sci.electronics.repair@googlegroups.com

Today's topics:

* Another reason ... - 8 messages, 5 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/a9a63c157742e708?hl=en
* Looking for a Samsung LED TV for my den - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/d15cd1bccfc7ffd5?hl=en
* Why you should change your vehicle to flex fuel - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/f73a5559d9585644?hl=en
* Self-Repair Manifesto - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/047741f126542a73?hl=en

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Another reason ...
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/a9a63c157742e708?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 8 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 12 2010 8:44 pm
From: D Yuniskis

Hi Arfa,

Arfa Daily wrote:

>> What was the rationale behind phasing out the 60's before the 100's?
>> Frosted before clear?
>
> AS far as I have been able to ascertain, the reasoning behind earlier
> phase-out of 60s, was that it was felt that CFLs had reached the point
> where they could substitute for them in terms of equivalence of light
> output, whereas they still had some way to go to be able to make that

Ah, that makes sense!

> claim for 100s. As to why pearl before clear, I have not been able to
> find a definitive answer to that one. I have seen it suggested that the
> pearl envelope is more inefficient than the clear one, in that it blocks
> more of the light output of the filament, causing it to be lost as heat.
> I'm not at all sure that I believe that as a valid reason, and
> subjectively, I've always thought that a pearl bulb in fact *appears*

It could, perhaps, be related to the fact that clear bulbs tend to
be "exposed" as part of the "artistry" of the light fixture
whereas frosted bulbs are typically behind a shade? I.e., if
the clear ones were replaced early, people would gripe more
about "how ugly" the CFL replacements are (??)

(who the hell knows... maybe they flipped a coin in some back
room?)

> brighter than a clear one. Certainly, the fact that the light is
> diffuse, seems to make it less prone to generating sharp shadows, and
> from a purely aesthetic point of view, pearl bulbs look much more
> attractive in fittings where they are visible. Clear bulbs always seem
> to conjour up that 'seedy' feel that you get from old thirties gangster
> and private eye movies.

Ah, here we see clear bulbs "exposed" in fixtures more than
frosted equivalents (unless you are talking about "*functional*
lighting fixtures")

== 2 of 8 ==
Date: Sat, Nov 13 2010 6:16 am
From: "William Sommerwerck"

From my view, governments /should/ be forcing (yes, forcing) people to do
what's necessary to save energy. Market forces are highly effective in
making short-term changes; they are much less effective in effecting proper
long-term changes. (Things usually get worse until they abruptly collapse.)
The problem, of course, is making sure the forced changes are rational and
occur in the correct order.

What people find aesthetically pleasing varies widely. In Jack Finney's
classic novel "Time and Again" (it's the literary equivalent of a box of
chocolate-covered cherries and I recommend it highly, just for fun), when
Simon Morley returns to the 20th century from the 19th with his girlfriend
Julia Charbonneau, she loves the brightness and clarity of incandescent
lamps, but he says he prefers gas light.

== 3 of 8 ==
Date: Sat, Nov 13 2010 3:44 pm
From: "Dave Plowman (News)"

In article <ibm6km$o5k$2@news.eternal-september.org>,
William Sommerwerck <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote:
> when Simon Morley returns to the 20th century from the 19th with his
> girlfriend Julia Charbonneau, she loves the brightness and clarity of
> incandescent lamps, but he says he prefers gas light.

Both are pretty continuous spectrum light sources. The problem with both
CFL and LED is they ain't - they have troughs and spikes. Which is what
makes them unpleasant to many, IMHO.

--
*It's not hard to meet expenses... they're everywhere.

Dave Plowman dave@davenoise.co.uk London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

== 4 of 8 ==
Date: Sat, Nov 13 2010 4:10 pm
From: Jim Yanik

"William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote in
news:ibm6km$o5k$2@news.eternal-september.org:

> From my view, governments /should/ be forcing (yes, forcing) people to
> do what's necessary to save energy. Market forces are highly effective
> in making short-term changes; they are much less effective in
> effecting proper long-term changes. (Things usually get worse until
> they abruptly collapse.) The problem, of course, is making sure the
> forced changes are rational and occur in the correct order.

if that's what you want,then MOVE to somewhere that does that sort of
stuff. don't try to enact it here in the US. We value our freedom.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
localnet
dot com

== 5 of 8 ==
Date: Sat, Nov 13 2010 5:10 pm
From: Jamie

Jim Yanik wrote:

> "William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote in
> news:ibm6km$o5k$2@news.eternal-september.org:
>
>
>>From my view, governments /should/ be forcing (yes, forcing) people to
>>do what's necessary to save energy. Market forces are highly effective
>>in making short-term changes; they are much less effective in
>>effecting proper long-term changes. (Things usually get worse until
>>they abruptly collapse.) The problem, of course, is making sure the
>>forced changes are rational and occur in the correct order.
>
>
> if that's what you want,then MOVE to somewhere that does that sort of
> stuff. don't try to enact it here in the US. We value our freedom.
>
Freedom?
Last time I heard, that was coming up short!

== 6 of 8 ==
Date: Sat, Nov 13 2010 6:06 pm
From: "William Sommerwerck"

"Jim Yanik" <jyanik@abuse.gov> wrote in message
news:Xns9E2FC3226D716jyaniklocalnetcom@216.168.3.44...
> "William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote in
> news:ibm6km$o5k$2@news.eternal-september.org:

>> From my view, governments /should/ be forcing (yes, forcing) people
>> to do what's necessary to save energy. Market forces are highly
>> effective in making short-term changes; they are much less effective
>> in effecting proper long-term changes. (Things usually get worse until
>> they abruptly collapse.) The problem, of course, is making sure the
>> forced changes are rational and occur in the correct order.

> if that's what you want,then MOVE to somewhere that does that sort
> of stuff. don't try to enact it here in the US. We value our freedom.

Yeah, our freedom to ruin everything without regard for the consequences.

Think about what would have happened if the US government had, after WW II,
FORCED auto makers to gradually improve fuel mileage at a "reasonable" rate.
The world would almost certainly be quite different.

== 7 of 8 ==
Date: Sat, Nov 13 2010 6:10 pm
From: "William Sommerwerck"

> if that's what you want,then MOVE to somewhere that does that sort of
> stuff. don't try to enact it here in the US. We value our freedom.

Freedom is important -- critical, vital -- with respect to what we think,
which people we associate with, which books we read, which church we attend,
whom we have sex with, etc.

It is of less than zero importance with respect to the cars we drive or the
lamps we illuminate our houses with. The economic stability of this country
is far more important. Those who scream "FREEDOM! FREEDOM! FREEDOM!" are the
ones doing the most to destroy this country's economic vitality.

== 8 of 8 ==
Date: Sat, Nov 13 2010 7:58 pm
From: Jamie

William Sommerwerck wrote:
>>if that's what you want,then MOVE to somewhere that does that sort of
>>stuff. don't try to enact it here in the US. We value our freedom.
>
>
> Freedom is important -- critical, vital -- with respect to what we think,
> which people we associate with, which books we read, which church we attend,
> whom we have sex with, etc.
>
> It is of less than zero importance with respect to the cars we drive or the
> lamps we illuminate our houses with. The economic stability of this country
> is far more important. Those who scream "FREEDOM! FREEDOM! FREEDOM!" are the
> ones doing the most to destroy this country's economic vitality.
>
>
That's all well and fine how ever, after seeing who is running the show
these days, do you really think we would be in good hands if we gave up
those freedoms?

Think about it, you are sounding like those that want 100% control
over you and you're willing to give it.. Has it ever occurred to you
that our leadership is using that as an excuse for them screwing up
so bad?

They know the time they have left in office or at least one or
two of them, its a good cover up for they're problems.. Just like
blaming BUSH and all the prior leaders before him .. THat does not sit
right with me. Most of us do not want to hear the past, we want to make
it go away. Using the past as an excuse for not getting equality for
man kind sounds more like Bible thumping.. And you should know that
politics and religion do not mix!

Nothing gets done with bible thumpers other than pointing the finger
at the other guy for all their problems. They seem to thieve on it. And
with out elaborating on that, I'm sure you know what I am referring too.

Come on now, do you want to be the first to give up your freedoms to
our leaders? Especially those that are in power at the moment?

I will admit that something's we do have, made it a little easier than
it should be to gain access to funds that are diverted where they
should not be. Who is the blame for that? our freedoms? I don't think
so.

Remember, its not just a little, it's all or nothing! I don't
really think you are prepare to just turn over and die!

If we didn't have any FREEDOM thumpers. You'd be in a world of shit
and long time ago...

The first thing that needs to be done is to remove those off the
program that don't belong on it, especially those that are not even
legal to start with! You talk about FREEDOMS, its those people that are
doing the most damage by threatening our FREEDOMS. Because they
are using up all the resources our country created for those that are
legally born here and worked for it.. If you do the math, one of our
greatest problems is those on the system illegally..

Next on the list is to get the peoples hands out of each others
pockets. That includes all the entitlements and pay outs from
big business.. This all comes to a bottleneck at some point and the
bottle has broken!

No, Its not our FREEDOMS that are the problems, its those governing
them and don't want us to have them because they don't know how to
manage it and keep their nose out of area's where they don't belong with
out them or their buddies getting a cut some where.. Most of those guys
are there for the wrong reasons, not the reasons we put them there for.

And don't forget that.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Looking for a Samsung LED TV for my den
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/d15cd1bccfc7ffd5?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sat, Nov 13 2010 5:47 am
From: Keith

All:
I am looking for either a 37" or 40" Samsung LED TV for sale. It must be fairly new and in working shape with
no scratches or dings on it. Please either post or email me here if you or anyone you know has such a TV for
sale -- especially if you are in the Southern California area nearest San Diego. Thank you!

Keith

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Why you should change your vehicle to flex fuel
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/f73a5559d9585644?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Sat, Nov 13 2010 1:34 pm
From: "Charles"

"William Sommerwerck" wrote in message
news:ibkjnk$rmj$2@news.eternal-september.org...

> The government should mandate that car companies make
> ALL vehicles Flex-fuel. It doesn't cost much but I think the
> oil companies are bribing the car companies not to do it. If
> all cars were flex fuel, alternative suppliers would begin to
> pop up everywhere weaning us of terrorist's oil supplies.

No, it's not expensive, and GM used to make a lot of flex-fuel autos. (Don't
know if they still do.)

Problem is, ethyl alcohol is still not really cost-competitive with
gasoline. Making lots of cars that use it would increase the demand, but I
don't think that would do much to reduce production cost, something that
alcohol producers have been trying to do /regardless/ of whether there are
cars to use alcohol.

It is more than just the surface data. More land clearing, more pesticides,
more fertilizers, increasing food costs for folks who can ill afford that,
more environmental damage, and the beat goes on.

Ethyl alcohol is for making us stupid (when we drink it and also when we
imagine it to be a solution to the Middle East crisis).

Flex fuel cars? Sure, why not (as William said, it is really not a big
deal). However, the corn thing here in the US would collapse immediately if
ALL the government subsidies were cancelled (and they should be).

It is time to bite the bullet and increase the cost of energy (by removing
government manipulation and subsidies) and thus encourage conservation and
investment into better ideas.

But, NO, the US just printed another six hundred billion dollars of fake
money to prop up an unsustainable economic system for another month or two.
And when it all falls down, we will be worried about far more than flex fuel
cars.

Humpty Dumpty is soon going to have a great fall.

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Sat, Nov 13 2010 5:10 pm
From: Jamie

Charles wrote:

>
>
> "William Sommerwerck" wrote in message
> news:ibkjnk$rmj$2@news.eternal-september.org...
>
>> The government should mandate that car companies make
>> ALL vehicles Flex-fuel. It doesn't cost much but I think the
>> oil companies are bribing the car companies not to do it. If
>> all cars were flex fuel, alternative suppliers would begin to
>> pop up everywhere weaning us of terrorist's oil supplies.
>
>
> No, it's not expensive, and GM used to make a lot of flex-fuel autos.
> (Don't
> know if they still do.)
>
> Problem is, ethyl alcohol is still not really cost-competitive with
> gasoline. Making lots of cars that use it would increase the demand, but I
> don't think that would do much to reduce production cost, something that
> alcohol producers have been trying to do /regardless/ of whether there are
> cars to use alcohol.
>
> It is more than just the surface data. More land clearing, more
> pesticides, more fertilizers, increasing food costs for folks who can
> ill afford that, more environmental damage, and the beat goes on.
>
> Ethyl alcohol is for making us stupid (when we drink it and also when we
> imagine it to be a solution to the Middle East crisis).
>
> Flex fuel cars? Sure, why not (as William said, it is really not a big
> deal). However, the corn thing here in the US would collapse
> immediately if ALL the government subsidies were cancelled (and they
> should be).
>
> It is time to bite the bullet and increase the cost of energy (by
> removing government manipulation and subsidies) and thus encourage
> conservation and investment into better ideas.
>
> But, NO, the US just printed another six hundred billion dollars of fake
> money to prop up an unsustainable economic system for another month or
> two. And when it all falls down, we will be worried about far more than
> flex fuel cars.
>
> Humpty Dumpty is soon going to have a great fall.
>
OBama says you're welcome.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Self-Repair Manifesto
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/047741f126542a73?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 14 2010 12:05 am
From: Jeff Liebermann

<http://www.ifixit.com/Manifesto>
--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

==============================================================================

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sci.electronics.repair"
group.

To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair?hl=en

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sci.electronics.repair+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com

To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/subscribe?hl=en

To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com

==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com/?hl=en