesn't know the difference between 'constant
curvature' and 'Gaussian curvature', he doesn't know what an integral
is, and he's a halfwit who can't figure out even basic geometry
problems.

Now remember, this is the same moron who k'lames he's an
astrophysicist... yet he's stated that the Riemann curvature tensor
concept being the central mathematical tool in the theory of general
relativity and the modern theory of gravity, and the curvature of
space-time being described by the geodesic deviation equation, is
"science fiction" and "a howler".

In addition, the moron k'lamed that 4-D Minkowski space-time was
mostly positive Gaussian curvature, with only small areas of negative
Gaussian curvature, which proves the moron has no idea of the effects
of mass or magnetism upon the 4-D Minkowski space-time manifold.

He has k'lamed that the Gaussian curvature of the universe is
predominantly positive, which means Lunkhead believes that massive
objects such as planets, stars and black holes ride *above* the
tangential plane of the 4-D Minkowski space-time manifold, thereby
making the planes of principal curvature positive Gaussian curvature,
and thus causing gravity to *repel*.

Lunkhead the moron has k'lamed that magnetism has "*no* effect" upon
the 4-D Minkowski space-time manifold, then backpedaled and said there
was a "small amount of positive curvature due to the energy density in
the field", thereby proving he doesn't know how magnetism affects the
4-D Minkowski space-time manifold, and denies the existence of
magnetic attraction.

Thus, Kensi the moron has described a universe in which planets could
not maintain their orbits, a universe in which magnets could not work,
and therefore a universe which could not exist.

Kensi is the same moron who k'lames that snow at a colder temperature
than the surrounding atmosphere is somehow violating the First and
Second Laws of Thermodynamics and giving off "blackbody radiation".

Kensi is the same moron who k'lames that snow gives off "blackbody
radiation" at wavelengths that would put the temperature of the snow
at 489 F.

Kensi is the same moron who first denied the existence of the
~11-micron infrared atmospheric window, then backpedaled and k'lamed
that snow emitted outside that ~11-micron window, and was proven
wrong. Then the spankard moron tried to use the backpedal of
"blackbody radiation" being at a different wavelength than spectral
emission, yet again demonstrating that the moron has no clue how
spectral absorption and emission works.

Kensi is the same moron who denies the NASA SABER study proving that
CO2 is a global *cooling* gas _because_ of the ~11-micron infrared
atmospheric window.

The reality exposed by the NASA SABER study also proves the Klimate
Katastrophe Kook Anthropogenic Global Warming k'lame of CO2 being a
global warming gas is a fairy tale that violates the First and Second
Laws of Thermodynamics, thus destroying CO2-induced AGW, yet this same
moron continues to cling to his delusions.

Kensi is the same moron who continues to cling to his delusion that
global warming causes more intense hurricanes, despite three
peer-reviewed studies proving the exact opposite.

Kensi is not an astrophysicist, he's far too stupid to be. He's just a
slumpy dumpy frumpy lumpy loser trying to pretend that he's
intelligent... and failing badly.

That would be because Kensi is a moron with an underpowered brain that
struggles (and fails) to understand reality.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#556150

Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>

Bite My Shiny Metal Ass, in
<news:utbpcb5037q3fih5hs7pnbl552fk05ha39@4ax.com> did thusly jump head
first into the wood chipper again:

Froups desnecked, Coward.

> Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus
> <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:

>>> Let me get this straight.  You think the FT & LT are about
>>> graphing sinewaves, and not output/input frequency resonses?

>> Let me get this straight... you're the moron who's already
>> demonstrated his inability to distinguish between peak-to-peak and RMS
>> when you blathered that the graph I posted was actually a graph of 85
>> volt RMS.
>> 
>> Shiny Tinfoil Brain wrote:
>> <MID:rdomcb169mq5csebugqrbj9ganol8je5s1@4ax.com>
>> "You graphed sines with 85v RMS and 147v RMS amplitude."
>> 
>> Yeah, you *are* the moron who demonstrated that you don't know the
>> difference between RMS and peak-to-peak. No idea where you're getting
>> 147 volts, maybe you're just a moron.
>> 
>> SPNAK!

> Here, fakey, i think this will help explain everything clearly
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4GVjkg_7bK0

Well, that pretty much sums it up, doesn't it, Spankard?

<snicker>

> to your porous, encephalytic foam-frothed brain:

You're projecting again, Moron. LOL

Shiny Tinfoil Brain didn't even know the Euler equation is a subset of
equations known as the Euler-Fourier Formulas, thus that a sinewave is
a transformation of a circle (which should have been intuitive, given
that generators *rotate* to create *sinusoids*); that cross
correlation is used with Fourier transforms; what cross correlation
is; that superposition is the same as wave interference; that wave
interference works the same for standing or traveling waves; that RMS
and peak-to-peak voltage are two different things; that 170 volt peak,
120.208 volt RMS L-N 3-phase service gives 208.207 volts RMS L-L; and
the moron continues to demonstrate his inability to read a graph. He's
more clueless than even Chimpy when it comes to electrics.

<snicker>

> -- 
> "The 120.208 volt RMS L-N sinewaves peak at 120.208 volts,
> moron. LOL"
>   --fakey claims RMS and peak voltage are identically equal

Shiny Tinfoil Brain k'lames 120.208 volts is a peak voltage and not an 
RMS voltage. LOL!

SPNAK! on the moron.

<snicker>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#555944

Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>

Robert Michael Wolfe the Pittsburgh Pied Piper Of Penis (aka
DildoRider) of 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey),
socked up as sucksroot@127.0.0.1, in
<news:op.ydane7z3tm21m2@benson.localhost> did thusly jump head first
into the wood chipper again:

> On Tue, 23 Feb 2016 11:13:18 -0500, Shiny Tinfoil Brain
> <bender@the.future> wrote:

>> Uh, fakey...
>> A sinusoid of 170v peak IS, in fact, 120.208v RMS.

> SHHHHH!  next you'll tell fakey that x times sqrt(2) is a linear function!

Bwahahahaaaa! DildoRider says taking 170 * SQRT(2) = 120.208 volts.

In point of fact, that faggoty retard k'lamed 120/208 volt 3-phase
service was fed by 240 volts, then graphed 120 volts and showed a 240
volt result, then k'lamed he could get 120 volts L-L from 240 volts
L-N, because just as he's demonstrated above, he doesn't know shit
about Watt's Law.

SPNAK!

Message-ID: <8ae01a64e9f97aa0fa45a70bb6524ba9@dizum.com>
===========================================================
> reconstructing the wye transformer's input signal:
> (phase A minus phase B minus phase C)
> sin(2*pi*60*x)*120-
> sin((2*pi*60*x+(120*pi)/180))*120-
> sin((2*pi*60*x+(240*pi)/180))*120
> 
> gnuplot> plot  
> sin(2*pi*60*x)*120-
> sin((2*pi*60*x+(120*pi)/180))*120-
> sin((2*pi*60*x+(240*pi)/180))*120,240
> http://i.imgur.com/o55uvkm.png

So... you're saying that 120 volt legs combine in the wye transformer
to give 240 volts, eh?

----------
{EDIT: No, the moron reversed himself and said that 120/208 volt 
3-phase is fed by 240 volts RMS L-N, and he can magically make his 
transformer put out 120 volts RMS L-N on the secondary using all three 
legs. So he's wrong on more than just the math, he's wrong on the 
entire concept. Hey, DildoRider, why would you need a transformer if 
you've already got 240 volts on the upstream? Doh! LOL!}
----------

It's apparent that you have no idea how a 3-phase transformer works,
nor do you have any idea how to calculate 3-phase voltages via the
Euler sinewave summation equation, DildoRider.

The peak voltage is divided by SQRT(2) to get RMS:
678 / SQRT(2) = 480
480 / SQRT(2) = 339
339 / SQRT(2) = 240
240 / SQRT(2) = 170
170 / SQRT(2) = 120

The L-N voltage is divided by SQRT(3):
480 / SQRT(3) = 277 <== commercial and industrial lighting voltage

The L-L voltage is multiplied by SQRT(3): 120 * SQRT(3) = 208

And you can't k'lame it's actually peak voltage you're calculating,
you show 120 volts in your equation, and L-L voltage is multiplied by
SQRT(3): 170 * SQRT(3) = 294v Peak

----------
{EDIT: Backpedaling moron said he was graphing the input, yet he put 
120 volts RMS into his equation... so he's working backwards. And his 
fucked-up sinewave subtraction equation is giving him the wrong 
results in any case. LOL!}
----------

So if you were calculating peak voltages, you'd arrive at 294 volts
peak.

And: 294 / SQRT(2) = 208v RMS

So no matter what, the equation ends up at 208v RMS volts from 120v
RMS (294v peak from 170v peak), not 240v.

So you'll be getting right on describing exactly how your magical
3-phase transformer is converting 120 volts to 240 volts, DildoRider.

Also, if the Euler sinewave summation equation is changed to
subtraction and applied to two hot legs, it arrives at 208 volts from
170 volts... you're inputting a peak voltage and arriving at an RMS
voltage. In reality, 208 volts RMS can only be achieved by multiplying
120 volts RMS * SQRT(2), thus the sinewave summation equation is the
equation to use.

<http://i.imgur.com/1WLIvfn.png>
<http://i.imgur.com/76PX0PP.png>

SPNAK!

----------
{EDIT: The math challenged moron refused to address this. He was far 
too busy backpedaling, hemming and hawing and making up stoooopid 
fairy tales about his magical transformer that doesn't obey Watt's 
Law. LOL!}
----------

Here's the proper way to do it:
<http://i.imgur.com/NrZzxlb.png>

170 volt peak, 120.208 volt RMS L-N on each hot leg, converts to
208.207 volt RMS L-L.

Educate yourself, you moron:
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8O2FwSCk_Yo>
"When 208v power comes into your park, it'll come in over 3 hot wires,
plus the neutral. If you measure from one hot wire to neutral, it will
be 120 volts, but if you measure from one hot wire to a second hot
wire, it will be 208 volts."

So the *only* way you can get 240 volts out of a transformer supplied
with 3-phase 120v RMS (170v peak) is to use only *two* of the 120v RMS
(170v peak) legs L-N. Not all three. Thus your kooky sinewave
subtraction equation *FAILS*.

SPNAK!
===========================================================

-- 

Robert Michael Wolfe the Pittsburgh Pied Piper Of Penis (aka
DildoRider, aka Teh Mop Jockey)
5907 Stanton Ave.
Pittsburgh, PA
(412) 853-6395
(412) 799-0532
(412) 665-8289
(412) 404-8757

DildoRider admits he's stoooopid:
MID: <c65504c436778934b3e8a0fb022b7618@dizum.com>
=================================================
>> it appears I've kicked your ass so hard it's
>> damaged your brain, DildoRider.

> then it appears that you like shooting fish in
> barrels, intellectually lazy fuckhead that you are.

Well, you've just admitted that intellectually kicking your ass is
akin to shooting fish in a barrel... IOW, you've admitted that you're
stoooopid. No un-ringing that bell.

<snicker>
=================================================

DildoRider admits he's "really stupid" (his words). LOL
MID: <8a9faed11123abfaa1257fb33fb0c082@dizum.com>
=================================================
> so what you're saying is that your targets for attack
> have to be really stupid or else you can't manage?
=================================================

DildoRider admits much more about himself:
MID: <36c6802852caf4f712515dedb738e450@dizum.com>
=================================================
"absolutely and completely retarded, insane, gay, ugly, smelly,
toothless, dirt-poor, incontinent and possibly homeless"
=================================================

This is a libtard's method of "winning", for fuck sake.

150 IQ? LOL

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#554371

Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>

Robert Michael Wolfe the Pittsburgh Pied Piper Of Penis (aka 
DildoRider) of 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), 
socked up as sucksroot@127.0.0.1, in 
<news:op.yc09xkpxtm21m2@benson.localhost> did thusly jump head first 
into the wood chipper again:

> On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 01:20:45 -0500, Friendly Neighborhood
> Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:

>> Robert Michael Wolfe the Pittsburgh Pied Piper Of Penis (aka
>> DildoRider) of 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey),
>> socked up as sucksroot@127.0.0.1, in
>> <news:op.yczn3ab2tm21m2@benson.localhost> did thusly jump head first
>> into the wood chipper again:

>>> <looks at subject>
>>>
>>> okay, so now please go "sum" any two of the 3 phases of standard 3-phase
>>> power and tell me how many volts potential it is at any instant, k0oky.
>>> then "sum" all three.  show us the sums.

>> "at any instant" LOL
>>
>> You mean the time-varying instantaneous voltage, which varies on each
>> hot leg? Moron. LOL
>>
>> V(L1-N) = sin(2*pi*f*t)*Vp
>> V(L2-N) = sin((2*pi*f*t+((4/3)*pi)*Vp
>> V(L3-N) = sin((2*pi*f*t+((2/3)*pi)*Vp

> hey, those equations look very familiar.  you just left out the  
> definitions of f=60 and Vp=120
> 
> 120*sin(60*2*pi*x) OR sin(2*pi*60*x)*120
> 120*sin(60*2*pi*x+(120*pi/180)) OR sin(2*pi*60*x+((120/180)*pi)*120
> 120*sin(60*2*pi*x+(240*pi/180)) OR sin(2*pi*60*x+((240/180)*pi)*120

Well, given that you can't even reduce a fraction, that pretty much 
proves my point that you're a mathematical moron. LOL

SPNAK!

> you're finally not being a fucktard about correct equations,

I never was. I was only "being a fucktard" about the fact that you're 
using the equations wrong and using the wrong equation, because you're 
a mathematical moron who doesn't understand what the equation is 
supposed to do. Moron. LOL

> unlike when  
> you kept insisting that one should both graph and do the math for two 180  
> degree phase shifted signals by flipping the polarity of one of the  
> signals and "summing" them to get an instantaneous voltage.

That wasn't me "insisting that one should both graph and do the math 
for two 180 degree phase shifted signals by flipping the polarity of 
one of the signals and "summing" them to get an instantaneous 
voltage", that was *you*, you backpedaling moron... or did you forget 
your adding pi to your equation to flip one hot leg by 180 degrees in 
phase?

SPNAK!

> "What does 2 (Dual / Split) Phase Power mean?
> 
> If you’re not electrically minded, think of 2 (Dual / Split) phase power  
> like a two pedal bicycle where one (pushing leg) or both (pushing legs)  
> can provide power.
> 
> Dual Phase or Split Phase power is also Single Phase because it’s a two  
> wire Alternating Current (AC ) power circuit. In the US, this is the  
> standard household power arrangement with two (Phase A, Phase B) 120V  
> power wires (180 degrees out of phase with one another) like two bicycle  
> pedals and one neutral wire. This arrangement provides (2) 120V and (1)  
> 240V power circuits. 120V power flows (alternating) between either power  
> wire (through the load) and the neutral wire. 240V power flows  
> (alternating) between the two power wires (through the load)."
> 
> "If you connected a dual trace oscope's probes' gnds to the Neutral  
> (center tapped wire) and put one probe on phase A and the other on phase B  
> the waveforms would be 180 degrees out of phase. When A peaks positive B  
> peaks negative. So how is it that the A-Neutral and B-Neutral voltages are  
> said to be "in phase"? [Of course, it makes no sense to ask about the  
> phasing of A-B - any voltage is always in phase with itself.]"

Wrong. They'd be oppositely-phased in relation to the 
midpoint-neutral, but they cannot be "out of phase" on the hot legs, 
as connecting directly across the two hot legs gives 240 volts 
*single*-*phase* at 0 degrees, as you have acknowledged.

But thanks for yet again demonstrating your inability to grok how 
split-phase midpoint-neutral electrical systems work, DildoRider. You 
are, after all, the moron who's been calling it "two phase", which is 
just silly. Even Chimpy was laughing at that, and he's as big a moron 
as you are.

SPNAK!

>> Educate yourself, you retard.
>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phasor>
>> <http://white.stanford.edu/teach/index.php/Fourier_transform_math>
>> <http://www.fourier-series.com/>

> i took engineering in college, thanks.  ;)

Oh, then you *did* skip the first day of class when they taught 
Euler's equation, so you could instead suck dicks in a dark alley. LOL

SPNAK!

>> That equation in the Stanford link above, based upon Euler's sinewave
>> summation equation, allows one to sum *any* number of sinewaves of
>> *any* frequency and phase. Moron.
>>
>> How can you do *any* electronics work and *not* know how to use the
>> Fourier transform of Euler's equation, given that using complex
>> phasors allows one to not only calculate voltage but factor in
>> impedance, current and any other aspect one wants? Unless you're the
>> type who solders it together, powers it up and prays for no smoke?
>> Moron. LOL

<crickets> LOL

>> "standard 3-phase power" LOL
>>
>> Do you mean 3-wire delta, 3-wire wye or 4-wire wye? Moron. LOL

> yes, the 3-phase service that powers any of those.

Translation:
"I... I don't know! I'm in over my head. Don't ask me hard questions 
or I'll start to spam more bad sinewaves with my kooky sinewave 
subtraction equation!"

<snicker>

>> Do you mean a 230 V system, or a 230/400 V system? Moron. LOL

> for now, just 230

>> My uncle has a high-leg delta center-tap-grounded system at his
>> business, so he can power his 120 volt loads, his single-phase and
>> 3-phase 240 volt loads and his 208 volt lighting. Despite the fact
>> that delta has been supplanted by wye for new installations in the US
>> because of improved load balancing, that's "standard 3-phase power",
>> too. Moron. LOL

> that's an ideal setup for your uncle.  does he have a ball bearing  
> factory, or something?  LOL

Or something. LOL

>> But let's not get off the topic of you *proving* your kooky sinewave
>> subtraction equation didn't calculate those 6 sinewaves correctly,

> it certainly did plot it correctly and you've not proven otherwise.

I most certainly *did* prove otherwise. It can't even arrive at the 
correct sinewave summation voltage of 2550.25 volts, as you *proved* 
and *graphed*, complete with a horizontal line so everyone would be 
sure to see that your kooky equation didn't work, you moron. LOL

Your kooky equation seems to be a result of you squashing together 
parts of the phasor and trigonometric sinewave expressions, because 
it's certainly not the correct equation to use.

SPNAK!

> it is  
> you who cannot answer the simple question regarding at which time in  
> seconds that the sine waves that you've conjured would ever  
> "constructively interfere" to produce 2550.25.

You'll have to do the work of proving your kooky sinewave subtraction 
equation doesn't work, DildoRider. Given that you cannot even make it 
produce the proper constructively-interfered maximum voltage of 
2550.25 volts, there's no way for you to calculate the period of the 
resultant, therefore you're forced to either admit you're *wrong*, or 
change to using the correct Euler equation and thereby admit you're 
*wrong*.

SPNAK!

>> which means you're using the *wrong* *equation*,

> then prove it by posting the *correct* *equation*...

I did at the beginning of this whole fiasco, and you bleated that it 
wasn't the correct equation, then started spamming your bad sinewaves 
using your kooky sinewave subtraction equation, despite the fact that 
GnuPlot can use the correct equation, as you proved when you posted 
about those researchers using it in GnuPlot.

SPNAK!

>> and despite you
>> admitting GnuPlot can use the proper Euler sinewave summation
>> equation,

> it can use whatever tab-delimited data you give it.  so just post you're  
> euler data points and we'll get down to the bottom of this.

Translation:
"I'm wrong, but don't want to admit it. I'm too stupid to use the 
correct Euler equation, but don't want to admit it. So I'll keep 
spamming my bad sinewaves because I'm a mathematical moron." LOL

>> you persist in proving yourself a mathematical moron by
>> insisting on using the *wrong* *equation*. LOL

> you insist on repetitively and somewhat-schizophrenically bleating out  
> that everything is *wrong* while being unable to provide any evidence  
> whatsoever that this is the case.  is that somehow the "high ground" these  
> days?

There are three ways of expressing a sinewave, the trigonometric, 
complex exponential and phasor methods. I prefer the phasor method, as 
one can not only calculate phase and voltage, one can factor in 
impedance, solve for current, etc.

You appear to prefer the trigonometric method, but take a look at the 
proper Euler equation, expressed in the trigonometric expression of a 
sinewave, and tell me your equation is correct, DildoRider... do you 
see where you've borrowed parts of the phasor expression of a 
sinewave, and parts of the trigonometric expression of a sinewave, and 
added your kooky correcting factors to try to make it work? Then you 
stupidly switched your minus signs to plus signs and bleated 
"DAAARRRRHHH! I gots the propur Euler eqooashun now! It don't not work 
neither!", thereby *proving* you don't have a fucking clue. And you've 
still not demonstrated that you can jigger your kooky equation to even 
give the proper output both because your phase is wrong, and the 
resultant voltage is wrong. Moron. LOL

And now, you're reduced to droolbleating "SHOW ME DUH PURDY PICHERS! 
<clap clap> DUURRRRHHH! I WANNA SEE DUH PURDY PICHERS!" because you 
have no clue how to do it properly yourself.

SPNAK!

>>> don't forget... 3-phase *is* separated by 120 degrees instead of 180.
>>> don't forget that in your maths.
>>>
>>> for extra credit use quaternion maths.  LOL

>> I don't have to graph or calculate a single fucking thing,

> well, yeah because you're inept and just trying to cover up for it.

Or I know I'm right, and that you're a mathematical moron. And I know 
you'll do far better proving that fact yourself than I could. I mean, 
look at all the fuckups you've already made. LOL

>> you math challenged moron.

> ironic, as you were just challenged to prove your math.

You mean the proper Euler equation, in use by every scientist and 
engineer and proven since the 1700s, whereas your kooky sinewave 
subtraction equation is only used by one delusional and backpedaling 
mathematical moron? LOL

>> All I had to do was prove you *wrong*, which I did
>> by forcing you to prove *yourself* wrong... because I like making my
>> kooks do my work for me.
>>
>> Now get back to work, you slack-jawed mono-browed thick-witted
>> uneducated dolt. You've got a lot more bad sinewaves to spam before I
>> deem you sufficiently embarrassed to allow you to run away with tail
>> tucked.
>>
>> <snicker>

> did everybody applaud?

They sure as hell did, but not for you. People just look at the ground 
and shuffle their feet in embarrassed silence when it comes to you.

<snicker>

Fag. LOL
Idiot. LOL
Moron. LOL
Tranny. LOL
Libtard. LOL
Crackhead. LOL
GableTard. LOL
DildoRider. LOL
Bad Musician. LOL
Stick Figure. LOL
Terrible Liar. LOL
Sinewave Spammer. LOL
Mathematical Moron. LOL
Outerfilthing Stalker. LOL
Talentless FrothMonkey. LOL
Klimate Katastrophe Kook. LOL
Defeated Tearful Spankard. LOL
Waster Of Time To Save $10. LOL
Worst Maker Of Sinewaves In The History Of Usenet. LOL

-- 

Robert Michael Wolfe the Pittsburgh Pied Piper Of Penis (aka 
DildoRider, aka Teh Mop Jockey)
5907 Stanton Ave.
Pittsburgh, PA
(412) 853-6395
(412) 799-0532
(412) 665-8289
(412) 404-8757

DildoRider admits he's stoooopid:
MID: <c65504c436778934b3e8a0fb022b7618@dizum.com>
=================================================
>> it appears I've kicked your ass so hard it's
>> damaged your brain, DildoRider.

> then it appears that you like shooting fish in
> barrels, intellectually lazy fuckhead that you are.

Well, you've just admitted that intellectually kicking your ass is 
akin to shooting fish in a barrel... IOW, you've admitted that you're 
stoooopid. No un-ringing that bell.

<snicker>
=================================================

DildoRider admits he's "really stupid" (his words). LOL
MID: <8a9faed11123abfaa1257fb33fb0c082@dizum.com>
=================================================
> so what you're saying is that your targets for attack
> have to be really stupid or else you can't manage?
=================================================

DildoRider admits much more about himself:
MID: <36c6802852caf4f712515dedb738e450@dizum.com>
=================================================
"absolutely and completely retarded, insane, gay, ugly, smelly, 
toothless, dirt-poor, incontinent and possibly homeless"
=================================================

This is a libtard's method of "winning", for fuck sake.

150 IQ? LOL

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#554375

On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 22:03:43 +0100 (CET), Friendly Neighborhood Vote
Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:

>
>That wasn't me "insisting that one should both graph and do the math 
>for two 180 degree phase shifted signals by flipping the polarity of 
>one of the signals and "summing" them to get an instantaneous 
>voltage", that was *you*, you backpedaling moron...


Lie Cry Deny

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#554423

On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 16:03:43 -0500, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler  
Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:

> Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
>
> Robert Michael Wolfe the Pittsburgh Pied Piper Of Penis (aka
> DildoRider) of 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey),
> socked up as sucksroot@127.0.0.1, in
> <news:op.yc09xkpxtm21m2@benson.localhost> did thusly jump head first
> into the wood chipper again:
>
>> On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 01:20:45 -0500, Friendly Neighborhood
>> Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:
>
>>> Robert Michael Wolfe the Pittsburgh Pied Piper Of Penis (aka
>>> DildoRider) of 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey),
>>> socked up as sucksroot@127.0.0.1, in
>>> <news:op.yczn3ab2tm21m2@benson.localhost> did thusly jump head first
>>> into the wood chipper again:
>
>>>> <looks at subject>
>>>>
>>>> okay, so now please go "sum" any two of the 3 phases of standard  
>>>> 3-phase
>>>> power and tell me how many volts potential it is at any instant,  
>>>> k0oky.
>>>> then "sum" all three.  show us the sums.
>
>>> "at any instant" LOL
>>>
>>> You mean the time-varying instantaneous voltage, which varies on each
>>> hot leg? Moron. LOL
>>>
>>> V(L1-N) = sin(2*pi*f*t)*Vp
>>> V(L2-N) = sin((2*pi*f*t+((4/3)*pi)*Vp
>>> V(L3-N) = sin((2*pi*f*t+((2/3)*pi)*Vp
>
>> hey, those equations look very familiar.  you just left out the
>> definitions of f=60 and Vp=120
>>
>> 120*sin(60*2*pi*x) OR sin(2*pi*60*x)*120
>> 120*sin(60*2*pi*x+(120*pi/180)) OR sin(2*pi*60*x+((120/180)*pi)*120
>> 120*sin(60*2*pi*x+(240*pi/180)) OR sin(2*pi*60*x+((240/180)*pi)*120
>
> Well, given that you can't even reduce a fraction, that pretty much
> proves my point that you're a mathematical moron. LOL
>
> SPNAK!
>
>> you're finally not being a fucktard about correct equations,
>
> I never was. I was only "being a fucktard" about the fact that you're
> using the equations wrong and using the wrong equation, because you're
> a mathematical moron who doesn't understand what the equation is
> supposed to do. Moron. LOL
>
>> unlike when
>> you kept insisting that one should both graph and do the math for two  
>> 180
>> degree phase shifted signals by flipping the polarity of one of the
>> signals and "summing" them to get an instantaneous voltage.
>
> That wasn't me "insisting that one should both graph and do the math
> for two 180 degree phase shifted signals by flipping the polarity of
> one of the signals and "summing" them to get an instantaneous
> voltage", that was *you*, you backpedaling moron... or did you forget
> your adding pi to your equation to flip one hot leg by 180 degrees in
> phase?
>
> SPNAK!
>
>> "What does 2 (Dual / Split) Phase Power mean?
>>
>> If you’re not electrically minded, think of 2 (Dual / Split) phase  
>> power
>> like a two pedal bicycle where one (pushing leg) or both (pushing legs)
>> can provide power.
>>
>> Dual Phase or Split Phase power is also Single Phase because it’s a  
>> two
>> wire Alternating Current (AC ) power circuit. In the US, this is the
>> standard household power arrangement with two (Phase A, Phase B) 120V
>> power wires (180 degrees out of phase with one another) like two bicycle
>> pedals and one neutral wire. This arrangement provides (2) 120V and (1)
>> 240V power circuits. 120V power flows (alternating) between either power
>> wire (through the load) and the neutral wire. 240V power flows
>> (alternating) between the two power wires (through the load)."
>>
>> "If you connected a dual trace oscope's probes' gnds to the Neutral
>> (center tapped wire) and put one probe on phase A and the other on  
>> phase B
>> the waveforms would be 180 degrees out of phase. When A peaks positive B
>> peaks negative. So how is it that the A-Neutral and B-Neutral voltages  
>> are
>> said to be "in phase"? [Of course, it makes no sense to ask about the
>> phasing of A-B - any voltage is always in phase with itself.]"
>
> Wrong. They'd be oppositely-phased in relation to the
> midpoint-neutral, but they cannot be "out of phase" on the hot legs,
> as connecting directly across the two hot legs gives 240 volts
> *single*-*phase* at 0 degrees, as you have acknowledged.
>
> But thanks for yet again demonstrating your inability to grok how
> split-phase midpoint-neutral electrical systems work, DildoRider. You
> are, after all, the moron who's been calling it "two phase", which is
> just silly. Even Chimpy was laughing at that, and he's as big a moron
> as you are.
>
> SPNAK!
>
>>> Educate yourself, you retard.
>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phasor>
>>> <http://white.stanford.edu/teach/index.php/Fourier_transform_math>
>>> <http://www.fourier-series.com/>
>
>> i took engineering in college, thanks.  ;)
>
> Oh, then you *did* skip the first day of class when they taught
> Euler's equation, so you could instead suck dicks in a dark alley. LOL
>
> SPNAK!
>
>>> That equation in the Stanford link above, based upon Euler's sinewave
>>> summation equation, allows one to sum *any* number of sinewaves of
>>> *any* frequency and phase. Moron.
>>>
>>> How can you do *any* electronics work and *not* know how to use the
>>> Fourier transform of Euler's equation, given that using complex
>>> phasors allows one to not only calculate voltage but factor in
>>> impedance, current and any other aspect one wants? Unless you're the
>>> type who solders it together, powers it up and prays for no smoke?
>>> Moron. LOL
>
> <crickets> LOL
>
>>> "standard 3-phase power" LOL
>>>
>>> Do you mean 3-wire delta, 3-wire wye or 4-wire wye? Moron. LOL
>
>> yes, the 3-phase service that powers any of those.
>
> Translation:
> "I... I don't know! I'm in over my head. Don't ask me hard questions
> or I'll start to spam more bad sinewaves with my kooky sinewave
> subtraction equation!"
>
> <snicker>
>
>>> Do you mean a 230 V system, or a 230/400 V system? Moron. LOL
>
>> for now, just 230
>
>>> My uncle has a high-leg delta center-tap-grounded system at his
>>> business, so he can power his 120 volt loads, his single-phase and
>>> 3-phase 240 volt loads and his 208 volt lighting. Despite the fact
>>> that delta has been supplanted by wye for new installations in the US
>>> because of improved load balancing, that's "standard 3-phase power",
>>> too. Moron. LOL
>
>> that's an ideal setup for your uncle.  does he have a ball bearing
>> factory, or something?  LOL
>
> Or something. LOL
>
>>> But let's not get off the topic of you *proving* your kooky sinewave
>>> subtraction equation didn't calculate those 6 sinewaves correctly,
>
>> it certainly did plot it correctly and you've not proven otherwise.
>
> I most certainly *did* prove otherwise. It can't even arrive at the
> correct sinewave summation voltage of 2550.25 volts, as you *proved*
> and *graphed*, complete with a horizontal line so everyone would be
> sure to see that your kooky equation didn't work, you moron. LOL
>
> Your kooky equation seems to be a result of you squashing together
> parts of the phasor and trigonometric sinewave expressions, because
> it's certainly not the correct equation to use.
>
> SPNAK!
>
>> it is
>> you who cannot answer the simple question regarding at which time in
>> seconds that the sine waves that you've conjured would ever
>> "constructively interfere" to produce 2550.25.
>
> You'll have to do the work of proving your kooky sinewave subtraction
> equation doesn't work, DildoRider. Given that you cannot even make it
> produce the proper constructively-interfered maximum voltage of
> 2550.25 volts, there's no way for you to calculate the period of the
> resultant, therefore you're forced to either admit you're *wrong*, or
> change to using the correct Euler equation and thereby admit you're
> *wrong*.
>
> SPNAK!
>
>>> which means you're using the *wrong* *equation*,
>
>> then prove it by posting the *correct* *equation*...
>
> I did at the beginning of this whole fiasco, and you bleated that it
> wasn't the correct equation, then started spamming your bad sinewaves
> using your kooky sinewave subtraction equation, despite the fact that
> GnuPlot can use the correct equation, as you proved when you posted
> about those researchers using it in GnuPlot.
>
> SPNAK!
>
>>> and despite you
>>> admitting GnuPlot can use the proper Euler sinewave summation
>>> equation,
>
>> it can use whatever tab-delimited data you give it.  so just post you're
>> euler data points and we'll get down to the bottom of this.
>
> Translation:
> "I'm wrong, but don't want to admit it. I'm too stupid to use the
> correct Euler equation, but don't want to admit it. So I'll keep
> spamming my bad sinewaves because I'm a mathematical moron." LOL
>
>>> you persist in proving yourself a mathematical moron by
>>> insisting on using the *wrong* *equation*. LOL
>
>> you insist on repetitively and somewhat-schizophrenically bleating out
>> that everything is *wrong* while being unable to provide any evidence
>> whatsoever that this is the case.  is that somehow the "high ground"  
>> these
>> days?
>
> There are three ways of expressing a sinewave, the trigonometric,
> complex exponential and phasor methods. I prefer the phasor method, as
> one can not only calculate phase and voltage, one can factor in
> impedance, solve for current, etc.
>
> You appear to prefer the trigonometric method, but take a look at the
> proper Euler equation, expressed in the trigonometric expression of a
> sinewave, and tell me your equation is correct, DildoRider... do you
> see where you've borrowed parts of the phasor expression of a
> sinewave, and parts of the trigonometric expression of a sinewave, and
> added your kooky correcting factors to try to make it work? Then you
> stupidly switched your minus signs to plus signs and bleated
> "DAAARRRRHHH! I gots the propur Euler eqooashun now! It don't not work
> neither!", thereby *proving* you don't have a fucking clue. And you've
> still not demonstrated that you can jigger your kooky equation to even
> give the proper output both because your phase is wrong, and the
> resultant voltage is wrong. Moron. LOL
>
> And now, you're reduced to droolbleating "SHOW ME DUH PURDY PICHERS!
> <clap clap> DUURRRRHHH! I WANNA SEE DUH PURDY PICHERS!" because you
> have no clue how to do it properly yourself.
>
> SPNAK!
>
>>>> don't forget... 3-phase *is* separated by 120 degrees instead of 180.
>>>> don't forget that in your maths.
>>>>
>>>> for extra credit use quaternion maths.  LOL
>
>>> I don't have to graph or calculate a single fucking thing,
>
>> well, yeah because you're inept and just trying to cover up for it.
>
> Or I know I'm right, and that you're a mathematical moron. And I know
> you'll do far better proving that fact yourself than I could. I mean,
> look at all the fuckups you've already made. LOL
>
>>> you math challenged moron.
>
>> ironic, as you were just challenged to prove your math.
>
> You mean the proper Euler equation, in use by every scientist and
> engineer and proven since the 1700s, whereas your kooky sinewave
> subtraction equation is only used by one delusional and backpedaling
> mathematical moron? LOL
>
>>> All I had to do was prove you *wrong*, which I did
>>> by forcing you to prove *yourself* wrong... because I like making my
>>> kooks do my work for me.
>>>
>>> Now get back to work, you slack-jawed mono-browed thick-witted
>>> uneducated dolt. You've got a lot more bad sinewaves to spam before I
>>> deem you sufficiently embarrassed to allow you to run away with tail
>>> tucked.
>>>
>>> <snicker>
>
>> did everybody applaud?
>
> They sure as hell did, but not for you. People just look at the ground
> and shuffle their feet in embarrassed silence when it comes to you.
>
> <snicker>
>
> Fag. LOL
> Idiot. LOL
> Moron. LOL
> Tranny. LOL
> Libtard. LOL
> Crackhead. LOL
> GableTard. LOL
> DildoRider. LOL
> Bad Musician. LOL
> Stick Figure. LOL
> Terrible Liar. LOL
> Sinewave Spammer. LOL
> Mathematical Moron. LOL
> Outerfilthing Stalker. LOL
> Talentless FrothMonkey. LOL
> Klimate Katastrophe Kook. LOL
> Defeated Tearful Spankard. LOL
> Waster Of Time To Save $10. LOL
> Worst Maker Of Sinewaves In The History Of Usenet. LOL
>

fakey, why did you trim out the following and refuse to comment on it?

i eagerly anticipate fakey's answer to what the following *sums* to with  
his euler summation:

V((L1+L2)-N) = sin(2*pi*f*t)*Vp + sin((2*pi*f*t+(4/3)*pi))*Vp

OR let f=60 and Vp=170:

sin(2*pi*60*t)*170 + sin((2*pi*60*t+(4/3)*pi))*170

i get:

http://i.imgur.com/gfm2vfV.png

fakey has not only proclaimed that this is the method for calculating the  
voltage that a load would see across those two conductors but that it  
*must* be zero volts.

his furry-euler summations CAN'T be wrong, he sez.

-- 
"sines, sines, everywhere there's sines
blocking up the snickerTurds, breaking his mind"
http://imgur.com/a/yMFsu

-

FNVWe attempts to rewrite physics texts in Message-ID:  
<3dcad3dd0a0d39727506717506883c26@dizum.com>

">>let's not forget that mine also had the correct applied mathematics
>> equations unlike fakey the supposed know-it-all:
>>  phase A: 120*sin(2*pi*60*x)
>> phase B: 120*sin(2*pi*60*x+pi)
>>  voltage difference between phase A and phase B at any point x in time:
>> 120*sin(2*pi*60*x) - 120*sin(2*pi*60*x+pi) = 240*sin(2*pi*60*x)

Wrong, as has already been proven. What does it say below, you fecking  
*moron*?

"The _sum_ E(θ) ≡ E(a) + E(b) can be written thusly:""

it says that you don't even know how to correctly apply mathematics to  
real-world AC electricity, snickerTurds.

http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/textbook/alternating-current/chpt-10/single-phase-power-systems/
http://sub.allaboutcircuits.com/images/02170.png
"To mathematically calculate voltage between “hot” wires, we must subtract  
voltages, because their polarity marks show them to be opposed to each  
other:"
http://sub.allaboutcircuits.com/images/12112.png

http://www.samlexamerica.com/support/documents/WhitePaper-120240VACSingleSplitPhaseandMultiWireBranchCircuits.pdf

on page 2:

** NOTE: The phase of Hot Leg 2 (Phase B) is in the
  opposite direction - i.e., 180° apart from the phase
  of Hot Leg L1 (Phase A)

*COUGH*
SPNAK!!

-

i know a guy on the internet who will draw a triangular sine wave in ASCII  
art if you ask nicely.
see: Message-ID: <4ba4a50aaaebc7fb8a348293c5cf9f13@dizum.com>

-

Fakey irrationally demands a theme song to foam to:
"all I really want your pathetic pwned ass to do is write me a classic  
rock song as tribute to your Usenet Lord and Master..."  
<f4f9193fa7d28b760a9de681e61427e7@dizum.com>

-

On Fri, 12 Feb 2016 17:25:03 -0500, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler  
Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:

<snicker>

Fag. LOL
Idiot. LOL
Moron. LOL
Tranny. LOL
Libtard. LOL
Crackhead. LOL
GableTard. LOL
DildoRider. LOL
Bad Musician. LOL
Stick Figure. LOL
Terrible Liar. LOL
Sinewave Spammer. LOL
Outerfilthing Stalker. LOL
Talentless FrothMonkey. LOL
Math Challenged Halfwit. LOL
Klimate Katastrophe Kook. LOL
Defeated Tearful Spankard. LOL
Waster Of Time To Save $10. LOL
Worst Maker Of Sinewaves In The History Of Usenet. LOL


on top of old snick-ers, all covered with Fag. LOL
is where my usenet lord and mas-ter
can go straight to hell*

*hell doesn't exist.  hope everybody is having a productive evening.

-

http://i.imgur.com/2tH6zVB.jpg

http://cafepress.com/kooktown

http://i.imgur.com/pnWqhSG.jpg

-

If my poasts are offensive to you, you can always block all From: headers  
containing "root@127.0.0.1", unless you are an idiot who would like to  
yammer about "morphing" and maybe try to lodge some frivolous complaints  
to my news provider, then please be sure to ignore this helpful  
information and have fun making an ass of yourself in public.  :)

-

if that route of silencing those horrid opinions of mine that you  
downloaded to your computer under duress doesn't work you can always try:  
http://i.imgur.com/jlsN9JX.png?2

-

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Gish_Gallop
The Gish Gallop is often used as an indirect argument from authority — as  
it appears to paint the galloper as an expert in a broad range of subjects  
or with an extensive knowledge of an individual one. Simultaneously it  
presents opponents (in spoken debates) or refuters (in written,  
Internet-based ones) as incompetent bumblers who didn't do their homework  
before the debate. Such emphasis on style over substance is the reason  
many scientists disdain public debates as a forum for disseminating  
opinions. - Page #1 from the Gospel of SnickerTurd

-

Coming soon!  To a newsgroup near you!:

$ perl fakeyBot.pl
FakeyBot>       I'm FakeyBot. What's your name so I can Google-stalk you,  
look you up on Radaris, and hurl invective and probably-illegal harrassing  
bile from behind an anonymous dizum account?  <snicker>
You>    Robert Michael Wolfe
FakeyBot>       Oh look, you're back again to polish my size 16 steel-toed  
boot with your colon and listen to me talk about bestiality and cocks,  
Robert. <snicker>
Robert> you talk about cocks a lot.
FakeyBot>       Oh, I talk about sex a lot?
Robert> gay sex, mostly...
FakeyBot>       Fag!

(just as useful as the original!)

-

snickers the wonderturd describes how he alerted lots of his kiddie pr0n  
friends to the ensuing FBI sting in message  
<b5e7da79a455d0c9227b1b50e25e7ea1@dizum.com>:
"That's easy enough to do... how do you think my crew uncovered the
largest CP ring using Tor and I2P, which we promptly turned over to
the FBI? I discovered a way to uncover the IP addresses the I2P users were  
using, and a way of tracking Eepsites back to their IP addresses, then we  
figured out that we could DDOS a Tor IP address and modify Tor headers  
while checking whether a Tor hidden service was still up, then using  
process of elimination to pinpoint the IP address hosting that hidden  
service. It's not rocket science.

_The I2P community got all up in arms when I discussed on their forum how  
I was doing it, and that it'd be a good way of cleaning up I2P so it can  
get on with being a platform to research anonymous communication... my  
distinct impression was that the "anonymity
research platform" story was just a cover story to allow pervs to
trade CP._  (NOTE: admits to participating in what he "suspected" was a  
kiddie pr0n network.)

That Silk Road 2.0 was taken offline in the ensuing FBI Operation
Onymous was just icing on the cake."
 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#554427

On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 18:13:24 -0500, "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder
living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey),
socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117"
<root@127.0.0.1> wrote:

>On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 16:03:43 -0500, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler  
>Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:
>
>> Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
>>
>> Robert Michael Wolfe the Pittsburgh Pied Piper Of Penis (aka
>> DildoRider) of 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey),
>> socked up as sucksroot@127.0.0.1, in
>> <news:op.yc09xkpxtm21m2@benson.localhost> did thusly jump head first
>> into the wood chipper again:
>>
>>> On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 01:20:45 -0500, Friendly Neighborhood
>>> Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:
>>
>>>> Robert Michael Wolfe the Pittsburgh Pied Piper Of Penis (aka
>>>> DildoRider) of 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey),
>>>> socked up as sucksroot@127.0.0.1, in
>>>> <news:op.yczn3ab2tm21m2@benson.localhost> did thusly jump head first
>>>> into the wood chipper again:
>>
>>>>> <looks at subject>
>>>>>
>>>>> okay, so now please go "sum" any two of the 3 phases of standard  
>>>>> 3-phase
>>>>> power and tell me how many volts potential it is at any instant,  
>>>>> k0oky.
>>>>> then "sum" all three.  show us the sums.
>>
>>>> "at any instant" LOL
>>>>
>>>> You mean the time-varying instantaneous voltage, which varies on each
>>>> hot leg? Moron. LOL
>>>>
>>>> V(L1-N) = sin(2*pi*f*t)*Vp
>>>> V(L2-N) = sin((2*pi*f*t+((4/3)*pi)*Vp
>>>> V(L3-N) = sin((2*pi*f*t+((2/3)*pi)*Vp
>>
>>> hey, those equations look very familiar.  you just left out the
>>> definitions of f=60 and Vp=120
>>>
>>> 120*sin(60*2*pi*x) OR sin(2*pi*60*x)*120
>>> 120*sin(60*2*pi*x+(120*pi/180)) OR sin(2*pi*60*x+((120/180)*pi)*120
>>> 120*sin(60*2*pi*x+(240*pi/180)) OR sin(2*pi*60*x+((240/180)*pi)*120
>>
>> Well, given that you can't even reduce a fraction, that pretty much
>> proves my point that you're a mathematical moron. LOL
>>
>> SPNAK!
>>
>>> you're finally not being a fucktard about correct equations,
>>
>> I never was. I was only "being a fucktard" about the fact that you're
>> using the equations wrong and using the wrong equation, because you're
>> a mathematical moron who doesn't understand what the equation is
>> supposed to do. Moron. LOL
>>
>>> unlike when
>>> you kept insisting that one should both graph and do the math for two  
>>> 180
>>> degree phase shifted signals by flipping the polarity of one of the
>>> signals and "summing" them to get an instantaneous voltage.
>>
>> That wasn't me "insisting that one should both graph and do the math
>> for two 180 degree phase shifted signals by flipping the polarity of
>> one of the signals and "summing" them to get an instantaneous
>> voltage", that was *you*, you backpedaling moron... or did you forget
>> your adding pi to your equation to flip one hot leg by 180 degrees in
>> phase?
>>
>> SPNAK!
>>
>>> "What does 2 (Dual / Split) Phase Power mean?
>>>
>>> If you’re not electrically minded, think of 2 (Dual / Split) phase  
>>> power
>>> like a two pedal bicycle where one (pushing leg) or both (pushing legs)
>>> can provide power.
>>>
>>> Dual Phase or Split Phase power is also Single Phase because it’s a  
>>> two
>>> wire Alternating Current (AC ) power circuit. In the US, this is the
>>> standard household power arrangement with two (Phase A, Phase B) 120V
>>> power wires (180 degrees out of phase with one another) like two bicycle
>>> pedals and one neutral wire. This arrangement provides (2) 120V and (1)
>>> 240V power circuits. 120V power flows (alternating) between either power
>>> wire (through the load) and the neutral wire. 240V power flows
>>> (alternating) between the two power wires (through the load)."
>>>
>>> "If you connected a dual trace oscope's probes' gnds to the Neutral
>>> (center tapped wire) and put one probe on phase A and the other on  
>>> phase B
>>> the waveforms would be 180 degrees out of phase. When A peaks positive B
>>> peaks negative. So how is it that the A-Neutral and B-Neutral voltages  
>>> are
>>> said to be "in phase"? [Of course, it makes no sense to ask about the
>>> phasing of A-B - any voltage is always in phase with itself.]"
>>
>> Wrong. They'd be oppositely-phased in relation to the
>> midpoint-neutral, but they cannot be "out of phase" on the hot legs,
>> as connecting directly across the two hot legs gives 240 volts
>> *single*-*phase* at 0 degrees, as you have acknowledged.
>>
>> But thanks for yet again demonstrating your inability to grok how
>> split-phase midpoint-neutral electrical systems work, DildoRider. You
>> are, after all, the moron who's been calling it "two phase", which is
>> just silly. Even Chimpy was laughing at that, and he's as big a moron
>> as you are.
>>
>> SPNAK!
>>
>>>> Educate yourself, you retard.
>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phasor>
>>>> <http://white.stanford.edu/teach/index.php/Fourier_transform_math>
>>>> <http://www.fourier-series.com/>
>>
>>> i took engineering in college, thanks.  ;)
>>
>> Oh, then you *did* skip the first day of class when they taught
>> Euler's equation, so you could instead suck dicks in a dark alley. LOL
>>
>> SPNAK!
>>
>>>> That equation in the Stanford link above, based upon Euler's sinewave
>>>> summation equation, allows one to sum *any* number of sinewaves of
>>>> *any* frequency and phase. Moron.
>>>>
>>>> How can you do *any* electronics work and *not* know how to use the
>>>> Fourier transform of Euler's equation, given that using complex
>>>> phasors allows one to not only calculate voltage but factor in
>>>> impedance, current and any other aspect one wants? Unless you're the
>>>> type who solders it together, powers it up and prays for no smoke?
>>>> Moron. LOL
>>
>> <crickets> LOL
>>
>>>> "standard 3-phase power" LOL
>>>>
>>>> Do you mean 3-wire delta, 3-wire wye or 4-wire wye? Moron. LOL
>>
>>> yes, the 3-phase service that powers any of those.
>>
>> Translation:
>> "I... I don't know! I'm in over my head. Don't ask me hard questions
>> or I'll start to spam more bad sinewaves with my kooky sinewave
>> subtraction equation!"
>>
>> <snicker>
>>
>>>> Do you mean a 230 V system, or a 230/400 V system? Moron. LOL
>>
>>> for now, just 230
>>
>>>> My uncle has a high-leg delta center-tap-grounded system at his
>>>> business, so he can power his 120 volt loads, his single-phase and
>>>> 3-phase 240 volt loads and his 208 volt lighting. Despite the fact
>>>> that delta has been supplanted by wye for new installations in the US
>>>> because of improved load balancing, that's "standard 3-phase power",
>>>> too. Moron. LOL
>>
>>> that's an ideal setup for your uncle.  does he have a ball bearing
>>> factory, or something?  LOL
>>
>> Or something. LOL
>>
>>>> But let's not get off the topic of you *proving* your kooky sinewave
>>>> subtraction equation didn't calculate those 6 sinewaves correctly,
>>
>>> it certainly did plot it correctly and you've not proven otherwise.
>>
>> I most certainly *did* prove otherwise. It can't even arrive at the
>> correct sinewave summation voltage of 2550.25 volts, as you *proved*
>> and *graphed*, complete with a horizontal line so everyone would be
>> sure to see that your kooky equation didn't work, you moron. LOL
>>
>> Your kooky equation seems to be a result of you squashing together
>> parts of the phasor and trigonometric sinewave expressions, because
>> it's certainly not the correct equation to use.
>>
>> SPNAK!
>>
>>> it is
>>> you who cannot answer the simple question regarding at which time in
>>> seconds that the sine waves that you've conjured would ever
>>> "constructively interfere" to produce 2550.25.
>>
>> You'll have to do the work of proving your kooky sinewave subtraction
>> equation doesn't work, DildoRider. Given that you cannot even make it
>> produce the proper constructively-interfered maximum voltage of
>> 2550.25 volts, there's no way for you to calculate the period of the
>> resultant, therefore you're forced to either admit you're *wrong*, or
>> change to using the correct Euler equation and thereby admit you're
>> *wrong*.
>>
>> SPNAK!
>>
>>>> which means you're using the *wrong* *equation*,
>>
>>> then prove it by posting the *correct* *equation*...
>>
>> I did at the beginning of this whole fiasco, and you bleated that it
>> wasn't the correct equation, then started spamming your bad sinewaves
>> using your kooky sinewave subtraction equation, despite the fact that
>> GnuPlot can use the correct equation, as you proved when you posted
>> about those researchers using it in GnuPlot.
>>
>> SPNAK!
>>
>>>> and despite you
>>>> admitting GnuPlot can use the proper Euler sinewave summation
>>>> equation,
>>
>>> it can use whatever tab-delimited data you give it.  so just post you're
>>> euler data points and we'll get down to the bottom of this.
>>
>> Translation:
>> "I'm wrong, but don't want to admit it. I'm too stupid to use the
>> correct Euler equation, but don't want to admit it. So I'll keep
>> spamming my bad sinewaves because I'm a mathematical moron." LOL
>>
>>>> you persist in proving yourself a mathematical moron by
>>>> insisting on using the *wrong* *equation*. LOL
>>
>>> you insist on repetitively and somewhat-schizophrenically bleating out
>>> that everything is *wrong* while being unable to provide any evidence
>>> whatsoever that this is the case.  is that somehow the "high ground"  
>>> these
>>> days?
>>
>> There are three ways of expressing a sinewave, the trigonometric,
>> complex exponential and phasor methods. I prefer the phasor method, as
>> one can not only calculate phase and voltage, one can factor in
>> impedance, solve for current, etc.
>>
>> You appear to prefer the trigonometric method, but take a look at the
>> proper Euler equation, expressed in the trigonometric expression of a
>> sinewave, and tell me your equation is correct, DildoRider... do you
>> see where you've borrowed parts of the phasor expression of a
>> sinewave, and parts of the trigonometric expression of a sinewave, and
>> added your kooky correcting factors to try to make it work? Then you
>> stupidly switched your minus signs to plus signs and bleated
>> "DAAARRRRHHH! I gots the propur Euler eqooashun now! It don't not work
>> neither!", thereby *proving* you don't have a fucking clue. And you've
>> still not demonstrated that you can jigger your kooky equation to even
>> give the proper output both because your phase is wrong, and the
>> resultant voltage is wrong. Moron. LOL
>>
>> And now, you're reduced to droolbleating "SHOW ME DUH PURDY PICHERS!
>> <clap clap> DUURRRRHHH! I WANNA SEE DUH PURDY PICHERS!" because you
>> have no clue how to do it properly yourself.
>>
>> SPNAK!
>>
>>>>> don't forget... 3-phase *is* separated by 120 degrees instead of 180.
>>>>> don't forget that in your maths.
>>>>>
>>>>> for extra credit use quaternion maths.  LOL
>>
>>>> I don't have to graph or calculate a single fucking thing,
>>
>>> well, yeah because you're inept and just trying to cover up for it.
>>
>> Or I know I'm right, and that you're a mathematical moron. And I know
>> you'll do far better proving that fact yourself than I could. I mean,
>> look at all the fuckups you've already made. LOL
>>
>>>> you math challenged moron.
>>
>>> ironic, as you were just challenged to prove your math.
>>
>> You mean the proper Euler equation, in use by every scientist and
>> engineer and proven since the 1700s, whereas your kooky sinewave
>> subtraction equation is only used by one delusional and backpedaling
>> mathematical moron? LOL
>>
>>>> All I had to do was prove you *wrong*, which I did
>>>> by forcing you to prove *yourself* wrong... because I like making my
>>>> kooks do my work for me.
>>>>
>>>> Now get back to work, you slack-jawed mono-browed thick-witted
>>>> uneducated dolt. You've got a lot more bad sinewaves to spam before I
>>>> deem you sufficiently embarrassed to allow you to run away with tail
>>>> tucked.
>>>>
>>>> <snicker>
>>
>>> did everybody applaud?
>>
>> They sure as hell did, but not for you. People just look at the ground
>> and shuffle their feet in embarrassed silence when it comes to you.
>>
>> <snicker>
>>
>> Fag. LOL
>> Idiot. LOL
>> Moron. LOL
>> Tranny. LOL
>> Libtard. LOL
>> Crackhead. LOL
>> GableTard. LOL
>> DildoRider. LOL
>> Bad Musician. LOL
>> Stick Figure. LOL
>> Terrible Liar. LOL
>> Sinewave Spammer. LOL
>> Mathematical Moron. LOL
>> Outerfilthing Stalker. LOL
>> Talentless FrothMonkey. LOL
>> Klimate Katastrophe Kook. LOL
>> Defeated Tearful Spankard. LOL
>> Waster Of Time To Save $10. LOL
>> Worst Maker Of Sinewaves In The History Of Usenet. LOL
>>
>
>fakey, why did you trim out the following and refuse to comment on it?
>
>i eagerly anticipate fakey's answer to what the following *sums* to with  
>his euler summation:
>
>V((L1+L2)-N) = sin(2*pi*f*t)*Vp + sin((2*pi*f*t+(4/3)*pi))*Vp
>
>OR let f=60 and Vp=170:
>
>sin(2*pi*60*t)*170 + sin((2*pi*60*t+(4/3)*pi))*170
>
>i get:
>
>http://i.imgur.com/gfm2vfV.png
>
>fakey has not only proclaimed that this is the method for calculating the  
>voltage that a load would see across those two conductors but that it  
>*must* be zero volts.
>
>his furry-euler summations CAN'T be wrong, he sez.


I'm sure glad I have no idea what the hell you guys are talking about.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#554428

Skeeter wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 18:13:24 -0500, "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder
> living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey),
> socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117"
> <root@127.0.0.1> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 16:03:43 -0500, Friendly Neighborhood Vote
>> Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:
>>
>>> Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
>>>
>>> Robert Michael Wolfe the Pittsburgh Pied Piper Of Penis (aka
>>> DildoRider) of 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop
>>> Jockey), socked up as sucksroot@127.0.0.1, in
>>> <news:op.yc09xkpxtm21m2@benson.localhost> did thusly jump head first
>>> into the wood chipper again:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 01:20:45 -0500, Friendly Neighborhood
>>>> Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Robert Michael Wolfe the Pittsburgh Pied Piper Of Penis (aka
>>>>> DildoRider) of 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop
>>>>> Jockey), socked up as sucksroot@127.0.0.1, in
>>>>> <news:op.yczn3ab2tm21m2@benson.localhost> did thusly jump head
>>>>> first into the wood chipper again:
>>>
>>>>>> <looks at subject>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> okay, so now please go "sum" any two of the 3 phases of standard
>>>>>> 3-phase
>>>>>> power and tell me how many volts potential it is at any instant,
>>>>>> k0oky.
>>>>>> then "sum" all three.  show us the sums.
>>>
>>>>> "at any instant" LOL
>>>>>
>>>>> You mean the time-varying instantaneous voltage, which varies on
>>>>> each hot leg? Moron. LOL
>>>>>
>>>>> V(L1-N) = sin(2*pi*f*t)*Vp
>>>>> V(L2-N) = sin((2*pi*f*t+((4/3)*pi)*Vp
>>>>> V(L3-N) = sin((2*pi*f*t+((2/3)*pi)*Vp
>>>
>>>> hey, those equations look very familiar.  you just left out the
>>>> definitions of f=60 and Vp=120
>>>>
>>>> 120*sin(60*2*pi*x) OR sin(2*pi*60*x)*120
>>>> 120*sin(60*2*pi*x+(120*pi/180)) OR sin(2*pi*60*x+((120/180)*pi)*120
>>>> 120*sin(60*2*pi*x+(240*pi/180)) OR sin(2*pi*60*x+((240/180)*pi)*120
>>>
>>> Well, given that you can't even reduce a fraction, that pretty much
>>> proves my point that you're a mathematical moron. LOL
>>>
>>> SPNAK!
>>>
>>>> you're finally not being a fucktard about correct equations,
>>>
>>> I never was. I was only "being a fucktard" about the fact that
>>> you're using the equations wrong and using the wrong equation,
>>> because you're
>>> a mathematical moron who doesn't understand what the equation is
>>> supposed to do. Moron. LOL
>>>
>>>> unlike when
>>>> you kept insisting that one should both graph and do the math for
>>>> two 180
>>>> degree phase shifted signals by flipping the polarity of one of the
>>>> signals and "summing" them to get an instantaneous voltage.
>>>
>>> That wasn't me "insisting that one should both graph and do the math
>>> for two 180 degree phase shifted signals by flipping the polarity of
>>> one of the signals and "summing" them to get an instantaneous
>>> voltage", that was *you*, you backpedaling moron... or did you
>>> forget your adding pi to your equation to flip one hot leg by 180
>>> degrees in phase?
>>>
>>> SPNAK!
>>>
>>>> "What does 2 (Dual / Split) Phase Power mean?
>>>>
>>>> If youâ?Tre not electrically minded, think of 2 (Dual / Split)
>>>> phase power
>>>> like a two pedal bicycle where one (pushing leg) or both (pushing
>>>> legs) can provide power.
>>>>
>>>> Dual Phase or Split Phase power is also Single Phase because
>>>> itâ?Ts a two
>>>> wire Alternating Current (AC ) power circuit. In the US, this is
>>>> the standard household power arrangement with two (Phase A, Phase
>>>> B) 120V power wires (180 degrees out of phase with one another)
>>>> like two bicycle pedals and one neutral wire. This arrangement
>>>> provides (2) 120V and (1) 240V power circuits. 120V power flows
>>>> (alternating) between either power wire (through the load) and the
>>>> neutral wire. 240V power flows (alternating) between the two power
>>>> wires (through the load)."
>>>>
>>>> "If you connected a dual trace oscope's probes' gnds to the Neutral
>>>> (center tapped wire) and put one probe on phase A and the other on
>>>> phase B
>>>> the waveforms would be 180 degrees out of phase. When A peaks
>>>> positive B peaks negative. So how is it that the A-Neutral and
>>>> B-Neutral voltages are
>>>> said to be "in phase"? [Of course, it makes no sense to ask about
>>>> the phasing of A-B - any voltage is always in phase with itself.]"
>>>
>>> Wrong. They'd be oppositely-phased in relation to the
>>> midpoint-neutral, but they cannot be "out of phase" on the hot legs,
>>> as connecting directly across the two hot legs gives 240 volts
>>> *single*-*phase* at 0 degrees, as you have acknowledged.
>>>
>>> But thanks for yet again demonstrating your inability to grok how
>>> split-phase midpoint-neutral electrical systems work, DildoRider.
>>> You are, after all, the moron who's been calling it "two phase",
>>> which is just silly. Even Chimpy was laughing at that, and he's as
>>> big a moron
>>> as you are.
>>>
>>> SPNAK!
>>>
>>>>> Educate yourself, you retard.
>>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phasor>
>>>>> <http://white.stanford.edu/teach/index.php/Fourier_transform_math>
>>>>> <http://www.fourier-series.com/>
>>>
>>>> i took engineering in college, thanks.  ;)
>>>
>>> Oh, then you *did* skip the first day of class when they taught
>>> Euler's equation, so you could instead suck dicks in a dark alley.
>>> LOL
>>>
>>> SPNAK!
>>>
>>>>> That equation in the Stanford link above, based upon Euler's
>>>>> sinewave summation equation, allows one to sum *any* number of
>>>>> sinewaves of *any* frequency and phase. Moron.
>>>>>
>>>>> How can you do *any* electronics work and *not* know how to use
>>>>> the Fourier transform of Euler's equation, given that using
>>>>> complex phasors allows one to not only calculate voltage but
>>>>> factor in impedance, current and any other aspect one wants?
>>>>> Unless you're the type who solders it together, powers it up and
>>>>> prays for no smoke? Moron. LOL
>>>
>>> <crickets> LOL
>>>
>>>>> "standard 3-phase power" LOL
>>>>>
>>>>> Do you mean 3-wire delta, 3-wire wye or 4-wire wye? Moron. LOL
>>>
>>>> yes, the 3-phase service that powers any of those.
>>>
>>> Translation:
>>> "I... I don't know! I'm in over my head. Don't ask me hard questions
>>> or I'll start to spam more bad sinewaves with my kooky sinewave
>>> subtraction equation!"
>>>
>>> <snicker>
>>>
>>>>> Do you mean a 230 V system, or a 230/400 V system? Moron. LOL
>>>
>>>> for now, just 230
>>>
>>>>> My uncle has a high-leg delta center-tap-grounded system at his
>>>>> business, so he can power his 120 volt loads, his single-phase and
>>>>> 3-phase 240 volt loads and his 208 volt lighting. Despite the fact
>>>>> that delta has been supplanted by wye for new installations in
>>>>> the US because of improved load balancing, that's "standard
>>>>> 3-phase power", too. Moron. LOL
>>>
>>>> that's an ideal setup for your uncle.  does he have a ball bearing
>>>> factory, or something?  LOL
>>>
>>> Or something. LOL
>>>
>>>>> But let's not get off the topic of you *proving* your kooky
>>>>> sinewave subtraction equation didn't calculate those 6 sinewaves
>>>>> correctly,
>>>
>>>> it certainly did plot it correctly and you've not proven otherwise.
>>>
>>> I most certainly *did* prove otherwise. It can't even arrive at the
>>> correct sinewave summation voltage of 2550.25 volts, as you *proved*
>>> and *graphed*, complete with a horizontal line so everyone would be
>>> sure to see that your kooky equation didn't work, you moron. LOL
>>>
>>> Your kooky equation seems to be a result of you squashing together
>>> parts of the phasor and trigonometric sinewave expressions, because
>>> it's certainly not the correct equation to use.
>>>
>>> SPNAK!
>>>
>>>> it is
>>>> you who cannot answer the simple question regarding at which time
>>>> in seconds that the sine waves that you've conjured would ever
>>>> "constructively interfere" to produce 2550.25.
>>>
>>> You'll have to do the work of proving your kooky sinewave
>>> subtraction equation doesn't work, DildoRider. Given that you
>>> cannot even make it produce the proper constructively-interfered
>>> maximum voltage of 2550.25 volts, there's no way for you to
>>> calculate the period of the resultant, therefore you're forced to
>>> either admit you're *wrong*, or change to using the correct Euler
>>> equation and thereby admit you're *wrong*.
>>>
>>> SPNAK!
>>>
>>>>> which means you're using the *wrong* *equation*,
>>>
>>>> then prove it by posting the *correct* *equation*...
>>>
>>> I did at the beginning of this whole fiasco, and you bleated that it
>>> wasn't the correct equation, then started spamming your bad
>>> sinewaves using your kooky sinewave subtraction equation, despite
>>> the fact that GnuPlot can use the correct equation, as you proved
>>> when you posted about those researchers using it in GnuPlot.
>>>
>>> SPNAK!
>>>
>>>>> and despite you
>>>>> admitting GnuPlot can use the proper Euler sinewave summation
>>>>> equation,
>>>
>>>> it can use whatever tab-delimited data you give it.  so just post
>>>> you're euler data points and we'll get down to the bottom of this.
>>>
>>> Translation:
>>> "I'm wrong, but don't want to admit it. I'm too stupid to use the
>>> correct Euler equation, but don't want to admit it. So I'll keep
>>> spamming my bad sinewaves because I'm a mathematical moron." LOL
>>>
>>>>> you persist in proving yourself a mathematical moron by
>>>>> insisting on using the *wrong* *equation*. LOL
>>>
>>>> you insist on repetitively and somewhat-schizophrenically bleating
>>>> out that everything is *wrong* while being unable to provide any
>>>> evidence whatsoever that this is the case.  is that somehow the
>>>> "high ground" these
>>>> days?
>>>
>>> There are three ways of expressing a sinewave, the trigonometric,
>>> complex exponential and phasor methods. I prefer the phasor method,
>>> as one can not only calculate phase and voltage, one can factor in
>>> impedance, solve for current, etc.
>>>
>>> You appear to prefer the trigonometric method, but take a look at
>>> the proper Euler equation, expressed in the trigonometric
>>> expression of a sinewave, and tell me your equation is correct,
>>> DildoRider... do you
>>> see where you've borrowed parts of the phasor expression of a
>>> sinewave, and parts of the trigonometric expression of a sinewave,
>>> and added your kooky correcting factors to try to make it work?
>>> Then you stupidly switched your minus signs to plus signs and
>>> bleated "DAAARRRRHHH! I gots the propur Euler eqooashun now! It
>>> don't not work neither!", thereby *proving* you don't have a
>>> fucking clue. And you've still not demonstrated that you can jigger
>>> your kooky equation to even give the proper output both because
>>> your phase is wrong, and the resultant voltage is wrong. Moron. LOL
>>>
>>> And now, you're reduced to droolbleating "SHOW ME DUH PURDY PICHERS!
>>> <clap clap> DUURRRRHHH! I WANNA SEE DUH PURDY PICHERS!" because you
>>> have no clue how to do it properly yourself.
>>>
>>> SPNAK!
>>>
>>>>>> don't forget... 3-phase *is* separated by 120 degrees instead of
>>>>>> 180. don't forget that in your maths.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> for extra credit use quaternion maths.  LOL
>>>
>>>>> I don't have to graph or calculate a single fucking thing,
>>>
>>>> well, yeah because you're inept and just trying to cover up for it.
>>>
>>> Or I know I'm right, and that you're a mathematical moron. And I
>>> know you'll do far better proving that fact yourself than I could.
>>> I mean, look at all the fuckups you've already made. LOL
>>>
>>>>> you math challenged moron.
>>>
>>>> ironic, as you were just challenged to prove your math.
>>>
>>> You mean the proper Euler equation, in use by every scientist and
>>> engineer and proven since the 1700s, whereas your kooky sinewave
>>> subtraction equation is only used by one delusional and backpedaling
>>> mathematical moron? LOL
>>>
>>>>> All I had to do was prove you *wrong*, which I did
>>>>> by forcing you to prove *yourself* wrong... because I like making
>>>>> my kooks do my work for me.
>>>>>
>>>>> Now get back to work, you slack-jawed mono-browed thick-witted
>>>>> uneducated dolt. You've got a lot more bad sinewaves to spam
>>>>> before I deem you sufficiently embarrassed to allow you to run
>>>>> away with tail tucked.
>>>>>
>>>>> <snicker>
>>>
>>>> did everybody applaud?
>>>
>>> They sure as hell did, but not for you. People just look at the
>>> ground and shuffle their feet in embarrassed silence when it comes
>>> to you.
>>>
>>> <snicker>
>>>
>>> Fag. LOL
>>> Idiot. LOL
>>> Moron. LOL
>>> Tranny. LOL
>>> Libtard. LOL
>>> Crackhead. LOL
>>> GableTard. LOL
>>> DildoRider. LOL
>>> Bad Musician. LOL
>>> Stick Figure. LOL
>>> Terrible Liar. LOL
>>> Sinewave Spammer. LOL
>>> Mathematical Moron. LOL
>>> Outerfilthing Stalker. LOL
>>> Talentless FrothMonkey. LOL
>>> Klimate Katastrophe Kook. LOL
>>> Defeated Tearful Spankard. LOL
>>> Waster Of Time To Save $10. LOL
>>> Worst Maker Of Sinewaves In The History Of Usenet. LOL
>>>
>>
>> fakey, why did you trim out the following and refuse to comment on
>> it?
>>
>> i eagerly anticipate fakey's answer to what the following *sums* to
>> with his euler summation:
>>
>> V((L1+L2)-N) = sin(2*pi*f*t)*Vp + sin((2*pi*f*t+(4/3)*pi))*Vp
>>
>> OR let f=60 and Vp=170:
>>
>> sin(2*pi*60*t)*170 + sin((2*pi*60*t+(4/3)*pi))*170
>>
>> i get:
>>
>> http://i.imgur.com/gfm2vfV.png
>>
>> fakey has not only proclaimed that this is the method for
>> calculating the voltage that a load would see across those two
>> conductors but that it *must* be zero volts.
>>
>> his furry-euler summations CAN'T be wrong, he sez.
>
>
> I'm sure glad I have no idea what the hell you guys are talking about.

discus 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#554431

On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 16:24:42 -0700, "%" <persent@gmail.com> wrote:

>Skeeter wrote:
>> On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 18:13:24 -0500, "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder
>> living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey),
>> socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117"
>> <root@127.0.0.1> wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 16:03:43 -0500, Friendly Neighborhood Vote
>>> Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
>>>>
>>>> Robert Michael Wolfe the Pittsburgh Pied Piper Of Penis (aka
>>>> DildoRider) of 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop
>>>> Jockey), socked up as sucksroot@127.0.0.1, in
>>>> <news:op.yc09xkpxtm21m2@benson.localhost> did thusly jump head first
>>>> into the wood chipper again:
>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 01:20:45 -0500, Friendly Neighborhood
>>>>> Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> Robert Michael Wolfe the Pittsburgh Pied Piper Of Penis (aka
>>>>>> DildoRider) of 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop
>>>>>> Jockey), socked up as sucksroot@127.0.0.1, in
>>>>>> <news:op.yczn3ab2tm21m2@benson.localhost> did thusly jump head
>>>>>> first into the wood chipper again:
>>>>
>>>>>>> <looks at subject>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> okay, so now please go "sum" any two of the 3 phases of standard
>>>>>>> 3-phase
>>>>>>> power and tell me how many volts potential it is at any instant,
>>>>>>> k0oky.
>>>>>>> then "sum" all three.  show us the sums.
>>>>
>>>>>> "at any instant" LOL
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You mean the time-varying instantaneous voltage, which varies on
>>>>>> each hot leg? Moron. LOL
>>>>>>
>>>>>> V(L1-N) = sin(2*pi*f*t)*Vp
>>>>>> V(L2-N) = sin((2*pi*f*t+((4/3)*pi)*Vp
>>>>>> V(L3-N) = sin((2*pi*f*t+((2/3)*pi)*Vp
>>>>
>>>>> hey, those equations look very familiar.  you just left out the
>>>>> definitions of f=60 and Vp=120
>>>>>
>>>>> 120*sin(60*2*pi*x) OR sin(2*pi*60*x)*120
>>>>> 120*sin(60*2*pi*x+(120*pi/180)) OR sin(2*pi*60*x+((120/180)*pi)*120
>>>>> 120*sin(60*2*pi*x+(240*pi/180)) OR sin(2*pi*60*x+((240/180)*pi)*120
>>>>
>>>> Well, given that you can't even reduce a fraction, that pretty much
>>>> proves my point that you're a mathematical moron. LOL
>>>>
>>>> SPNAK!
>>>>
>>>>> you're finally not being a fucktard about correct equations,
>>>>
>>>> I never was. I was only "being a fucktard" about the fact that
>>>> you're using the equations wrong and using the wrong equation,
>>>> because you're
>>>> a mathematical moron who doesn't understand what the equation is
>>>> supposed to do. Moron. LOL
>>>>
>>>>> unlike when
>>>>> you kept insisting that one should both graph and do the math for
>>>>> two 180
>>>>> degree phase shifted signals by flipping the polarity of one of the
>>>>> signals and "summing" them to get an instantaneous voltage.
>>>>
>>>> That wasn't me "insisting that one should both graph and do the math
>>>> for two 180 degree phase shifted signals by flipping the polarity of
>>>> one of the signals and "summing" them to get an instantaneous
>>>> voltage", that was *you*, you backpedaling moron... or did you
>>>> forget your adding pi to your equation to flip one hot leg by 180
>>>> degrees in phase?
>>>>
>>>> SPNAK!
>>>>
>>>>> "What does 2 (Dual / Split) Phase Power mean?
>>>>>
>>>>> If youâ?Tre not electrically minded, think of 2 (Dual / Split)
>>>>> phase power
>>>>> like a two pedal bicycle where one (pushing leg) or both (pushing
>>>>> legs) can provide power.
>>>>>
>>>>> Dual Phase or Split Phase power is also Single Phase because
>>>>> itâ?Ts a two
>>>>> wire Alternating Current (AC ) power circuit. In the US, this is
>>>>> the standard household power arrangement with two (Phase A, Phase
>>>>> B) 120V power wires (180 degrees out of phase with one another)
>>>>> like two bicycle pedals and one neutral wire. This arrangement
>>>>> provides (2) 120V and (1) 240V power circuits. 120V power flows
>>>>> (alternating) between either power wire (through the load) and the
>>>>> neutral wire. 240V power flows (alternating) between the two power
>>>>> wires (through the load)."
>>>>>
>>>>> "If you connected a dual trace oscope's probes' gnds to the Neutral
>>>>> (center tapped wire) and put one probe on phase A and the other on
>>>>> phase B
>>>>> the waveforms would be 180 degrees out of phase. When A peaks
>>>>> positive B peaks negative. So how is it that the A-Neutral and
>>>>> B-Neutral voltages are
>>>>> said to be "in phase"? [Of course, it makes no sense to ask about
>>>>> the phasing of A-B - any voltage is always in phase with itself.]"
>>>>
>>>> Wrong. They'd be oppositely-phased in relation to the
>>>> midpoint-neutral, but they cannot be "out of phase" on the hot legs,
>>>> as connecting directly across the two hot legs gives 240 volts
>>>> *single*-*phase* at 0 degrees, as you have acknowledged.
>>>>
>>>> But thanks for yet again demonstrating your inability to grok how
>>>> split-phase midpoint-neutral electrical systems work, DildoRider.
>>>> You are, after all, the moron who's been calling it "two phase",
>>>> which is just silly. Even Chimpy was laughing at that, and he's as
>>>> big a moron
>>>> as you are.
>>>>
>>>> SPNAK!
>>>>
>>>>>> Educate yourself, you retard.
>>>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phasor>
>>>>>> <http://white.stanford.edu/teach/index.php/Fourier_transform_math>
>>>>>> <http://www.fourier-series.com/>
>>>>
>>>>> i took engineering in college, thanks.  ;)
>>>>
>>>> Oh, then you *did* skip the first day of class when they taught
>>>> Euler's equation, so you could instead suck dicks in a dark alley.
>>>> LOL
>>>>
>>>> SPNAK!
>>>>
>>>>>> That equation in the Stanford link above, based upon Euler's
>>>>>> sinewave summation equation, allows one to sum *any* number of
>>>>>> sinewaves of *any* frequency and phase. Moron.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How can you do *any* electronics work and *not* know how to use
>>>>>> the Fourier transform of Euler's equation, given that using
>>>>>> complex phasors allows one to not only calculate voltage but
>>>>>> factor in impedance, current and any other aspect one wants?
>>>>>> Unless you're the type who solders it together, powers it up and
>>>>>> prays for no smoke? Moron. LOL
>>>>
>>>> <crickets> LOL
>>>>
>>>>>> "standard 3-phase power" LOL
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Do you mean 3-wire delta, 3-wire wye or 4-wire wye? Moron. LOL
>>>>
>>>>> yes, the 3-phase service that powers any of those.
>>>>
>>>> Translation:
>>>> "I... I don't know! I'm in over my head. Don't ask me hard questions
>>>> or I'll start to spam more bad sinewaves with my kooky sinewave
>>>> subtraction equation!"
>>>>
>>>> <snicker>
>>>>
>>>>>> Do you mean a 230 V system, or a 230/400 V system? Moron. LOL
>>>>
>>>>> for now, just 230
>>>>
>>>>>> My uncle has a high-leg delta center-tap-grounded system at his
>>>>>> business, so he can power his 120 volt loads, his single-phase and
>>>>>> 3-phase 240 volt loads and his 208 volt lighting. Despite the fact
>>>>>> that delta has been supplanted by wye for new installations in
>>>>>> the US because of improved load balancing, that's "standard
>>>>>> 3-phase power", too. Moron. LOL
>>>>
>>>>> that's an ideal setup for your uncle.  does he have a ball bearing
>>>>> factory, or something?  LOL
>>>>
>>>> Or something. LOL
>>>>
>>>>>> But let's not get off the topic of you *proving* your kooky
>>>>>> sinewave subtraction equation didn't calculate those 6 sinewaves
>>>>>> correctly,
>>>>
>>>>> it certainly did plot it correctly and you've not proven otherwise.
>>>>
>>>> I most certainly *did* prove otherwise. It can't even arrive at the
>>>> correct sinewave summation voltage of 2550.25 volts, as you *proved*
>>>> and *graphed*, complete with a horizontal line so everyone would be
>>>> sure to see that your kooky equation didn't work, you moron. LOL
>>>>
>>>> Your kooky equation seems to be a result of you squashing together
>>>> parts of the phasor and trigonometric sinewave expressions, because
>>>> it's certainly not the correct equation to use.
>>>>
>>>> SPNAK!
>>>>
>>>>> it is
>>>>> you who cannot answer the simple question regarding at which time
>>>>> in seconds that the sine waves that you've conjured would ever
>>>>> "constructively interfere" to produce 2550.25.
>>>>
>>>> You'll have to do the work of proving your kooky sinewave
>>>> subtraction equation doesn't work, DildoRider. Given that you
>>>> cannot even make it produce the proper constructively-interfered
>>>> maximum voltage of 2550.25 volts, there's no way for you to
>>>> calculate the period of the resultant, therefore you're forced to
>>>> either admit you're *wrong*, or change to using the correct Euler
>>>> equation and thereby admit you're *wrong*.
>>>>
>>>> SPNAK!
>>>>
>>>>>> which means you're using the *wrong* *equation*,
>>>>
>>>>> then prove it by posting the *correct* *equation*...
>>>>
>>>> I did at the beginning of this whole fiasco, and you bleated that it
>>>> wasn't the correct equation, then started spamming your bad
>>>> sinewaves using your kooky sinewave subtraction equation, despite
>>>> the fact that GnuPlot can use the correct equation, as you proved
>>>> when you posted about those researchers using it in GnuPlot.
>>>>
>>>> SPNAK!
>>>>
>>>>>> and despite you
>>>>>> admitting GnuPlot can use the proper Euler sinewave summation
>>>>>> equation,
>>>>
>>>>> it can use whatever tab-delimited data you give it.  so just post
>>>>> you're euler data points and we'll get down to the bottom of this.
>>>>
>>>> Translation:
>>>> "I'm wrong, but don't want to admit it. I'm too stupid to use the
>>>> correct Euler equation, but don't want to admit it. So I'll keep
>>>> spamming my bad sinewaves because I'm a mathematical moron." LOL
>>>>
>>>>>> you persist in proving yourself a mathematical moron by
>>>>>> insisting on using the *wrong* *equation*. LOL
>>>>
>>>>> you insist on repetitively and somewhat-schizophrenically bleating
>>>>> out that everything is *wrong* while being unable to provide any
>>>>> evidence whatsoever that this is the case.  is that somehow the
>>>>> "high ground" these
>>>>> days?
>>>>
>>>> There are three ways of expressing a sinewave, the trigonometric,
>>>> complex exponential and phasor methods. I prefer the phasor method,
>>>> as one can not only calculate phase and voltage, one can factor in
>>>> impedance, solve for current, etc.
>>>>
>>>> You appear to prefer the trigonometric method, but take a look at
>>>> the proper Euler equation, expressed in the trigonometric
>>>> expression of a sinewave, and tell me your equation is correct,
>>>> DildoRider... do you
>>>> see where you've borrowed parts of the phasor expression of a
>>>> sinewave, and parts of the trigonometric expression of a sinewave,
>>>> and added your kooky correcting factors to try to make it work?
>>>> Then you stupidly switched your minus signs to plus signs and
>>>> bleated "DAAARRRRHHH! I gots the propur Euler eqooashun now! It
>>>> don't not work neither!", thereby *proving* you don't have a
>>>> fucking clue. And you've still not demonstrated that you can jigger
>>>> your kooky equation to even give the proper output both because
>>>> your phase is wrong, and the resultant voltage is wrong. Moron. LOL
>>>>
>>>> And now, you're reduced to droolbleating "SHOW ME DUH PURDY PICHERS!
>>>> <clap clap> DUURRRRHHH! I WANNA SEE DUH PURDY PICHERS!" because you
>>>> have no clue how to do it properly yourself.
>>>>
>>>> SPNAK!
>>>>
>>>>>>> don't forget... 3-phase *is* separated by 120 degrees instead of
>>>>>>> 180. don't forget that in your maths.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> for extra credit use quaternion maths.  LOL
>>>>
>>>>>> I don't have to graph or calculate a single fucking thing,
>>>>
>>>>> well, yeah because you're inept and just trying to cover up for it.
>>>>
>>>> Or I know I'm right, and that you're a mathematical moron. And I
>>>> know you'll do far better proving that fact yourself than I could.
>>>> I mean, look at all the fuckups you've already made. LOL
>>>>
>>>>>> you math challenged moron.
>>>>
>>>>> ironic, as you were just challenged to prove your math.
>>>>
>>>> You mean the proper Euler equation, in use by every scientist and
>>>> engineer and proven since the 1700s, whereas your kooky sinewave
>>>> subtraction equation is only used by one delusional and backpedaling
>>>> mathematical moron? LOL
>>>>
>>>>>> All I had to do was prove you *wrong*, which I did
>>>>>> by forcing you to prove *yourself* wrong... because I like making
>>>>>> my kooks do my work for me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Now get back to work, you slack-jawed mono-browed thick-witted
>>>>>> uneducated dolt. You've got a lot more bad sinewaves to spam
>>>>>> before I deem you sufficiently embarrassed to allow you to run
>>>>>> away with tail tucked.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <snicker>
>>>>
>>>>> did everybody applaud?
>>>>
>>>> They sure as hell did, but not for you. People just look at the
>>>> ground and shuffle their feet in embarrassed silence when it comes
>>>> to you.
>>>>
>>>> <snicker>
>>>>
>>>> Fag. LOL
>>>> Idiot. LOL
>>>> Moron. LOL
>>>> Tranny. LOL
>>>> Libtard. LOL
>>>> Crackhead. LOL
>>>> GableTard. LOL
>>>> DildoRider. LOL
>>>> Bad Musician. LOL
>>>> Stick Figure. LOL
>>>> Terrible Liar. LOL
>>>> Sinewave Spammer. LOL
>>>> Mathematical Moron. LOL
>>>> Outerfilthing Stalker. LOL
>>>> Talentless FrothMonkey. LOL
>>>> Klimate Katastrophe Kook. LOL
>>>> Defeated Tearful Spankard. LOL
>>>> Waster Of Time To Save $10. LOL
>>>> Worst Maker Of Sinewaves In The History Of Usenet. LOL
>>>>
>>>
>>> fakey, why did you trim out the following and refuse to comment on
>>> it?
>>>
>>> i eagerly anticipate fakey's answer to what the following *sums* to
>>> with his euler summation:
>>>
>>> V((L1+L2)-N) = sin(2*pi*f*t)*Vp + sin((2*pi*f*t+(4/3)*pi))*Vp
>>>
>>> OR let f=60 and Vp=170:
>>>
>>> sin(2*pi*60*t)*170 + sin((2*pi*60*t+(4/3)*pi))*170
>>>
>>> i get:
>>>
>>> http://i.imgur.com/gfm2vfV.png
>>>
>>> fakey has not only proclaimed that this is the method for
>>> calculating the voltage that a load would see across those two
>>> conductors but that it *must* be zero volts.
>>>
>>> his furry-euler summations CAN'T be wrong, he sez.
>>
>>
>> I'm sure glad I have no idea what the hell you guys are talking about.
>
>discus 

well i think its about surfing, there are signs and waves, i imagine
the signs say no surfing after dark.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#554435

On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 18:24:42 -0500, % <persent@gmail.com> wrote:

> Skeeter wrote:
>> On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 18:13:24 -0500, "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder
>> living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey),
>> socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117"
>> <root@127.0.0.1> wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 16:03:43 -0500, Friendly Neighborhood Vote
>>> Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
>>>>
>>>> Robert Michael Wolfe the Pittsburgh Pied Piper Of Penis (aka
>>>> DildoRider) of 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop
>>>> Jockey), socked up as sucksroot@127.0.0.1, in
>>>> <news:op.yc09xkpxtm21m2@benson.localhost> did thusly jump head first
>>>> into the wood chipper again:
>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 01:20:45 -0500, Friendly Neighborhood
>>>>> Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> Robert Michael Wolfe the Pittsburgh Pied Piper Of Penis (aka
>>>>>> DildoRider) of 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop
>>>>>> Jockey), socked up as sucksroot@127.0.0.1, in
>>>>>> <news:op.yczn3ab2tm21m2@benson.localhost> did thusly jump head
>>>>>> first into the wood chipper again:
>>>>
>>>>>>> <looks at subject>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> okay, so now please go "sum" any two of the 3 phases of standard
>>>>>>> 3-phase
>>>>>>> power and tell me how many volts potential it is at any instant,
>>>>>>> k0oky.
>>>>>>> then "sum" all three.  show us the sums.
>>>>
>>>>>> "at any instant" LOL
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You mean the time-varying instantaneous voltage, which varies on
>>>>>> each hot leg? Moron. LOL
>>>>>>
>>>>>> V(L1-N) = sin(2*pi*f*t)*Vp
>>>>>> V(L2-N) = sin((2*pi*f*t+((4/3)*pi)*Vp
>>>>>> V(L3-N) = sin((2*pi*f*t+((2/3)*pi)*Vp
>>>>
>>>>> hey, those equations look very familiar.  you just left out the
>>>>> definitions of f=60 and Vp=120
>>>>>
>>>>> 120*sin(60*2*pi*x) OR sin(2*pi*60*x)*120
>>>>> 120*sin(60*2*pi*x+(120*pi/180)) OR sin(2*pi*60*x+((120/180)*pi)*120
>>>>> 120*sin(60*2*pi*x+(240*pi/180)) OR sin(2*pi*60*x+((240/180)*pi)*120
>>>>
>>>> Well, given that you can't even reduce a fraction, that pretty much
>>>> proves my point that you're a mathematical moron. LOL
>>>>
>>>> SPNAK!
>>>>
>>>>> you're finally not being a fucktard about correct equations,
>>>>
>>>> I never was. I was only "being a fucktard" about the fact that
>>>> you're using the equations wrong and using the wrong equation,
>>>> because you're
>>>> a mathematical moron who doesn't understand what the equation is
>>>> supposed to do. Moron. LOL
>>>>
>>>>> unlike when
>>>>> you kept insisting that one should both graph and do the math for
>>>>> two 180
>>>>> degree phase shifted signals by flipping the polarity of one of the
>>>>> signals and "summing" them to get an instantaneous voltage.
>>>>
>>>> That wasn't me "insisting that one should both graph and do the math
>>>> for two 180 degree phase shifted signals by flipping the polarity of
>>>> one of the signals and "summing" them to get an instantaneous
>>>> voltage", that was *you*, you backpedaling moron... or did you
>>>> forget your adding pi to your equation to flip one hot leg by 180
>>>> degrees in phase?
>>>>
>>>> SPNAK!
>>>>
>>>>> "What does 2 (Dual / Split) Phase Power mean?
>>>>>
>>>>> If youâ?Tre not electrically minded, think of 2 (Dual / Split)
>>>>> phase power
>>>>> like a two pedal bicycle where one (pushing leg) or both (pushing
>>>>> legs) can provide power.
>>>>>
>>>>> Dual Phase or Split Phase power is also Single Phase because
>>>>> itâ?Ts a two
>>>>> wire Alternating Current (AC ) power circuit. In the US, this is
>>>>> the standard household power arrangement with two (Phase A, Phase
>>>>> B) 120V power wires (180 degrees out of phase with one another)
>>>>> like two bicycle pedals and one neutral wire. This arrangement
>>>>> provides (2) 120V and (1) 240V power circuits. 120V power flows
>>>>> (alternating) between either power wire (through the load) and the
>>>>> neutral wire. 240V power flows (alternating) between the two power
>>>>> wires (through the load)."
>>>>>
>>>>> "If you connected a dual trace oscope's probes' gnds to the Neutral
>>>>> (center tapped wire) and put one probe on phase A and the other on
>>>>> phase B
>>>>> the waveforms would be 180 degrees out of phase. When A peaks
>>>>> positive B peaks negative. So how is it that the A-Neutral and
>>>>> B-Neutral voltages are
>>>>> said to be "in phase"? [Of course, it makes no sense to ask about
>>>>> the phasing of A-B - any voltage is always in phase with itself.]"
>>>>
>>>> Wrong. They'd be oppositely-phased in relation to the
>>>> midpoint-neutral, but they cannot be "out of phase" on the hot legs,
>>>> as connecting directly across the two hot legs gives 240 volts
>>>> *single*-*phase* at 0 degrees, as you have acknowledged.
>>>>
>>>> But thanks for yet again demonstrating your inability to grok how
>>>> split-phase midpoint-neutral electrical systems work, DildoRider.
>>>> You are, after all, the moron who's been calling it "two phase",
>>>> which is just silly. Even Chimpy was laughing at that, and he's as
>>>> big a moron
>>>> as you are.
>>>>
>>>> SPNAK!
>>>>
>>>>>> Educate yourself, you retard.
>>>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phasor>
>>>>>> <http://white.stanford.edu/teach/index.php/Fourier_transform_math>
>>>>>> <http://www.fourier-series.com/>
>>>>
>>>>> i took engineering in college, thanks.  ;)
>>>>
>>>> Oh, then you *did* skip the first day of class when they taught
>>>> Euler's equation, so you could instead suck dicks in a dark alley.
>>>> LOL
>>>>
>>>> SPNAK!
>>>>
>>>>>> That equation in the Stanford link above, based upon Euler's
>>>>>> sinewave summation equation, allows one to sum *any* number of
>>>>>> sinewaves of *any* frequency and phase. Moron.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How can you do *any* electronics work and *not* know how to use
>>>>>> the Fourier transform of Euler's equation, given that using
>>>>>> complex phasors allows one to not only calculate voltage but
>>>>>> factor in impedance, current and any other aspect one wants?
>>>>>> Unless you're the type who solders it together, powers it up and
>>>>>> prays for no smoke? Moron. LOL
>>>>
>>>> <crickets> LOL
>>>>
>>>>>> "standard 3-phase power" LOL
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Do you mean 3-wire delta, 3-wire wye or 4-wire wye? Moron. LOL
>>>>
>>>>> yes, the 3-phase service that powers any of those.
>>>>
>>>> Translation:
>>>> "I... I don't know! I'm in over my head. Don't ask me hard questions
>>>> or I'll start to spam more bad sinewaves with my kooky sinewave
>>>> subtraction equation!"
>>>>
>>>> <snicker>
>>>>
>>>>>> Do you mean a 230 V system, or a 230/400 V system? Moron. LOL
>>>>
>>>>> for now, just 230
>>>>
>>>>>> My uncle has a high-leg delta center-tap-grounded system at his
>>>>>> business, so he can power his 120 volt loads, his single-phase and
>>>>>> 3-phase 240 volt loads and his 208 volt lighting. Despite the fact
>>>>>> that delta has been supplanted by wye for new installations in
>>>>>> the US because of improved load balancing, that's "standard
>>>>>> 3-phase power", too. Moron. LOL
>>>>
>>>>> that's an ideal setup for your uncle.  does he have a ball bearing
>>>>> factory, or something?  LOL
>>>>
>>>> Or something. LOL
>>>>
>>>>>> But let's not get off the topic of you *proving* your kooky
>>>>>> sinewave subtraction equation didn't calculate those 6 sinewaves
>>>>>> correctly,
>>>>
>>>>> it certainly did plot it correctly and you've not proven otherwise.
>>>>
>>>> I most certainly *did* prove otherwise. It can't even arrive at the
>>>> correct sinewave summation voltage of 2550.25 volts, as you *proved*
>>>> and *graphed*, complete with a horizontal line so everyone would be
>>>> sure to see that your kooky equation didn't work, you moron. LOL
>>>>
>>>> Your kooky equation seems to be a result of you squashing together
>>>> parts of the phasor and trigonometric sinewave expressions, because
>>>> it's certainly not the correct equation to use.
>>>>
>>>> SPNAK!
>>>>
>>>>> it is
>>>>> you who cannot answer the simple question regarding at which time
>>>>> in seconds that the sine waves that you've conjured would ever
>>>>> "constructively interfere" to produce 2550.25.
>>>>
>>>> You'll have to do the work of proving your kooky sinewave
>>>> subtraction equation doesn't work, DildoRider. Given that you
>>>> cannot even make it produce the proper constructively-interfered
>>>> maximum voltage of 2550.25 volts, there's no way for you to
>>>> calculate the period of the resultant, therefore you're forced to
>>>> either admit you're *wrong*, or change to using the correct Euler
>>>> equation and thereby admit you're *wrong*.
>>>>
>>>> SPNAK!
>>>>
>>>>>> which means you're using the *wrong* *equation*,
>>>>
>>>>> then prove it by posting the *correct* *equation*...
>>>>
>>>> I did at the beginning of this whole fiasco, and you bleated that it
>>>> wasn't the correct equation, then started spamming your bad
>>>> sinewaves using your kooky sinewave subtraction equation, despite
>>>> the fact that GnuPlot can use the correct equation, as you proved
>>>> when you posted about those researchers using it in GnuPlot.
>>>>
>>>> SPNAK!
>>>>
>>>>>> and despite you
>>>>>> admitting GnuPlot can use the proper Euler sinewave summation
>>>>>> equation,
>>>>
>>>>> it can use whatever tab-delimited data you give it.  so just post
>>>>> you're euler data points and we'll get down to the bottom of this.
>>>>
>>>> Translation:
>>>> "I'm wrong, but don't want to admit it. I'm too stupid to use the
>>>> correct Euler equation, but don't want to admit it. So I'll keep
>>>> spamming my bad sinewaves because I'm a mathematical moron." LOL
>>>>
>>>>>> you persist in proving yourself a mathematical moron by
>>>>>> insisting on using the *wrong* *equation*. LOL
>>>>
>>>>> you insist on repetitively and somewhat-schizophrenically bleating
>>>>> out that everything is *wrong* while being unable to provide any
>>>>> evidence whatsoever that this is the case.  is that somehow the
>>>>> "high ground" these
>>>>> days?
>>>>
>>>> There are three ways of expressing a sinewave, the trigonometric,
>>>> complex exponential and phasor methods. I prefer the phasor method,
>>>> as one can not only calculate phase and voltage, one can factor in
>>>> impedance, solve for current, etc.
>>>>
>>>> You appear to prefer the trigonometric method, but take a look at
>>>> the proper Euler equation, expressed in the trigonometric
>>>> expression of a sinewave, and tell me your equation is correct,
>>>> DildoRider... do you
>>>> see where you've borrowed parts of the phasor expression of a
>>>> sinewave, and parts of the trigonometric expression of a sinewave,
>>>> and added your kooky correcting factors to try to make it work?
>>>> Then you stupidly switched your minus signs to plus signs and
>>>> bleated "DAAARRRRHHH! I gots the propur Euler eqooashun now! It
>>>> don't not work neither!", thereby *proving* you don't have a
>>>> fucking clue. And you've still not demonstrated that you can jigger
>>>> your kooky equation to even give the proper output both because
>>>> your phase is wrong, and the resultant voltage is wrong. Moron. LOL
>>>>
>>>> And now, you're reduced to droolbleating "SHOW ME DUH PURDY PICHERS!
>>>> <clap clap> DUURRRRHHH! I WANNA SEE DUH PURDY PICHERS!" because you
>>>> have no clue how to do it properly yourself.
>>>>
>>>> SPNAK!
>>>>
>>>>>>> don't forget... 3-phase *is* separated by 120 degrees instead of
>>>>>>> 180. don't forget that in your maths.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> for extra credit use quaternion maths.  LOL
>>>>
>>>>>> I don't have to graph or calculate a single fucking thing,
>>>>
>>>>> well, yeah because you're inept and just trying to cover up for it.
>>>>
>>>> Or I know I'm right, and that you're a mathematical moron. And I
>>>> know you'll do far better proving that fact yourself than I could.
>>>> I mean, look at all the fuckups you've already made. LOL
>>>>
>>>>>> you math challenged moron.
>>>>
>>>>> ironic, as you were just challenged to prove your math.
>>>>
>>>> You mean the proper Euler equation, in use by every scientist and
>>>> engineer and proven since the 1700s, whereas your kooky sinewave
>>>> subtraction equation is only used by one delusional and backpedaling
>>>> mathematical moron? LOL
>>>>
>>>>>> All I had to do was prove you *wrong*, which I did
>>>>>> by forcing you to prove *yourself* wrong... because I like making
>>>>>> my kooks do my work for me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Now get back to work, you slack-jawed mono-browed thick-witted
>>>>>> uneducated dolt. You've got a lot more bad sinewaves to spam
>>>>>> before I deem you sufficiently embarrassed to allow you to run
>>>>>> away with tail tucked.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <snicker>
>>>>
>>>>> did everybody applaud?
>>>>
>>>> They sure as hell did, but not for you. People just look at the
>>>> ground and shuffle their feet in embarrassed silence when it comes
>>>> to you.
>>>>
>>>> <snicker>
>>>>
>>>> Fag. LOL
>>>> Idiot. LOL
>>>> Moron. LOL
>>>> Tranny. LOL
>>>> Libtard. LOL
>>>> Crackhead. LOL
>>>> GableTard. LOL
>>>> DildoRider. LOL
>>>> Bad Musician. LOL
>>>> Stick Figure. LOL
>>>> Terrible Liar. LOL
>>>> Sinewave Spammer. LOL
>>>> Mathematical Moron. LOL
>>>> Outerfilthing Stalker. LOL
>>>> Talentless FrothMonkey. LOL
>>>> Klimate Katastrophe Kook. LOL
>>>> Defeated Tearful Spankard. LOL
>>>> Waster Of Time To Save $10. LOL
>>>> Worst Maker Of Sinewaves In The History Of Usenet. LOL
>>>>
>>>
>>> fakey, why did you trim out the following and refuse to comment on
>>> it?
>>>
>>> i eagerly anticipate fakey's answer to what the following *sums* to
>>> with his euler summation:
>>>
>>> V((L1+L2)-N) = sin(2*pi*f*t)*Vp + sin((2*pi*f*t+(4/3)*pi))*Vp
>>>
>>> OR let f=60 and Vp=170:
>>>
>>> sin(2*pi*60*t)*170 + sin((2*pi*60*t+(4/3)*pi))*170
>>>
>>> i get:
>>>
>>> http://i.imgur.com/gfm2vfV.png
>>>
>>> fakey has not only proclaimed that this is the method for
>>> calculating the voltage that a load would see across those two
>>> conductors but that it *must* be zero volts.
>>>
>>> his furry-euler summations CAN'T be wrong, he sez.
>>
>>
>> I'm sure glad I have no idea what the hell you guys are talking about.
>
> discus

add your legs together.

-- 
"sines, sines, everywhere there's sines
blocking up the snickerTurds, breaking his mind"
http://imgur.com/a/yMFsu

-

FNVWe attempts to rewrite physics texts in Message-ID:  
<3dcad3dd0a0d39727506717506883c26@dizum.com>

">>let's not forget that mine also had the correct applied mathematics
>> equations unlike fakey the supposed know-it-all:
>>  phase A: 120*sin(2*pi*60*x)
>> phase B: 120*sin(2*pi*60*x+pi)
>>  voltage difference between phase A and phase B at any point x in time:
>> 120*sin(2*pi*60*x) - 120*sin(2*pi*60*x+pi) = 240*sin(2*pi*60*x)

Wrong, as has already been proven. What does it say below, you fecking  
*moron*?

"The _sum_ E(θ) ≡ E(a) + E(b) can be written thusly:""

it says that you don't even know how to correctly apply mathematics to  
real-world AC electricity, snickerTurds.

http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/textbook/alternating-current/chpt-10/single-phase-power-systems/
http://sub.allaboutcircuits.com/images/02170.png
"To mathematically calculate voltage between “hot” wires, we must subtract  
voltages, because their polarity marks show them to be opposed to each  
other:"
http://sub.allaboutcircuits.com/images/12112.png

http://www.samlexamerica.com/support/documents/WhitePaper-120240VACSingleSplitPhaseandMultiWireBranchCircuits.pdf

on page 2:

** NOTE: The phase of Hot Leg 2 (Phase B) is in the
  opposite direction - i.e., 180° apart from the phase
  of Hot Leg L1 (Phase A)

*COUGH*
SPNAK!!

-

i know a guy on the internet who will draw a triangular sine wave in ASCII  
art if you ask nicely.
see: Message-ID: <4ba4a50aaaebc7fb8a348293c5cf9f13@dizum.com>

-

Fakey irrationally demands a theme song to foam to:
"all I really want your pathetic pwned ass to do is write me a classic  
rock song as tribute to your Usenet Lord and Master..."  
<f4f9193fa7d28b760a9de681e61427e7@dizum.com>

-

On Fri, 12 Feb 2016 17:25:03 -0500, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler  
Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:

<snicker>

Fag. LOL
Idiot. LOL
Moron. LOL
Tranny. LOL
Libtard. LOL
Crackhead. LOL
GableTard. LOL
DildoRider. LOL
Bad Musician. LOL
Stick Figure. LOL
Terrible Liar. LOL
Sinewave Spammer. LOL
Outerfilthing Stalker. LOL
Talentless FrothMonkey. LOL
Math Challenged Halfwit. LOL
Klimate Katastrophe Kook. LOL
Defeated Tearful Spankard. LOL
Waster Of Time To Save $10. LOL
Worst Maker Of Sinewaves In The History Of Usenet. LOL


on top of old snick-ers, all covered with Fag. LOL
is where my usenet lord and mas-ter
can go straight to hell*

*hell doesn't exist.  hope everybody is having a productive evening.

-

http://i.imgur.com/2tH6zVB.jpg

http://cafepress.com/kooktown

http://i.imgur.com/pnWqhSG.jpg

-

If my poasts are offensive to you, you can always block all From: headers  
containing "root@127.0.0.1", unless you are an idiot who would like to  
yammer about "morphing" and maybe try to lodge some frivolous complaints  
to my news provider, then please be sure to ignore this helpful  
information and have fun making an ass of yourself in public.  :)

-

if that route of silencing those horrid opinions of mine that you  
downloaded to your computer under duress doesn't work you can always try:  
http://i.imgur.com/jlsN9JX.png?2

-

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Gish_Gallop
The Gish Gallop is often used as an indirect argument from authority — as  
it appears to paint the galloper as an expert in a broad range of subjects  
or with an extensive knowledge of an individual one. Simultaneously it  
presents opponents (in spoken debates) or refuters (in written,  
Internet-based ones) as incompetent bumblers who didn't do their homework  
before the debate. Such emphasis on style over substance is the reason  
many scientists disdain public debates as a forum for disseminating  
opinions. - Page #1 from the Gospel of SnickerTurd

-

Coming soon!  To a newsgroup near you!:

$ perl fakeyBot.pl
FakeyBot>       I'm FakeyBot. What's your name so I can Google-stalk you,  
look you up on Radaris, and hurl invective and probably-illegal harrassing  
bile from behind an anonymous dizum account?  <snicker>
You>    Robert Michael Wolfe
FakeyBot>       Oh look, you're back again to polish my size 16 steel-toed  
boot with your colon and listen to me talk about bestiality and cocks,  
Robert. <snicker>
Robert> you talk about cocks a lot.
FakeyBot>       Oh, I talk about sex a lot?
Robert> gay sex, mostly...
FakeyBot>       Fag!

(just as useful as the original!)

-

snickers the wonderturd describes how he alerted lots of his kiddie pr0n  
friends to the ensuing FBI sting in message  
<b5e7da79a455d0c9227b1b50e25e7ea1@dizum.com>:
"That's easy enough to do... how do you think my crew uncovered the
largest CP ring using Tor and I2P, which we promptly turned over to
the FBI? I discovered a way to uncover the IP addresses the I2P users were  
using, and a way of tracking Eepsites back to their IP addresses, then we  
figured out that we could DDOS a Tor IP address and modify Tor headers  
while checking whether a Tor hidden service was still up, then using  
process of elimination to pinpoint the IP address hosting that hidden  
service. It's not rocket science.

_The I2P community got all up in arms when I discussed on their forum how  
I was doing it, and that it'd be a good way of cleaning up I2P so it can  
get on with being a platform to research anonymous communication... my  
distinct impression was that the "anonymity
research platform" story was just a cover story to allow pervs to
trade CP._  (NOTE: admits to participating in what he "suspected" was a  
kiddie pr0n network.)

That Silk Road 2.0 was taken offline in the ensuing FBI Operation
Onymous was just icing on the cake."
 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#554545

Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 18:13:24 -0500, "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder
> living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey),
> socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117"
> <root@127.0.0.1> wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 16:03:43 -0500,  
> > Fakey Neighborhood Vote Wanker Ersatzus 
> > <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:
> >
> >> Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
[...]
> >> Worst Maker Of Sinewaves In The History Of Usenet. LOL
> >>
> >
> >fakey, why did you trim out the following and refuse to comment on it?
> >
> >i eagerly anticipate fakey's answer to what the following *sums* to with
> >his euler summation:
> >
> >V((L1+L2)-N) = sin(2*pi*f*t)*Vp + sin((2*pi*f*t+(4/3)*pi))*Vp
> >
> >OR let f=60 and Vp=170:
> >
> >sin(2*pi*60*t)*170 + sin((2*pi*60*t+(4/3)*pi))*170
> >
> >i get:
> >
> >http://i.imgur.com/gfm2vfV.png
> >
> >fakey has not only proclaimed that this is the method for calculating the
> >voltage that a load would see across those two conductors but that it
> >*must* be zero volts.
> >
> >his furry-euler summations CAN'T be wrong, he sez.
> 
> 
> I'm sure glad I have no idea what the hell you guys are talking about.
>

Neither has Fakey.

-- 
^Ï^.       Sn!pe       <snipeco.1@gmail.com>
        
My pet rock Gordon just is.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#554627

On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 18:22:38 -0500, Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 18:13:24 -0500, "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder
> living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey),
> socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117"
> <root@127.0.0.1> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 16:03:43 -0500, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler
>> Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:
>>
>>> Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
>>>
>>> Robert Michael Wolfe the Pittsburgh Pied Piper Of Penis (aka
>>> DildoRider) of 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey),
>>> socked up as sucksroot@127.0.0.1, in
>>> <news:op.yc09xkpxtm21m2@benson.localhost> did thusly jump head first
>>> into the wood chipper again:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 01:20:45 -0500, Friendly Neighborhood
>>>> Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Robert Michael Wolfe the Pittsburgh Pied Piper Of Penis (aka
>>>>> DildoRider) of 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  
>>>>> Jockey),
>>>>> socked up as sucksroot@127.0.0.1, in
>>>>> <news:op.yczn3ab2tm21m2@benson.localhost> did thusly jump head first
>>>>> into the wood chipper again:
>>>
>>>>>> <looks at subject>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> okay, so now please go "sum" any two of the 3 phases of standard
>>>>>> 3-phase
>>>>>> power and tell me how many volts potential it is at any instant,
>>>>>> k0oky.
>>>>>> then "sum" all three.  show us the sums.
>>>
>>>>> "at any instant" LOL
>>>>>
>>>>> You mean the time-varying instantaneous voltage, which varies on each
>>>>> hot leg? Moron. LOL
>>>>>
>>>>> V(L1-N) = sin(2*pi*f*t)*Vp
>>>>> V(L2-N) = sin((2*pi*f*t+((4/3)*pi)*Vp
>>>>> V(L3-N) = sin((2*pi*f*t+((2/3)*pi)*Vp
>>>
>>>> hey, those equations look very familiar.  you just left out the
>>>> definitions of f=60 and Vp=120
>>>>
>>>> 120*sin(60*2*pi*x) OR sin(2*pi*60*x)*120
>>>> 120*sin(60*2*pi*x+(120*pi/180)) OR sin(2*pi*60*x+((120/180)*pi)*120
>>>> 120*sin(60*2*pi*x+(240*pi/180)) OR sin(2*pi*60*x+((240/180)*pi)*120
>>>
>>> Well, given that you can't even reduce a fraction, that pretty much
>>> proves my point that you're a mathematical moron. LOL
>>>
>>> SPNAK!
>>>
>>>> you're finally not being a fucktard about correct equations,
>>>
>>> I never was. I was only "being a fucktard" about the fact that you're
>>> using the equations wrong and using the wrong equation, because you're
>>> a mathematical moron who doesn't understand what the equation is
>>> supposed to do. Moron. LOL
>>>
>>>> unlike when
>>>> you kept insisting that one should both graph and do the math for two
>>>> 180
>>>> degree phase shifted signals by flipping the polarity of one of the
>>>> signals and "summing" them to get an instantaneous voltage.
>>>
>>> That wasn't me "insisting that one should both graph and do the math
>>> for two 180 degree phase shifted signals by flipping the polarity of
>>> one of the signals and "summing" them to get an instantaneous
>>> voltage", that was *you*, you backpedaling moron... or did you forget
>>> your adding pi to your equation to flip one hot leg by 180 degrees in
>>> phase?
>>>
>>> SPNAK!
>>>
>>>> "What does 2 (Dual / Split) Phase Power mean?
>>>>
>>>> If you’re not electrically minded, think of 2 (Dual / Split) phase
>>>> power
>>>> like a two pedal bicycle where one (pushing leg) or both (pushing  
>>>> legs)
>>>> can provide power.
>>>>
>>>> Dual Phase or Split Phase power is also Single Phase because it’s a
>>>> two
>>>> wire Alternating Current (AC ) power circuit. In the US, this is the
>>>> standard household power arrangement with two (Phase A, Phase B) 120V
>>>> power wires (180 degrees out of phase with one another) like two  
>>>> bicycle
>>>> pedals and one neutral wire. This arrangement provides (2) 120V and  
>>>> (1)
>>>> 240V power circuits. 120V power flows (alternating) between either  
>>>> power
>>>> wire (through the load) and the neutral wire. 240V power flows
>>>> (alternating) between the two power wires (through the load)."
>>>>
>>>> "If you connected a dual trace oscope's probes' gnds to the Neutral
>>>> (center tapped wire) and put one probe on phase A and the other on
>>>> phase B
>>>> the waveforms would be 180 degrees out of phase. When A peaks  
>>>> positive B
>>>> peaks negative. So how is it that the A-Neutral and B-Neutral voltages
>>>> are
>>>> said to be "in phase"? [Of course, it makes no sense to ask about the
>>>> phasing of A-B - any voltage is always in phase with itself.]"
>>>
>>> Wrong. They'd be oppositely-phased in relation to the
>>> midpoint-neutral, but they cannot be "out of phase" on the hot legs,
>>> as connecting directly across the two hot legs gives 240 volts
>>> *single*-*phase* at 0 degrees, as you have acknowledged.
>>>
>>> But thanks for yet again demonstrating your inability to grok how
>>> split-phase midpoint-neutral electrical systems work, DildoRider. You
>>> are, after all, the moron who's been calling it "two phase", which is
>>> just silly. Even Chimpy was laughing at that, and he's as big a moron
>>> as you are.
>>>
>>> SPNAK!
>>>
>>>>> Educate yourself, you retard.
>>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phasor>
>>>>> <http://white.stanford.edu/teach/index.php/Fourier_transform_math>
>>>>> <http://www.fourier-series.com/>
>>>
>>>> i took engineering in college, thanks.  ;)
>>>
>>> Oh, then you *did* skip the first day of class when they taught
>>> Euler's equation, so you could instead suck dicks in a dark alley. LOL
>>>
>>> SPNAK!
>>>
>>>>> That equation in the Stanford link above, based upon Euler's sinewave
>>>>> summation equation, allows one to sum *any* number of sinewaves of
>>>>> *any* frequency and phase. Moron.
>>>>>
>>>>> How can you do *any* electronics work and *not* know how to use the
>>>>> Fourier transform of Euler's equation, given that using complex
>>>>> phasors allows one to not only calculate voltage but factor in
>>>>> impedance, current and any other aspect one wants? Unless you're the
>>>>> type who solders it together, powers it up and prays for no smoke?
>>>>> Moron. LOL
>>>
>>> <crickets> LOL
>>>
>>>>> "standard 3-phase power" LOL
>>>>>
>>>>> Do you mean 3-wire delta, 3-wire wye or 4-wire wye? Moron. LOL
>>>
>>>> yes, the 3-phase service that powers any of those.
>>>
>>> Translation:
>>> "I... I don't know! I'm in over my head. Don't ask me hard questions
>>> or I'll start to spam more bad sinewaves with my kooky sinewave
>>> subtraction equation!"
>>>
>>> <snicker>
>>>
>>>>> Do you mean a 230 V system, or a 230/400 V system? Moron. LOL
>>>
>>>> for now, just 230
>>>
>>>>> My uncle has a high-leg delta center-tap-grounded system at his
>>>>> business, so he can power his 120 volt loads, his single-phase and
>>>>> 3-phase 240 volt loads and his 208 volt lighting. Despite the fact
>>>>> that delta has been supplanted by wye for new installations in the US
>>>>> because of improved load balancing, that's "standard 3-phase power",
>>>>> too. Moron. LOL
>>>
>>>> that's an ideal setup for your uncle.  does he have a ball bearing
>>>> factory, or something?  LOL
>>>
>>> Or something. LOL
>>>
>>>>> But let's not get off the topic of you *proving* your kooky sinewave
>>>>> subtraction equation didn't calculate those 6 sinewaves correctly,
>>>
>>>> it certainly did plot it correctly and you've not proven otherwise.
>>>
>>> I most certainly *did* prove otherwise. It can't even arrive at the
>>> correct sinewave summation voltage of 2550.25 volts, as you *proved*
>>> and *graphed*, complete with a horizontal line so everyone would be
>>> sure to see that your kooky equation didn't work, you moron. LOL
>>>
>>> Your kooky equation seems to be a result of you squashing together
>>> parts of the phasor and trigonometric sinewave expressions, because
>>> it's certainly not the correct equation to use.
>>>
>>> SPNAK!
>>>
>>>> it is
>>>> you who cannot answer the simple question regarding at which time in
>>>> seconds that the sine waves that you've conjured would ever
>>>> "constructively interfere" to produce 2550.25.
>>>
>>> You'll have to do the work of proving your kooky sinewave subtraction
>>> equation doesn't work, DildoRider. Given that you cannot even make it
>>> produce the proper constructively-interfered maximum voltage of
>>> 2550.25 volts, there's no way for you to calculate the period of the
>>> resultant, therefore you're forced to either admit you're *wrong*, or
>>> change to using the correct Euler equation and thereby admit you're
>>> *wrong*.
>>>
>>> SPNAK!
>>>
>>>>> which means you're using the *wrong* *equation*,
>>>
>>>> then prove it by posting the *correct* *equation*...
>>>
>>> I did at the beginning of this whole fiasco, and you bleated that it
>>> wasn't the correct equation, then started spamming your bad sinewaves
>>> using your kooky sinewave subtraction equation, despite the fact that
>>> GnuPlot can use the correct equation, as you proved when you posted
>>> about those researchers using it in GnuPlot.
>>>
>>> SPNAK!
>>>
>>>>> and despite you
>>>>> admitting GnuPlot can use the proper Euler sinewave summation
>>>>> equation,
>>>
>>>> it can use whatever tab-delimited data you give it.  so just post  
>>>> you're
>>>> euler data points and we'll get down to the bottom of this.
>>>
>>> Translation:
>>> "I'm wrong, but don't want to admit it. I'm too stupid to use the
>>> correct Euler equation, but don't want to admit it. So I'll keep
>>> spamming my bad sinewaves because I'm a mathematical moron." LOL
>>>
>>>>> you persist in proving yourself a mathematical moron by
>>>>> insisting on using the *wrong* *equation*. LOL
>>>
>>>> you insist on repetitively and somewhat-schizophrenically bleating out
>>>> that everything is *wrong* while being unable to provide any evidence
>>>> whatsoever that this is the case.  is that somehow the "high ground"
>>>> these
>>>> days?
>>>
>>> There are three ways of expressing a sinewave, the trigonometric,
>>> complex exponential and phasor methods. I prefer the phasor method, as
>>> one can not only calculate phase and voltage, one can factor in
>>> impedance, solve for current, etc.
>>>
>>> You appear to prefer the trigonometric method, but take a look at the
>>> proper Euler equation, expressed in the trigonometric expression of a
>>> sinewave, and tell me your equation is correct, DildoRider... do you
>>> see where you've borrowed parts of the phasor expression of a
>>> sinewave, and parts of the trigonometric expression of a sinewave, and
>>> added your kooky correcting factors to try to make it work? Then you
>>> stupidly switched your minus signs to plus signs and bleated
>>> "DAAARRRRHHH! I gots the propur Euler eqooashun now! It don't not work
>>> neither!", thereby *proving* you don't have a fucking clue. And you've
>>> still not demonstrated that you can jigger your kooky equation to even
>>> give the proper output both because your phase is wrong, and the
>>> resultant voltage is wrong. Moron. LOL
>>>
>>> And now, you're reduced to droolbleating "SHOW ME DUH PURDY PICHERS!
>>> <clap clap> DUURRRRHHH! I WANNA SEE DUH PURDY PICHERS!" because you
>>> have no clue how to do it properly yourself.
>>>
>>> SPNAK!
>>>
>>>>>> don't forget... 3-phase *is* separated by 120 degrees instead of  
>>>>>> 180.
>>>>>> don't forget that in your maths.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> for extra credit use quaternion maths.  LOL
>>>
>>>>> I don't have to graph or calculate a single fucking thing,
>>>
>>>> well, yeah because you're inept and just trying to cover up for it.
>>>
>>> Or I know I'm right, and that you're a mathematical moron. And I know
>>> you'll do far better proving that fact yourself than I could. I mean,
>>> look at all the fuckups you've already made. LOL
>>>
>>>>> you math challenged moron.
>>>
>>>> ironic, as you were just challenged to prove your math.
>>>
>>> You mean the proper Euler equation, in use by every scientist and
>>> engineer and proven since the 1700s, whereas your kooky sinewave
>>> subtraction equation is only used by one delusional and backpedaling
>>> mathematical moron? LOL
>>>
>>>>> All I had to do was prove you *wrong*, which I did
>>>>> by forcing you to prove *yourself* wrong... because I like making my
>>>>> kooks do my work for me.
>>>>>
>>>>> Now get back to work, you slack-jawed mono-browed thick-witted
>>>>> uneducated dolt. You've got a lot more bad sinewaves to spam before I
>>>>> deem you sufficiently embarrassed to allow you to run away with tail
>>>>> tucked.
>>>>>
>>>>> <snicker>
>>>
>>>> did everybody applaud?
>>>
>>> They sure as hell did, but not for you. People just look at the ground
>>> and shuffle their feet in embarrassed silence when it comes to you.
>>>
>>> <snicker>
>>>
>>> Fag. LOL
>>> Idiot. LOL
>>> Moron. LOL
>>> Tranny. LOL
>>> Libtard. LOL
>>> Crackhead. LOL
>>> GableTard. LOL
>>> DildoRider. LOL
>>> Bad Musician. LOL
>>> Stick Figure. LOL
>>> Terrible Liar. LOL
>>> Sinewave Spammer. LOL
>>> Mathematical Moron. LOL
>>> Outerfilthing Stalker. LOL
>>> Talentless FrothMonkey. LOL
>>> Klimate Katastrophe Kook. LOL
>>> Defeated Tearful Spankard. LOL
>>> Waster Of Time To Save $10. LOL
>>> Worst Maker Of Sinewaves In The History Of Usenet. LOL
>>>
>>
>> fakey, why did you trim out the following and refuse to comment on it?
>>
>> i eagerly anticipate fakey's answer to what the following *sums* to with
>> his euler summation:
>>
>> V((L1+L2)-N) = sin(2*pi*f*t)*Vp + sin((2*pi*f*t+(4/3)*pi))*Vp
>>
>> OR let f=60 and Vp=170:
>>
>> sin(2*pi*60*t)*170 + sin((2*pi*60*t+(4/3)*pi))*170
>>
>> i get:
>>
>> http://i.imgur.com/gfm2vfV.png
>>
>> fakey has not only proclaimed that this is the method for calculating  
>> the
>> voltage that a load would see across those two conductors but that it
>> *must* be zero volts.
>>
>> his furry-euler summations CAN'T be wrong, he sez.
>
>
> I'm sure glad I have no idea what the hell you guys are talking about.

now you sound like the tiny voice inside bleaty the spankard's head that  
nobody has ever heard from.

-- 
"sines, sines, everywhere there's sines
blocking up the snickerTurds, breaking his mind"
http://imgur.com/a/yMFsu

-

FNVWe attempts to rewrite physics texts in Message-ID:  
<3dcad3dd0a0d39727506717506883c26@dizum.com>

">>let's not forget that mine also had the correct applied mathematics
>> equations unlike fakey the supposed know-it-all:
>>  phase A: 120*sin(2*pi*60*x)
>> phase B: 120*sin(2*pi*60*x+pi)
>>  voltage difference between phase A and phase B at any point x in time:
>> 120*sin(2*pi*60*x) - 120*sin(2*pi*60*x+pi) = 240*sin(2*pi*60*x)

Wrong, as has already been proven. What does it say below, you fecking  
*moron*?

"The _sum_ E(θ) ≡ E(a) + E(b) can be written thusly:""

it says that you don't even know how to correctly apply mathematics to  
real-world AC electricity, snickerTurds.

http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/textbook/alternating-current/chpt-10/single-phase-power-systems/
http://sub.allaboutcircuits.com/images/02170.png
"To mathematically calculate voltage between “hot” wires, we must subtract  
voltages, because their polarity marks show them to be opposed to each  
other:"
http://sub.allaboutcircuits.com/images/12112.png

http://www.samlexamerica.com/support/documents/WhitePaper-120240VACSingleSplitPhaseandMultiWireBranchCircuits.pdf

on page 2:

** NOTE: The phase of Hot Leg 2 (Phase B) is in the
  opposite direction - i.e., 180° apart from the phase
  of Hot Leg L1 (Phase A)

*COUGH*
SPNAK!!

-

i know a guy on the internet who will draw a triangular sine wave in ASCII  
art if you ask nicely.
see: Message-ID: <4ba4a50aaaebc7fb8a348293c5cf9f13@dizum.com>

-

Fakey irrationally demands a theme song to foam to:
"all I really want your pathetic pwned ass to do is write me a classic  
rock song as tribute to your Usenet Lord and Master..."  
<f4f9193fa7d28b760a9de681e61427e7@dizum.com>

-

On Fri, 12 Feb 2016 17:25:03 -0500, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler  
Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:

<snicker>

Fag. LOL
Idiot. LOL
Moron. LOL
Tranny. LOL
Libtard. LOL
Crackhead. LOL
GableTard. LOL
DildoRider. LOL
Bad Musician. LOL
Stick Figure. LOL
Terrible Liar. LOL
Sinewave Spammer. LOL
Outerfilthing Stalker. LOL
Talentless FrothMonkey. LOL
Math Challenged Halfwit. LOL
Klimate Katastrophe Kook. LOL
Defeated Tearful Spankard. LOL
Waster Of Time To Save $10. LOL
Worst Maker Of Sinewaves In The History Of Usenet. LOL


on top of old snick-ers, all covered with Fag. LOL
is where my usenet lord and mas-ter
can go straight to hell*

*hell doesn't exist.  hope everybody is having a productive evening.

-

http://i.imgur.com/2tH6zVB.jpg

http://cafepress.com/kooktown

http://i.imgur.com/pnWqhSG.jpg

-

If my poasts are offensive to you, you can always block all From: headers  
containing "root@127.0.0.1", unless you are an idiot who would like to  
yammer about "morphing" and maybe try to lodge some frivolous complaints  
to my news provider, then please be sure to ignore this helpful  
information and have fun making an ass of yourself in public.  :)

-

if that route of silencing those horrid opinions of mine that you  
downloaded to your computer under duress doesn't work you can always try:  
http://i.imgur.com/jlsN9JX.png?2

-

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Gish_Gallop
The Gish Gallop is often used as an indirect argument from authority — as  
it appears to paint the galloper as an expert in a broad range of subjects  
or with an extensive knowledge of an individual one. Simultaneously it  
presents opponents (in spoken debates) or refuters (in written,  
Internet-based ones) as incompetent bumblers who didn't do their homework  
before the debate. Such emphasis on style over substance is the reason  
many scientists disdain public debates as a forum for disseminating  
opinions. - Page #1 from the Gospel of SnickerTurd

-

Coming soon!  To a newsgroup near you!:

$ perl fakeyBot.pl
FakeyBot>       I'm FakeyBot. What's your name so I can Google-stalk you,  
look you up on Radaris, and hurl invective and probably-illegal harrassing  
bile from behind an anonymous dizum account?  <snicker>
You>    Robert Michael Wolfe
FakeyBot>       Oh look, you're back again to polish my size 16 steel-toed  
boot with your colon and listen to me talk about bestiality and cocks,  
Robert. <snicker>
Robert> you talk about cocks a lot.
FakeyBot>       Oh, I talk about sex a lot?
Robert> gay sex, mostly...
FakeyBot>       Fag!

(just as useful as the original!)

-

snickers the wonderturd describes how he alerted lots of his kiddie pr0n  
friends to the ensuing FBI sting in message  
<b5e7da79a455d0c9227b1b50e25e7ea1@dizum.com>:
"That's easy enough to do... how do you think my crew uncovered the
largest CP ring using Tor and I2P, which we promptly turned over to
the FBI? I discovered a way to uncover the IP addresses the I2P users were  
using, and a way of tracking Eepsites back to their IP addresses, then we  
figured out that we could DDOS a Tor IP address and modify Tor headers  
while checking whether a Tor hidden service was still up, then using  
process of elimination to pinpoint the IP address hosting that hidden  
service. It's not rocket science.

_The I2P community got all up in arms when I discussed on their forum how  
I was doing it, and that it'd be a good way of cleaning up I2P so it can  
get on with being a platform to research anonymous communication... my  
distinct impression was that the "anonymity
research platform" story was just a cover story to allow pervs to
trade CP._  (NOTE: admits to participating in what he "suspected" was a  
kiddie pr0n network.)

That Silk Road 2.0 was taken offline in the ensuing FBI Operation
Onymous was just icing on the cake."

-

Golden Killfile, June 2005
KOTM, November 2006
Bob Allisat Memorial Hook, Line & Sinker, November 2006
Special Ops Cody Memorial Purple Heart, November 2006
Special Ops Cody Memorial Purple Heart, September 2007
Tony Sidaway Memorial "Drama Queen" Award, November 2006
Busted Urinal Award, April 2007
Order of the Holey Sockpuppet, September 2007
Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog Whistle, September 2006
Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog Whistle, April 2008
Tinfoil Sombrero, February 2007
AUK Mascot, September 2007

 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#554637

On Fri, 19 Feb 2016 11:15:03 -0500, "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder
living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey),
socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117"
<root@127.0.0.1> wrote:

>On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 18:22:38 -0500, Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 18:13:24 -0500, "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder
>> living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey),
>> socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117"
>> <root@127.0.0.1> wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 16:03:43 -0500, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler
>>> Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
>>>>
>>>> Robert Michael Wolfe the Pittsburgh Pied Piper Of Penis (aka
>>>> DildoRider) of 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey),
>>>> socked up as sucksroot@127.0.0.1, in
>>>> <news:op.yc09xkpxtm21m2@benson.localhost> did thusly jump head first
>>>> into the wood chipper again:
>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 01:20:45 -0500, Friendly Neighborhood
>>>>> Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> Robert Michael Wolfe the Pittsburgh Pied Piper Of Penis (aka
>>>>>> DildoRider) of 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  
>>>>>> Jockey),
>>>>>> socked up as sucksroot@127.0.0.1, in
>>>>>> <news:op.yczn3ab2tm21m2@benson.localhost> did thusly jump head first
>>>>>> into the wood chipper again:
>>>>
>>>>>>> <looks at subject>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> okay, so now please go "sum" any two of the 3 phases of standard
>>>>>>> 3-phase
>>>>>>> power and tell me how many volts potential it is at any instant,
>>>>>>> k0oky.
>>>>>>> then "sum" all three.  show us the sums.
>>>>
>>>>>> "at any instant" LOL
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You mean the time-varying instantaneous voltage, which varies on each
>>>>>> hot leg? Moron. LOL
>>>>>>
>>>>>> V(L1-N) = sin(2*pi*f*t)*Vp
>>>>>> V(L2-N) = sin((2*pi*f*t+((4/3)*pi)*Vp
>>>>>> V(L3-N) = sin((2*pi*f*t+((2/3)*pi)*Vp
>>>>
>>>>> hey, those equations look very familiar.  you just left out the
>>>>> definitions of f=60 and Vp=120
>>>>>
>>>>> 120*sin(60*2*pi*x) OR sin(2*pi*60*x)*120
>>>>> 120*sin(60*2*pi*x+(120*pi/180)) OR sin(2*pi*60*x+((120/180)*pi)*120
>>>>> 120*sin(60*2*pi*x+(240*pi/180)) OR sin(2*pi*60*x+((240/180)*pi)*120
>>>>
>>>> Well, given that you can't even reduce a fraction, that pretty much
>>>> proves my point that you're a mathematical moron. LOL
>>>>
>>>> SPNAK!
>>>>
>>>>> you're finally not being a fucktard about correct equations,
>>>>
>>>> I never was. I was only "being a fucktard" about the fact that you're
>>>> using the equations wrong and using the wrong equation, because you're
>>>> a mathematical moron who doesn't understand what the equation is
>>>> supposed to do. Moron. LOL
>>>>
>>>>> unlike when
>>>>> you kept insisting that one should both graph and do the math for two
>>>>> 180
>>>>> degree phase shifted signals by flipping the polarity of one of the
>>>>> signals and "summing" them to get an instantaneous voltage.
>>>>
>>>> That wasn't me "insisting that one should both graph and do the math
>>>> for two 180 degree phase shifted signals by flipping the polarity of
>>>> one of the signals and "summing" them to get an instantaneous
>>>> voltage", that was *you*, you backpedaling moron... or did you forget
>>>> your adding pi to your equation to flip one hot leg by 180 degrees in
>>>> phase?
>>>>
>>>> SPNAK!
>>>>
>>>>> "What does 2 (Dual / Split) Phase Power mean?
>>>>>
>>>>> If you’re not electrically minded, think of 2 (Dual / Split) phase
>>>>> power
>>>>> like a two pedal bicycle where one (pushing leg) or both (pushing  
>>>>> legs)
>>>>> can provide power.
>>>>>
>>>>> Dual Phase or Split Phase power is also Single Phase because it’s a
>>>>> two
>>>>> wire Alternating Current (AC ) power circuit. In the US, this is the
>>>>> standard household power arrangement with two (Phase A, Phase B) 120V
>>>>> power wires (180 degrees out of phase with one another) like two  
>>>>> bicycle
>>>>> pedals and one neutral wire. This arrangement provides (2) 120V and  
>>>>> (1)
>>>>> 240V power circuits. 120V power flows (alternating) between either  
>>>>> power
>>>>> wire (through the load) and the neutral wire. 240V power flows
>>>>> (alternating) between the two power wires (through the load)."
>>>>>
>>>>> "If you connected a dual trace oscope's probes' gnds to the Neutral
>>>>> (center tapped wire) and put one probe on phase A and the other on
>>>>> phase B
>>>>> the waveforms would be 180 degrees out of phase. When A peaks  
>>>>> positive B
>>>>> peaks negative. So how is it that the A-Neutral and B-Neutral voltages
>>>>> are
>>>>> said to be "in phase"? [Of course, it makes no sense to ask about the
>>>>> phasing of A-B - any voltage is always in phase with itself.]"
>>>>
>>>> Wrong. They'd be oppositely-phased in relation to the
>>>> midpoint-neutral, but they cannot be "out of phase" on the hot legs,
>>>> as connecting directly across the two hot legs gives 240 volts
>>>> *single*-*phase* at 0 degrees, as you have acknowledged.
>>>>
>>>> But thanks for yet again demonstrating your inability to grok how
>>>> split-phase midpoint-neutral electrical systems work, DildoRider. You
>>>> are, after all, the moron who's been calling it "two phase", which is
>>>> just silly. Even Chimpy was laughing at that, and he's as big a moron
>>>> as you are.
>>>>
>>>> SPNAK!
>>>>
>>>>>> Educate yourself, you retard.
>>>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phasor>
>>>>>> <http://white.stanford.edu/teach/index.php/Fourier_transform_math>
>>>>>> <http://www.fourier-series.com/>
>>>>
>>>>> i took engineering in college, thanks.  ;)
>>>>
>>>> Oh, then you *did* skip the first day of class when they taught
>>>> Euler's equation, so you could instead suck dicks in a dark alley. LOL
>>>>
>>>> SPNAK!
>>>>
>>>>>> That equation in the Stanford link above, based upon Euler's sinewave
>>>>>> summation equation, allows one to sum *any* number of sinewaves of
>>>>>> *any* frequency and phase. Moron.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How can you do *any* electronics work and *not* know how to use the
>>>>>> Fourier transform of Euler's equation, given that using complex
>>>>>> phasors allows one to not only calculate voltage but factor in
>>>>>> impedance, current and any other aspect one wants? Unless you're the
>>>>>> type who solders it together, powers it up and prays for no smoke?
>>>>>> Moron. LOL
>>>>
>>>> <crickets> LOL
>>>>
>>>>>> "standard 3-phase power" LOL
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Do you mean 3-wire delta, 3-wire wye or 4-wire wye? Moron. LOL
>>>>
>>>>> yes, the 3-phase service that powers any of those.
>>>>
>>>> Translation:
>>>> "I... I don't know! I'm in over my head. Don't ask me hard questions
>>>> or I'll start to spam more bad sinewaves with my kooky sinewave
>>>> subtraction equation!"
>>>>
>>>> <snicker>
>>>>
>>>>>> Do you mean a 230 V system, or a 230/400 V system? Moron. LOL
>>>>
>>>>> for now, just 230
>>>>
>>>>>> My uncle has a high-leg delta center-tap-grounded system at his
>>>>>> business, so he can power his 120 volt loads, his single-phase and
>>>>>> 3-phase 240 volt loads and his 208 volt lighting. Despite the fact
>>>>>> that delta has been supplanted by wye for new installations in the US
>>>>>> because of improved load balancing, that's "standard 3-phase power",
>>>>>> too. Moron. LOL
>>>>
>>>>> that's an ideal setup for your uncle.  does he have a ball bearing
>>>>> factory, or something?  LOL
>>>>
>>>> Or something. LOL
>>>>
>>>>>> But let's not get off the topic of you *proving* your kooky sinewave
>>>>>> subtraction equation didn't calculate those 6 sinewaves correctly,
>>>>
>>>>> it certainly did plot it correctly and you've not proven otherwise.
>>>>
>>>> I most certainly *did* prove otherwise. It can't even arrive at the
>>>> correct sinewave summation voltage of 2550.25 volts, as you *proved*
>>>> and *graphed*, complete with a horizontal line so everyone would be
>>>> sure to see that your kooky equation didn't work, you moron. LOL
>>>>
>>>> Your kooky equation seems to be a result of you squashing together
>>>> parts of the phasor and trigonometric sinewave expressions, because
>>>> it's certainly not the correct equation to use.
>>>>
>>>> SPNAK!
>>>>
>>>>> it is
>>>>> you who cannot answer the simple question regarding at which time in
>>>>> seconds that the sine waves that you've conjured would ever
>>>>> "constructively interfere" to produce 2550.25.
>>>>
>>>> You'll have to do the work of proving your kooky sinewave subtraction
>>>> equation doesn't work, DildoRider. Given that you cannot even make it
>>>> produce the proper constructively-interfered maximum voltage of
>>>> 2550.25 volts, there's no way for you to calculate the period of the
>>>> resultant, therefore you're forced to either admit you're *wrong*, or
>>>> change to using the correct Euler equation and thereby admit you're
>>>> *wrong*.
>>>>
>>>> SPNAK!
>>>>
>>>>>> which means you're using the *wrong* *equation*,
>>>>
>>>>> then prove it by posting the *correct* *equation*...
>>>>
>>>> I did at the beginning of this whole fiasco, and you bleated that it
>>>> wasn't the correct equation, then started spamming your bad sinewaves
>>>> using your kooky sinewave subtraction equation, despite the fact that
>>>> GnuPlot can use the correct equation, as you proved when you posted
>>>> about those researchers using it in GnuPlot.
>>>>
>>>> SPNAK!
>>>>
>>>>>> and despite you
>>>>>> admitting GnuPlot can use the proper Euler sinewave summation
>>>>>> equation,
>>>>
>>>>> it can use whatever tab-delimited data you give it.  so just post  
>>>>> you're
>>>>> euler data points and we'll get down to the bottom of this.
>>>>
>>>> Translation:
>>>> "I'm wrong, but don't want to admit it. I'm too stupid to use the
>>>> correct Euler equation, but don't want to admit it. So I'll keep
>>>> spamming my bad sinewaves because I'm a mathematical moron." LOL
>>>>
>>>>>> you persist in proving yourself a mathematical moron by
>>>>>> insisting on using the *wrong* *equation*. LOL
>>>>
>>>>> you insist on repetitively and somewhat-schizophrenically bleating out
>>>>> that everything is *wrong* while being unable to provide any evidence
>>>>> whatsoever that this is the case.  is that somehow the "high ground"
>>>>> these
>>>>> days?
>>>>
>>>> There are three ways of expressing a sinewave, the trigonometric,
>>>> complex exponential and phasor methods. I prefer the phasor method, as
>>>> one can not only calculate phase and voltage, one can factor in
>>>> impedance, solve for current, etc.
>>>>
>>>> You appear to prefer the trigonometric method, but take a look at the
>>>> proper Euler equation, expressed in the trigonometric expression of a
>>>> sinewave, and tell me your equation is correct, DildoRider... do you
>>>> see where you've borrowed parts of the phasor expression of a
>>>> sinewave, and parts of the trigonometric expression of a sinewave, and
>>>> added your kooky correcting factors to try to make it work? Then you
>>>> stupidly switched your minus signs to plus signs and bleated
>>>> "DAAARRRRHHH! I gots the propur Euler eqooashun now! It don't not work
>>>> neither!", thereby *proving* you don't have a fucking clue. And you've
>>>> still not demonstrated that you can jigger your kooky equation to even
>>>> give the proper output both because your phase is wrong, and the
>>>> resultant voltage is wrong. Moron. LOL
>>>>
>>>> And now, you're reduced to droolbleating "SHOW ME DUH PURDY PICHERS!
>>>> <clap clap> DUURRRRHHH! I WANNA SEE DUH PURDY PICHERS!" because you
>>>> have no clue how to do it properly yourself.
>>>>
>>>> SPNAK!
>>>>
>>>>>>> don't forget... 3-phase *is* separated by 120 degrees instead of  
>>>>>>> 180.
>>>>>>> don't forget that in your maths.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> for extra credit use quaternion maths.  LOL
>>>>
>>>>>> I don't have to graph or calculate a single fucking thing,
>>>>
>>>>> well, yeah because you're inept and just trying to cover up for it.
>>>>
>>>> Or I know I'm right, and that you're a mathematical moron. And I know
>>>> you'll do far better proving that fact yourself than I could. I mean,
>>>> look at all the fuckups you've already made. LOL
>>>>
>>>>>> you math challenged moron.
>>>>
>>>>> ironic, as you were just challenged to prove your math.
>>>>
>>>> You mean the proper Euler equation, in use by every scientist and
>>>> engineer and proven since the 1700s, whereas your kooky sinewave
>>>> subtraction equation is only used by one delusional and backpedaling
>>>> mathematical moron? LOL
>>>>
>>>>>> All I had to do was prove you *wrong*, which I did
>>>>>> by forcing you to prove *yourself* wrong... because I like making my
>>>>>> kooks do my work for me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Now get back to work, you slack-jawed mono-browed thick-witted
>>>>>> uneducated dolt. You've got a lot more bad sinewaves to spam before I
>>>>>> deem you sufficiently embarrassed to allow you to run away with tail
>>>>>> tucked.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <snicker>
>>>>
>>>>> did everybody applaud?
>>>>
>>>> They sure as hell did, but not for you. People just look at the ground
>>>> and shuffle their feet in embarrassed silence when it comes to you.
>>>>
>>>> <snicker>
>>>>
>>>> Fag. LOL
>>>> Idiot. LOL
>>>> Moron. LOL
>>>> Tranny. LOL
>>>> Libtard. LOL
>>>> Crackhead. LOL
>>>> GableTard. LOL
>>>> DildoRider. LOL
>>>> Bad Musician. LOL
>>>> Stick Figure. LOL
>>>> Terrible Liar. LOL
>>>> Sinewave Spammer. LOL
>>>> Mathematical Moron. LOL
>>>> Outerfilthing Stalker. LOL
>>>> Talentless FrothMonkey. LOL
>>>> Klimate Katastrophe Kook. LOL
>>>> Defeated Tearful Spankard. LOL
>>>> Waster Of Time To Save $10. LOL
>>>> Worst Maker Of Sinewaves In The History Of Usenet. LOL
>>>>
>>>
>>> fakey, why did you trim out the following and refuse to comment on it?
>>>
>>> i eagerly anticipate fakey's answer to what the following *sums* to with
>>> his euler summation:
>>>
>>> V((L1+L2)-N) = sin(2*pi*f*t)*Vp + sin((2*pi*f*t+(4/3)*pi))*Vp
>>>
>>> OR let f=60 and Vp=170:
>>>
>>> sin(2*pi*60*t)*170 + sin((2*pi*60*t+(4/3)*pi))*170
>>>
>>> i get:
>>>
>>> http://i.imgur.com/gfm2vfV.png
>>>
>>> fakey has not only proclaimed that this is the method for calculating  
>>> the
>>> voltage that a load would see across those two conductors but that it
>>> *must* be zero volts.
>>>
>>> his furry-euler summations CAN'T be wrong, he sez.
>>
>>
>> I'm sure glad I have no idea what the hell you guys are talking about.
>
>now you sound like the tiny voice inside bleaty the spankard's head that  
>nobody has ever heard from.

Whatever, this is not my forte, but I know enough to know you are
making him dance like a monkey on meth.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#554641

On Fri, 19 Feb 2016 12:16:29 -0500, Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> On Fri, 19 Feb 2016 11:15:03 -0500, "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder
> living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey),
> socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117"
> <root@127.0.0.1> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 18:22:38 -0500, Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid>  
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 18:13:24 -0500, "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder
>>> living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey),
>>> socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117"
>>> <root@127.0.0.1> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 16:03:43 -0500, Friendly Neighborhood Vote  
>>>> Wrangler
>>>> Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
>>>>>
>>>>> Robert Michael Wolfe the Pittsburgh Pied Piper Of Penis (aka
>>>>> DildoRider) of 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  
>>>>> Jockey),
>>>>> socked up as sucksroot@127.0.0.1, in
>>>>> <news:op.yc09xkpxtm21m2@benson.localhost> did thusly jump head first
>>>>> into the wood chipper again:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 01:20:45 -0500, Friendly Neighborhood
>>>>>> Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Robert Michael Wolfe the Pittsburgh Pied Piper Of Penis (aka
>>>>>>> DildoRider) of 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop
>>>>>>> Jockey),
>>>>>>> socked up as sucksroot@127.0.0.1, in
>>>>>>> <news:op.yczn3ab2tm21m2@benson.localhost> did thusly jump head  
>>>>>>> first
>>>>>>> into the wood chipper again:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> <looks at subject>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> okay, so now please go "sum" any two of the 3 phases of standard
>>>>>>>> 3-phase
>>>>>>>> power and tell me how many volts potential it is at any instant,
>>>>>>>> k0oky.
>>>>>>>> then "sum" all three.  show us the sums.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> "at any instant" LOL
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You mean the time-varying instantaneous voltage, which varies on  
>>>>>>> each
>>>>>>> hot leg? Moron. LOL
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> V(L1-N) = sin(2*pi*f*t)*Vp
>>>>>>> V(L2-N) = sin((2*pi*f*t+((4/3)*pi)*Vp
>>>>>>> V(L3-N) = sin((2*pi*f*t+((2/3)*pi)*Vp
>>>>>
>>>>>> hey, those equations look very familiar.  you just left out the
>>>>>> definitions of f=60 and Vp=120
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 120*sin(60*2*pi*x) OR sin(2*pi*60*x)*120
>>>>>> 120*sin(60*2*pi*x+(120*pi/180)) OR sin(2*pi*60*x+((120/180)*pi)*120
>>>>>> 120*sin(60*2*pi*x+(240*pi/180)) OR sin(2*pi*60*x+((240/180)*pi)*120
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, given that you can't even reduce a fraction, that pretty much
>>>>> proves my point that you're a mathematical moron. LOL
>>>>>
>>>>> SPNAK!
>>>>>
>>>>>> you're finally not being a fucktard about correct equations,
>>>>>
>>>>> I never was. I was only "being a fucktard" about the fact that you're
>>>>> using the equations wrong and using the wrong equation, because  
>>>>> you're
>>>>> a mathematical moron who doesn't understand what the equation is
>>>>> supposed to do. Moron. LOL
>>>>>
>>>>>> unlike when
>>>>>> you kept insisting that one should both graph and do the math for  
>>>>>> two
>>>>>> 180
>>>>>> degree phase shifted signals by flipping the polarity of one of the
>>>>>> signals and "summing" them to get an instantaneous voltage.
>>>>>
>>>>> That wasn't me "insisting that one should both graph and do the math
>>>>> for two 180 degree phase shifted signals by flipping the polarity of
>>>>> one of the signals and "summing" them to get an instantaneous
>>>>> voltage", that was *you*, you backpedaling moron... or did you forget
>>>>> your adding pi to your equation to flip one hot leg by 180 degrees in
>>>>> phase?
>>>>>
>>>>> SPNAK!
>>>>>
>>>>>> "What does 2 (Dual / Split) Phase Power mean?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you’re not electrically minded, think of 2 (Dual / Split) phase
>>>>>> power
>>>>>> like a two pedal bicycle where one (pushing leg) or both (pushing
>>>>>> legs)
>>>>>> can provide power.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Dual Phase or Split Phase power is also Single Phase because it’s  
>>>>>> a
>>>>>> two
>>>>>> wire Alternating Current (AC ) power circuit. In the US, this is the
>>>>>> standard household power arrangement with two (Phase A, Phase B)  
>>>>>> 120V
>>>>>> power wires (180 degrees out of phase with one another) like two
>>>>>> bicycle
>>>>>> pedals and one neutral wire. This arrangement provides (2) 120V and
>>>>>> (1)
>>>>>> 240V power circuits. 120V power flows (alternating) between either
>>>>>> power
>>>>>> wire (through the load) and the neutral wire. 240V power flows
>>>>>> (alternating) between the two power wires (through the load)."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "If you connected a dual trace oscope's probes' gnds to the Neutral
>>>>>> (center tapped wire) and put one probe on phase A and the other on
>>>>>> phase B
>>>>>> the waveforms would be 180 degrees out of phase. When A peaks
>>>>>> positive B
>>>>>> peaks negative. So how is it that the A-Neutral and B-Neutral  
>>>>>> voltages
>>>>>> are
>>>>>> said to be "in phase"? [Of course, it makes no sense to ask about  
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> phasing of A-B - any voltage is always in phase with itself.]"
>>>>>
>>>>> Wrong. They'd be oppositely-phased in relation to the
>>>>> midpoint-neutral, but they cannot be "out of phase" on the hot legs,
>>>>> as connecting directly across the two hot legs gives 240 volts
>>>>> *single*-*phase* at 0 degrees, as you have acknowledged.
>>>>>
>>>>> But thanks for yet again demonstrating your inability to grok how
>>>>> split-phase midpoint-neutral electrical systems work, DildoRider. You
>>>>> are, after all, the moron who's been calling it "two phase", which is
>>>>> just silly. Even Chimpy was laughing at that, and he's as big a moron
>>>>> as you are.
>>>>>
>>>>> SPNAK!
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Educate yourself, you retard.
>>>>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phasor>
>>>>>>> <http://white.stanford.edu/teach/index.php/Fourier_transform_math>
>>>>>>> <http://www.fourier-series.com/>
>>>>>
>>>>>> i took engineering in college, thanks.  ;)
>>>>>
>>>>> Oh, then you *did* skip the first day of class when they taught
>>>>> Euler's equation, so you could instead suck dicks in a dark alley.  
>>>>> LOL
>>>>>
>>>>> SPNAK!
>>>>>
>>>>>>> That equation in the Stanford link above, based upon Euler's  
>>>>>>> sinewave
>>>>>>> summation equation, allows one to sum *any* number of sinewaves of
>>>>>>> *any* frequency and phase. Moron.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How can you do *any* electronics work and *not* know how to use the
>>>>>>> Fourier transform of Euler's equation, given that using complex
>>>>>>> phasors allows one to not only calculate voltage but factor in
>>>>>>> impedance, current and any other aspect one wants? Unless you're  
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> type who solders it together, powers it up and prays for no smoke?
>>>>>>> Moron. LOL
>>>>>
>>>>> <crickets> LOL
>>>>>
>>>>>>> "standard 3-phase power" LOL
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Do you mean 3-wire delta, 3-wire wye or 4-wire wye? Moron. LOL
>>>>>
>>>>>> yes, the 3-phase service that powers any of those.
>>>>>
>>>>> Translation:
>>>>> "I... I don't know! I'm in over my head. Don't ask me hard questions
>>>>> or I'll start to spam more bad sinewaves with my kooky sinewave
>>>>> subtraction equation!"
>>>>>
>>>>> <snicker>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Do you mean a 230 V system, or a 230/400 V system? Moron. LOL
>>>>>
>>>>>> for now, just 230
>>>>>
>>>>>>> My uncle has a high-leg delta center-tap-grounded system at his
>>>>>>> business, so he can power his 120 volt loads, his single-phase and
>>>>>>> 3-phase 240 volt loads and his 208 volt lighting. Despite the fact
>>>>>>> that delta has been supplanted by wye for new installations in the  
>>>>>>> US
>>>>>>> because of improved load balancing, that's "standard 3-phase  
>>>>>>> power",
>>>>>>> too. Moron. LOL
>>>>>
>>>>>> that's an ideal setup for your uncle.  does he have a ball bearing
>>>>>> factory, or something?  LOL
>>>>>
>>>>> Or something. LOL
>>>>>
>>>>>>> But let's not get off the topic of you *proving* your kooky  
>>>>>>> sinewave
>>>>>>> subtraction equation didn't calculate those 6 sinewaves correctly,
>>>>>
>>>>>> it certainly did plot it correctly and you've not proven otherwise.
>>>>>
>>>>> I most certainly *did* prove otherwise. It can't even arrive at the
>>>>> correct sinewave summation voltage of 2550.25 volts, as you *proved*
>>>>> and *graphed*, complete with a horizontal line so everyone would be
>>>>> sure to see that your kooky equation didn't work, you moron. LOL
>>>>>
>>>>> Your kooky equation seems to be a result of you squashing together
>>>>> parts of the phasor and trigonometric sinewave expressions, because
>>>>> it's certainly not the correct equation to use.
>>>>>
>>>>> SPNAK!
>>>>>
>>>>>> it is
>>>>>> you who cannot answer the simple question regarding at which time in
>>>>>> seconds that the sine waves that you've conjured would ever
>>>>>> "constructively interfere" to produce 2550.25.
>>>>>
>>>>> You'll have to do the work of proving your kooky sinewave subtraction
>>>>> equation doesn't work, DildoRider. Given that you cannot even make it
>>>>> produce the proper constructively-interfered maximum voltage of
>>>>> 2550.25 volts, there's no way for you to calculate the period of the
>>>>> resultant, therefore you're forced to either admit you're *wrong*, or
>>>>> change to using the correct Euler equation and thereby admit you're
>>>>> *wrong*.
>>>>>
>>>>> SPNAK!
>>>>>
>>>>>>> which means you're using the *wrong* *equation*,
>>>>>
>>>>>> then prove it by posting the *correct* *equation*...
>>>>>
>>>>> I did at the beginning of this whole fiasco, and you bleated that it
>>>>> wasn't the correct equation, then started spamming your bad sinewaves
>>>>> using your kooky sinewave subtraction equation, despite the fact that
>>>>> GnuPlot can use the correct equation, as you proved when you posted
>>>>> about those researchers using it in GnuPlot.
>>>>>
>>>>> SPNAK!
>>>>>
>>>>>>> and despite you
>>>>>>> admitting GnuPlot can use the proper Euler sinewave summation
>>>>>>> equation,
>>>>>
>>>>>> it can use whatever tab-delimited data you give it.  so just post
>>>>>> you're
>>>>>> euler data points and we'll get down to the bottom of this.
>>>>>
>>>>> Translation:
>>>>> "I'm wrong, but don't want to admit it. I'm too stupid to use the
>>>>> correct Euler equation, but don't want to admit it. So I'll keep
>>>>> spamming my bad sinewaves because I'm a mathematical moron." LOL
>>>>>
>>>>>>> you persist in proving yourself a mathematical moron by
>>>>>>> insisting on using the *wrong* *equation*. LOL
>>>>>
>>>>>> you insist on repetitively and somewhat-schizophrenically bleating  
>>>>>> out
>>>>>> that everything is *wrong* while being unable to provide any  
>>>>>> evidence
>>>>>> whatsoever that this is the case.  is that somehow the "high ground"
>>>>>> these
>>>>>> days?
>>>>>
>>>>> There are three ways of expressing a sinewave, the trigonometric,
>>>>> complex exponential and phasor methods. I prefer the phasor method,  
>>>>> as
>>>>> one can not only calculate phase and voltage, one can factor in
>>>>> impedance, solve for current, etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> You appear to prefer the trigonometric method, but take a look at the
>>>>> proper Euler equation, expressed in the trigonometric expression of a
>>>>> sinewave, and tell me your equation is correct, DildoRider... do you
>>>>> see where you've borrowed parts of the phasor expression of a
>>>>> sinewave, and parts of the trigonometric expression of a sinewave,  
>>>>> and
>>>>> added your kooky correcting factors to try to make it work? Then you
>>>>> stupidly switched your minus signs to plus signs and bleated
>>>>> "DAAARRRRHHH! I gots the propur Euler eqooashun now! It don't not  
>>>>> work
>>>>> neither!", thereby *proving* you don't have a fucking clue. And  
>>>>> you've
>>>>> still not demonstrated that you can jigger your kooky equation to  
>>>>> even
>>>>> give the proper output both because your phase is wrong, and the
>>>>> resultant voltage is wrong. Moron. LOL
>>>>>
>>>>> And now, you're reduced to droolbleating "SHOW ME DUH PURDY PICHERS!
>>>>> <clap clap> DUURRRRHHH! I WANNA SEE DUH PURDY PICHERS!" because you
>>>>> have no clue how to do it properly yourself.
>>>>>
>>>>> SPNAK!
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> don't forget... 3-phase *is* separated by 120 degrees instead of
>>>>>>>> 180.
>>>>>>>> don't forget that in your maths.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> for extra credit use quaternion maths.  LOL
>>>>>
>>>>>>> I don't have to graph or calculate a single fucking thing,
>>>>>
>>>>>> well, yeah because you're inept and just trying to cover up for it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Or I know I'm right, and that you're a mathematical moron. And I know
>>>>> you'll do far better proving that fact yourself than I could. I mean,
>>>>> look at all the fuckups you've already made. LOL
>>>>>
>>>>>>> you math challenged moron.
>>>>>
>>>>>> ironic, as you were just challenged to prove your math.
>>>>>
>>>>> You mean the proper Euler equation, in use by every scientist and
>>>>> engineer and proven since the 1700s, whereas your kooky sinewave
>>>>> subtraction equation is only used by one delusional and backpedaling
>>>>> mathematical moron? LOL
>>>>>
>>>>>>> All I had to do was prove you *wrong*, which I did
>>>>>>> by forcing you to prove *yourself* wrong... because I like making  
>>>>>>> my
>>>>>>> kooks do my work for me.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Now get back to work, you slack-jawed mono-browed thick-witted
>>>>>>> uneducated dolt. You've got a lot more bad sinewaves to spam  
>>>>>>> before I
>>>>>>> deem you sufficiently embarrassed to allow you to run away with  
>>>>>>> tail
>>>>>>> tucked.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <snicker>
>>>>>
>>>>>> did everybody applaud?
>>>>>
>>>>> They sure as hell did, but not for you. People just look at the  
>>>>> ground
>>>>> and shuffle their feet in embarrassed silence when it comes to you.
>>>>>
>>>>> <snicker>
>>>>>
>>>>> Fag. LOL
>>>>> Idiot. LOL
>>>>> Moron. LOL
>>>>> Tranny. LOL
>>>>> Libtard. LOL
>>>>> Crackhead. LOL
>>>>> GableTard. LOL
>>>>> DildoRider. LOL
>>>>> Bad Musician. LOL
>>>>> Stick Figure. LOL
>>>>> Terrible Liar. LOL
>>>>> Sinewave Spammer. LOL
>>>>> Mathematical Moron. LOL
>>>>> Outerfilthing Stalker. LOL
>>>>> Talentless FrothMonkey. LOL
>>>>> Klimate Katastrophe Kook. LOL
>>>>> Defeated Tearful Spankard. LOL
>>>>> Waster Of Time To Save $10. LOL
>>>>> Worst Maker Of Sinewaves In The History Of Usenet. LOL
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> fakey, why did you trim out the following and refuse to comment on it?
>>>>
>>>> i eagerly anticipate fakey's answer to what the following *sums* to  
>>>> with
>>>> his euler summation:
>>>>
>>>> V((L1+L2)-N) = sin(2*pi*f*t)*Vp + sin((2*pi*f*t+(4/3)*pi))*Vp
>>>>
>>>> OR let f=60 and Vp=170:
>>>>
>>>> sin(2*pi*60*t)*170 + sin((2*pi*60*t+(4/3)*pi))*170
>>>>
>>>> i get:
>>>>
>>>> http://i.imgur.com/gfm2vfV.png
>>>>
>>>> fakey has not only proclaimed that this is the method for calculating
>>>> the
>>>> voltage that a load would see across those two conductors but that it
>>>> *must* be zero volts.
>>>>
>>>> his furry-euler summations CAN'T be wrong, he sez.
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm sure glad I have no idea what the hell you guys are talking about.
>>
>> now you sound like the tiny voice inside bleaty the spankard's head that
>> nobody has ever heard from.
>
> Whatever, this is not my forte, but I know enough to know you are
> making him dance like a monkey on meth.

i wonder when the methMonkey will bleat again?

-- 
"sines, sines, everywhere there's sines
blocking up the snickerTurds, breaking his mind"
http://imgur.com/a/yMFsu

-

FNVWe attempts to rewrite physics texts in Message-ID:  
<3dcad3dd0a0d39727506717506883c26@dizum.com>

">>let's not forget that mine also had the correct applied mathematics
>> equations unlike fakey the supposed know-it-all:
>>  phase A: 120*sin(2*pi*60*x)
>> phase B: 120*sin(2*pi*60*x+pi)
>>  voltage difference between phase A and phase B at any point x in time:
>> 120*sin(2*pi*60*x) - 120*sin(2*pi*60*x+pi) = 240*sin(2*pi*60*x)

Wrong, as has already been proven. What does it say below, you fecking  
*moron*?

"The _sum_ E(θ) ≡ E(a) + E(b) can be written thusly:""

it says that you don't even know how to correctly apply mathematics to  
real-world AC electricity, snickerTurds.

http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/textbook/alternating-current/chpt-10/single-phase-power-systems/
http://sub.allaboutcircuits.com/images/02170.png
"To mathematically calculate voltage between “hot” wires, we must subtract  
voltages, because their polarity marks show them to be opposed to each  
other:"
http://sub.allaboutcircuits.com/images/12112.png

http://www.samlexamerica.com/support/documents/WhitePaper-120240VACSingleSplitPhaseandMultiWireBranchCircuits.pdf

on page 2:

** NOTE: The phase of Hot Leg 2 (Phase B) is in the
  opposite direction - i.e., 180° apart from the phase
  of Hot Leg L1 (Phase A)

*COUGH*
SPNAK!!

-

i know a guy on the internet who will draw a triangular sine wave in ASCII  
art if you ask nicely.
see: Message-ID: <4ba4a50aaaebc7fb8a348293c5cf9f13@dizum.com>

-

Fakey irrationally demands a theme song to foam to:
"all I really want your pathetic pwned ass to do is write me a classic  
rock song as tribute to your Usenet Lord and Master..."  
<f4f9193fa7d28b760a9de681e61427e7@dizum.com>

-

On Fri, 12 Feb 2016 17:25:03 -0500, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler  
Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:

<snicker>

Fag. LOL
Idiot. LOL
Moron. LOL
Tranny. LOL
Libtard. LOL
Crackhead. LOL
GableTard. LOL
DildoRider. LOL
Bad Musician. LOL
Stick Figure. LOL
Terrible Liar. LOL
Sinewave Spammer. LOL
Outerfilthing Stalker. LOL
Talentless FrothMonkey. LOL
Math Challenged Halfwit. LOL
Klimate Katastrophe Kook. LOL
Defeated Tearful Spankard. LOL
Waster Of Time To Save $10. LOL
Worst Maker Of Sinewaves In The History Of Usenet. LOL


on top of old snick-ers, all covered with Fag. LOL
is where my usenet lord and mas-ter
can go straight to hell*

*hell doesn't exist.  hope everybody is having a productive evening.

-

http://i.imgur.com/2tH6zVB.jpg

http://cafepress.com/kooktown

http://i.imgur.com/pnWqhSG.jpg

-

If my poasts are offensive to you, you can always block all From: headers  
containing "root@127.0.0.1", unless you are an idiot who would like to  
yammer about "morphing" and maybe try to lodge some frivolous complaints  
to my news provider, then please be sure to ignore this helpful  
information and have fun making an ass of yourself in public.  :)

-

if that route of silencing those horrid opinions of mine that you  
downloaded to your computer under duress doesn't work you can always try:  
http://i.imgur.com/jlsN9JX.png?2

-

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Gish_Gallop
The Gish Gallop is often used as an indirect argument from authority — as  
it appears to paint the galloper as an expert in a broad range of subjects  
or with an extensive knowledge of an individual one. Simultaneously it  
presents opponents (in spoken debates) or refuters (in written,  
Internet-based ones) as incompetent bumblers who didn't do their homework  
before the debate. Such emphasis on style over substance is the reason  
many scientists disdain public debates as a forum for disseminating  
opinions. - Page #1 from the Gospel of SnickerTurd

-

Coming soon!  To a newsgroup near you!:

$ perl fakeyBot.pl
FakeyBot>       I'm FakeyBot. What's your name so I can Google-stalk you,  
look you up on Radaris, and hurl invective and probably-illegal harrassing  
bile from behind an anonymous dizum account?  <snicker>
You>    Robert Michael Wolfe
FakeyBot>       Oh look, you're back again to polish my size 16 steel-toed  
boot with your colon and listen to me talk about bestiality and cocks,  
Robert. <snicker>
Robert> you talk about cocks a lot.
FakeyBot>       Oh, I talk about sex a lot?
Robert> gay sex, mostly...
FakeyBot>       Fag!

(just as useful as the original!)

-

snickers the wonderturd describes how he alerted lots of his kiddie pr0n  
friends to the ensuing FBI sting in message  
<b5e7da79a455d0c9227b1b50e25e7ea1@dizum.com>:
"That's easy enough to do... how do you think my crew uncovered the
largest CP ring using Tor and I2P, which we promptly turned over to
the FBI? I discovered a way to uncover the IP addresses the I2P users were  
using, and a way of tracking Eepsites back to their IP addresses, then we  
figured out that we could DDOS a Tor IP address and modify Tor headers  
while checking whether a Tor hidden service was still up, then using  
process of elimination to pinpoint the IP address hosting that hidden  
service. It's not rocket science.

_The I2P community got all up in arms when I discussed on their forum how  
I was doing it, and that it'd be a good way of cleaning up I2P so it can  
get on with being a platform to research anonymous communication... my  
distinct impression was that the "anonymity
research platform" story was just a cover story to allow pervs to
trade CP._  (NOTE: admits to participating in what he "suspected" was a  
kiddie pr0n network.)

That Silk Road 2.0 was taken offline in the ensuing FBI Operation
Onymous was just icing on the cake."

-

Golden Killfile, June 2005
KOTM, November 2006
Bob Allisat Memorial Hook, Line & Sinker, November 2006
Special Ops Cody Memorial Purple Heart, November 2006
Special Ops Cody Memorial Purple Heart, September 2007
Tony Sidaway Memorial "Drama Queen" Award, November 2006
Busted Urinal Award, April 2007
Order of the Holey Sockpuppet, September 2007
Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog Whistle, September 2006
Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog Whistle, April 2008
Tinfoil Sombrero, February 2007
AUK Mascot, September 2007

 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#554825

Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>

Robert Michael Wolfe the Pittsburgh Pied Piper Of Penis (aka
DildoRider) of 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey),
socked up as sucksroot@127.0.0.1, in
<news:op.yc1xgmeetm21m2@benson.localhost> did thusly jump head first
into the wood chipper again:

> fakey, why did you trim out the following and refuse to comment on it?

I didn't, you moron. That was a later post than the one I made. I've
replied to it separately... but just know that as a kook melts down,
it's often common that they lose track of chronology. Now it's
happening to you. LOL

But I do note you've effectively ignored all those giant whomping
SPNAK!s upthread. Why did you do that, DildoRider? LOL

> i eagerly anticipate fakey's answer to what the following *sums* to with  
> his euler summation:
> 
> V((L1+L2)-N) = sin(2*pi*f*t)*Vp + sin((2*pi*f*t+(4/3)*pi))*Vp
> 
> OR let f=60 and Vp=170:
> 
> sin(2*pi*60*t)*170 + sin((2*pi*60*t+(4/3)*pi))*170

For fuck sake, you moron. You can't just take your kooky sinewave 
subtraction equation, switch out the minus signs with plus signs and 
stupidly blather about it being the correct equation to use. You've 
already tried that in the past, remember?

Fucking moron. Do it again, and this time, get it right. LOL

> i get:
> 
> http://i.imgur.com/gfm2vfV.png

Wrong. LOL

> fakey has not only proclaimed that this is the method for calculating the  
> voltage that a load would see across those two conductors but that it  
> *must* be zero volts.
> 
> his furry-euler summations CAN'T be wrong, he sez.

That's not the Euler sinewave summation equation you're using, you 
fucking moron. I've already posted the correct equation, you just 
refuse to use it... likely because you're too stoooopid to figure it 
out. LOL

Fag. LOL
Idiot. LOL
Moron. LOL
Tranny. LOL
Libtard. LOL
Crackhead. LOL
GableTard. LOL
DildoRider. LOL
Bad Musician. LOL
Stick Figure. LOL
Terrible Liar. LOL
Sinewave Spammer. LOL
Mathematical Moron. LOL
Outerfilthing Stalker. LOL
Talentless FrothMonkey. LOL
Klimate Katastrophe Kook. LOL
Defeated Tearful Spankard. LOL
Waster Of Time To Save $10. LOL
Worst Maker Of Sinewaves In The History Of Usenet. LOL

-- 

Robert Michael Wolfe the Pittsburgh Pied Piper Of Penis (aka
DildoRider, aka Teh Mop Jockey)
5907 Stanton Ave.
Pittsburgh, PA
(412) 853-6395
(412) 799-0532
(412) 665-8289
(412) 404-8757

DildoRider admits he's stoooopid:
MID: <c65504c436778934b3e8a0fb022b7618@dizum.com>
=================================================
>> it appears I've kicked your ass so hard it's
>> damaged your brain, DildoRider.

> then it appears that you like shooting fish in
> barrels, intellectually lazy fuckhead that you are.

Well, you've just admitted that intellectually kicking your ass is
akin to shooting fish in a barrel... IOW, you've admitted that you're
stoooopid. No un-ringing that bell.

<snicker>
=================================================

DildoRider admits he's "really stupid" (his words). LOL
MID: <8a9faed11123abfaa1257fb33fb0c082@dizum.com>
=================================================
> so what you're saying is that your targets for attack
> have to be really stupid or else you can't manage?
=================================================

DildoRider admits much more about himself:
MID: <36c6802852caf4f712515dedb738e450@dizum.com>
=================================================
"absolutely and completely retarded, insane, gay, ugly, smelly,
toothless, dirt-poor, incontinent and possibly homeless"
=================================================

This is a libtard's method of "winning", for fuck sake.

150 IQ? LOL

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#554029

On 17/02/2016 12:30 PM, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote:

> It'd have a periodicity of 4,444,525,800. M<ushroom cloud>

*headdesk*

Unbelievable. Ol' ko0ky here can calculate an LCM accurately but mixes 
up his periods with his frequencies. Some sort of focal brain lesion?

-- 
"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain
the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy." ~David Brooks
"I get fooled all the time by the constant hosiery parade
in here."                                                     ~Checkmate

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#554040

In article <na2mdv$h6v$3@gioia.aioe.org>, kkensington01@gmail.invalid 
says...


> 
> On 17/02/2016 12:30 PM, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote:
> 
> > It'd have a periodicity of 4,444,525,800. M<ushroom cloud>
> 
> *headdesk*
> 
> Unbelievable. Ol' ko0ky here can calculate an LCM accurately but mixes 
> up his periods with his frequencies. Some sort of focal brain lesion?

It would appear that Fakey has frequent periods like a little bitch boy.  
HTH.

-- 

Checkmate, AUK DoW #1, new FNVW of AUK, and Fakey's master
AUK Hammer of Thor award, Feb. 2012 (Pre-Burnore)
Destroyer of the AUK Ko0k Vote  (Post-Burnore)
Originator of the "Dance for me" (tm) lame
Copyright © 2016 
all rights reserved 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#554152

Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>

Ko0O0oki kensi the LunkHeaded LibTard, in
<news:na2mdv$h6v$3@gioia.aioe.org> did thusly jump head first into the
wood chipper again:

> On 17/02/2016 12:30 PM, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler
> Emeritus wrote:

>> It'd have a periodicity of 4,444,525,800. Moron. Do you even know how
>> to calculate the periodicity of those sinewaves after vector summing
>> their Fourier transformed phasors? I guess not, if you had to ask. LOL

> *headdesk*
> 
> Unbelievable. Ol' ko0ky here can calculate an LCM accurately but mixes 
> up his periods with his frequencies. Some sort of focal brain lesion?

And just where did I do that, you moronic halfwit? Or do you not
realize that the periodicity of a sinewave in cycles per second and
graphed in seconds would have a periodicity denoted in *seconds*
because the resultant frequency is the reciprocal of the LCM of the
periodicity, you math challenged idiotic goof?

IOW, you know that after one period of each sinewave, each sinewave
will repeat. In order for the resultant sinewave to repeat, all six of
the tributary sinewave's periods must repeat. This only happens after
an integer number of periods for each of the sinewaves, which
corresponds to the LCM of the tributary sinewave's periods.

But then, you're that math challenged moron who got spanked hard, as
outlined in my .sig, so your confusion is understandable.

SPNAK!

-- 

Kensi the moron wrote:
================================
The sphere's Gaussian curvature is 1/r^2, and its area is 4*pi*r^2, so
the curvature is 4*pi
================================

Kensi the moron said the Gaussian curvature = 1 / r^2 *and* the
Gaussian curvature = 4 * pi.

Therefore, 1 / r^2 = 4 * pi
Therefore, r = 0.28209479176

Kensi the moron says every sphere in the entire universe has a radius
of 0.28209479176. Of course, being a moron, kensi didn't specify the
units.

The moron also said the Gaussian curvature of a sphere is dependent
upon that sphere's radius. Wholly incorrect.

Kensi the moron was corrected:
================================
Did... did you just say "the Gaussian curvature = 1/r^2" *and* "the
Gaussian curvature = 4*pi" therefore "1/r^2 = 4*pi"? Now you
backpedal, LunkHead.

You mean the Gaussian curvature = 1/r^2 * (4*pi*r^2) therefore =
(4*pi), and therefore the Gaussian curvature of a sphere is
independent of r due to its symmetry, thereby proving your original
"The sphere's Gaussian curvature is 1/r^2" blather *wrong*?
================================

But Kensi the moron persists in insisting that what he wrote isn't
fucked up, and that the Gaussian curvature of a sphere *does* depend
upon its radius, because he doesn't understand the equations he's
trying to use, he doesn't know the difference between 'constant
curvature' and 'Gaussian curvature', he doesn't know what an integral
is, and he's a halfwit who can't figure out even basic geometry
problems.

Now remember, this is the same moron who k'lames he's an
astrophysicist... yet he's stated that the Riemann curvature tensor
concept being the central mathematical tool in the theory of general
relativity and the modern theory of gravity, and the curvature of
space-time being described by the geodesic deviation equation, is
"science fiction" and "a howler".

In addition, the moron k'lamed that 4-D Minkowski space-time was
mostly positive Gaussian curvature, with only small areas of negative
Gaussian curvature, which proves the moron has no idea of the effects
of mass or magnetism upon the 4-D Minkowski space-time manifold.

He has k'lamed that the Gaussian curvature of the universe is
predominantly positive, which means Lunkhead believes that massive
objects such as planets, stars and black holes ride *above* the
tangential plane of the 4-D Minkowski space-time manifold, thereby
making the planes of principal curvature positive Gaussian curvature,
and thus causing gravity to *repel*.

Lunkhead the moron has k'lamed that magnetism has "*no* effect" upon
the 4-D Minkowski space-time manifold, then backpedaled and said there
was a "small amount of positive curvature due to the energy density in
the field", thereby proving he doesn't know how magnetism affects the
4-D Minkowski space-time manifold, and denies the existence of
magnetic attraction.

Thus, Kensi the moron has described a universe in which planets could
not maintain their orbits, a universe in which magnets could not work,
and therefore a universe which could not exist.

Kensi is the same moron who k'lames that snow at a colder temperature
than the surrounding atmosphere is somehow violating the First and
Second Laws of Thermodynamics and giving off "blackbody radiation".

Kensi is the same moron who k'lames that snow gives off "blackbody
radiation" at wavelengths that would put the temperature of the snow
at 489 F.

Kensi is the same moron who first denied the existence of the
~11-micron infrared atmospheric window, then backpedaled and k'lamed
that snow emitted outside that ~11-micron window, and was proven
wrong. Then the spankard moron tried to use the backpedal of
"blackbody radiation" being at a different wavelength than spectral
emission, yet again demonstrating that the moron has no clue how
spectral absorption and emission works.

Kensi is the same moron who denies the NASA SABER study proving that
CO2 is a global *cooling* gas _because_ of the ~11-micron infrared
atmospheric window.

The reality exposed by the NASA SABER study also proves the Klimate
Katastrophe Kook Anthropogenic Global Warming k'lame of CO2 being a
global warming gas is a fairy tale that violates the First and Second
Laws of Thermodynamics, thus destroying CO2-induced AGW, yet this same
moron continues to cling to his delusions.

Kensi is the same moron who continues to cling to his delusion that
global warming causes more intense hurricanes, despite three
peer-reviewed studies proving the exact opposite.

Kensi is not an astrophysicist, he's far too stupid to be. He's just a
slumpy dumpy frumpy lumpy loser trying to pretend that he's
intelligent... and failing badly.

That would be because Kensi is a moron with an underpowered brain that
struggles (and fails) to understand reality.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#553803

On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 06:17:18 +0100 (CET), Friendly Neighborhood Vote
Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:

> since the 18th century

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 5 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web