Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #553766 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-02-17 06:17 +0100 |
| Last post | 2016-02-17 02:57 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 99 — 9 participants |
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.
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 2 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 Next page →
| From | Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-20 12:38 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <r4ghcb1c51u7pp8qar1sv1rofhgj2v46g7@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #554999 |
On Sat, 20 Feb 2016 11:00:06 -0800, "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> wrote: >In article <o3ahcblg4ki1uuec4d17252catbd65aflr@4ax.com>, >skeet@invalid.invalid says... > > >> >> On Sat, 20 Feb 2016 09:51:13 -0800, "Checkmate, DoW #1" >> <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> wrote: >> >> >In article <tgvgcbpvk9nt9n1li5e4c8po3nlsdss45o@4ax.com>, >> >bender@the.future says... >> > >> > >> >> "I was all wrong"... is it that hard to say? >> > >> >There's that quagmire again. All I heard Fakey say, was "Giggity!" >> >> >> quagmire, wasn't he on king of the hill? > >No, he missed that part, but worked in Family Guy. Shows you how much I watch.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-20 20:05 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <d5311a006365b615aca2caa22e06ce46@dizum.com> |
| In reply to | #554913 |
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker> Bite My Shiny Metal Ass, in <news:tgvgcbpvk9nt9n1li5e4c8po3nlsdss45o@4ax.com> did thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again: > Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus > <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote: >> Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker> >> >> Bite My Shiny Metal Ass, in >> <news:ig3ccbduvp9f3h7u93n2snkpleasa3e2ka@4ax.com> did thusly jump head >> first into the wood chipper again: >>>>> 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 wrote: >>>> On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 01:20:45 -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.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 >>> Assuming Vp means peak voltage, if this is a 120 volt >>> system, Vp would be 120*sqrt(2), about 170 volts. >>> 120 volts is the RMS voltage, or effective voltage. >>> >>> snip >> Whoopsie, DildoRider forgot RMS voltage. LOL > Whoops, Fakey doesn't know the diff between RMS, peak, and > peak-to-peak. Whoops, Shiny Metal Brain didn't know that Fourier transforms are used in manipulating multiple sinewaves, or that a sinewave is a Fourier decomposition of a circle, or that superposition is the same as wave interference, or that superposition equally applies to traveling waves and standing waves, or that the LCM of the six tributary sinewaves wasn't 4.4 GHz because he doesn't understand what periodicity of a resultant sinewave derives from, or that differential equations can be used in calculating sinewaves because he doesn't understand the underlying mechanics of sine and cosine. RMS = root mean square, the square root of the arithmetic mean of the squares of a set of numbers Vp-p = Vp * 2 >> Euler's formula describes how a circle transforms to a sinewave, using >> phasors. > No, it actually doesn't, since a circle in the x-y plane can > be described with real numbers. Nothing imaginary about it. <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sine_wave> <https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a5/ComplexSinInATimeAxe.gif/400px-ComplexSinInATimeAxe.gif> Z=x+iy SPNAK! >> Phasor math turns into the imaginary number math which is reviewed >> below. >> >> Phasor A can be multiplied by phasor B >> Phasor A can be divided by phasor B >> Phasor A can be added to phasor B > That's fine, except you don't know how to do any of that. I just graphed 3-phase 170 volt peak, showing 120.208 volt RMS L-N and 208.207 L-L. Moron. LOL >>> See Fakey, the fourier series gives you a (generally) >>> infinite series summation of all the pure (sine & cosine) >>> frequencies in a given waveform. This gives you the >>> frequency-domain equivalent of a time-domain signal. >>> Understand?... oh, never mind. >> The Euler equation is on that web page, what about that don't you >> understand? What about "a sinewave is a Fourier decomposition of a >> circle" don't you understand? > If you want to think that, go ahead, show us a fourier > transform of a circle. Already posted, and you avoided it, so I'll post it again: <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 SPNAK! >>> You already know the frequency components of 3 phase systems >>> -- it's all 60 hz! You don't need fourier analysis to do >>> that. What a loony maroon! >> I wasn't using Fourier analysis, > Obviously, since you don't know how. Obviously I do, given that I just proved it by graphing 3-phase 170 volt peak, showing 120.208 volt RMS L-N and 208.207 L-L. Moron. LOL Oh, Shiny Metal Brain didn't know the Euler equation we're using is a subset of what are better known as the Euler-Fourier Formulas. LOL! SPNAK! >>> You already know the frequency components of your composite >>> 6-frequency sinusoids. Again, you don't need fourier >>> analysis to do that. What a loony maroon! >> But we don't know the frequency of the resultant, > YOU don't know. Kensi and everyone else do. > > It has a period if 1 sec. The frequency of the composite > sum is 1 hz. WTF? Shiny Metal Brain k'lames he can add: A sinewave of 120 Hz frequency and 150 volt amplitude A sinewave of 33 Hz frequency and 20.25 volt amplitude A sinewave of 150 Hz frequency and 1400 volt amplitude A sinewave of 5013 Hz frequency and 20 volt amplitude A sinewave of 13 Hz and 600 volt amplitude A sinewave of 1209 Hz and 360 volt amplitude and magically come up with a resultant of 1 Hz! Bwahahahaaa! >> I didn't see you haranguing DildoRider when he *demonstrated* for >> everyone that his kooky sinewave subtraction equation didn't work by >> graphing the result and even being courteous enough to provide a >> horizontal line on the graph at 2550.25 volts, thereby proving his >> equation wasn't correct. Didn't even come close. > When he was wrong, he corrected himself. WHen you are > wrong, you foam, name-call, produce reams of screed, and dig > yourself deeper. That's why i filtered your posts in the > past. Until you proclaimed yourself an expert on something > you obviously don't understand. Except when I was wrong that one time, I corrected myself. LOL The rest of your blather is fanfic. > Everyone (including you) knows the composite waveform never > reaches 2550v. The fact that you can't specify the time > when that happens, proves you're in damage-control mode. > > "I was all wrong"... is it that hard to say? I said it was a complex periodic resultant, and DildoRider would have to graph it to see how it looked. I also said the addition of the voltages of the tributaries acted as a quick acid test to see if DildoRider's kooky sinewave subtraction equation worked... it didn't, it doesn't. Even with the latest round, where I'm coming up with the correct 120.208 volt L-N RMS of 170 volt peak, with 208.207 volt L-L voltages, DildoRider's kooky equation won't even graph, and comes up with 150.283974501 volts for all values of x... a flat line. I don't see you haranguing him, despite his having spammed bad sinewave after bad sinewave and insisting for the past *month* that his kooky sinewave subtraction equation worked. 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]
| From | Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-20 12:38 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <36ghcbla1eofimcpc59sh3r029avje0te7@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #555003 |
On Sat, 20 Feb 2016 20:05:40 +0100 (CET), Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote: >Already posted, and you avoided it, so I'll post it again: Did pigs just fly?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe, DoW #2) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-20 22:05 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <1mixuo0.4p9jva1tcorf3N%snipeco.2@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #555027 |
Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> wrote: > On Sat, 20 Feb 2016 20:05:40 +0100 (CET), Friendly Neighborhood Vote > Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote: > > >Already posted, and you avoided it, so I'll post it again: > > > Did pigs just fly? > PorkAir Flight 123, you are cleared for takeoff. -- ^Ï^. Sn!pe, DoW #2 <snipeco.1@gmail.com> PTB Siri Seal of Disavowal #007-007 (license to killfile) AUK DoW #2, Fuckhead #3 AUK Ministry of Circle Jerks, Aug. 2015 (award now deprecated) 0 % My pet rock Gordon just is.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-21 14:23 +0800 |
| Message-ID | <6kgicbpv8tsn8ragngeeuv7vrrm6fi8p3g@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #555003 |
Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote: > Bite My Shiny Metal Ass, in > > Whoops, Fakey doesn't know the diff between RMS, peak, and > > peak-to-peak. > > Whoops, Shiny Metal Brain didn't know that Fourier transforms are used > in manipulating multiple sinewaves, I told you what a fourier transform used for. It can also be used for solving differential equations, along with its more general Laplace forebear. I can't help that you didn't understand. [For make-up extra credit, explain the difference between the fourier & the laplace transforms.] > or that a sinewave is a Fourier > decomposition of a circle, It's not. You can't show us a fourier transform of a circle. Your deliberate ignorance is funny. > or that superposition is the same as wave > interference, or that superposition equally applies to traveling waves Here are examples of interference: http://www.citycollegiate.com/interference1.htm Interference is broader than simple addition and subtraction, but ok, i will grant you that superposition of same-frequency waveforms can be called interference (tho i wouldn't). Note the statement, "CONDITIONS FOR INTERFERENCE The two sources of light should emit continuous waves of same wavelength and same time period i.e. the source should have phase coherence. so your 6-frequency voltages are not "interfering". > and standing waves, or that the LCM of the six tributary sinewaves > wasn't 4.4 GHz because he doesn't understand what periodicity of a > resultant sinewave derives from, Uh... Fakey? YOU were the one who latched onto the 4444000000-something number (which Kensi had to calculate for you) as meaning something. It's the least common multiple of your 6 frequencies; in order to be a multiple it has to be in hz. That would be ~4.4whatever Ghz. I realize you don't understand the difference between frequency and period. Whatever you think the number means is wrong. > or that differential equations can be > used in calculating sinewaves Can't understand what this means. <snip elementary googled explanatin of RMS & peak> > >> Euler's formula describes how a circle transforms to a sinewave, using > >> phasors. > > > No, it actually doesn't, since a circle in the x-y plane can > > be described with real numbers. Nothing imaginary about it. > > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sine_wave> > <https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a5/ComplexSinInATimeAxe.gif/400px-ComplexSinInATimeAxe.gif> > Z=x+iy So? Sine & cosine were known to ancients. Euler lived in the 1700s. You are trying to claim sine is derived from euler's theorem? Not. It's simple, REAL geometry. Can you not see the euler proved his theorem using sine & cosine? SPNAK! > >> Phasor math turns into the imaginary number math which is reviewed > >> below. > >> > >> Phasor A can be multiplied by phasor B > >> Phasor A can be divided by phasor B > >> Phasor A can be added to phasor B > > > That's fine, except you don't know how to do any of that. > > I just graphed 3-phase 170 volt peak, showing 120.208 volt RMS L-N and > 208.207 L-L. Moron. LOL Yeah. Wrong... at least you admitted it. So, what complex numbers did you use? How do you fourier-xform a circle? What time do the 6 voltages sum to 2550v. ? Run, fakey, run! LOL. > >>> See Fakey, the fourier series gives you a (generally) > >>> infinite series summation of all the pure (sine & cosine) > >>> frequencies in a given waveform. This gives you the > >>> frequency-domain equivalent of a time-domain signal. > >>> Understand?... oh, never mind. > > >> The Euler equation is on that web page, what about that don't you > >> understand? What about "a sinewave is a Fourier decomposition of a > >> circle" don't you understand? > > > If you want to think that, go ahead, show us a fourier > > transform of a circle. > > Already posted, and you avoided it, so I'll post it again: > > <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 Nope. That's a simple geometric visualization of sine. What, exactly, is fourier-transformed? Do you know what a fourier transform of a periodic signal looks like? Here's an example. <http://www.cst.uwaterloo.ca/courses/ece318/ECE318_NOTES_P27_P36.pdf> Fig 10(a) shows a cycle of the periodic signal. Fig 10(b) shows multiple cycles. Fig 10(c) shows the Fourier transform. Note that the transformed representation shows DISCRETE FREQUENCIES. Grok that? The fourier transform of a periodic signal is a set of DISCRETE FREQUENCIES. (Since it's periodic, you can simplify it and just use the fourier series, not the full-blown transform.) It's a FREQUENCY-DOMAIN representation of the signal, not a time-domain one. Bleat away: ________________ > SPNAK! yep. > > >>> You already know the frequency components of 3 phase systems > >>> -- it's all 60 hz! You don't need fourier analysis to do > >>> that. What a loony maroon! > > >> I wasn't using Fourier analysis, > > > Obviously, since you don't know how. > > Obviously I do, given that I just proved it by graphing 3-phase 170 > volt peak, showing 120.208 volt RMS L-N and 208.207 L-L. Moron. LOL There was no fourier analysis in that (wrong) plot. > >>> You already know the frequency components of your composite > >>> 6-frequency sinusoids. Again, you don't need fourier > >>> analysis to do that. What a loony maroon! > > >> But we don't know the frequency of the resultant, > > > YOU don't know. Kensi and everyone else do. > > > > It has a period if 1 sec. The frequency of the composite > > sum is 1 hz. > > WTF? Shiny Metal Brain k'lames he can add: > A sinewave of 120 Hz frequency and 150 volt amplitude > A sinewave of 33 Hz frequency and 20.25 volt amplitude > A sinewave of 150 Hz frequency and 1400 volt amplitude > A sinewave of 5013 Hz frequency and 20 volt amplitude > A sinewave of 13 Hz and 600 volt amplitude > A sinewave of 1209 Hz and 360 volt amplitude > > and magically come up with a resultant of 1 Hz! Correct. The composite sum has a frequency of 1 hz. It's not magic, just takes a little arithmetic. > > Everyone (including you) knows the composite waveform never > > reaches 2550v. The fact that you can't specify the time > > when that happens, proves you're in damage-control mode. > > > > "I was all wrong"... is it that hard to say? > > I said it was a complex periodic resultant, and DildoRider would have Ok, where's the imaginary part of the "complex periodic resultant"? > to graph it to see how it looked. Your Dogwhistle did that. But you couldn't. > I also said the addition of the > voltages of the tributaries acted as a quick acid test to see if > DildoRider's kooky sinewave subtraction equation worked... it didn't, > it doesn't. You were also wrong again. Don't you get tired of that? > Even with the latest round, where I'm coming up with the correct > 120.208 volt L-N RMS of 170 volt peak, with 208.207 volt L-L voltages, > DildoRider's kooky equation won't even graph, and comes up with > 150.283974501 volts for all values of x... a flat line. I didn't see any problem with it. Please explain.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-22 06:45 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <80d61a6928a9e7df316c519affcf3838@dizum.com> |
| In reply to | #555186 |
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker> Bite My Shiny Metal Ass, in <news:6kgicbpv8tsn8ragngeeuv7vrrm6fi8p3g@4ax.com> did thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again: > Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus > <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote: >> Bite My Shiny Metal Ass, in >>> Whoops, Fakey doesn't know the diff between RMS, peak, and >>> peak-to-peak. >> Whoops, Shiny Metal Brain didn't know that Fourier transforms are used >> in manipulating multiple sinewaves, > I told you what a fourier transform used for. It can also > be used for solving differential equations, along with its > more general Laplace forebear. I can't help that you didn't > understand. And I told you that differential equations can be used for summing sinewaves. Then I proved it. I can't help that you didn't understand. > [For make-up extra credit, explain the difference between > the fourier & the laplace transforms.] A Fourier transform can be thought of as analogous to a spreadsheet, whereas a Laplace transform is more like a database. Whereas the Fourier transform only evaluates the imaginary axis of a complex frequency and disregards the real part, a Laplace transform evaluates both. So say you have a 3-D graph. Along the x axis is the imaginary, along the y axis is the real, along the z axis is the amplitude. A Fourier transform only works with data along the x and z axis, whereas the Laplace works with data along all three. So the Fourier can be thought of as one "slice" of a Laplace. So when the selection = 0, using a Laplace makes no sense, since you're effectively using a Fourier. Thus, a Laplace is an n-dimensional Fourier, where n can be any number of dimensions. It essentially vectorizes a Fourier to simplify the calculations. <https://see.stanford.edu/materials/lsoftaee261/chap8.pdf> >> or that a sinewave is a Fourier decomposition of a circle, > It's not. You can't show us a fourier transform of a > circle. Your deliberate ignorance is funny. Already posted (twice), and you avoided it (twice), so I'll post it again: <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/SMRGcQY.png> SPNAK! >> or that superposition is the same as wave >> interference, or that superposition equally applies to traveling waves > Here are examples of interference: > > http://www.citycollegiate.com/interference1.htm > > Interference is broader than simple addition and > subtraction, but ok, i will grant you that superposition of > same-frequency waveforms can be called interference (tho i > wouldn't). > > Note the statement, > "CONDITIONS FOR INTERFERENCE > The two sources of light should emit continuous waves > of same wavelength and same time period i.e. the > source should have phase coherence. > > so your 6-frequency voltages are not "interfering". Sure they are. All waves interfere, constructively and destructively, via superposition. <http://www.phys.uconn.edu/~gibson/Notes/Section5_2/Sec5_2.htm> "On the other hand, completely independent of the geometry, there is a property of waves called superposition that can lead to constructive or destructive interference." Aren't you the *moron* who insisted that constructive / destructive interference and superposition were completely different things, then backpedaled and said interference only happened with traveling waves because you didn't realize wave interference occurs regardless of whether a wave is standing or traveling, and in fact the constructive interference of two opposite-direction traveling waves results in a standing wave (in fact, that's how a resonator works)? Yeah... yeah you are. SPNAK! >> and standing waves, or that the LCM of the six tributary sinewaves >> wasn't 4.4 GHz because he doesn't understand what periodicity of a >> resultant sinewave derives from, > Uh... Fakey? YOU were the one who latched onto the > 4444000000-something number (which Kensi had to calculate > for you) as meaning something. It's the least common > multiple of your 6 frequencies; in order to be a multiple it > has to be in hz. That would be ~4.4whatever Ghz. LunkHead didn't have to calculate it for me, you moron. It's the number of complete tributary wave patterns that would have to complete in order for one full resultant wave pattern to complete. > I realize you don't understand the difference between > frequency and period. Whatever you think the number means > is wrong. You're projecting because you're a moron who doesn't know the difference between frequency and period. And I'll prove that contention below. Try not to cry too much. LOL The period of a sinusoid is the amount of *time* it takes for a sinusoid to repeat itself. If you are summing the sinusoids, then this happens the first time that a whole number of each tributary sinusoid ends at the same time axis, and at the same phase angle as when each tributary sinusoid started. Aren't you the *moron* who k'lamed the period was measured in Hz, and that the resultant would be 4.4 GHz? Yeah... yeah you are. Aren't you the *moron* who k'lamed the "frequency of the composite sum is 1 hz."? Yeah... yeah, you are. Aren't you the *moron* who doesn't understand that the period is the inverse of the frequency? Yeah... yeah you are. So you're the *moron* who believes that 4,400,000,000 = 1. SPNAK! >> or that differential equations can be used in calculating sinewaves > Can't understand what this means. I can't help that you didn't understand. > <snip elementary googled explanatin of RMS & peak> Translation: "<snip of everything that proves me *wrong*>" LOL >>>> Euler's formula describes how a circle transforms to a sinewave, using >>>> phasors. >>> No, it actually doesn't, since a circle in the x-y plane can >>> be described with real numbers. Nothing imaginary about it. >> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sine_wave> >> <https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a5/ComplexSinInATimeAxe.gif/400px-ComplexSinInATimeAxe.gif> >> Z=x+iy > So? Sine & cosine were known to ancients. Euler lived in > the 1700s. You are trying to claim sine is derived from > euler's theorem? Not. It's simple, REAL geometry. You fecking nong, the equation used is known as the Euler Formula, a subset of the Euler-Fourier Formulas. Good Christ, you get any dumber and they're going to have to snake a feeding tube down your nose and declare you braindead. LOL > Can you not see the euler proved his theorem using sine & > cosine? Nicely backpedaled... are you now admitting that a circle transforms to a sinewave? > SP<SMACKAKOOK!> SPNAK! >>>> Phasor math turns into the imaginary number math which is reviewed >>>> below. >>>> >>>> Phasor A can be multiplied by phasor B >>>> Phasor A can be divided by phasor B >>>> Phasor A can be added to phasor B >>> That's fine, except you don't know how to do any of that. >> I just graphed 3-phase 170 volt peak, showing 120.208 volt RMS L-N and >> 208.207 L-L. Moron. LOL > Yeah. Wrong... at least you admitted it. <http://i.imgur.com/SMRGcQY.png> I graphed it absolutely *right*. Showing the Euler sinewave summation equation plotting 170 volt peak hot legs translating via superposition into 120.208 volt RMS L-N and 208.207 volt RMS L-L, as is evidenced in 120/208 wye electrical service, the most ubiquitous commercial electrical service. The 170 volt peak sinewaves are the tributaries. The 120.208 volt RMS L-N sinewaves are the first resultants. The 208.207 volt RMS L-L sinewaves are the second resultants derived from the first resultants. SPNAK! > So, what complex numbers did you use? Translation: "I *still* don't know how to use the Euler sinewave summation equation, so I ask stoooopid questions like "So, what complex numbers did you use?"." SPNAK! > How do you fourier-xform a circle? I've posted the equation in scientific notation, all you have to do is convert it back to decimal notation and you'll have your answer. > What time do the 6 voltages sum to 2550v. ? I said I was using the sum of the 6 voltages as a quick acid test to determine if DildoRider's kooky sinewave subtraction equation was even in the ballpark of a correct answer. It wasn't. I also said he'd have to graph it correctly using the Euler sinewave summation equation to determine the peak voltage. Moron. > Run, fakey, run! LOL. Backpedal, Shiny Tinfoil Brain, backpedal! LOL You haven't been right about much, which is why you're so butthurt now. LOL >>>>> See Fakey, the fourier series gives you a (generally) >>>>> infinite series summation of all the pure (sine & cosine) >>>>> frequencies in a given waveform. This gives you the >>>>> frequency-domain equivalent of a time-domain signal. >>>>> Understand?... oh, never mind. >>>> The Euler equation is on that web page, what about that don't you >>>> understand? What about "a sinewave is a Fourier decomposition of a >>>> circle" don't you understand? >>> If you want to think that, go ahead, show us a fourier >>> transform of a circle. >> Already posted, and you avoided it, so I'll post it again: >> >> <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 > Nope. WTF? Are you really *that* fucking stoooopid? <http://betterexplained.com/articles/an-interactive-guide-to-the-fourier-transform/> an-interactive-guide-to-the-fourier-transform SPNAK! > That's a simple geometric visualization of sine. Yeah, you really _are_ *that* fucking stoooopid. LOL <https://gist.github.com/kazad/8bb682da198db597558c> The code used to create the interactive widget on the website above to Fourier transform a circle to a sinewave. And that code is based upon this Javascript web page, Fourier transforming a circle to a sinewave: <http://treeblurb.com/dev_math/sin_canv00.html> SPNAK! > What, exactly, is fourier-transformed? Do you know what a > fourier transform of a periodic signal looks like? Nicely conflated, moron. We're not talking about a Fourier transform of a periodic signal (not withstanding the fact that a circle *is* a "periodic signal"), we're discussing the *fact* that a sinewave is a Fourier decomposition of a circle. A circle translates into a sinewave because a full rotation is 2*pi radians, because a circle's circumference is 2*pi*radius. So a sinewave's frequency (the time it takes to complete one full sine, or one full "rotation" of 2*pi radians) is the same as RPMs, whereas the amplitude of the sinewave is analogous to the radius of the circle. > Here's an example. > <http://www.cst.uwaterloo.ca/courses/ece318/ECE318_NOTES_P27_P36.pdf> > > Fig 10(a) shows a cycle of the periodic signal. > Fig 10(b) shows multiple cycles. > Fig 10(c) shows the Fourier transform. Note that the > transformed representation shows DISCRETE FREQUENCIES. > > Grok that? The fourier transform of a periodic signal is a > set of DISCRETE FREQUENCIES. (Since it's periodic, you can > simplify it and just use the fourier series, not the > full-blown transform.) It's a FREQUENCY-DOMAIN > representation of the signal, not a time-domain one. > > Bleat away: ________________ What's your conflationary backpedaling bleating got to do with the *fact* that a sinewave is a Fourier (technically, using the Euler-Fourier Formula) transform of a circle? >> SPNAK! > yep. Indeed. <snicker> >>>>> You already know the frequency components of 3 phase systems >>>>> -- it's all 60 hz! You don't need fourier analysis to do >>>>> that. What a loony maroon! >>>> I wasn't using Fourier analysis, >>> Obviously, since you don't know how. >> Obviously I do, given that I just proved it by graphing 3-phase 170 >> volt peak, showing 120.208 volt RMS L-N and 208.207 L-L. Moron. LOL > There was no fourier analysis in that (wrong) plot. The Euler-Fourier Formula, otherwise known as the Euler Formula, was used in that entirely correct plot. And you have the equation in scientific notation, so all you have to do in order to prove yourself *wrong* (again) is to change that scientific notation to decimal notation to see the equation, and plot it yourself. <http://i.imgur.com/SMRGcQY.png> Showing the Euler sinewave summation equation plotting 170 volt peak hot legs translating into 120.208 volt RMS L-N and 208.207 volt RMS L-L, as is evidenced in 120/208 wye electrical service, the most ubiquitous commercial electrical service. SPNAK! >>>> But we don't know the frequency of the resultant, >>> YOU don't know. Kensi and everyone else do. >>> >>> It has a period if 1 sec. The frequency of the composite >>> sum is 1 hz. >> WTF? Shiny Metal Brain k'lames he can add: >> A sinewave of 120 Hz frequency and 150 volt amplitude >> A sinewave of 33 Hz frequency and 20.25 volt amplitude >> A sinewave of 150 Hz frequency and 1400 volt amplitude >> A sinewave of 5013 Hz frequency and 20 volt amplitude >> A sinewave of 13 Hz and 600 volt amplitude >> A sinewave of 1209 Hz and 360 volt amplitude >> >> and magically come up with a resultant of 1 Hz! > Correct. The composite sum has a frequency of 1 hz. > It's not magic, just takes a little arithmetic. And yet you also k'lame the period is 4.4 GHz (period is denoted via *time*, not frequency)... and we've already discussed the fact that this leads to you tacitly admitting you believe 1 = 4,400,000,000. That, or you'll be forced to admit you don't know the difference between period and frequency. SPNAK! >>> Everyone (including you) knows the composite waveform never >>> reaches 2550v. The fact that you can't specify the time >>> when that happens, proves you're in damage-control mode. >>> >>> "I was all wrong"... is it that hard to say? >> I said it was a complex periodic resultant, and DildoRider would have > Ok, where's the imaginary part of the "complex periodic > resultant"? Change the scientific notation to decimal notation and see for yourself... unless you don't know how to do that. LOL And why would we be doing any operations on the resultants except to graph them? We're operating on the tributaries. Are you confused? LOL SPNAK! >> to graph it to see how it looked. > Your Dogwhistle did that. But you couldn't. <http://i.imgur.com/SMRGcQY.png> Showing the Euler sinewave summation equation plotting 170 volt peak hot legs translating via superposition into 120.208 volt RMS L-N and 208.207 volt RMS L-L, as is evidenced in 120/208 wye electrical service, the most ubiquitous commercial electrical service. DildoRider's result from his kooky sinewave subtraction equation won't even graph, it just gives a result of 150.283974501 volts for all values of t, which is *wrong*. SPNAK! >> I also said the addition of the voltages of the tributaries acted as >> a quick acid test to see if DildoRider's kooky sinewave subtraction >> equation worked... it didn't, it doesn't. > You were also wrong again. Don't you get tired of that? I proved DildoRider's kooky sinewave subtraction equation didn't work. And I posted a wholly correct graph of 170 volt peak hot legs translating via superposition into 120.208 volt RMS L-N and 208.207 volt RMS L-L, as is evidenced in 120/208 wye electrical service, the most ubiquitous commercial electrical service. So you're wrong. Again. Don't you get tired of that? LOL >> Even with the latest round, where I'm coming up with the correct >> 120.208 volt L-N RMS of 170 volt peak, with 208.207 volt L-L voltages, >> DildoRider's kooky equation won't even graph, and comes up with >> 150.283974501 volts for all values of x... a flat line. > I didn't see any problem with it. Please explain. Except for the fact that it won't graph at all, and that it returns a result of 150.283974501 volts for all values of t, which is *wrong*. But then, you're the moron who doesn't understand much, and demonstrated that amply above. 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]
| From | Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-22 16:15 +0800 |
| Message-ID | <fpflcb1vvjkfvsa986pq3jhk89l20j8j81@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #555397 |
Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus
<FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:
> Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
>
> Bite My Shiny Metal Ass, in
> <news:6kgicbpv8tsn8ragngeeuv7vrrm6fi8p3g@4ax.com> did thusly jump head
> first into the wood chipper again:
>
> > Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus
> > <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:
>
> >> Bite My Shiny Metal Ass, in
>
> >>> Whoops, Fakey doesn't know the diff between RMS, peak, and
> >>> peak-to-peak.
>
> >> Whoops, Shiny Metal Brain didn't know that Fourier transforms are used
> >> in manipulating multiple sinewaves,
>
> > I told you what a fourier transform used for. It can also
> > be used for solving differential equations, along with its
> > more general Laplace forebear. I can't help that you didn't
> > understand.
>
> And I told you that differential equations can be used for summing
> sinewaves. Then I proved it. I can't help that you didn't understand.
>
> > [For make-up extra credit, explain the difference between
> > the fourier & the laplace transforms.]
>
> A Fourier transform can be thought of as analogous to a spreadsheet,
> whereas a Laplace transform is more like a database. Whereas the
> Fourier transform only evaluates the imaginary axis of a complex
> frequency and disregards the real part, a Laplace transform evaluates
> both.
You googled something that you didn't fully comprehend. You
get partial credit... the Laplace transform variable s (some
older sources use p instead) is
s = sigma (the real part) = j omega (or j*w, imaginary part)
When you FT the time function, you include the whole thing,
real and imaginary. It's the output that contains only jw,
because you're throwing away sigma, whereas the LT retains
sigma.
The answer i was looking for is that jw gives you the forced
(steady state) frequency response, ie the response of a
filter, amp etc. to a steady sinusoidal ac input frequency.
Sigma gives you the TRANSIENT response, generally
exp(sigma*t) where sigma better be negative, otherwise you
have an unstable system (output increases without bounds).
> So say you have a 3-D graph. Along the x axis is the imaginary, along
> the y axis is the real, along the z axis is the amplitude. A Fourier
> transform only works with data along the x and z axis, whereas the
> Laplace works with data along all three. So the Fourier can be thought
> of as one "slice" of a Laplace.
Are you talking about the input, or the output?
The FT input is the time-domain signal f(t). To graph it,
you need a graph showing
x axis = time
z axis = Re{f(t)}
y axis = Im{f(t)}
The FT output, F(w), is similarly
x axis = w, angular frequency (2*pi*f)
z axis = Re{F(w)}
y axis = Im{F(w)}
As i pointed out before, for a continuous, periodic f(t),
F(w) will be composed of discrete frequencies
(non-continuous).
I don't have time to read the rest of your post. Maybe
later, if you are lucky.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-22 20:01 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <ccfc49dc2376305cbd11fe5349cc130b@dizum.com> |
| In reply to | #555426 |
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
Bite My Shiny Metal Ass, in
<news:fpflcb1vvjkfvsa986pq3jhk89l20j8j81@4ax.com> did thusly jump head
first into the wood chipper again:
> Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus
> <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:
>> Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
>>
>> Bite My Shiny Metal Ass, in
>> <news:6kgicbpv8tsn8ragngeeuv7vrrm6fi8p3g@4ax.com> did thusly jump head
>> first into the wood chipper again:
>>> Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus
>>> <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:
>>>> Bite My Shiny Metal Ass, in
>>>>> Whoops, Fakey doesn't know the diff between RMS, peak, and
>>>>> peak-to-peak.
>>>> Whoops, Shiny Metal Brain didn't know that Fourier transforms are used
>>>> in manipulating multiple sinewaves,
>>> I told you what a fourier transform used for. It can also
>>> be used for solving differential equations, along with its
>>> more general Laplace forebear. I can't help that you didn't
>>> understand.
>> And I told you that differential equations can be used for summing
>> sinewaves. Then I proved it. I can't help that you didn't understand.
>>> [For make-up extra credit, explain the difference between
>>> the fourier & the laplace transforms.]
>> A Fourier transform can be thought of as analogous to a spreadsheet,
>> whereas a Laplace transform is more like a database. Whereas the
>> Fourier transform only evaluates the imaginary axis of a complex
>> frequency and disregards the real part, a Laplace transform evaluates
>> both.
> You googled something that you didn't fully comprehend.
Ironic, coming from someone who's demonstrated his lack of
understanding of *so* *much*. 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 superposition
was the same as wave interference; that wave interference works the
same for standing or traveling waves; 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.
<http://i.imgur.com/Em4KS1b.png>
A properly graphed example of 3-phase wye electrical service. The 170
volt peak hot legs are in the first three equations, which results in
the 120.208 volt RMS L-N first-resultants as graphed, which result in
the 208.207 volt RMS L-L second-resultant, only one of which is
graphed.
SPNAK!
<snicker>
> You get partial credit... the Laplace transform variable s (some
> older sources use p instead) is
>
> s = sigma (the real part) = j omega (or j*w, imaginary part)
Gee, that's kinda like what I used via the Euler sinewave summation
equation to properly graph those sinewaves... except in n-dimensions.
Right? LOL
> When you FT the time function, you include the whole thing,
> real and imaginary. It's the output that contains only jw,
> because you're throwing away sigma, whereas the LT retains
> sigma.
>
> The answer i was looking for is that jw gives you the forced
> (steady state) frequency response, ie the response of a
> filter, amp etc. to a steady sinusoidal ac input frequency.
> Sigma gives you the TRANSIENT response, generally
> exp(sigma*t) where sigma better be negative, otherwise you
> have an unstable system (output increases without bounds).
But we're not talking about frequency response, we're talking about
properly graphing a sinewave, which you've demonstrated you lack the
clue to accomplish. LOL
<http://i.imgur.com/Em4KS1b.png>
A properly graphed example of 3-phase wye electrical service. The 170
volt peak hot legs are in the first three equations, which results in
the 120.208 volt RMS L-N first-resultants as graphed, which result in
the 208.207 volt RMS L-L second-resultant, only one of which is
graphed.
SPNAK!
Now you blather out your stupidity again so you can further
demonstrate that you have no clue how the Euler sinewave summation
equation works, moron.
<snicker>
>> So say you have a 3-D graph. Along the x axis is the imaginary, along
>> the y axis is the real, along the z axis is the amplitude. A Fourier
>> transform only works with data along the x and z axis, whereas the
>> Laplace works with data along all three. So the Fourier can be thought
>> of as one "slice" of a Laplace.
> Are you talking about the input, or the output?
Translation:
"I have no idea how math actually works, so I ask stoooopid questions
like "Are you talking about the input, or the output?". LOL!
> The FT input is the time-domain signal f(t). To graph it,
> you need a graph showing
> x axis = time
> z axis = Re{f(t)}
> y axis = Im{f(t)}
>
> The FT output, F(w), is similarly
> x axis = w, angular frequency (2*pi*f)
> z axis = Re{F(w)}
> y axis = Im{F(w)}
>
> As i pointed out before, for a continuous, periodic f(t),
> F(w) will be composed of discrete frequencies
> (non-continuous).
>
> I don't have time to read the rest of your post. Maybe
> later, if you are lucky.
Translation:
"I'm running away from all that SPNAK!age you leveled against me,
because I know I'm *wrong*, and I'm at the limits of my ability to
Google up more diversionary blather to distract people away from the
fact that I keep demonstrating that I'm a 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 superposition
was the same as wave interference; that wave interference works the
same for standing or traveling waves; 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.
<http://i.imgur.com/Em4KS1b.png>
A properly graphed example of 3-phase wye electrical service. The 170
volt peak hot legs are in the first three equations, which results in
the 120.208 volt RMS L-N first-resultants as graphed, which result in
the 208.207 volt RMS L-L second-resultant, only one of which is
graphed.
SPNAK!
<snicker>
--
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]
| From | Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-23 03:42 +0800 |
| Message-ID | <rdomcb169mq5csebugqrbj9ganol8je5s1@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #555569 |
Fakey jumped up & down screaming, "Talk to the elbows! talk to the elbows!", while whining: > 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? 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. > 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! > <http://i.imgur.com/Em4KS1b.png> > > A properly graphed example of 3-phase wye electrical service. The 170 > volt peak hot legs are in the first three equations, which results in > the 120.208 volt RMS L-N first-resultants as graphed, which result in > the 208.207 volt RMS L-L second-resultant, only one of which is > graphed. Silly twat. You graphed sines with 85v RMS and 147v RMS amplitude. Keep trying, sunshine. You'll get it right some day. (Hint: try graphing the formulas over on the left side.) Isn't your ass burning hot cherry-red by now? -- "...a sinewave is a Fourier transformation of a circle." --Fakey
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "\"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> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-22 15:42 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <op.yc844ldytm21m2@benson.localhost> |
| In reply to | #555586 |
On Mon, 22 Feb 2016 14:42:22 -0500, Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> wrote: > Fakey jumped up & down screaming, "Talk to the elbows! talk > to the elbows!", while whining: > > >> 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? > > 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. > >> 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! > >> <http://i.imgur.com/Em4KS1b.png> >> >> A properly graphed example of 3-phase wye electrical service. The 170 >> volt peak hot legs are in the first three equations, which results in >> the 120.208 volt RMS L-N first-resultants as graphed, which result in >> the 208.207 volt RMS L-L second-resultant, only one of which is >> graphed. > > Silly twat. You graphed sines with 85v RMS and 147v RMS > amplitude. Keep trying, sunshine. You'll get it right some > day. > > (Hint: try graphing the formulas over on the left side.) PREDICTION: he is going to have trouble doing that correctly. > Isn't your ass burning hot cherry-red by now? bleaty the spankard must crave punishment and humiliation or something. given, three hot legs carrying 120 degree shifted 60Hz sine waves at +/-120Vac: phase A=sin(2*pi*60*x)*120 phase B=sin((2*pi*60*x+(120*pi)/180))*120 phase C=sin((2*pi*60*x+(240*pi)/180))*120 graphed separately: http://i.imgur.com/KTU4xI1.png potential between two conductors carrying phase A and phase B, respectively: (phase A minus phase B) sin(2*pi*60*x)*120-sin((2*pi*60*x+(120*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))*120,208 http://i.imgur.com/KjpeSZh.png potential between two conductors carrying phase B and phase C, respectively: (phase B minus phase C) 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))*120,208 http://i.imgur.com/ILFlzNw.png 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 i wonder why fakey's graphs are borken? perhaps he's making things more complicated with his furry transformers? i wonder if he'll ever explain why subtraction (not addition) is used to determine voltage potentials? -- "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]
| From | Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-23 07:27 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <8ae01a64e9f97aa0fa45a70bb6524ba9@dizum.com> |
| In reply to | #555616 |
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.yc844ldytm21m2@benson.localhost> did thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again: > 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? 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 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! 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! > i wonder why fakey's graphs are borken? They're not. Yours are. Moron. > perhaps he's making things more complicated with his furry transformers? > i wonder if he'll ever explain why subtraction (not addition) is used > to determine voltage potentials? Perhaps you're a mathematical moron. 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 -- 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]
| From | Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-23 01:27 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <3v5ocb96dcdr1i6f351t55nghg761iodeh@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #555779 |
On Tue, 23 Feb 2016 07:27:46 +0100 (CET), Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote: >Euler sinewave summation equation Fakeys answer to life, no wonder he got it all wrong.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-23 09:55 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <41b9e1ad6cf45443f028d89cf3dcba06@dizum.com> |
| In reply to | #555779 |
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker> Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus, in <news:8ae01a64e9f97aa0fa45a70bb6524ba9@dizum.com> 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.yc844ldytm21m2@benson.localhost> did thusly jump head first > into the wood chipper again: >> 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? > > 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 > > 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. Should be "by multiplying 120 volts RMS * SQRT(3)". Now let's watch the morons jump all over that typo rather than admit they've been defeated and proven to be know-nothing mathematical morons. <snicker> > <http://i.imgur.com/1WLIvfn.png> > <http://i.imgur.com/76PX0PP.png> > > SPNAK! > > 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! >> i wonder why fakey's graphs are borken? > They're not. Yours are. Moron. >> perhaps he's making things more complicated with his furry transformers? >> i wonder if he'll ever explain why subtraction (not addition) is used >> to determine voltage potentials? > Perhaps you're a mathematical moron. SPNAK! <snicker> -- 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]
| From | "\"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> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-23 09:54 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <op.ydajo7pntm21m2@benson.localhost> |
| In reply to | #555779 |
On Tue, 23 Feb 2016 01:27:46 -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.yc844ldytm21m2@benson.localhost> did thusly jump head first > into the wood chipper again: > >> 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? no, fucktard. i'm saying that the input of the transformer is 240Vac from the line. > 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. and yet, the only thing you've tried to "correct" is your misunderstanding of how a wye transformer splits 240Vac into 3 120Vac signals. you'd likely be baffled if someone took a wye transformer and connected the 3 hot legs to the output of a 3-phase generator and then got 240Vac out of the transformer's other winding. pretty sure that you have no idea how a transformer works. > > 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 > > 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. no shit sherlock. i graphed the potential between 2 sets of legs. it was 208Vac. you're simply going on here about your inability to conceive that a wye transformer is connected to a 240Vac source. > > So you'll be getting right on describing exactly how your magical > 3-phase transformer is converting 120 volts to 240 volts, DildoRider. it converts 240 volts AC to three 120V 120 degree phase shifted signals. if you connect three 120V 120 degree phase shifted INPUT signals on the typical "output" side, however, you'll see 240Vac out the other winding. DUMBASS. > > 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! > > 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. looks like my graph is correct, then. > > 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." looks like my graph is correct then. three 120v hots. 208 volts hot to hot between A-B and B-C. i left out A-C as an exercise for the sinewave addled reader. > 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*. wrong. to get 240V out of a wye tranformer, all you have to do is apply three 120 degree phase shifted 120V signals to the secondaries. did nobody tell you that transformers work in both directions? > > SPNAK! > >> i wonder why fakey's graphs are borken? > > They're not. Yours are. Moron. > >> perhaps he's making things more complicated with his furry transformers? >> i wonder if he'll ever explain why subtraction (not addition) is used >> to determine voltage potentials? > > Perhaps you're a mathematical moron. > > 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 > -- "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]
| From | Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-23 17:10 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <a62baf5af12890451dcfa54347d50323@dizum.com> |
| In reply to | #555868 |
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.ydajo7pntm21m2@benson.localhost> did thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again: > On Tue, 23 Feb 2016 01:27:46 -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.yc844ldytm21m2@benson.localhost> did thusly jump head first >> into the wood chipper again: >>> 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? > no, fucktard. i'm saying that the input of the transformer is 240Vac from > the line. Except that's not what you graphed. I quote you: "reconstructing the wye transformer's *input* signal" Then you put 120 volts into your equations. And that's not even taking into account that it's not 240 VAC L-N, which is RMS. You can't get 120v RMS from 240v RMS unless you use only *two* legs of your magical transformer, Moron. The 3-phase power is fed from a 170 volt peak, 120 volt RMS L-N supply, and the 208 volts is tapped off of any two legs, Moron. But nicely backpedaled. SPNAK! >> 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. > and yet, the only thing you've tried to "correct" is your misunderstanding > of how a wye transformer splits 240Vac into 3 120Vac signals. Wrong. LOL The input side of the transformer is 170v peak, 120v RMS, 3-phase L-N. 208.207 volt RMS L-L, Moron. But nicely backpedaled. SPNAK! > you'd likely be baffled if someone took a wye transformer and connected > the 3 hot legs to the output of a 3-phase generator and then got 240Vac > out of the transformer's other winding. pretty sure that you have no idea > how a transformer works. Fanfic from the moron who just demonstrated for a potential 8 billion people that he doesn't know jack-shit about how a 3-phase 120/208 volt electrical system, the most ubiquitous electrical system in North America, works. And you demonstrated yet again that you're a math challenged moron. SPNAK! >> 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 >> >> 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. > no shit sherlock. i graphed the potential between 2 sets of legs. it was > 208Vac. No, you graphed the "input" of the transformer as 240 volts RMS, you just admitted it above, then you k'lamed you were getting 120 volts RMS from that 240 volts RMS, an impossibility unless you only use *two* legs of your magical transformer, Moron. SPNAK! > you're simply going on here about your inability to conceive that a wye > transformer is connected to a 240Vac source. No, a 120/208 volt electrical supply, the most ubiquitous electrical supply in all of North America, is fed by 3-phase 170 volt peak, 120.207 volt RMS L-N, and the 208.207 volt RMS L-L is achieved by tapping across any two hot legs, Moron. SPNAK! >> So you'll be getting right on describing exactly how your magical >> 3-phase transformer is converting 120 volts to 240 volts, DildoRider. > it converts 240 volts AC to three 120V 120 degree phase shifted signals. Wrong. You'll be showing your math on that. This should be good. Moron. SPNAK! > if you connect three 120V 120 degree phase shifted INPUT signals on the > typical "output" side, however, you'll see 240Vac out the other winding. "120V 120 degree phase shifted INPUT signals"? You just said above that the input was 240 volts RMS L-N and you were getting 120 volts RMS L-N from that, an utter impossibility, Moron. But nicely backpedaled. SPNAK! > DUMBASS. Wrong. Get to showing your math showing how your magical transformer can achieve 120 volts RMS L-N from 240 volts RMS L-N, Moron. SPNAK! >> 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! >> >> 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. > looks like my graph is correct, then. Wrong. You failed to show how your kooky sinewave subtraction equation converted any of those voltages, you just graphed the voltages directly. On top of that, you fucked up and k'lamed that 170 volt peak, 120 volt RMS L-N can create 240 volt RMS, and that's just utter bullshit. Show your math, Moron. SPNAK! >> 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." > looks like my graph is correct then. three 120v hots. 208 volts hot to > hot between A-B and B-C. i left out A-C as an exercise for the sinewave > addled reader. Wrong. You k'lamed your kooky sinewave subtraction program fed 170 volts peak, 120 volts RMS L-N to arrive at 240 volts RMS, another physical impossibility. 208 volts RMS L-L is created from the 120 volts RMS L-N, Moron. But nicely backpedaled. SPNAK! >> 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*. > wrong. to get 240V out of a wye tranformer, all you have to do is apply > three 120 degree phase shifted 120V signals to the secondaries. Wrong. Show your math, Moron. SPNAK! > did nobody tell you that transformers work in both directions? Did anybody tell you you're a math challenged moron? SPNAK! >> SPNAK! >>> i wonder why fakey's graphs are borken? >> They're not. Yours are. Moron. >>> perhaps he's making things more complicated with his furry transformers? >>> i wonder if he'll ever explain why subtraction (not addition) is used >>> to determine voltage potentials? >> Perhaps you're a mathematical moron. 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 -- 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]
| From | "\"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> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-23 11:56 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <op.ydapcahftm21m2@benson.localhost> |
| In reply to | #555886 |
On Tue, 23 Feb 2016 11:10:16 -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.ydajo7pntm21m2@benson.localhost> did thusly jump head first > into the wood chipper again: > >> On Tue, 23 Feb 2016 01:27:46 -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.yc844ldytm21m2@benson.localhost> did thusly jump head first >>> into the wood chipper again: > >>>> 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? > >> no, fucktard. i'm saying that the input of the transformer is 240Vac >> from >> the line. > > Except that's not what you graphed. I quote you: > "reconstructing the wye transformer's *input* signal" > > Then you put 120 volts into your equations. > > And that's not even taking into account that it's not 240 VAC L-N, > which is RMS. You can't get 120v RMS from 240v RMS unless you use only > *two* legs of your magical transformer, Moron. > > The 3-phase power is fed from a 170 volt peak, 120 volt RMS L-N > supply, and the 208 volts is tapped off of any two legs, Moron. > > But nicely backpedaled. > > SPNAK! > >>> 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. > >> and yet, the only thing you've tried to "correct" is your >> misunderstanding >> of how a wye transformer splits 240Vac into 3 120Vac signals. > > Wrong. LOL > > The input side of the transformer is 170v peak, 120v RMS, 3-phase L-N. > 208.207 volt RMS L-L, Moron. > > But nicely backpedaled. > > SPNAK! > >> you'd likely be baffled if someone took a wye transformer and connected >> the 3 hot legs to the output of a 3-phase generator and then got 240Vac >> out of the transformer's other winding. pretty sure that you have no >> idea >> how a transformer works. > > Fanfic from the moron who just demonstrated for a potential 8 billion > people that he doesn't know jack-shit about how a 3-phase 120/208 volt > electrical system, the most ubiquitous electrical system in North > America, works. And you demonstrated yet again that you're a math > challenged moron. > > SPNAK! > >>> 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 >>> >>> 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. > >> no shit sherlock. i graphed the potential between 2 sets of legs. it >> was >> 208Vac. > > No, you graphed the "input" of the transformer as 240 volts RMS, you > just admitted it above, then you k'lamed you were getting 120 volts > RMS from that 240 volts RMS, an impossibility unless you only use > *two* legs of your magical transformer, Moron. > > SPNAK! > >> you're simply going on here about your inability to conceive that a wye >> transformer is connected to a 240Vac source. > > No, a 120/208 volt electrical supply, the most ubiquitous electrical > supply in all of North America, is fed by 3-phase 170 volt peak, > 120.207 volt RMS L-N, and the 208.207 volt RMS L-L is achieved by > tapping across any two hot legs, Moron. > > SPNAK! > >>> So you'll be getting right on describing exactly how your magical >>> 3-phase transformer is converting 120 volts to 240 volts, DildoRider. > >> it converts 240 volts AC to three 120V 120 degree phase shifted signals. > > Wrong. You'll be showing your math on that. This should be good. > Moron. > > SPNAK! > >> if you connect three 120V 120 degree phase shifted INPUT signals on the >> typical "output" side, however, you'll see 240Vac out the other winding. > > "120V 120 degree phase shifted INPUT signals"? > > You just said above that the input was 240 volts RMS L-N and you were > getting 120 volts RMS L-N from that, an utter impossibility, Moron. > > But nicely backpedaled. > > SPNAK! > >> DUMBASS. > > Wrong. Get to showing your math showing how your magical transformer > can achieve 120 volts RMS L-N from 240 volts RMS L-N, Moron. perhaps you can show the math that shows how 240Vac is split into three 120V 120 degree phase shifted signals. i did. > > SPNAK! > >>> 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! >>> >>> 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. > >> looks like my graph is correct, then. > > Wrong. You failed to show how your kooky sinewave subtraction equation > converted any of those voltages, you just graphed the voltages > directly. imagine the convenience of that, fakey. i also got correct sinewave plots out of it. it took you about 3 weeks to catch up and you've not once demonstrated HOW you are graphing anything, so i see no reason to. > On top of that, you fucked up and k'lamed that 170 volt > peak, 120 volt RMS L-N can create 240 volt RMS, and that's just utter > bullshit. Show your math, Moron. if you backfed three 120V 120 degree phase shifted signals through that wye transformer's secondaries, you would see 240Vac at the primary winding. or were you not quite so sure how a transformer fundamentally works? > > SPNAK! > >>> 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." > >> looks like my graph is correct then. three 120v hots. 208 volts hot to >> hot between A-B and B-C. i left out A-C as an exercise for the sinewave >> addled reader. > > Wrong. You k'lamed your kooky sinewave subtraction program fed 170 > volts peak, 120 volts RMS L-N to arrive at 240 volts RMS, another no, i showed that 240Vac on the wye primary produces three 120V 120 degree phase shifted signals. where do you think the power to supply three 120V phases came from, idjit? did you think that transformers were stand-alone power sources like batteries, or something k0oky like that? > physical impossibility. 208 volts RMS L-L is created from the 120 > volts RMS L-N, Moron. not only am i aware of that, i graphed that weeks before you caught up to the discussion in this thread right after your sinewave stew meltdown, where you demonstrated that you are incapable of proving that your stew ever summed to 2550.25 volts as you had k0okily klamed by incorrectly using your "euler summations". > But nicely backpedaled. nicely projected, spankard. > > SPNAK! > >>> 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*. > >> wrong. to get 240V out of a wye tranformer, all you have to do is apply >> three 120 degree phase shifted 120V signals to the secondaries. > > Wrong. Show your math, Moron. i just did and you intentionally confused it with L-L voltage. show me what a 240Vac input into a the primary of the wye transformer that we are discussing produces, nitwit. show your math, BTW. LOL > > SPNAK! > >> did nobody tell you that transformers work in both directions? > > Did anybody tell you you're a math challenged moron? did you just say that because you don't want to admit that you were completely unaware that most transformers can be back-fed? > > SPNAK! > >>> SPNAK! > >>>> i wonder why fakey's graphs are borken? > >>> They're not. Yours are. Moron. perhaps you can share the full equations that you are graphing and we can get down to the business of determining how you fucked up? or... you could always correct any mistakes that you think i've made. hopefully we've cleared up that the input of the transformer can be calculated and graphed by: phase A minus phase B minus phase C. of course, we're all ignoring negligible losses here due to heat, otherwise even your graph would probably look different. > >>>> perhaps he's making things more complicated with his furry >>>> transformers? >>>> i wonder if he'll ever explain why subtraction (not addition) is used >>>> to determine voltage potentials? ??? no? > >>> Perhaps you're a mathematical moron. > > 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 > -- "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]
| From | Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-23 22:45 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <d190270c37368b10eb3bb3e316c92bdb@dizum.com> |
| In reply to | #555892 |
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.ydapcahftm21m2@benson.localhost> did thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again: > On Tue, 23 Feb 2016 11:10:16 -0500, Friendly Neighborhood > Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote: >>>>> 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? >>> no, fucktard. i'm saying that the input of the transformer is 240Vac >>> from the line. "the input of the transformer is 240Vac from the line" LOL! What transformer, DildoRider? Your magical transformer that can somehow deliver 120 volts from the 240 volt *primary* side, in violation of Watt's Law? Your magical transformer that isn't even needed because the electrical service is fed by 170 volt peak L-N, 120 volt RMS L-N, 208 volt RMS L-L, and therefore the loads can be powered directly, without your magical pixiedust transformer? SPNAK! >> Except that's not what you graphed. I quote you: >> "reconstructing the wye transformer's *input* signal" >> >> Then you put 120 volts into your equations. >> >> And that's not even taking into account that it's not 240 VAC L-N, >> which is RMS. You can't get 120v RMS from 240v RMS unless you use only >> *two* legs of your magical transformer, Moron. >> >> The 3-phase power is fed from a 170 volt peak, 120 volt RMS L-N >> supply, and the 208 volts is tapped off of any two legs, Moron. >> >> But nicely backpedaled. <crickets> LOL! SPNAK! >>>> 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. >>> and yet, the only thing you've tried to "correct" is your >>> misunderstanding >>> of how a wye transformer splits 240Vac into 3 120Vac signals. >> Wrong. LOL >> >> The input side of the transformer is 170v peak, 120v RMS, 3-phase L-N. >> 208.207 volt RMS L-L, Moron. >> >> But nicely backpedaled. <crickets> LOL! SPNAK! >>> you'd likely be baffled if someone took a wye transformer and connected >>> the 3 hot legs to the output of a 3-phase generator and then got 240Vac >>> out of the transformer's other winding. pretty sure that you have no >>> idea how a transformer works. >> Fanfic from the moron who just demonstrated for a potential 8 billion >> people that he doesn't know jack-shit about how a 3-phase 120/208 volt >> electrical system, the most ubiquitous electrical system in North >> America, works. And you demonstrated yet again that you're a math >> challenged moron. <crickets> LOL! SPNAK! >>>> 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 >>>> >>>> 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. >>> no shit sherlock. i graphed the potential between 2 sets of legs. it >>> was >>> 208Vac. >> No, you graphed the "input" of the transformer as 240 volts RMS, you >> just admitted it above, then you k'lamed you were getting 120 volts >> RMS from that 240 volts RMS, an impossibility unless you only use >> *two* legs of your magical transformer, Moron. <crickets> LOL! SPNAK! >>> you're simply going on here about your inability to conceive that a wye >>> transformer is connected to a 240Vac source. >> No, a 120/208 volt electrical supply, the most ubiquitous electrical >> supply in all of North America, is fed by 3-phase 170 volt peak, >> 120.207 volt RMS L-N, and the 208.207 volt RMS L-L is achieved by >> tapping across any two hot legs, Moron. <crickets> LOL! SPNAK! >>>> So you'll be getting right on describing exactly how your magical >>>> 3-phase transformer is converting 120 volts to 240 volts, DildoRider. >>> it converts 240 volts AC to three 120V 120 degree phase shifted signals. >> Wrong. You'll be showing your math on that. This should be good. >> Moron. <crickets> LOL! SPNAK! >>> if you connect three 120V 120 degree phase shifted INPUT signals on the >>> typical "output" side, however, you'll see 240Vac out the other winding. >> "120V 120 degree phase shifted INPUT signals"? >> >> You just said above that the input was 240 volts RMS L-N and you were >> getting 120 volts RMS L-N from that, an utter impossibility, Moron. >> >> But nicely backpedaled. <crickets> LOL! SPNAK! >>> DUMBASS. >> Wrong. Get to showing your math showing how your magical transformer >> can achieve 120 volts RMS L-N from 240 volts RMS L-N, Moron. > perhaps you can show the math that shows how 240Vac is split into three > 120V 120 degree phase shifted signals. i did. No, you didn't. You spewed a bunch of mathematical moronism, got caught being a retard, backpedaled and k'lamed you were talking about the primary and that the primary was fed by 240 volts, and you were deriving that 120 volts off the *primary* side of the transformer. And you did it all while violating Watt's Law. And that's not even considering that a 120/208 volt system *isn't* fed by 240 volts, it's fed by 170 volt peak L-N, 120 volt RMS L-N, 208 volt RMS L-L. So there's usually not even any need for a transformer, as most loads are powered directly from L-N at 120 volts and L-L at 208 volts. Backpedaling moron. SPNAK! >>>> 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! >>>> >>>> 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. >>> looks like my graph is correct, then. >> Wrong. You failed to show how your kooky sinewave subtraction equation >> converted any of those voltages, you just graphed the voltages >> directly. > imagine the convenience of that, fakey. i also got correct sinewave plots > out of it. No, you didn't. Your kooky sinewave subtraction equation violates Watt's Law, you're k'laming to have derived 120 volts directly from the 240 volt primary side of a transformer, you're k'laming that a 120/208 volt system is fed by 240 volts when it's actually fed by 170 volt peak L-N, 120 volt RMS L-N, 208 volt RMS L-L, and there is no need for a transformer. Likely because you're a backpedaling mathematical moron. SPNAK! > it took you about 3 weeks to catch up and you've not once demonstrated HOW > you are graphing anything, so i see no reason to. You were never ahead, DildoRider. I was just giving you line to run. Now the hook is set, and the more you flop and flail, the more you prove yourself to be a mathematical moron. SPNAK! >> On top of that, you fucked up and k'lamed that 170 volt >> peak, 120 volt RMS L-N can create 240 volt RMS, and that's just utter >> bullshit. Show your math, Moron. > if you backfed three 120V 120 degree phase shifted signals through that > wye transformer's secondaries, you would see 240Vac at the primary winding. > > or were you not quite so sure how a transformer fundamentally works? "backfed three 120V 120 degree phase shifted signals through that wye transformer's secondaries" LOL! Backfed it from *where*, you fucking nong? From the *loads*? Bwahahaa! You fucking idiot, there's no transformer required, it's 120/208 volt being fed, so 120 volt loads are powered directly via L-N and 208 volt loads are powered directly from L-L. SPNAK! on the backpedaling mathematical moron as he writhes to get out of his kooky demonstration that he can't do simple Euler sinewave summation, and k'lames he can magically violate Watt's Law. >>>> 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." >>> looks like my graph is correct then. three 120v hots. 208 volts hot to >>> hot between A-B and B-C. i left out A-C as an exercise for the sinewave >>> addled reader. >> Wrong. You k'lamed your kooky sinewave subtraction program fed 170 >> volts peak, 120 volts RMS L-N to arrive at 240 volts RMS, another > no, i showed that 240Vac on the wye primary produces three 120V 120 degree > phase shifted signals. What "primary", you fucking moron? The most ubiquitous electrical service is 120/208 3-phase. The 120 volt loads are powered directly off the line via L-N, the 208 volt loads are powered directly off the line via L-L, no transformer required. Now, how is your magical "transformer" that shouldn't even be there violating Watt's Law and deriving 120 volts off your k'lamed 240 volts on the *primary* side, you backpedaling *moron*. SPNAK! > where do you think the power to supply three 120V phases came from, > idjit? did you think that transformers were stand-alone power sources > like batteries, or something k0oky like that? Good gawd you're a fucking idiot. Do you suppose every fucking business that has 120/208 volt service has a transformer tucked away somewhere? Keep digging that stupidity hole, DildoRider. SPNAK! >> physical impossibility. 208 volts RMS L-L is created from the 120 >> volts RMS L-N, Moron. > not only am i aware of that, i graphed that weeks before you caught up to > the discussion in this thread right after your sinewave stew meltdown, > where you demonstrated that you are incapable of proving that your stew > ever summed to 2550.25 volts as you had k0okily klamed by incorrectly > using your "euler summations". I said I was using the total sum of the six sinewave's voltages as a quick acid test to determine whether your kooky sinewave subtraction equation was even in the ballpark. It wasn't, it isn't. It violates Watt's Law and gives you fucked up answers like deriving 120 volts from 240 volts on the *primary* side of a transformer that shouldn't even be there because 120/208 service isn't fed by 480 volts, it's fed by 170 volt peak L-N, 120 volt RMS L-N with 208 volt RMS L-L and therefore the loads are powered directly from the 120 volt RMS L-N and the 208 volt RMS L-L. SPNAK! >> But nicely backpedaled. > nicely projected, spankard. Nicely backpedaled again, Spankard. I proved your kooky sinewave subtraction equation violates Watt's Law and therefore *cannot* work. SPNAK! >>>> 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*. >>> wrong. to get 240V out of a wye tranformer, all you have to do is apply >>> three 120 degree phase shifted 120V signals to the secondaries. >> Wrong. Show your math, Moron. > i just did and you intentionally confused it with L-L voltage. You're the moron k'laming that you're feeding a magical transformer with 240 volts to power a 120/208 system, and that you can conjure up 120 volts directly from that 240 volts on the *primary* side of that transformer, in direct violation of Watt's Law. The only one confused is *you*, Moron. Show your math, Moron. SPNAK! > show me what a 240Vac input into a the primary of the wye transformer that > we are discussing produces, nitwit. What transformer is there for a 120/208 volt service, DildoRider? Do you suppose the loads are all powered through your magical 240 volt primary transformer that gives you 120 volts on the *primary* side, in violation of Watt's Law *and* common sense? I'd tell you to put the crack pipe down, but we both know you won't, Cracky McCrackHead. SPNAK! > show your math, BTW. LOL I have no need. It's *you* who's made the k'lame that 120/208 volt service is somehow fed via a 240 volt primary magical transformer that can deliver 120 volts on the *primary* side, in direct contradiction to the reality of a 120/208 volt system being fed with 170 volt peak L-N, 120 volt RMS L-N, 208 volt RMS L-L, thus powering the 120 and 208 volt loads directly, no magical transformer that can violate Watt's Law required. SPNAK! >> SPNAK! >>> did nobody tell you that transformers work in both directions? >> Did anybody tell you you're a math challenged moron? > did you just say that because you don't want to admit that you were > completely unaware that most transformers can be back-fed? What transformer, DildoRider? Your magical transformer that can somehow deliver 120 volts from the 240 volt *primary* side, in violation of Watt's Law? Your magical transformer that isn't even needed because the electrical service is 170 volt peak L-N, 120 volt RMS L-N, 208 volt RMS L-L, and therefore the loads can be powered directly, without your magical pixiedust transformer? SPNAK! >>>>> i wonder why fakey's graphs are borken? >>>> They're not. Yours are. Moron. > perhaps you can share the full equations that you are graphing and we can > get down to the business of determining how you fucked up? Sure... it's the Euler equation. Go find it, I didn't change anything. It's only been in use since the 1800s by every scientist and engineer. That you can't figure it out is no one's fault but your own. Moron. SPNAK! > or... you could always correct any mistakes that you think i've made. Where to start? Your entire wall of blather you've been spewing for the past month is one huge mistake. You haven't gotten one fucking thing right. Moron. > hopefully we've cleared up that the input of the transformer can be > calculated and graphed by: > phase A minus phase B minus phase C. What transformer, DildoRider? Your magical transformer that can deliver 120 volts directly from 240 volts on the *primary* side of your magical transformer, in direct violation of Watt's Law? The transformer that isn't even needed because the "primary" isn't fed by 240 volts, it's fed by 170 volt peak L-N, 120 volt RMS L-N, 208 volt RMS L-L, so the loads can be powered directly, no need for retarded magical transformers that violate Watt's Law. SPNAK! > of course, we're all ignoring negligible losses here due to heat, > otherwise even your graph would probably look different. Moron. LOL >>>>> perhaps he's making things more complicated with his furry >>>>> transformers? >>>>> i wonder if he'll ever explain why subtraction (not addition) is used >>>>> to determine voltage potentials? > ??? no? Moron. LOL >>>> Perhaps you're a mathematical moron. 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 -- 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]
| From | "\"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> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-23 16:56 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <op.yda27vrttm21m2@benson.localhost> |
| In reply to | #556019 |
On Tue, 23 Feb 2016 16:45:33 -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.ydapcahftm21m2@benson.localhost> did thusly jump head first > into the wood chipper again: > >> On Tue, 23 Feb 2016 11:10:16 -0500, Friendly Neighborhood >> Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote: > >>>>>> 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? > >>>> no, fucktard. i'm saying that the input of the transformer is 240Vac >>>> from the line. > > "the input of the transformer is 240Vac from the line" LOL! > > What transformer, DildoRider? Your magical transformer that can > somehow deliver 120 volts from the 240 volt *primary* side, in > violation of Watt's Law? Your magical transformer that isn't even > needed because the electrical service is fed by 170 volt peak L-N, 120 > volt RMS L-N, 208 volt RMS L-L, and therefore the loads can be powered > directly, without your magical pixiedust transformer? > > SPNAK! > >>> Except that's not what you graphed. I quote you: >>> "reconstructing the wye transformer's *input* signal" >>> >>> Then you put 120 volts into your equations. >>> >>> And that's not even taking into account that it's not 240 VAC L-N, >>> which is RMS. You can't get 120v RMS from 240v RMS unless you use only >>> *two* legs of your magical transformer, Moron. >>> >>> The 3-phase power is fed from a 170 volt peak, 120 volt RMS L-N >>> supply, and the 208 volts is tapped off of any two legs, Moron. >>> >>> But nicely backpedaled. > > <crickets> LOL! > > SPNAK! > >>>>> 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. > >>>> and yet, the only thing you've tried to "correct" is your >>>> misunderstanding >>>> of how a wye transformer splits 240Vac into 3 120Vac signals. > >>> Wrong. LOL >>> >>> The input side of the transformer is 170v peak, 120v RMS, 3-phase L-N. >>> 208.207 volt RMS L-L, Moron. >>> >>> But nicely backpedaled. > > <crickets> LOL! > > SPNAK! > >>>> you'd likely be baffled if someone took a wye transformer and >>>> connected >>>> the 3 hot legs to the output of a 3-phase generator and then got >>>> 240Vac >>>> out of the transformer's other winding. pretty sure that you have no >>>> idea how a transformer works. > >>> Fanfic from the moron who just demonstrated for a potential 8 billion >>> people that he doesn't know jack-shit about how a 3-phase 120/208 volt >>> electrical system, the most ubiquitous electrical system in North >>> America, works. And you demonstrated yet again that you're a math >>> challenged moron. > > <crickets> LOL! > > SPNAK! > >>>>> 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 >>>>> >>>>> 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. > >>>> no shit sherlock. i graphed the potential between 2 sets of legs. it >>>> was >>>> 208Vac. > >>> No, you graphed the "input" of the transformer as 240 volts RMS, you >>> just admitted it above, then you k'lamed you were getting 120 volts >>> RMS from that 240 volts RMS, an impossibility unless you only use >>> *two* legs of your magical transformer, Moron. > > <crickets> LOL! > > SPNAK! > >>>> you're simply going on here about your inability to conceive that a >>>> wye >>>> transformer is connected to a 240Vac source. > >>> No, a 120/208 volt electrical supply, the most ubiquitous electrical >>> supply in all of North America, is fed by 3-phase 170 volt peak, >>> 120.207 volt RMS L-N, and the 208.207 volt RMS L-L is achieved by >>> tapping across any two hot legs, Moron. > > <crickets> LOL! > > SPNAK! > >>>>> So you'll be getting right on describing exactly how your magical >>>>> 3-phase transformer is converting 120 volts to 240 volts, DildoRider. > >>>> it converts 240 volts AC to three 120V 120 degree phase shifted >>>> signals. > >>> Wrong. You'll be showing your math on that. This should be good. >>> Moron. > > <crickets> LOL! > > SPNAK! > >>>> if you connect three 120V 120 degree phase shifted INPUT signals on >>>> the >>>> typical "output" side, however, you'll see 240Vac out the other >>>> winding. > >>> "120V 120 degree phase shifted INPUT signals"? >>> >>> You just said above that the input was 240 volts RMS L-N and you were >>> getting 120 volts RMS L-N from that, an utter impossibility, Moron. >>> >>> But nicely backpedaled. > > <crickets> LOL! > > SPNAK! > >>>> DUMBASS. > >>> Wrong. Get to showing your math showing how your magical transformer >>> can achieve 120 volts RMS L-N from 240 volts RMS L-N, Moron. > >> perhaps you can show the math that shows how 240Vac is split into three >> 120V 120 degree phase shifted signals. i did. > > No, you didn't. You spewed a bunch of mathematical moronism, got > caught being a retard, backpedaled and k'lamed you were talking about > the primary and that the primary was fed by 240 volts, and you were > deriving that 120 volts off the *primary* side of the transformer. And > you did it all while violating Watt's Law. > > And that's not even considering that a 120/208 volt system *isn't* fed > by 240 volts, it's fed by 170 volt peak L-N, 120 volt RMS L-N, 208 > volt RMS L-L. So there's usually not even any need for a transformer, > as most loads are powered directly from L-N at 120 volts and L-L at > 208 volts. Backpedaling moron. > > SPNAK! > >>>>> 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! >>>>> >>>>> 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. > >>>> looks like my graph is correct, then. > >>> Wrong. You failed to show how your kooky sinewave subtraction equation >>> converted any of those voltages, you just graphed the voltages >>> directly. > >> imagine the convenience of that, fakey. i also got correct sinewave >> plots >> out of it. > > No, you didn't. Your kooky sinewave subtraction equation violates > Watt's Law, you're k'laming to have derived 120 volts directly from > the 240 volt primary side of a transformer, you're k'laming that a > 120/208 volt system is fed by 240 volts when it's actually fed by 170 > volt peak L-N, 120 volt RMS L-N, 208 volt RMS L-L, and there is no > need for a transformer. Likely because you're a backpedaling > mathematical moron. > > SPNAK! > >> it took you about 3 weeks to catch up and you've not once demonstrated >> HOW >> you are graphing anything, so i see no reason to. > > You were never ahead, DildoRider. I was just giving you line to run. > Now the hook is set, and the more you flop and flail, the more you > prove yourself to be a mathematical moron. > > SPNAK! > >>> On top of that, you fucked up and k'lamed that 170 volt >>> peak, 120 volt RMS L-N can create 240 volt RMS, and that's just utter >>> bullshit. Show your math, Moron. > >> if you backfed three 120V 120 degree phase shifted signals through that >> wye transformer's secondaries, you would see 240Vac at the primary >> winding. >> >> or were you not quite so sure how a transformer fundamentally works? > > "backfed three 120V 120 degree phase shifted signals through that wye > transformer's secondaries" LOL! > > Backfed it from *where*, you fucking nong? From the *loads*? Bwahahaa! > > You fucking idiot, there's no transformer required, it's 120/208 volt > being fed, so 120 volt loads are powered directly via L-N and 208 volt > loads are powered directly from L-L. > > SPNAK! on the backpedaling mathematical moron as he writhes to get out > of his kooky demonstration that he can't do simple Euler sinewave > summation, and k'lames he can magically violate Watt's Law. > >>>>> 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." > >>>> looks like my graph is correct then. three 120v hots. 208 volts hot >>>> to >>>> hot between A-B and B-C. i left out A-C as an exercise for the >>>> sinewave >>>> addled reader. > >>> Wrong. You k'lamed your kooky sinewave subtraction program fed 170 >>> volts peak, 120 volts RMS L-N to arrive at 240 volts RMS, another > >> no, i showed that 240Vac on the wye primary produces three 120V 120 >> degree >> phase shifted signals. > > What "primary", you fucking moron? The most ubiquitous electrical > service is 120/208 3-phase. The 120 volt loads are powered directly > off the line via L-N, the 208 volt loads are powered directly off the > line via L-L, no transformer required. > > Now, how is your magical "transformer" that shouldn't even be there > violating Watt's Law and deriving 120 volts off your k'lamed 240 volts > on the *primary* side, you backpedaling *moron*. > > SPNAK! > >> where do you think the power to supply three 120V phases came from, >> idjit? did you think that transformers were stand-alone power sources >> like batteries, or something k0oky like that? > > Good gawd you're a fucking idiot. Do you suppose every fucking > business that has 120/208 volt service has a transformer tucked away > somewhere? Keep digging that stupidity hole, DildoRider. > > SPNAK! > >>> physical impossibility. 208 volts RMS L-L is created from the 120 >>> volts RMS L-N, Moron. > >> not only am i aware of that, i graphed that weeks before you caught up >> to >> the discussion in this thread right after your sinewave stew meltdown, >> where you demonstrated that you are incapable of proving that your stew >> ever summed to 2550.25 volts as you had k0okily klamed by incorrectly >> using your "euler summations". > > I said I was using the total sum of the six sinewave's voltages as a > quick acid test to determine whether your kooky sinewave subtraction > equation was even in the ballpark. It wasn't, it isn't. It violates > Watt's Law and gives you fucked up answers like deriving 120 volts > from 240 volts on the *primary* side of a transformer that shouldn't > even be there because 120/208 service isn't fed by 480 volts, it's fed > by 170 volt peak L-N, 120 volt RMS L-N with 208 volt RMS L-L and > therefore the loads are powered directly from the 120 volt RMS L-N and > the 208 volt RMS L-L. > > SPNAK! > >>> But nicely backpedaled. > >> nicely projected, spankard. > > Nicely backpedaled again, Spankard. I proved your kooky sinewave > subtraction equation violates Watt's Law and therefore *cannot* work. > > SPNAK! > >>>>> 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*. > >>>> wrong. to get 240V out of a wye tranformer, all you have to do is >>>> apply >>>> three 120 degree phase shifted 120V signals to the secondaries. > >>> Wrong. Show your math, Moron. > >> i just did and you intentionally confused it with L-L voltage. > > You're the moron k'laming that you're feeding a magical transformer > with 240 volts to power a 120/208 system, and that you can conjure up > 120 volts directly from that 240 volts on the *primary* side of that > transformer, in direct violation of Watt's Law. The only one confused > is *you*, Moron. > > Show your math, Moron. > > SPNAK! > >> show me what a 240Vac input into a the primary of the wye transformer >> that >> we are discussing produces, nitwit. > > What transformer is there for a 120/208 volt service, DildoRider? Do > you suppose the loads are all powered through your magical 240 volt > primary transformer that gives you 120 volts on the *primary* side, in > violation of Watt's Law *and* common sense? > > I'd tell you to put the crack pipe down, but we both know you won't, > Cracky McCrackHead. > > SPNAK! > >> show your math, BTW. LOL > > I have no need. It's *you* who's made the k'lame that 120/208 volt > service is somehow fed via a 240 volt primary magical transformer that > can deliver 120 volts on the *primary* side, in direct contradiction > to the reality of a 120/208 volt system being fed with 170 volt peak > L-N, 120 volt RMS L-N, 208 volt RMS L-L, thus powering the 120 and 208 > volt loads directly, no magical transformer that can violate Watt's > Law required. > > SPNAK! > >>> SPNAK! > >>>> did nobody tell you that transformers work in both directions? > >>> Did anybody tell you you're a math challenged moron? > >> did you just say that because you don't want to admit that you were >> completely unaware that most transformers can be back-fed? > > What transformer, DildoRider? Your magical transformer that can > somehow deliver 120 volts from the 240 volt *primary* side, in > violation of Watt's Law? Your magical transformer that isn't even > needed because the electrical service is 170 volt peak L-N, 120 volt > RMS L-N, 208 volt RMS L-L, and therefore the loads can be powered > directly, without your magical pixiedust transformer? > > SPNAK! > >>>>>> i wonder why fakey's graphs are borken? > >>>>> They're not. Yours are. Moron. > >> perhaps you can share the full equations that you are graphing and we >> can >> get down to the business of determining how you fucked up? > > Sure... it's the Euler equation. Go find it, I didn't change anything. > It's only been in use since the 1800s by every scientist and engineer. > That you can't figure it out is no one's fault but your own. Moron. > > SPNAK! > >> or... you could always correct any mistakes that you think i've made. > > Where to start? Your entire wall of blather you've been spewing for > the past month is one huge mistake. You haven't gotten one fucking > thing right. Moron. > >> hopefully we've cleared up that the input of the transformer can be >> calculated and graphed by: >> phase A minus phase B minus phase C. > > What transformer, DildoRider? Your magical transformer that can > deliver 120 volts directly from 240 volts on the *primary* side of > your magical transformer, in direct violation of Watt's Law? The > transformer that isn't even needed because the "primary" isn't fed by > 240 volts, it's fed by 170 volt peak L-N, 120 volt RMS L-N, 208 volt > RMS L-L, so the loads can be powered directly, no need for retarded > magical transformers that violate Watt's Law. > > SPNAK! > >> of course, we're all ignoring negligible losses here due to heat, >> otherwise even your graph would probably look different. > > Moron. LOL > >>>>>> perhaps he's making things more complicated with his furry >>>>>> transformers? >>>>>> i wonder if he'll ever explain why subtraction (not addition) is >>>>>> used >>>>>> to determine voltage potentials? > >> ??? no? > > Moron. LOL > >>>>> Perhaps you're a mathematical moron. > > 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 > are you going to continue bleating for the rest of the night? -- "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]
| From | Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-24 06:38 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <f72b3b7d972d48493bd099c6f1812add@dizum.com> |
| In reply to | #556022 |
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.yda27vrttm21m2@benson.localhost> did thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again: > On Tue, 23 Feb 2016 16:45:33 -0500, Friendly Neighborhood > Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote: >>>>>>> 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? >>>>> no, fucktard. i'm saying that the input of the transformer is 240Vac >>>>> from the line. >> "the input of the transformer is 240Vac from the line" LOL! >> >> What transformer, DildoRider? Your magical transformer that can >> somehow deliver 120 volts from the 240 volt *primary* side, in >> violation of Watt's Law? Your magical transformer that isn't even >> needed because the electrical service is fed by 170 volt peak L-N, 120 >> volt RMS L-N, 208 volt RMS L-L, and therefore the loads can be powered >> directly, without your magical pixiedust transformer? >> >> SPNAK! >>>> Except that's not what you graphed. I quote you: >>>> "reconstructing the wye transformer's *input* signal" >>>> >>>> Then you put 120 volts into your equations. >>>> >>>> And that's not even taking into account that it's not 240 VAC L-N, >>>> which is RMS. You can't get 120v RMS from 240v RMS unless you use only >>>> *two* legs of your magical transformer, Moron. >>>> >>>> The 3-phase power is fed from a 170 volt peak, 120 volt RMS L-N >>>> supply, and the 208 volts is tapped off of any two legs, Moron. >>>> >>>> But nicely backpedaled. >> <crickets> LOL! >> >> SPNAK! >>>>>> 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. >>>>> and yet, the only thing you've tried to "correct" is your >>>>> misunderstanding of how a wye transformer splits 240Vac into >>>>> 3 120Vac signals. >>>>> you'd likely be baffled if someone took a wye transformer and >>>>> connected the 3 hot legs to the output of a 3-phase generator and then got >>>>> 240Vac out of the transformer's other winding. pretty sure that you have no >>>>> idea how a transformer works. >>>> Fanfic from the moron who just demonstrated for a potential 8 billion >>>> people that he doesn't know jack-shit about how a 3-phase 120/208 volt >>>> electrical system, the most ubiquitous electrical system in North >>>> America, works. And you demonstrated yet again that you're a math >>>> challenged moron. >> <crickets> LOL! >> >> SPNAK! >>>>>> 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 >>>>>> >>>>>> 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. >>>>> no shit sherlock. i graphed the potential between 2 sets of legs. it >>>>> was 208Vac. >>>> No, you graphed the "input" of a transformer as 240 volts RMS, you >>>> just admitted it above, then you k'lamed you were getting 120 volts >>>> RMS from that 240 volts RMS, an impossibility unless you only use >>>> *two* legs of your magical transformer, Moron. >> <crickets> LOL! >> >> SPNAK! >>>>> you're simply going on here about your inability to conceive that a >>>>> wye transformer is connected to a 240Vac source. >>>> No, a 120/208 volt electrical supply, the most ubiquitous electrical >>>> supply in all of North America, is fed by 3-phase 170 volt peak, >>>> 120.207 volt RMS L-N, and the 208.207 volt RMS L-L is achieved by >>>> tapping across any two hot legs, Moron. >> <crickets> LOL! >> >> SPNAK! >>>>>> So you'll be getting right on describing exactly how your magical >>>>>> 3-phase transformer is converting 120 volts to 240 volts, DildoRider. >>>>> it converts 240 volts AC to three 120V 120 degree phase shifted >>>>> signals. >>>> Wrong. You'll be showing your math on that. This should be good. >>>> Moron. >> <crickets> LOL! >> >> SPNAK! >>>>> if you connect three 120V 120 degree phase shifted INPUT signals on >>>>> the typical "output" side, however, you'll see 240Vac out the other >>>>> winding. >>>> "120V 120 degree phase shifted INPUT signals"? >>>> >>>> You just said above that the input was 240 volts RMS L-N and you were >>>> getting 120 volts RMS L-N from that, an utter impossibility, Moron. >>>> >>>> But nicely backpedaled. >> <crickets> LOL! >> >> SPNAK! >>>>> DUMBASS. >>>> Wrong. Get to showing your math showing how your magical transformer >>>> can achieve 120 volts RMS L-N from 240 volts RMS L-N, Moron. >>> perhaps you can show the math that shows how 240Vac is split into three >>> 120V 120 degree phase shifted signals. i did. >> No, you didn't. You spewed a bunch of mathematical moronism, got >> caught being a retard, backpedaled and k'lamed you were talking about >> the primary and that the primary was fed by 240 volts, and you were >> deriving that 120 volts off the *primary* side of the transformer. And >> you did it all while violating Watt's Law. >> >> And that's not even considering that a 120/208 volt system *isn't* fed >> by 240 volts, it's fed by 170 volt peak L-N, 120 volt RMS L-N, 208 >> volt RMS L-L. So there's usually not even any need for a transformer, >> as most loads are powered directly from L-N at 120 volts and L-L at >> 208 volts. Backpedaling moron. >> >> SPNAK! >>>>>> 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! >>>>>> >>>>>> 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. >>>>> looks like my graph is correct, then. >>>> Wrong. You failed to show how your kooky sinewave subtraction equation >>>> converted any of those voltages, you just graphed the voltages >>>> directly. >>> imagine the convenience of that, fakey. i also got correct sinewave >>> plots out of it. >> No, you didn't. Your kooky sinewave subtraction equation violates >> Watt's Law, you're k'laming to have derived 120 volts directly from >> the 240 volt primary side of a transformer, you're k'laming that a >> 120/208 volt system is fed by 240 volts when it's actually fed by 170 >> volt peak L-N, 120 volt RMS L-N, 208 volt RMS L-L, and there is no >> need for a transformer. Likely because you're a backpedaling >> mathematical moron. >> >> SPNAK! >>> it took you about 3 weeks to catch up and you've not once demonstrated >>> HOW you are graphing anything, so i see no reason to. >> You were never ahead, DildoRider. I was just giving you line to run. >> Now the hook is set, and the more you flop and flail, the more you >> prove yourself to be a mathematical moron. >> >> SPNAK! >>>> On top of that, you fucked up and k'lamed that 170 volt >>>> peak, 120 volt RMS L-N can create 240 volt RMS, and that's just utter >>>> bullshit. Show your math, Moron. >>> if you backfed three 120V 120 degree phase shifted signals through that >>> wye transformer's secondaries, you would see 240Vac at the primary >>> winding. >>> >>> or were you not quite so sure how a transformer fundamentally works? >> "backfed three 120V 120 degree phase shifted signals through that wye >> transformer's secondaries" LOL! >> >> Backfed it from *where*, you fucking nong? From the *loads*? Bwahahaa! >> >> You fucking idiot, there's no transformer required, it's 120/208 volt >> being fed, so 120 volt loads are powered directly via L-N and 208 volt >> loads are powered directly from L-L. >> >> SPNAK! on the backpedaling mathematical moron as he writhes to get out >> of his kooky demonstration that he can't do simple Euler sinewave >> summation, and k'lames he can magically violate Watt's Law. >>>>>> 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." >>>>> looks like my graph is correct then. three 120v hots. 208 volts hot >>>>> to hot between A-B and B-C. i left out A-C as an exercise for the >>>>> sinewave addled reader. >>>> Wrong. You k'lamed your kooky sinewave subtraction program fed 170 >>>> volts peak, 120 volts RMS L-N to arrive at 240 volts RMS, another >>> no, i showed that 240Vac on the wye primary produces three 120V 120 >>> degree phase shifted signals. >> What "primary", you fucking moron? The most ubiquitous electrical >> service is 120/208 3-phase. The 120 volt loads are powered directly >> off the line via L-N, the 208 volt loads are powered directly off the >> line via L-L, no transformer required. >> >> Now, how is your magical "transformer" that shouldn't even be there >> violating Watt's Law and deriving 120 volts off your k'lamed 240 volts >> on the *primary* side, you backpedaling *moron*. >> >> SPNAK! >>> where do you think the power to supply three 120V phases came from, >>> idjit? did you think that transformers were stand-alone power sources >>> like batteries, or something k0oky like that? >> Good gawd you're a fucking idiot. Do you suppose every fucking >> business that has 120/208 volt service has a transformer tucked away >> somewhere? Keep digging that stupidity hole, DildoRider. >> >> SPNAK! >>>> physical impossibility. 208 volts RMS L-L is created from the 120 >>>> volts RMS L-N, Moron. >>> not only am i aware of that, i graphed that weeks before you caught up >>> to the discussion in this thread right after your sinewave stew meltdown, >>> where you demonstrated that you are incapable of proving that your stew >>> ever summed to 2550.25 volts as you had k0okily klamed by incorrectly >>> using your "euler summations". >> I said I was using the total sum of the six sinewave's voltages as a >> quick acid test to determine whether your kooky sinewave subtraction >> equation was even in the ballpark. It wasn't, it isn't. It violates >> Watt's Law and gives you fucked up answers like deriving 120 volts >> from 240 volts on the *primary* side of a transformer that shouldn't >> even be there because 120/208 service isn't fed by 480 volts, it's fed >> by 170 volt peak L-N, 120 volt RMS L-N with 208 volt RMS L-L and >> therefore the loads are powered directly from the 120 volt RMS L-N and >> the 208 volt RMS L-L. >> >> SPNAK! >>>> But nicely backpedaled. >>> nicely projected, spankard. >> Nicely backpedaled again, Spankard. I proved your kooky sinewave >> subtraction equation violates Watt's Law and therefore *cannot* work. >> >> SPNAK! >>>>>> 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*. >>>>> wrong. to get 240V out of a wye tranformer, all you have to do is >>>>> apply three 120 degree phase shifted 120V signals to the secondaries. >>>> Wrong. Show your math, Moron. >>> i just did and you intentionally confused it with L-L voltage. >> You're the moron k'laming that you're feeding a magical transformer >> with 240 volts to power a 120/208 system, and that you can conjure up >> 120 volts directly from that 240 volts on the *primary* side of that >> transformer, in direct violation of Watt's Law. The only one confused >> is *you*, Moron. >> >> Show your math, Moron. >> >> SPNAK! >>> show me what a 240Vac input into a the primary of the wye transformer >>> that we are discussing produces, nitwit. >> What transformer is there for a 120/208 volt service, DildoRider? Do >> you suppose the loads are all powered through your magical 240 volt >> primary transformer that gives you 120 volts on the *primary* side, in >> violation of Watt's Law *and* common sense? >> >> I'd tell you to put the crack pipe down, but we both know you won't, >> Cracky McCrackHead. >> >> SPNAK! >>> show your math, BTW. LOL >> I have no need. It's *you* who's made the k'lame that 120/208 volt >> service is somehow fed via a 240 volt primary magical transformer that >> can deliver 120 volts on the *primary* side, in direct contradiction >> to the reality of a 120/208 volt system being fed with 170 volt peak >> L-N, 120 volt RMS L-N, 208 volt RMS L-L, thus powering the 120 and 208 >> volt loads directly, no magical transformer that can violate Watt's >> Law required. >> >> SPNAK! >>>>> did nobody tell you that transformers work in both directions? >>>> Did anybody tell you you're a math challenged moron? >>> did you just say that because you don't want to admit that you were >>> completely unaware that most transformers can be back-fed? >> What transformer, DildoRider? Your magical transformer that can >> somehow deliver 120 volts from the 240 volt *primary* side, in >> violation of Watt's Law? Your magical transformer that isn't even >> needed because the electrical service is 170 volt peak L-N, 120 volt >> RMS L-N, 208 volt RMS L-L, and therefore the loads can be powered >> directly, without your magical pixiedust transformer? >> >> SPNAK! >>>>>>> i wonder why fakey's graphs are borken? >>>>>> They're not. Yours are. Moron. >>> perhaps you can share the full equations that you are graphing and we >>> can get down to the business of determining how you fucked up? >> Sure... it's the Euler equation. Go find it, I didn't change anything. >> It's only been in use since the 1800s by every scientist and engineer. >> That you can't figure it out is no one's fault but your own. Moron. >> >> SPNAK! >>> or... you could always correct any mistakes that you think i've made. >> Where to start? Your entire wall of blather you've been spewing for >> the past month is one huge mistake. You haven't gotten one fucking >> thing right. Moron. >>> hopefully we've cleared up that the input of the transformer can be >>> calculated and graphed by: >>> phase A minus phase B minus phase C. >> What transformer, DildoRider? Your magical transformer that can >> deliver 120 volts directly from 240 volts on the *primary* side of >> your magical transformer, in direct violation of Watt's Law? The >> transformer that isn't even needed because the "primary" isn't fed by >> 240 volts, it's fed by 170 volt peak L-N, 120 volt RMS L-N, 208 volt >> RMS L-L, so the loads can be powered directly, no need for retarded >> magical transformers that violate Watt's Law. >> >> SPNAK! >>> of course, we're all ignoring negligible losses here due to heat, >>> otherwise even your graph would probably look different. >> Moron. LOL >>>>>>> perhaps he's making things more complicated with his furry >>>>>>> transformers? i wonder if he'll ever explain why subtraction >>>>>>> (not addition) is used to determine voltage potentials? >>> ??? no? DildoRider yet again demonstrates that he doesn't understand vectors, nor how adding opposite vectors results in a reduction in the result. SPNAK! >> Moron. LOL >>>>>> Perhaps you're a mathematical moron. > are you going to continue bleating for the rest of the night? Translation: "I'm going to continue bleating and backpedaling for the rest of the night, because you've irrefutably proven that my kooky math doesn't work, and therefore that my kook brain doesn't work." I had all my posts out by 9:30 AM, and I was out the door. *You* are the bootfucked spankard bleating all day. And now you'll be the bootfucked spankard bleating all night. Because you've yet again had your stoooopid ass drop-kicked across Usenet. Because you're a *moron*. <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 -- 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]
| From | kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-27 02:14 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <naricg$6bj$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #556019 |
On 23/02/2016 4:45 PM, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote: > [840-odd lines of kOokblather] Wow. Nearly up to 1000 lines per post now. Meltdown approaching Chernobyl levels... -- "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]
Page 2 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web