Ow!

Graeme said:

John Hearns <[email hidden]> wrote in
news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

How many electrons are used by a house using a 1KW electric
fire for a month on a 250V AC (hint here) circuit.

I didn't think they were "used", more kind of "borrowed".

Of course they're used; they're just not used up. It's a good thing
they still work actually, as most of them are rather old.

--
Dave...

Tom Anderson said:

Sorry to hear about that. What happened? I used to live half a mile
from that bridge, and cycle to work under it. It's a manky old
corner, what with the bridge, mud, random concrete and cobbled ramp
into the park, but i never really had a problem with it.

Heading north on Monday evening in pi*ssing rain. Slightly not straight
heading onto the metal sheet stuff under the bridge; on attempting to
straighten up the front wheel lost grip and down I went, making a perfect
one-point landing on my sorely-abused right knee. With the computer bracket
on that particular bike being a tad insecure, the computer continued its
northward movement into the cut. Interestingly, this is the first time for
about two years worth of BST that it has rained on a Monday evening...

I have now discovered that the brake disc is rubbing the left fork leg too,
so a fork transplant my be required too.

Still, at least the fact of wearing a martlehat saved me from drowning...

--
Dave Larrington - <http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/>
Like Kant, it is my wish to create my own individual epistemology. But
I also wish to find out what is for pudding.

"wafflycat" <waffles*AT*v21net*DOT*co*DOT*uk> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Dave Larrington" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I now have:...
o two holes in my knee...

Quoted message said:

Ouchie, indeed. Hope the holes in the person heal soon.

He wrote holes in his *knee*, not holes in his *person*! Prince Albert has a
lot to answer for ;-)

--
MatSav

dkahn400 said:

Graeme said:

John Hearns <[email hidden]> wrote in
news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

How many electrons are used by a house using a 1KW electric fire for a
month on a 250V AC (hint here) circuit.

I didn't think they were "used", more kind of "borrowed".

Of course they're used; they're just not used up. It's a good thing they
still work actually, as most of them are rather old.

Ah, but they go back to the power station to be cleaned once they've been
used, so they're in good nick!

tom

--
It's amazing how often conversations with you have the imaginary sound of human bones being crushed to rubble in the background. -- itchyfidget, to snowking

David Martin said:

On 17/5/05 9:00 pm, in article [email hidden],

John Hearns said:

Quoted message said:

To be environmentally responsible and not waste electrons (*) can we
give this phrase a number that we quote whenever the reply is warranted?

STABB ?

(*) How so? How many electrons are used by a house using a 1KW electric
fire for a month on a 250V AC (hint here) circuit.

How many would flow through the system in 1/50 second given a peak
voltage of 440 (RMS 250) and a sinusoidal distribution for potential
(assuming flow is proportional to potential..)

We did this in physics at school. Actually, no - we did this, then used
the density of electrons in metal to work out the average speed of
electrons in a wire. Turns out to be pretty poky - a few millimetres per
second, or microns per second, or something else quite similar to the
speed of traffic in London.

Anyway, you can work out the current by dividing power by voltage. I'm
pretty bad with integrals, so i'm going to take the rms voltage and
pretend it's constant DC; i won't be out by more than a factor of two,
which is good going for me. Current is in amps, which are really coulombs
per second, so you now know what the flux of charge is. Since you also
know the charge on the electon (1.6e-19 C), you can work out how many
electrons that is. Comes out as about 2.8e19 electrons per second (~7.5e25
a month). It's probably more like 2e19 per second (5e25 a month) if you do
the maths properly. In an AC circuit, of course, that counts electrons
going both ways past a point twice, but that's how you count the
aforementioned traffic, so it's good enough for me.

Do i get a lolly?

Maybe not until i can explain how Mr Nankivell got a figure a couple of
orders of magnitude bigger than mine. If he's right, though, he's only
getting 6.7 V out of each of his electrons, which is a scandalous waste of
potential.

tom

--
It's amazing how often conversations with you have the imaginary sound of human bones being crushed to rubble in the background. -- itchyfidget, to snowking

Dave Larrington said:

Tom Anderson said:

Sorry to hear about that. What happened? I used to live half a mile
from that bridge, and cycle to work under it. It's a manky old corner,
what with the bridge, mud, random concrete and cobbled ramp into the
park, but i never really had a problem with it.

Heading north on Monday evening in pi*ssing rain. Slightly not straight
heading onto the metal sheet stuff under the bridge; on attempting to
straighten up the front wheel lost grip and down I went, making a perfect
one-point landing on my sorely-abused right knee.

Ah, i see. Ouch indeed.

So, the problem's not so much that the metal's knobbly as that it's smooth
enough to skid on easily when wet - perhaps not nobbly enough! One day,
hopefully, that whole route will be properly cared-for and marked out
tarmac, from Bow to Hertford.

tom

--
It's amazing how often conversations with you have the imaginary sound of human bones being crushed to rubble in the background. -- itchyfidget, to snowking

On Thu, 19 May 2005 00:59:30 +0100 someone who may be Tom Anderson
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

Ah, but they go back to the power station to be cleaned once they've been
used, so they're in good nick!

That is the case with good old DC. However, with this new fangled AC
stuff they are not cleaned or recharged at the power station, merely
waggled backwards and forwards. All very mysterious:-)

Anyway, do electrons actually exist?

--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

David Hansen said:

Anyway, do electrons actually exist?

Yes. I'm positive about that.

R.

Al C-F said:

On Tue, 17 May 2005 21:00:31 +0100, John Hearns <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

How many electrons are used by a house using a 1KW electric fire for a
month on a 250V AC (hint here) circuit.

Define 'used'.

Sorry, bad terminology. Simon Brooke's reply makes it clear.
Old physics 'trick question'.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Anyway, do electrons actually exist?

Yes. I'm positive about that.

Strange. I had searched but came up a negative.

On 19/5/05 10:20 am, in article
[email hidden], "Mark Thompson"

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Anyway, do electrons actually exist?

Yes. I'm positive about that.

Strange. I had searched but came up a negative.

I sense the potential for a highly charged debate..

Maybe it should be brought back down to earth before we get grounded.

...d

pop quiz. Which model of clipless pedal would an electron prefer and why?

Mark Thompson said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Anyway, do electrons actually exist?

Yes. I'm positive about that.

Strange. I had searched but came up a negative.

You're searching in the wrong field.

R.

Richard said:

Mark Thompson said:

Quoted message said:

>Anyway, do electrons actually exist?

Yes. I'm positive about that.

Strange. I had searched but came up a negative.

You're searching in the wrong field.

For goodness sake, more than one joke about electrons is simply
repellant.

--
Trevor Barton

David Martin said:

pop quiz. Which model of clipless pedal would an electron prefer
and why?

Whichever pedal it chose it would presumably be fitted to a Litespeed.

--
Dave...

Tom Anderson said:

Maybe not until i can explain how Mr Nankivell got a figure a couple
of orders of magnitude bigger than mine. If he's right, though, he's
only getting 6.7 V out of each of his electrons, which is a
scandalous waste of potential.

I'm getting 8.187x10^-14J out of each of my electrons, which I believe is as
desired. I'm not entirely sure of the mechanism for this, what with neutrons
being the only atomic particles converted directly to electricity for the
national grid, but I'm sure there's a way.

A

Simon Brooke said:

in message <[email hidden]>,

Ambrose Nankivell (') said:

John Hearns said:

> To be environmentally responsible and not waste electrons (*) can
> we give this phrase a number that we quote whenever the reply is
> warranted? STABB ?

(*) How so?
How many electrons are used by a house using a 1KW electric fire for
a month on a 250V AC (hint here) circuit.

2.46 * 10^27 ?

Trick question. AC, so the net movement of electrons is effectively
nil; they just shake back and forth a bit. However there is a
difference between a net movement and 'use'.

Fair point, but it's pretty clear it directly used 4.46 * 10^23 neutrons
(assuming it's a UK house, of which 20% of its electricity is generated by
nuclear power with a 50% efficiency.)

A