sci.electronics.repair - 25 new messages in 8 topics - digest

sci.electronics.repair
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair?hl=en

sci.electronics.repair@googlegroups.com

Today's topics:

==============================================================================
TOPIC: carbon dioxide reduction question
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/62d314544c086f2a?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 14 ==
Date: Mon, Oct 3 2011 12:24 am
From: "Trevor Wilson"

kreed wrote:
> On Oct 3, 4:05 pm, who where <no...@home.net> wrote:
>> On Sun, 2 Oct 2011 20:15:59 -0700 (PDT), kreed
>> <kenreed1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> So in other words, the brewing process generates CO2 ?
>>
>> Yes.
>
> Good, thank you for confirming that.

**You're most welcome.

--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

== 2 of 14 ==
Date: Mon, Oct 3 2011 1:22 am
From: atec77

On 3/10/2011 1:15 PM, kreed wrote:
> On Oct 3, 12:41 pm, atec77<ate...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On 3/10/2011 11:23 AM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> who where wrote:
>>
>>>> On Sat, 01 Oct 2011 21:03:31 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
>>>> <mike.terr...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>>>>> Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>
>>>>>> **BIG difference. Beer and some sparkling wines generate their own CO2 via
>>>>>> the fermentation process.
>>
>>>>> Then why do breweries need huge tanks of Carbon Dioxide?
>>
>>>> The ones I have visited (northern Europe, mainly) have tanks for
>>>> *collecting* the CO2 byproduct of brewing, and it is then used
>>>> industrially or in-house for carbonated drinks.
>>
>>> The blueprints I saw for one brewery had a large tank, and piping for
>>> tank trucks to deliver Carbon Dioxide.
>>
>> What I know as beer gas
>> A lot of the generated gas in the fermentation process is used to
>> compress the kegs and larger container for delivery , very strong beer
>> smell of course
>>
>> --
>> X-No-Archive: Yes
>
> So in other words, the brewing process generates CO2 ?
>
> (Not that it matters of course)
>
yup
basic chemistry , beer is related to yogurt :)
I know which I prefer

--
X-No-Archive: Yes

== 3 of 14 ==
Date: Mon, Oct 3 2011 1:20 am
From: "Dennis"

"Franc Zabkar" <fzabkar@iinternode.on.net> wrote in message
news:08hi87doid1bf927pg7gmub7a67lktr6ns@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 1 Oct 2011 06:42:55 -0700 (PDT), kreed <kenreed1999@gmail.com>
> put finger to keyboard and composed:
>
>>Since there has been all this hype about removing carbon emissions,
>>
>>Why hasn't anyone come up with the concept of totally banning soft
>>drinks, since these are all made with carbon dioxide (for the carbonated
>>water)
>
> I refrain from drinking mineral water because it is indistinguishable
> from tap water, but others claim that it, too, has an unacceptable
> carbon footprint.
>
> http://www.inquirer.net/specialreports/watercrisis/view.php?db=1&article=20080219-119924
>
> "LONDON -- London Mayor Ken Livingstone on Tuesday [February 19, 2008]
> launched a blitz against bottled mineral water, urging restaurant
> customers in the British capital to ask for tap water to help the
> environment.
>
> Livingstone said tap water was not only cheaper but also comes without
> the heavy carbon footprint of transporting bottled varieties by road
> and often vast distances by air from countries as far away as Fiji and
> New Zealand."
>
> - Franc Zabkar
> --
> Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.

I know for a fact that one of the large name mineral waters sold here in
WA is simply bore water from a property in the hills near Perth.

Tap water is the way to go.

== 4 of 14 ==
Date: Mon, Oct 3 2011 1:28 am
From: kreed

On Oct 3, 5:24 pm, "Trevor Wilson" <tre...@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:
> kreed wrote:
> > On Oct 3, 4:05 pm, who where <no...@home.net> wrote:
> >> On Sun, 2 Oct 2011 20:15:59 -0700 (PDT), kreed
> >> <kenreed1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>> So in other words, the brewing process generates CO2 ?
>
> >> Yes.
>
> > Good, thank you for confirming that.
>
> **You're most welcome.
>
For what ?

> --
> Trevor Wilsonwww.rageaudio.com.au

== 5 of 14 ==
Date: Mon, Oct 3 2011 1:11 am
From: kreed

On Oct 3, 3:23 pm, Franc Zabkar <fzab...@iinternode.on.net> wrote:
> On Sat, 1 Oct 2011 06:42:55 -0700 (PDT), kreed <kenreed1...@gmail.com>
> put finger to keyboard and composed:
>
> >Since there has been all this hype about removing carbon emissions,
>
> >Why hasn't anyone come up with the concept of totally banning soft
> >drinks, since these are all made with carbon dioxide (for the carbonated water)
>
> I refrain from drinking mineral water because it is indistinguishable
> from tap water, but others claim that it, too, has an unacceptable
> carbon footprint.
>
> http://www.inquirer.net/specialreports/watercrisis/view.php?db=1&arti...
>
> "LONDON -- London Mayor Ken Livingstone on Tuesday [February 19, 2008]
> launched a blitz against bottled mineral water, urging restaurant
> customers in the British capital to ask for tap water to help the
> environment.
>
> Livingstone said tap water was not only cheaper but also comes without
> the heavy carbon footprint of transporting bottled varieties by road
> and often vast distances by air from countries as far away as Fiji and
> New Zealand."
>
> - Franc Zabkar
> --
> Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.

I always drank tap water (again no difference in taste in my opinion,
and it is essentially free) but stopped when fluoride was put in by
QLD state government order earlier in the year, as there is plenty of
controversy as to its safety that I would rather not risk it.
Back to rain water for me.

(For those that are into carbon footprints, I don't see how you can
beat rainwater).

== 6 of 14 ==
Date: Mon, Oct 3 2011 5:04 am
From: Phil Hobbs

On 10/03/2011 04:11 AM, kreed wrote:
> On Oct 3, 3:23 pm, Franc Zabkar<fzab...@iinternode.on.net> wrote:
>> On Sat, 1 Oct 2011 06:42:55 -0700 (PDT), kreed<kenreed1...@gmail.com>
>> put finger to keyboard and composed:
>>
>>> Since there has been all this hype about removing carbon emissions,
>>
>>> Why hasn't anyone come up with the concept of totally banning soft
>>> drinks, since these are all made with carbon dioxide (for the carbonated water)
>>
>> I refrain from drinking mineral water because it is indistinguishable
>> from tap water, but others claim that it, too, has an unacceptable
>> carbon footprint.
>>
>> http://www.inquirer.net/specialreports/watercrisis/view.php?db=1&arti...
>>
>> "LONDON -- London Mayor Ken Livingstone on Tuesday [February 19, 2008]
>> launched a blitz against bottled mineral water, urging restaurant
>> customers in the British capital to ask for tap water to help the
>> environment.
>>
>> Livingstone said tap water was not only cheaper but also comes without
>> the heavy carbon footprint of transporting bottled varieties by road
>> and often vast distances by air from countries as far away as Fiji and
>> New Zealand."
>>
>> - Franc Zabkar
>> --
>> Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.
>
> I always drank tap water (again no difference in taste in my opinion,
> and it is essentially free) but stopped when fluoride was put in by
> QLD state government order earlier in the year, as there is plenty of
> controversy as to its safety that I would rather not risk it.
> Back to rain water for me.
>
>
> (For those that are into carbon footprints, I don't see how you can
> beat rainwater).
>
>

How about all the ambulance traffic for people who get dysentery from
drinking the bird droppings rinsed off their roof? ;-&

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics

160 North State Road #203
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510
845-480-2058

hobbs at electrooptical dot net
http://electrooptical.net

== 7 of 14 ==
Date: Mon, Oct 3 2011 7:00 am
From: kreed

On Oct 3, 10:04 pm, Phil Hobbs
<pcdhSpamMeSensel...@electrooptical.net> wrote:
> On 10/03/2011 04:11 AM, kreed wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Oct 3, 3:23 pm, Franc Zabkar<fzab...@iinternode.on.net> wrote:
> >> On Sat, 1 Oct 2011 06:42:55 -0700 (PDT), kreed<kenreed1...@gmail.com>
> >> put finger to keyboard and composed:
>
> >>> Since there has been all this hype about removing carbon emissions,
>
> >>> Why hasn't anyone come up with the concept of totally banning soft
> >>> drinks, since these are all made with carbon dioxide (for the carbonated water)
>
> >> I refrain from drinking mineral water because it is indistinguishable
> >> from tap water, but others claim that it, too, has an unacceptable
> >> carbon footprint.
>
> >>http://www.inquirer.net/specialreports/watercrisis/view.php?db=1&arti...
>
> >> "LONDON -- London Mayor Ken Livingstone on Tuesday [February 19, 2008]
> >> launched a blitz against bottled mineral water, urging restaurant
> >> customers in the British capital to ask for tap water to help the
> >> environment.
>
> >> Livingstone said tap water was not only cheaper but also comes without
> >> the heavy carbon footprint of transporting bottled varieties by road
> >> and often vast distances by air from countries as far away as Fiji and
> >> New Zealand."
>
> >> - Franc Zabkar
> >> --
> >> Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.
>
> > I always drank tap water (again no difference in taste in my opinion,
> > and it is essentially free) but stopped when fluoride was put in by
> > QLD state government order earlier in the year, as there is plenty of
> > controversy as to its safety that I would rather not risk it.
> > Back to rain water for me.
>
> > (For those that are into carbon footprints, I don't see how you can
> > beat rainwater).
>
> How about all the ambulance traffic for people who get dysentery from
> drinking the bird droppings rinsed off their roof? ;-&
>
> Cheers
>
> Phil Hobbs
>
> --
> Dr Philip C D Hobbs
> Principal Consultant
> ElectroOptical Innovations LLC
> Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
>
> 160 North State Road #203
> Briarcliff Manor NY 10510
> 845-480-2058
>
> hobbs at electrooptical dot nethttp://electrooptical.net

On modern tanks, you have a "first flush" unit, that discards the
first lot of water, this allows sufficient time for the roof to be
washed clean before the tank starts filling, then the water is fine,
no dirt and crap. Interestingly though, at school a long long time
ago, we had 2x 8,000 gallon (approx) tanks that collected rain water
from the roof for drinking - no first flush or filter, everyone drank
out of them, including the teachers and no one got sick from it.

Of course, if there were toxic chemicals in the air and it wasnt safe,
I wouldnt drink it, but that isnt the case here.

No health problems in my family.

== 8 of 14 ==
Date: Mon, Oct 3 2011 12:33 pm
From: "Trevor Wilson"

kreed wrote:
> On Oct 3, 5:24 pm, "Trevor Wilson" <tre...@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>> kreed wrote:
>>> On Oct 3, 4:05 pm, who where <no...@home.net> wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 2 Oct 2011 20:15:59 -0700 (PDT), kreed
>>>> <kenreed1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>> So in other words, the brewing process generates CO2 ?
>>
>>>> Yes.
>>
>>> Good, thank you for confirming that.
>>
>> **You're most welcome.
>>
> For what ?

**For this:

"**BIG difference. Beer and some sparkling wines generate their own CO2 via
the fermentation process." 10/2/2011

--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

== 9 of 14 ==
Date: Mon, Oct 3 2011 1:33 pm
From: Roger Blake

On 2011-10-01, Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:
> **Humans (and pretty much every other critter on the planet) will gain, when
> (or, more likely, IF) CO2 levels are reduced.

Riiiight. And if you close your eyes, Tinkerbell will live.

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roger Blake (Change "invalid" to "com" for email. Google Groups killfiled.)

"Climate policy has almost nothing to do anymore with environmental
protection... the next world climate summit in Cancun is actually
an economy summit during which the distribution of the world's
resources will be negotiated." -- Ottmar Edenhofer, IPCC
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

== 10 of 14 ==
Date: Mon, Oct 3 2011 1:54 pm
From: Franc Zabkar

On Tue, 4 Oct 2011 06:33:30 +1100, "Trevor Wilson"
<trevor@rageaudio.com.au> put finger to keyboard and composed:

>kreed wrote:
>> On Oct 3, 5:24 pm, "Trevor Wilson" <tre...@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>>> kreed wrote:
>>>> On Oct 3, 4:05 pm, who where <no...@home.net> wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 2 Oct 2011 20:15:59 -0700 (PDT), kreed
>>>>> <kenreed1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> So in other words, the brewing process generates CO2 ?
>>>
>>>>> Yes.
>>>
>>>> Good, thank you for confirming that.
>>>
>>> **You're most welcome.
>>>
>> For what ?
>
>**For this:
>
>"**BIG difference. Beer and some sparkling wines generate their own CO2 via
>the fermentation process." 10/2/2011

I don't see the distinction. If we didn't brew alcoholic beverages,
then we wouldn't be creating CO2. Therefore, CO2 generated by the
fermentation process is still essentially man-made.

It's a bit like saying that it's not our driving that causes air
pollution, it's the natural consequence of the internal combustion
process.

- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.

== 11 of 14 ==
Date: Mon, Oct 3 2011 2:36 pm
From: "Trevor Wilson"

Franc Zabkar wrote:
> On Tue, 4 Oct 2011 06:33:30 +1100, "Trevor Wilson"
> <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> put finger to keyboard and composed:
>
>> kreed wrote:
>>> On Oct 3, 5:24 pm, "Trevor Wilson" <tre...@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>>>> kreed wrote:
>>>>> On Oct 3, 4:05 pm, who where <no...@home.net> wrote:
>>>>>> On Sun, 2 Oct 2011 20:15:59 -0700 (PDT), kreed
>>>>>> <kenreed1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>> So in other words, the brewing process generates CO2 ?
>>>>
>>>>>> Yes.
>>>>
>>>>> Good, thank you for confirming that.
>>>>
>>>> **You're most welcome.
>>>>
>>> For what ?
>>
>> **For this:
>>
>> "**BIG difference. Beer and some sparkling wines generate their own
>> CO2 via the fermentation process." 10/2/2011
>
> I don't see the distinction. If we didn't brew alcoholic beverages,
> then we wouldn't be creating CO2. Therefore, CO2 generated by the
> fermentation process is still essentially man-made.
>
> It's a bit like saying that it's not our driving that causes air
> pollution, it's the natural consequence of the internal combustion
> process.

**I'm not attempting to make any such distinction. I am merely attempting to
educate the monumentally ignorant, 'kreed', in some scientific facts. IE:
That the fermentaion process creates CO2. For some reason, this idiot
continues to post unscientific nonsense. Earlier, the claim was made that
carbonated drinks were a problem, because they used CO2. A completely
different scenario, though the energy required for manufacture may create
CO2. I also made the point that locking CO2 up in soft drink containers is
actually a good thing (though an incredibly wasteful, energy intensive
method of removing CO2 from the atmosphere).

--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

== 12 of 14 ==
Date: Mon, Oct 3 2011 3:39 pm
From: amdx

On 10/1/2011 10:26 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Sat, 1 Oct 2011 17:45:33 -0700 (PDT), Robert Macy
> <robert.a.macy@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Incidentally, I'm doing my best to contribute to the problem. During
> winter, I heat my house with about 2.5 cords of oak and madrone.
> <http://transitionculture.org/2008/05/19/is-burning-wood-really-a-long-term-energy-descent-strategy/>
> "The carbon dioxide released when burning wood (about 1900g CO2
> for each 1000g of wood burnt) is balanced by the fact that
> this carbon was taken up by the tree from the air when it grew.
> So this part of the emissions is carbon-neutral. However, many
> other chemicals are produced when wood is burnt, including
> one of the most potent greenhouse gases, nitrogen dioxide;
> although the amounts may be small (200 g of CO2 equivalent
> per kg of wood burnt), the gas is 300 times more potent as
> a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide and lasts 120 years in
> the atmosphere."
> Hmmm... maybe I should install a catalytic converter on the
> woodburner.
>

Get one of these and make fuel with your homemade CO2!
http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/node/4802
Mikek :-)

== 13 of 14 ==
Date: Mon, Oct 3 2011 3:40 pm
From: "Trevor Wilson"

Roger Blake wrote:
> On 2011-10-01, Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>> **Humans (and pretty much every other critter on the planet) will
>> gain, when (or, more likely, IF) CO2 levels are reduced.
>
> Riiiight. And if you close your eyes, Tinkerbell will live.

**Nup. Just the science. Always the science. You may embrace the
supernatural, if that makes you feel more comfortable. Me? I'll stick with
the science.

--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

== 14 of 14 ==
Date: Mon, Oct 3 2011 4:20 pm
From: kreed

On Oct 4, 7:36 am, "Trevor Wilson" <tre...@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:
> Franc Zabkar wrote:
> > On Tue, 4 Oct 2011 06:33:30 +1100, "Trevor Wilson"
> > <tre...@rageaudio.com.au> put finger to keyboard and composed:
>
> >> kreed wrote:
> >>> On Oct 3, 5:24 pm, "Trevor Wilson" <tre...@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:
> >>>> kreed wrote:
> >>>>> On Oct 3, 4:05 pm, who where <no...@home.net> wrote:
> >>>>>> On Sun, 2 Oct 2011 20:15:59 -0700 (PDT), kreed
> >>>>>> <kenreed1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>>>>>> So in other words, the brewing process generates CO2 ?
>
> >>>>>> Yes.
>
> >>>>> Good, thank you for confirming that.
>
> >>>> **You're most welcome.
>
> >>> For what ?
>
> >> **For this:
>
> >> "**BIG difference. Beer and some sparkling wines generate their own
> >> CO2 via the fermentation process." 10/2/2011
>

Was clarifying since there was a difference of opinion there, and it
is always wise to take what Trevor says with a grain of salt when
discussing anything to do with carbon dioxide as he pulls out the
corporate "21st century religious ministry" called the IPCC .

> > I don't see the distinction. If we didn't brew alcoholic beverages,
> > then we wouldn't be creating CO2. Therefore, CO2 generated by the
> > fermentation process is still essentially man-made.
>
> > It's a bit like saying that it's not our driving that causes air
> > pollution, it's the natural consequence of the internal combustion
> > process.
>
> **I'm not attempting to make any such distinction. I am merely attempting to
> educate the monumentally ignorant, 'kreed', in some scientific facts. IE:
> That the fermentaion process creates CO2.

Thank you for your assistance Trevor.

For some reason, this idiot
> continues to post unscientific nonsense. Earlier, the claim was made that
> carbonated drinks were a problem, because they used CO2. A completely
> different scenario, though the energy required for manufacture may create
> CO2. I also made the point that locking CO2 up in soft drink containers is
> actually a good thing (though an incredibly wasteful, energy intensive
> method of removing CO2 from the atmosphere).
>

The CO2 comes out once you open the drinks though, or once it is
drunk, absorbed by and then expelled from the human body - and
probably a lot of CO2 (looking at if from a "warmist" point of view)
is emitted in the process of producing and transporting this CO2 in
the first place.

I don't drink the shit, so Im not contributing to this form of "carbon
pollution" (unimportant), to corporate profits (important), or to my
own bad health. (very important)

> --
> Trevor Wilsonwww.rageaudio.com.au

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Calibrating a sound level pressure meter
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/21a5e0c259fd4f68?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Oct 3 2011 1:15 am
From: "N_Cook"

If I get back to this meter. I cannot make sense of the B indicator , the
resistor chain suggests 100mV fsd but reassembled and largely functioning
meter fsd is more of order 1V.
2 db ranges 60 and 70dB are stuck together . But for good posistions
switching between ranges for differing 1KHz sine signal in, consistent "0"
dB and +6.7 dB switching betweeen adjascent ranges. Don't know if that 6.7
instead of 10 is due to sine rather than noise source, will have to try
again with an attenuateable noise signal

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Any opinions, experiences with Best Buy store brand Dynex HDTV's?
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/365264a566b3ba21?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Oct 3 2011 6:27 am
From: chuck

On Sun, 2 Oct 2011 15:45:42 -0700 (PDT), muzician21
<muzician21@yahoo.com> wrote:

>There are some good prices on Dynex (Best Buy house brand) TV's right
>now. They're at the bargain end, though I read they're made by LG. Are
>they certifiable crap or decent? Not really concerned with esoteric
>picture issues and don't care about onboard sound as I plan on using
>other speakers, mostly interested in durability. The similarly priced
>Emerson's from Walmart seem to have very hit and miss reliability, the
>online reviews I've read for Dynex seem to be better. Hoping
>electronics savvy folks here will have some insights as to the
>components.
>
>Is there a particular brand you regard as being as close to
>bulletproof as you're going to get with an HDTV?
>
>Thanks for any input.

I can't vouch for Dynex. However, we use an Insignia (Best Buy's other
house brand) 32" monitor in an operation where it is on from 8 AM
until 10 PM every weekday for 2 years now. It hasn't had any problems
and has an very good picture. Chuck

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Oct 3 2011 2:19 pm
From: DewDude

On Oct 3, 9:27 am, chuck <ch...@deja.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 2 Oct 2011 15:45:42 -0700 (PDT), muzician21
>
> <muzicia...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >There are some good prices on Dynex (Best Buy house brand) TV's right
> >now. They're at the bargain end, though I read they're made by LG. Are
> >they certifiable crap or decent? Not really concerned with esoteric
> >picture issues and don't care about onboard sound as I plan on using
> >other speakers, mostly interested in durability. The similarly priced
> >Emerson's from Walmart seem to have very hit and miss reliability, the
> >online reviews I've read for Dynex seem to be better. Hoping
> >electronics savvy folks here will have some insights as to the
> >components.
>
> >Is there a particular brand you regard as being as close to
> >bulletproof as you're going to get with an HDTV?
>
> >Thanks for any input.
>
> I can't vouch for Dynex. However, we use an Insignia (Best Buy's other
> house brand) 32" monitor in an operation where it is on from 8 AM
> until 10 PM every weekday for 2 years now. It hasn't had any problems
> and has an very good picture. Chuck

Last I knew....Funai was a MAJOR manufacturer of house brands. I
believe all the Insignia stuff is Funai. My old Memorex DVD player
said Memocorp, which was reselling Funai brands.

Oh...and Emerson...is made by Funai. if the price points and features
are the same...that's likely who made the Dynex brand TV.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Fender twin reverb - dog's breakfast
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/fc9c59a309df1d03?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Oct 3 2011 8:32 am
From: "N_Cook"

Low level bacon and eggs noise and low level whistling kettle noise. Goes if
V1 is pulled , no difference with change of valve V1. Noises disappear if no
input and normal volume turned to maximum.
Leaky DC decoupling cap between first and second triode ?

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Oct 3 2011 9:01 am
From: "N_Cook"

you can play through a vib ip with no pedal sw and its fine, so not a
V2.....onwards problem

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Oct 3 2011 2:21 pm
From: DewDude

On Oct 3, 12:01 pm, "N_Cook" <dive...@tcp.co.uk> wrote:
> you can play through a vib ip with no pedal sw and its fine, so not a
> V2.....onwards problem

What are the tubes designations for V1? It sounds like some sort of
cap problem? Have you tried shotgunning it and changing all the caps?

==============================================================================
TOPIC: unijunction needed
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/ecf807243db79a90?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Oct 3 2011 1:17 pm
From: "Charles"

"alp soandso" wrote in message news:jT9gq.4119$WF1.1302@newsfe01.iad...

Jeff,
I don't use newsgroups very often. I hope I have done something taboo by
crossposting. As a matter of fact, there are some interesting links in a
reply in that other group.

Charles, Thanks. Every little bit helps.
Yes, perhaps one of those will work. Electronics is not my strong suit.
I'll have a bit of a time figuring out which one.

You are most welcome. The 2N4870 will probably work.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: OT Re: CFLs - retrofitting low ESR capacitors
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/4b33f31f667954a0?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Oct 3 2011 1:33 pm
From: "Trevor Wilson"

Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Sat, 1 Oct 2011 17:30:35 +1000, "Trevor Wilson"
> <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>
>>> <http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/crud/Vostok_Petit_data_03.jpg>
>
>> **I've studied the graphs in some considerable detail over the years
>> and have noted that CO2 rise sometimes precedes temperature rise and
>> sometimes it lags. This fits in well with current theory on how
>> temperature changes have occured in the past. Not all have been
>> caused by CO2 rise. The most important factor to note, however, is
>> that CO2 levels and temperature levels track each other very
>> closely. When one goes up, the other does too.
>
> You can't have it both ways.

**Of course you can. High CO2 levels lead to rising temperatures. High
temperatures drive CO2 out of solution from the oceans. When one rises, the
other follows.

Either warming causes a CO2 increase, or
> CO2 causes a warming increase.

**Of both.

Since they track each other, it's
> presumed that there's a cause and effect mechanism in operation.

**Well, we KNOW that CO2 acts as a GHG. That has been shown experimentally
many times.

If
> your claim of mutual causality were true, where an increase in either
> factor causes an increase in the other, then that's positive feedback.

**Correct.

> Temperature and CO2 would simply increase without any limit, causing
> the planet to look like Venus.

**Not necessarily. We don't have as much CO2 available as there is on Venus,
for instance. We also don't know precisely what caused prior warmings or
high CO2 levels. We are also much further out from the Sun than Venus is.
Make no mistake: The Sun is the major driver of temperatures on this planet.
CO2 is a relatively small driver. It is NOT an insignificant driver.

We've survived 5 temperature cycles in
> the last 500,000 years which demonstrates that it's NOT postive
> feedback.

**Not quite. The prior warming periods occured over many thousands of years.
This present warming is occuring within a few hundred. It is occuring MUCH
faster that at any time in the past few hundred million years. It is the
extreme rapidity of the present warming that is causing considerable
concern.

>
> <http://rps3.com/Files/AGW/VOSTOKICECoreObservations_Stewart2009.pdf>
> Assuming the five temperature maximums are related to the 1st
> Order 100,000 year Milankovitch cycles, CO2 had little effect
> is maintaining the high temperatures. As seen in Cycle 4,
> even though CO2 levels were at maximum 299 ppmv CO2,
> temperature did not continue to increase, but actually made
> a abrupt reversal. Therefore it appears that the mechanical
> temperature rise & fall associated with 1st order Milankovitch
> cycles appear to overwhelm any warming effect associated with
> CO2, for CO2 levels below 299 ppmv;

**Except that CO2 levels are presently around 385ppm and rising. As is
average temperature.

--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Oct 3 2011 1:41 pm
From: "Trevor Wilson"

josephkk wrote:
> On Sun, 2 Oct 2011 15:23:10 +1100, "Trevor Wilson"
> <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>
>>
>>>> **I've studied the graphs in some considerable detail over the
>>>> years and have noted that CO2 rise sometimes precedes temperature
>>>> rise and sometimes it lags. This fits in well with current theory
>>>> on how temperature changes have occured in the past. Not all have
>>>> been caused by CO2 rise. The most important factor to note,
>>>> however, is that CO2 levels and temperature levels track each
>>>> other very closely. When one goes up, the other does too.
>>>
>>> Except for two very important things: 1) correlation is NOT
>>> causation.
>>
>> **I never suggested otherwise. Read my words more carefully in
>> future.
>>
>> 2)
>>> effect cannot precede cause.
>>
>> **Duh. I suggest you study up on the sequence of events during times
>> of high CO2 levels.
>>
>> The graph is very clear on temperature
>>> change preceding CO2 levels generally.
>
> Only in seeming on the IPCC time reversed graphs. Which when read
> correctly shows CO2 follows temperature!!

**I suggest you examine the graphs VERY carefully.

>>
>> **Incorrect. The graphs span several hundred thousand years. The
>> graph clearly shows that CO2 rise precedes temperature rise several
>> times. When CO2 levels rise, temperature rise follows. When
>> temperatures rise, CO2 is outgassed from the oceans, causing rising
>> CO2 levels. When CO2 levels rise, temperature rise follows. And so
>> on.
>
> You need to study both the IPCC graph and the time orientation
> corrected graphs (thanks Jeff) a lot more then.

**I've been doing so for many years. I suggest you do likewise. It is
important that you understand the process, rather than just quickly looking
at the graphs. Incorrect assumptions can easily be made.

The raw data in the
> IPCC graph is increasing depth in the ice core, and thus farther back
> in time. Do read the labels carefully. Temperture generally
> precedes CO2 rather consistently (both increases and decreases).
>
> :-))

**Your words are almost correct. Temperature SOMETIMES precedes CO2 level
rise and SOMETIMES it lags.

--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

==============================================================================
TOPIC: No sync crt Tv
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/78e3ce8e9b81dc17?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Oct 3 2011 1:35 pm
From: "Dav.p"

> The obvious place to start is at the sync input pin on the SCART
> connector. From pin #16, it becomes P/S on connector PV04
>
> From there, I kinda ... lose it on the schematics.
> I'm assuming, here, that SCART doesn't use sync-on-green
> signalling, but uses the 'blanking' input in the form of
> a 'sandcastle' signal (i.e. sync plus blanking info).

Thank you, for now i comment what i understand..
so you say that P/Sw is used as a sync input (+blank)?
i don't knew it well... so maybe the faulty part is only that
signal? Since i have made an error on reconnecting cables to Crt,
(i have connected a 2 little wire connector with a X-ray signal on it (??)
with an empty socket, there was 2 empty sockets, on the PSU, with
the optional function of a P/C signal for switching on PSU from mo.bo.)
tv now seems to have one more problem, i hope i solve this soon,
for now i need to know, the RGB input from scart card goes on the teletext
card to be MUXed with TEXT rgb signal, to avoid a problem to the Mux,
i have connected with wire the scart rgb IN with the out in this same card,
also the signal named F/Sw (?? before was P/Sw), in the out connector near
P/Sw (named only Sw) there is a signal Sh, is this a sync signal also?
BYE.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Samsung BD-C6900 Blu-Ray drive replacement
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/b1692c93ba7961de?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Oct 3 2011 2:16 pm
From: DewDude

On Oct 2, 8:28 am, Andrew Rossmann
<andysnewsreply@no_junk.comcast.net> wrote:
> In article <7634554b-6b0b-4f4c-af83-62a6c26cc376
> @j19g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>, dewd...@gmail.com says...
>
>
>
> > Hey guys.
>
> > I've got a BD-C6900 that I'd like to replace the drive in. The unit
> > appears to have two different identifying marks for the drive. The
> > part number AK96-01214P as well as BD-P6A-1B loader. Looking around I
> > see various references to BD-P6A loaders and according to a Samsung
> > part site, there are two different drives associated with that unit. I
> > don't know the differences, so I'm hoping maybe someone here has a
> > service manual or knowledge of Samsung units as to suggest which part
> > numbers I can replace this defective drive with.
>
> > I'm pretty sure the Blu-Ray laser is dead as it will not read Blu-Rays
> > but will read DVD's just fine. I've not attempted to power up the
> > lasers to physically try to see.
>
> These days, it may be cheaper to replace the entire unit than just the
> drive.
>
> --
> If there is a no_junk in my address, please REMOVE it before replying!
> All junk mail senders will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the
> law!!http://home.comcast.net/~andyross

All depends. It's a 3D Blu-Ray unit...and I can't get a decent one of
those for under $120. Replacement drive from Samsung...when they're in
stock, is $102. For $102 I can get a 3d player, but it won't have
internet or media drive support or any of that...this one does.

Plus, there's also the fact that if I had a list of actual compatible
drives, I can pick one up on ebay for about $30.

In most cases, it is cheaper to buy a new one, but sometimes, you can
get away with replacing a module.

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

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

Electronics

sci.electronics.repair - 25 new messages in 8 topics - digest

No Response to "sci.electronics.repair - 25 new messages in 8 topics - digest"

Post a Comment

Blog Roll

Blog Archive