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

Groups > alt.checkmate > #55928

Re: 3 phase teaser

Cross-posted to 4 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

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

Bite My Shiny Metal Ass, in
<news:nuoscbtjfl9vfsb86h2sr2htsqsn73p22a@4ax.com> did thusly jump head
first into the wood chipper again:

Back to further demonstrate what an idiot you are? What've you been
right about? Nil. Zip. Nada. LOL

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

>> Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
>> 
>> Jim "Jism Junkie Gerbil Cannon" Gorman (aka Chimpy the Coin-Slot
>> Operated SuckMonkey, aka Checkmate The PickleTickler), in
>> <news:MPG.3136fd732d1d36a098c8a0@news.altopia.com> did thusly jump
>> head first into the wood chipper again:

>>> In article <8lmqcbthi6aqkq9jcnkh9t7k5ebke0sehr@4ax.com>, 
>>> Shiny Tinfoil Brain <bender@the.future> says...

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

>>>>> When backed into a corner and getting your stupid ass kicked, k'lame
>>>>> you were "just torlin', Gubnah", right? Because that would account for
>>>>> your months-long Quixotic quest to conquer the Euler equation, which
>>>>> you failed to do because you're a mathematical moron.

>>>> O quando quando, fakey, will you show us that you know how
>>>> to use the euler equations, or even what they mean?

>> Moron admits he can't figure out that easy Euler sinewave summation
>> equation.

> Fakey admits he doesn't know how to use an "euler sinewave
> summation equation" to add sines.  Probably because he
> realized it's not used for that.

Except I do know, and it is used for that, as I've demonstrated.
You're just a moron. LOL

>>   Likely because the moron doesn't know what a positive or
>> negative vector is. LOL

> What's a negative vector, fakey?  Example please.

Didn't they ever teach you this in your speshul klasses, Moron? LOL

<http://www.everythingmaths.co.za/science/grade-10/20-vectors-and-scalars/20-vectors-and-scalars-03.cnxmlplus>
===========================================================
Just like scalars which can have positive or negative values, vectors
can also be positive or negative. A negative vector is a vector which
points in the direction opposite to the reference positive direction.
===========================================================

Yet again, Shiny Tinfoil Brain demonstrates that he doesn't know shit
about shit.

<snicker>

Shiny Tinfoil Brain didn't even know the Euler equation is a subset of
equations known as the Euler-Fourier Formulas, thus that a sinewave is
a transformation of a circle (which should have been intuitive, given
that generators *rotate* to create *sinusoids*); that cross
correlation is used with Fourier transforms; that superposition is the
same as wave interference; that wave interference works the same for
standing or traveling waves; that RMS and peak-to-peak voltage are two
different things; that 170 volt peak, 120.208 volt RMS L-N 3-phase
service gives 208.207 volts RMS L-L; that 4444525800 != 4400000000 !=
1; that there's a difference between 'i' and 'j' in electrical
engineering, physics and control systems engineering; what a positive
or negative vector is; and the moron continues to demonstrate his
inability to read a graph.

SPNAK!

>>>> Or, at what time does your k00ky komposite of sines add up
>>>> to 2550v?

>> I said I was using the total sum of the six sinewave's voltages as a
>> quick acid test to determine whether DildoRider's kooky sinewave
>> subtraction equation was even in the ballpark. It wasn't, it isn't.

> Dogwhistle was right, you were wrong.  Admit it & move on.

DildoRider just today k'lamed he could subtract all three phases to
arrive at voltage doubling, in violation of Watt's Law. The
instantaneous voltage of all three phases *sum* to zero. If it were
any other way, 3-phase power could not work. Not that I expect a moron
like you to understand why that is. Moron.

SPNAK!

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

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

>> Shiny Tinfoil Brain k'lames 120.208 volts is a peak voltage and not an 
>> RMS voltage. LOL!
>> 
>> SPNAK! on the moron.
>> 
>> <snicker>

>>> LOL!  Fakey actually said that?  What an idiot!  I guess I can throw my 
>>> Fluke RMS voltmeter away, now that peak voltage and RMS voltage are the 
>>> same.  I can use some POS Harbor Freight meter that they give away with 
>>> a coupon.

>> No, moron. When graphed, the sinewave of the RMS waveform has a
>> maximum amplitude of 120.208 volts. You'll note I also graphed the 170
>> volt peak sinewave from which the 120.208 volt sinewave was derived.

> Bwahahahaha!!  Bleat louder, fakey.  Maybe it's more
> convincing if you scream in caps.
> 
> Maximum amplitude IS the peak voltage.

"Maximum amplitude IS the peak voltage." LOL!

Moron yet again demonstrates that he doesn't know the difference
between peak voltage, peak-to-peak voltage and RMS voltage.

> That's what peak
> voltage means, dumkopf.  But you think RMS means maximum
> amplitude.  What a maroon.  You must now continue repeating
> that forever, lest you admit that you were spectacularly and
> humiliatingly wrong.
> 
> Maybe you could claim it's just a typo.  Or, "jes torllin
> gubnor".
> 
> Free clue:  what's 120v/sqrt(2)?
> whats 208v/sqrt(2)?

It's a moron trying to mathematically prove he's a moron, is what it
is. And succeeding, for once. LOL

> What's the difference between i and j?
> Every electronics "expert" knows that.

No, only morons "know" of a "difference between i and j"... morons who
desperately Google-rape to try to make themselves appear to be more
intelligent than they really are.

There is no difference between the two. Both are equal to the square
root of -1. Whenever 'i' is ambiguous or its use debatable, 'j' is
used like in Electrical Engineering and Control Systems engineering,
where it denotes electric current. IOW, to resolve ambiguity, 'j' is
used instead of 'i' to represent the imaginary part of complex terms
in physics or electrical engineering.

Now, you continue bleating out your contention of there being a
difference between i and j... you've made the k'lame, you can't back
it up, so your only recourse is to screed it repeatedly in hopes some
other idiot will believe it.

Aren't you the moron who k'lamed that the imaginary part of complex
terms isn't used in the Euler sinewave summation equation... because
you k'lamed the Euler sinewave summation equation had nothing to do
with Fourier transforms... because you're the moron who didn't know
they're called the Euler-Fourier Formulas? Yeah, you are.

SPNAK!

> Complete the following, and explain its significance:
> "Bad boys rape... "
> Every electronics "expert" knows that.

Nicely bleated. Perhaps you should try to scream it in all caps, then
people might believe that you know the difference between peak,
peak-to-peak and RMS voltages, Moron.

Remember, you're the moron who keeps bleating about 120.208 volts RMS
being a "peak voltage", Moron.

Aren't you the moron who's already demonstrated his inability to
distinguish between peak-to-peak and RMS when you blathered that the
graph I'd posted was actually a graph of 85 volt RMS?

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

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

SPNAK!

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Spankard. Moron. LOL

-- 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Back to alt.checkmate | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: 3 phase teaser Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-24 20:39 +0100
  Re: 3 phase teaser Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-02-25 10:36 +0800
    Re: 3 phase teaser "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-02-24 19:05 -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 22:28 -0500
        Re: 3 phase teaser "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-02-24 19:42 -0800
    Re: 3 phase teaser Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-25 08:19 +0100
      Re: 3 phase teaser Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-02-26 00:30 +0800
        Re: 3 phase teaser "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-02-25 09:04 -0800
        Re: 3 phase teaser Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-25 19:26 +0100
        Re: 3 phase teaser Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-25 12:07 -0700
  Re: 3 phase teaser "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-02-24 21:04 -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> - 2016-02-25 00:16 -0500
      Re: 3 phase teaser "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-02-24 21:46 -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> - 2016-02-25 02:10 -0500
    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

csiph-web