My backup power solution -- critique wanted.

Yes, I have the same problem with his posts. He adds comments at the top, usually includes the entire text of articles he is replying to, but then sometimes adds "CY:..." extra comments in the included text.

There are three cardinal sins many posters to Usenet are making these days:

1. Top-posting and including the entire previous article.
2. Bottom-posting, with the same full article inclusion. (Especially bad are the "Me, too!" and "I agree!" bottom posts.)
3. Doing a line-by-line rebuttal of very long articles with lots of included text from multiple authors. Those who engage with "Erniegalts" often do this, as he routinely copies an entire article and then adds comments. Life is too short to spend time trying to figure out who's saying what in these "novels."

I learned when I started posting, back around 1988, to try to get to orginal comments on the FIRST screenful of text. That is, only quote enough of an article to establish context. This is not always possible, but it's a good goal.

--Tim May

You really think that most people on this group are able to handle AC theory on power factors?

Hell, Tim, most have enough trouble with Ohms law, discrimination between electrochemical cells and "batteries", output of different types, why the "watt hour" measurement has been quietly abandoned, and so on. :-)

However, since the military and ex-military types seem determined to drive me off this group, perhaps doesn't matter.

erniegalts

This is true...however, Jesus didnt go around telling people that he lived on a planet named Kolob...

Then quit identifying yourself as LDS if you're not going to live up to it.

And configure your Outlook editor for standard text.

I've only posted once in this thread to ask everyone to ignore him. His tactic is to commit threadjackings by making them about him and his ideas on God regardless of what the topic was initally.

Look at the bright side of it, I assume that you are reading from somewhere besides misc.survivalism So, he only messed up one thread in your ng. In misc.survivalism, he does it to almost every thread and it's feels like its been going on forever.

This is my last reply in this thread regarding ernie. Reply if you like, but I'm about to filter the thread. Once ernie threadjacks them, they are no longer worth following.

I'll only comment on this once.

Regardless of WHAT group it is on, it is just as unacceptable for those who have no religeous beliefs, or anti Christian beliefs to spout their claptrap as it is for those who do have a belief system to in any way mention theirs. Christianity is not a religion - it is a way of life - and it will ALWAYS be evident in one way or another in a Christian's life.

Just the same, non belief, or heathenism, or whatever is a way of life. It also will be evident in one way or another in the life of those who follow this lifestyle. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. Your lifestyle includes off colour jokes, cussing, denying the existance of a supreme being, or whatever? Fine. Keep it off these newsgroups. No more a place for YOUR beliefs than his.

If you are not willing to censor your own posts, please do not censor the posts of others.

He's also a troll in misc.rural and alt.energy.homepower, and I've learned from first-hand experience that while he might seem like he can be reasoned with, it's just a ploy to waste more of your time.

(Don't bother replying, erniegalts, you're in the new program's killfile too.)

Dave Hinz

It's obvious that I don't "get it", so I'll quit while I'm behind. I apologize also if anyone thought you looked inaccurate -- that sure wasn't my intent.

Don't *ever* respond to Ernie. He's like one of those clingy fat girls that craves any sort of attention, including being beaten over the head.

The things we learn to late (sigh).

I had a look through that webpage. Seems to say that the power consumption of a motor is larger than the power output of a motor. That's interesting.

It didn't say much about the difference between VA and watt - hours, or maybe I wasn't paying attention. I've done that!

stormin, consumption is watts consumed output is rated in horsepower, and sure there is loss, in friction , heat and conversion of that electricity to mechanical energy. Your converter doesnt convert 100%, maybe 90 to 96% the loss is in heat

Of course it is. There is no such thing in motors as 100%+ efficency.

Gunner

"The people who believe that, as a result of industrial development, life is about to become a hell, or may be one already, are guilty, at least, of sloppy pronouncements. On page 8 of Earth in the Balance, Al Gore claims that his study of the arms race gave him "a deeper appreciation for the most horrifying fact in all our lives: civilization is now capable of destroying itself."

In the first place, the most horrifying fact in many of our lives is that our ex-spouse has gotten ahold of our ATM card. And civilization has always been able to destroy itself. The Greeks of ancient Athens, who had a civilization remarkable for lack of technological progress during its period of greatest knowledge and power, managed to destroy themselves just fine." -- P.J. O'Rourke, All the trouble in the world. The lighter side of famine, pestilence, destruction and death.

of course power consumption of a motor is higher than it's output. by 10% or thereabouts.

At the least, and usually more.

Gunner

"You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind each blade of grass." --Japanese Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto

"Gunner" snipped-for-privacy@lightspeed.net wrote

It's not at all unusual to find motors with efficiencies over 90%. Compared to other machines (reciprocating engines, pumps, boilers), motors are pretty efficient.

E.g. sites