Password avoidance


B

Bob I

On Wed, 17 Mar 2010 10:05:16 -0500, Dave wrote:

If you had looked at the link I provided, you would have seen that Watt's
Law has nothing to do with electricity.

Your criticism of Char Jackson's error was otherwise valid, of course.

I forget the name of another law: when you post a correction in Usenet, you
will make an error in *your* post :)
Murphy's <grin>
 
Ad

Advertisements

D

Dave

Gene E. Bloch said:
There's not a statement in this reply of yours that is borne out by your
behavior in this thread. Not one. I mean this sincerely and literally.
If you are referring to yourself I think I have been respectful in all my
replies to you. If you are referring to others, sometimes people get the
rock thrown back at them.
I have also seen no evidence that you understood anything that I said in
any of my posts here, but plenty of evidence that you misinterpreted
almost
everything I posted, and the same for your interpretation of what Char
Jackson posted.
I did in fact read all the links you posted and understood what you said. I
disagreed with most of what you posted in relation to electrical, and
provided links to back it up, how many did you read? The parts that were not
germane to the topic at hand I tried to ignore.

BTW, I don't even agree all that much with Char, but we
didn't need to insult each other - or to insult you for that matter (at
least until you started your series of insults and other ad-hominem
arguments).
I did insult Char as he persisted in posting the same thing over and over
without any evidence to support his assumptions. And, it didn't look like he
was looking at any of the back-up links I provided for him either.
My memory isn't what it used to be, but as I remember it he started the
personal attack first. I, childishly I admit, responded in kind and finally
quit responding to his posts with no proof, just continued assumptions.
None of my arguments were ad-hominem, they were never presented as a proof
just because someone said it, I backed up all my presentations with links
for reference. I don't think I need to use them for either Watt's Law or
Ohm's law, but I presented them so others can verify for themselves what I
post if they choose.
 
G

Gene E. Bloch

None of my arguments were ad-hominem, they were never presented as a proof
just because someone said it
You should look up the definition of ad hominem.

You continue to misinterpret my posts. I am unable to see any point in
posting any further replies to you. That's why I quoted & remarked on only
the one line above...since we can at least hope that you have and can
understand a dictionary.
 
G

Gene E. Bloch

Murphy's <grin>
No, it has another name. It is, of course, most probably a corollary of
Murphy's law.

I'm going to test my Googling ability. Hold on, I'll be back in a moment.

(A bit of time elapses)

OK, here's Murphy's Law:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murphy's_law

But what I wanted was Skitt's Law, which I found in the S's on this page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_eponymous_laws

From where I quote it:
Skitt's law ¡X A corollary of Muphry's law, variously expressed as, "Any
post correcting an error in another post will contain at least one error
itself," or, "The likelihood of an error in a post is directly proportional
to the embarrassment it will cause the poster."

Look closely and notice that Skitt is not a corollary of *Murphy*'s Law,
according to the above.

Are we having fun yet? (I am!)
 
D

Dave

Gene E. Bloch said:
You should look up the definition of ad hominem.
See if this one works for you.
You continue to misinterpret my posts. I am unable to see any point in
posting any further replies to you. That's why I quoted & remarked on only
the one line above...since we can at least hope that you have and can
understand a dictionary.
Sounds like more of the ad-hominem to me. But, whatever, thanks for wishing
me a dictionary. As soon as I get it I'm going to look up head-in-the-sand.
See, even I can get ad-hominemic. :-D
Dave
 
S

Sam E

Sam said:
Sam E wrote:
[snip]

You may be using a computer for 60 years or more. 60 years, and ONE
logon per day. Now you've got over 21,914 logons. At 5 seconds each,
that's more than 24 hours wasted on repeatedly entering your password.
That is fine
What's "this"? Are you continuing to imagine that I was LIMITING
myself to ONE DAY? How many times do you log on during your LIFE? You
spend a lot more than 5 seconds logging on.

if it is your own computer.
Do it at work that demands security, and you'll find yourself out of a job.
That is totally ridiculous. All it takes is an outsider to get by
password security and it is all over with. What the OP wants is not
worth it.
You replied to the wrong person. I asked questions.
I remember a DOD gal that managed a VMS cluster and she got pretty lazy
and wrote down her password, only because VMS does not allow
passwordless systems, and the system got compromised. She spent the
next year going from government facitly to facility teaching security
after that snafu.
It isn't about how many times a year you have to login... why do you
think MS provided a password mechanism in the first place?
It helps to keep outsiders on the net from just waltzing in and snooping
thru your files.
Yes, however I'm not talking about that. I replied to someone who said
"it only takes 5 seconds". I said that's not true. I said NONE of this
other junk. Bye.
 
Ad

Advertisements

G

Gene E. Bloch

See if this one works for you.


Sounds like more of the ad-hominem to me. But, whatever, thanks for wishing
me a dictionary. As soon as I get it I'm going to look up head-in-the-sand.
See, even I can get ad-hominemic. :-D
Dave
Actually, I see your reply as a pretty mellow post. Maybe we're getting
tied of yelling at each other.

Which would be a good plan, if it's possible.

I think of 21:00/9PM as pretty late here, but you seem to be posting at
around midnight. Maybe it's too late in the day to argue :)
 
D

Dave

Gene E. Bloch said:
Actually, I see your reply as a pretty mellow post. Maybe we're getting
tied of yelling at each other.

Which would be a good plan, if it's possible.

I think of 21:00/9PM as pretty late here, but you seem to be posting at
around midnight. Maybe it's too late in the day to argue :)
It's 11 PM or so. I study for a while, then check mail and ng and study for
a while until I get tired. Since I retired I stay up a lot later than I used
to.
Dave
 
G

GreyCloud

Dave said:
Actually, James Watt never performed any electrical experiments, but
there is a Watt's Law that is used in electrics and electronics.
Of course we always have the P=IE equation that is explained in physics
books. There are also plenty of explanations in the physics books on
how it has been equated to James Watt. In this I can quote:

"WORK, POWER, AND ENERGY ... Before we can discuss the next important
part of this lesson, power in d-c circuits, it is important that you
know the difference between work, power, energy.

In a scientific sense, work is the overcoming of the opposition. A man
does work when he lifts a crated television set from the warehouse
platform into a truck or when he drags the crate along the platform. But
the man does no work at all, in the scientific sense of the word, no
matter how hard he pushes or pulls if he does not lift or move the
crate. If the resistance offered by the crate to being moved is not
overcome, no work is done.

Work is measured by the product of a force times the distance through
which the force moves. In a mechanical system, the most common unit of
work is the foot-pound.

In an electrical system, work is measured in watthours or
kilowatt-hours. One kilowatthour of work in an electrical system equals
approximately 2,660,000 ft-lb (foot-pounds) of work.

The work done by a man carrying a 50-lb audio amplifier up a flight of
stairs 12 ft high is 50 lb X 12 ft = 600 ft-lb. From the standpoint of
work done, it makes no difference whether the man does the job in an
hour or in a minute.

But the amount of power required to do the job does depend on time. The
amount of power required to do a job in one minute is 60 times the power
required to do it in one hour. The term "power" includes the idea of
time. Power is the speed, or rate, of doing work. Then,


power = work or work = power X time
----
time

The popular unit for measuring power in mechanical systems is the
horsepower. If a machine can do 33,000 ft-lb of work in one minute, its
power is one horsepower.

The practical units of power in electrical circuits are the watt and
kilowatt. One kilowatt (abbreviated kw) equals 1000 watts. Horse-power
and watts are related as follows:

1 hp = 746 watts

1 kw = 1.34 hp

The work done in an electrical circuit, kilowatthours, equals the power
in kilowatts times the number of hours. For example, if the power
required to operate a motor is 2 kw and the motor operates for 7 hr, the
work done is 2 X 7 = 14 kwhr (kilowatthours).

Energy is the capacity to do work. For example, if a battery is able to
do 1 kwhr of work before it must be recharged, the energy stored by the
battery is 1 kwhr. The difference between work and energy is that work
is what has been done by a device, while energy indicates the amount of
work which a source of energy is able to do.

There are many types of energy. A moving car, for example, has
mechanical energy. A charged battery has chemical energy. A hot stove
has heat energy.

An important concept about energy is that, when work is done, the energy
used to do the work is never used up; it is simply changed from one form
to another.

For example, suppose a charged battery causes current to flow in a
circuit. Chemical energy of the battery has changed to electric energy
in the circuit. Suppose the electric energy of the circuit causes a
vacuum-tube filament to heat up; now the electric energy has changed to
heat energy. When someone talks into a microphone and thus generates an
input signal to an amplifier, the acoustic energy of the sound waves is
changed into electric energy."

From my old physics handout lab sheets back in 1965.
It is
taken from James Watt since what we are measuring in this electrical
application is power. Since it is a measure of power (which Law Watt did
compile), it is directly related to a unit of energy called a Joule and
indirectly related to Horsepower. Neither of those terms are used much
in electrical analysis, but when or if you attend a program on
electronics you will learn how to apply these and cross-check between
any or all of them, or either get a bad grade or flunk out. All of these
units of measurement are standards in electricity and used constantly.
It has no bearing on steam and/or mechanical energy producing devices
that Watt did perform experiments on, other than it is related due to it
being a measure of a form of power, amount of electrons that move past a
noted point at a noted rate of flow for a noted period of time.
You don't have to take my word for any of this, search for Watt's Law
and you will see references that show this is a Law describing
electrical power. If you read long enough you will find all the
information I've posted here, which agrees with your assessment for the
most part, and if you don't read far enough you may come to the
conclusion Watt's Law has nothing to do with electrical and you would be
mistaken.

There is a connection tho that watts

You are indirectly correct in this as heat is a byproduct of power, in
this case electrical, and has to be factored in whenever you move past
the simplistic parts of circuit analysis.

I think that a good read in a physics book

There's some fun in letting the smoke out. :-D
The worst smelling component is the old selenium rectifier. Phew!
 
Ad

Advertisements

D

Dave

GreyCloud said:
Of course we always have the P=IE equation that is explained in physics
books. There are also plenty of explanations in the physics books on how
it has been equated to James Watt. In this I can quote:

"WORK, POWER, AND ENERGY ... Before we can discuss the next important part
of this lesson, power in d-c circuits, it is important that you know the
difference between work, power, energy.

In a scientific sense, work is the overcoming of the opposition. A man
does work when he lifts a crated television set from the warehouse
platform into a truck or when he drags the crate along the platform. But
the man does no work at all, in the scientific sense of the word, no
matter how hard he pushes or pulls if he does not lift or move the crate.
If the resistance offered by the crate to being moved is not overcome, no
work is done.

Work is measured by the product of a force times the distance through
which the force moves. In a mechanical system, the most common unit of
work is the foot-pound.

In an electrical system, work is measured in watthours or kilowatt-hours.
One kilowatthour of work in an electrical system equals approximately
2,660,000 ft-lb (foot-pounds) of work.

The work done by a man carrying a 50-lb audio amplifier up a flight of
stairs 12 ft high is 50 lb X 12 ft = 600 ft-lb. From the standpoint of
work done, it makes no difference whether the man does the job in an hour
or in a minute.

But the amount of power required to do the job does depend on time. The
amount of power required to do a job in one minute is 60 times the power
required to do it in one hour. The term "power" includes the idea of time.
Power is the speed, or rate, of doing work. Then,


power = work or work = power X time
----
time

The popular unit for measuring power in mechanical systems is the
horsepower. If a machine can do 33,000 ft-lb of work in one minute, its
power is one horsepower.

The practical units of power in electrical circuits are the watt and
kilowatt. One kilowatt (abbreviated kw) equals 1000 watts. Horse-power and
watts are related as follows:

1 hp = 746 watts

1 kw = 1.34 hp

The work done in an electrical circuit, kilowatthours, equals the power in
kilowatts times the number of hours. For example, if the power required to
operate a motor is 2 kw and the motor operates for 7 hr, the work done is
2 X 7 = 14 kwhr (kilowatthours).

Energy is the capacity to do work. For example, if a battery is able to do
1 kwhr of work before it must be recharged, the energy stored by the
battery is 1 kwhr. The difference between work and energy is that work is
what has been done by a device, while energy indicates the amount of work
which a source of energy is able to do.

There are many types of energy. A moving car, for example, has mechanical
energy. A charged battery has chemical energy. A hot stove has heat
energy.

An important concept about energy is that, when work is done, the energy
used to do the work is never used up; it is simply changed from one form
to another.

For example, suppose a charged battery causes current to flow in a
circuit. Chemical energy of the battery has changed to electric energy in
the circuit. Suppose the electric energy of the circuit causes a
vacuum-tube filament to heat up; now the electric energy has changed to
heat energy. When someone talks into a microphone and thus generates an
input signal to an amplifier, the acoustic energy of the sound waves is
changed into electric energy."

From my old physics handout lab sheets back in 1965.


The worst smelling component is the old selenium rectifier. Phew!
Enjoyed your dissertation, well put and spot on.
Dave
 
Ad

Advertisements


Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top