"Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." -- Apostle Paul
I like Jodie Foster. She's an incredibly talented actress. But for instruction in matters as important as the existence (or not) of God I'm not sure she's your best bet.
Merry Christmas, Mark.
The principle is different.
A prism refracts (bends) different wavelengths of light unequally.
A diffraction grating works with diffraction - light hitting or grazing small objects is bent or even reflected into random directions or a range of random directions. The grating has a large number of equally-spaced grooves. That causes the light to go only where the various paths (one for each groove) have distance from light source to destination differ from each other in length by only whole numbers of wavelengths, so that constructive interference occurs.
The effect remains similar to that of a prism. The biggest functional differences between a prism and a diffraction grating are:
Some "spindle packs" of recordable CDs or DVDs have a clear one at the top and sometimes the clear one has the grooves - and that makes that thing an example of a transmissive diffraction grating.
- Don Klipstein ( snipped-for-privacy@misty.com)
How about when the heating is other than resistive electric heat or unneeded year-round, and therefore CFLs are more economical than incandescents year-round?
- Don Klipstein ( snipped-for-privacy@misty.com)
Except most people on Usenet use news or email/news software.
I have yet to find any, not even that included in Netscape 4.7, designed to favor top or bottom posting one way or another. This means go with the flow - post bottom or interleaved!
Most Usenet posts I read are done by those with signature line count 5 or less, maybe majority have signature line count of 1. Usenet ettiquette sources advise to limit signature line count to 5 or 4.
Meanwhile, top-posting gets more complaints than long signatures. Top-posting often gets the new material not appearing adjacent to the material that it is in response to. Combine this with lack of a quotation symbol ("greater than symbol") added at the beginning of each line being quoted, and it makes reading your posts even more of a chore.
Now I gotta add below the ones you don't like to in order to make faster reading easier!
- Don Klipstein ( snipped-for-privacy@misty.com)
So you still think that people should post to Usenet with a "browser" as opposed to email/news or news software?
Meanwhile, his signature line is well within Usenet ettiquette - only 1 line more than the minimum of 1.
Furthermore, I notice now that your posts lack one more thing that usual news or email/news software adds: Mention of who wrote what you are responding to immediately before that gets quoted!
That makes the bad situation of lack of quotation symbols even worse for those who like to read Usenet newsgroups both expeditiously and effectively!
I add the follow>>Perhaps so, but someone who top posts, does not use quoting conventions,
- Don Klipstein ( snipped-for-privacy@misty.com)
As in supposedly understand what is posted by you by using your idea of a browser, as opposed to easily understanding what most others post because I use news software and I am used to the conventions of Usenet?
There you go again - at least easy to catch in this case - failing to add a quotation symbol, and I had to fix that.
At least this time, you noted who wrote what you were responding to.
- Don Klipstein ( snipped-for-privacy@misty.com)
Now are you not only failing to add quotation symbols to lines you quote, you are rewriting some of them.
- Don Klipstein ( snipped-for-privacy@misty.com)
What - Outlook fails to follow quoting convention, while the email/news software in the Netscape 4.7 package does? (Not that I post much with that either...)
I did not know that since I never use Outlook for anything. For one thing, I have heard half a bazillion complaints over most of the past several years how it is more vulnerable to e-mail viruses than what I use for e-mail, including the mail/news software in Netscape 4.7 and webmail services and the mail software in my Unix shell account, or even Eudora.
If Outlook also fails to add quotation symbols in material being responded to, then I agree with calling it Outhouse!
- Don Klipstein ( snipped-for-privacy@misty.com)
In article , Mark Lloyd wrote in part:
Dog-gone it, my Unix shell account's news software (or the composer that it invokes) does not recognize the dash-dash-space sig-separator as beginning of quoted material to exclude. Since I normally only use one line for signature, no wonder I failed to get into the habit of dash-dash-space.
Maybe I need to try more modern news software such as Thunderbird?
I've been using Thunderbird as a newsreader for a while now and it does everything I want it to do. I don't use it for Email because all my Email accounts are web based, like G-mail, Hotmail, etc.
TDD
There is an infamous bellicose bore who posts to some of the other groups I peruse and this particular fellow has an obnoxious signature that takes up a page or more. He accuses anyone who disapproves of his sig or the contents of his posts of obsessing about him. It makes him so much fun to tease but he also occupies many kill files and kill filters.
TDD
Also, some newsreaders will recognize quoted material (requiring the '>') and show it in a different color, so it's easier to find the original stuff. To make that easier, it helps to put blank lines before and after original material.
[snip]
Faith is a good thing. The above doesn't refer to faith, but to "magical thinking", a quality of small children and those who fail to grow up.
Strange that you would assume I was using quotations for instruction.
Here's another that's not at all for that purpose:
god is real - unless declared integer
As to God, consider the difference between it and Santa Claus, The Tooth Fairy, The Invisible Pink Unicorn, Zeus, Last Thursday's Cat, The Great Pumpkin, and millions of other mythical beings.
Thanx for the information. I have never experiemented with light much. This would make interesting studies with all the lighting spectrum hype and lighting technologies being launched.
We'll see what the compalints about ESL lighting are once it becomes more common.
A prism refracts (bends) different wavelengths of light unequally.
A diffraction grating works with diffraction - light hitting or grazing small objects is bent or even reflected into random directions or a range of random directions. The grating has a large number of equally-spaced grooves. That causes the light to go only where the various paths (one for each groove) have distance from light source to destination differ from each other in length by only whole numbers of wavelengths, so that constructive interference occurs.
The effect remains similar to that of a prism. The biggest functional differences between a prism and a diffraction grating are:
Some "spindle packs" of recordable CDs or DVDs have a clear one at the top and sometimes the clear one has the grooves - and that makes that thing an example of a transmissive diffraction grating.
- Don Klipstein ( snipped-for-privacy@misty.com)
Sometimes just leaving things alone is much more economical than making complex solutions to resolve perceived economic problems.
I remember the new Energy Star usage ratings the US announced a few years ago. Some people were getting randy about the huge losses in a freezer and how we were stupid for not throwing out all our old appliances. Turns out the $10 dollars per year, wasted, would never be paid for, in most of our lifetimes, by throwing out my 30 year old freezer with no insulation in the lid. OTOH Canada has had Energy Star usage tags and programmes for more than
30 years now.The whole package has to be considered and determined.
- Don Klipstein ( snipped-for-privacy@misty.com)
In article , JimH wrote: Simply install two lighting systems, and use the appropriate switches in summer or winter. Even better, automate the system so that the same switches will power the correct set of fixtures based on the outside temperature. (That makes it on topic for an automation news group.)
Josepi wrote: LOL. Yup, economic OCD is difficult.
On 11/21/2009 9:28 PM Don Klipstein spake thus:
You know, we've only heard you say this here about, oh, 117,000 times.
Your assertion (about CFLs resulting in less mercury contamination) contains a *major* fallacy. It implies that when one use a CFL instead of an incandescent light bulb, the electricity somehow, magically turns "cleaner", with less mercury emitted.
If you run a CFL, your electricity *still* comes from the same mercury-spewing coal-fired power plant. You're just using less of it than if you use an incandescent bulb.
Now, it's true that if *enough* people used CFLs, *and* if the resulting power savings were enough for the power companies to say, "Hey, let's start shutting down our dirty old coal-fired power plants", then one could truly say that the use of CFLs reduces mercury emissions. But that hasn't happened yet. Nowhere near it. They're still burning lots of coal, and planning on building even *more* coal-fired plants.
Oh, I think you can count on the fact that there will be fewer new coal burning power plants built. CFL's will certainly be able to take credit for some of that. And, in fact, existing power plants in some areas may be able to take part of their capacity offline resulting in fewer mercury emissions as well.
None of this really addresses either energy consumtion or pollution, though. The underlying problem for both is TOO MANY PEOPLE.
We don't need more generating capacity, or new sources of energy. We need to reverse population growth, and stop spending so much money and effort on making people live longer.
All too often, 30 yearold fridges consume more like $6-$10 per month more than new ones.
- Don Klipstein ( snipped-for-privacy@misty.com)
and *again*, you left the following lines short a quotation symbol each.
- Don Klipstein ( snipped-for-privacy@misty.com)
Yes, less mercury is emitted, because you use 70-75% less electricity.
That does get power companies to crank down their plants. The nukes and hydropower will be the last ones to crank down, because their load-related operating costs are low. (Most of the cost of nukes is unrelated to load.)
CFLs are merely slowing demand growth. Most of the incandescents that can be replaced with CFLs are not yet replaced with CFLs, the population is growing, along with use of larger TV sets. If all CFLs were replaced with incandescents of same light output, the situation would be even worse.
- Don Klipstein ( snipped-for-privacy@misty.com)
Feel free to rename all the character sets, if desired. Some may even understand part of your messages.
I have never seen anybody use a quotation symbol for marking lines. Quotation marks usually mean a quotation from a previous piece of text. I think that would be why they are called that.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.