Making sense of watts, amps and volts -- a typo?

[Chiron]

Except, perhaps, to hone one's flaming skills?

Good point; though it seems these skills are sufficiently developed in
this NG.

 

[[email protected]]

It's just barely possible that we went to different universities.

Quite possible. I hear there are more than a handful that have EE programs.

 

[[email protected]]

Still on the meds I see?

Meds? Why yes, I've said a few times that I take Metopolol. It wouldn't help
your condition, though.

Putting all your bull shit aside, I don't see you as much of a prize
winner, unless you want to count on how much of ass you really are. And
take my word for it, you are an ass. I doubt very much there are many
here that would say otherwise in your behalf.

Of course you don't; too stupid.

As far as JF being a hack? I've seen more material come out of him
that would actually work with plenty of help behind it to support those
that are interested. You on the other hand would rather sit there in
your natural domain and make an ass out of yourself. And you do that
very well. Must be one of your strong points.

If you thing that zero-crossing hairball was "help", well, you would.

Maybe JF hasn't had technical schooling in this subject, as "I" and
many others here, have however, I can say that his offerings are much
more interesting to look at rather than your material, which is most of
nothing.

Same as you, right? Since you're defending him instead of denying that you're
just another hack...

As for myself, You may perceive me as a hack, most likely because you
yourself just assume it is safer that way. You know, just follow the
sheep. Well, you are one of the sheep. I doubt if you could even
truly be able to identify who is and what constitutes a hack/hacker.

You are clearly a hack. No denying it.

<self-serving crap deleted>

 

[[email protected]]

I never said otherwise, moron. Only a real moron uses strawman tactics like
you, moron.

 

[[email protected]]

Well, you do draw files.

 

[[email protected]]

What's up, KRW?
You seem unusually contentious this evening.
It's unusual.

Ask Fields. He's the asshole who started this shit.

This whole thread got out of hand pretty quickly for
a subject that could have been handled with one sentence.
Then a couple more if phase angle needed to be addressed.

Fields has no interest in facts or communication. He's all about his ego and
to boost his he has to tear his betters down.

 

[[email protected]]

No, but the voltage can.

Indeed. That's the point. Voltage squared => power.

 

[[email protected]]

Actually, that was what my vague wonderings were trying to get at. I
remembered that RMS had *something* to do with values going negative; but
I couldn't remember the details. Of course, what I was groping for only
applied to the values that tended to average out to zero, so I was still
pretty wide of the mark... Oh, well.

It's kind of strange to find pedantry in an electronics group. Back in
the day (late seventies, early eighties) we were happy if we were within
10% of reality.

Some use pedantry to attempt to show how "brilliant" they are. It's one of
Field's trademarks.

 

[[email protected]]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1



He's right and you are wrong. It all depends on the load. In an AC
circuit, with a purely resistive load, VA = Watts. The power factor is
one Hundred percent.

What a dumbass. When was the last time your multimeter gave you the vector
voltage? What does the vector voltage have to do with harmonic content?

That power factor percentage is just another name for the cosine of
the angle between VA and Watts. No angle = Cos (0) = 1 = 100 percent.

Wrong. Even a newb knows that this doesn't account for the harmonic content.

If it were a purely inductive load, the power factor would be Cos (90)
= 0

It's when the load gives you a reactive power triangle that you get
watts on the bottom, VAR (reactive) going vertical and VA on the
hypotenuse.

You may be confusing RMS values for PF.

You must me a moron.

 

[Chiron]

Indeed. That's the point. Voltage squared => power.

Are you saying that voltage squared *equals* power? Because if so, it
doesn't.

But what are you saying then? I don't recognize the symbol => - or at
least, I don't know what it is intended to represent.

My question was originally about why power couldn't have an RMS value.
Someone said it couldn't happen. Someone else said that the calculation
could be performed, but that it had no physical meaning.

Upon investigation, I found that the calculation can be performed, and
that the result (RMS power) has a physical meaning. I also found that
this meaning isn't particularly useful, which is probably what people
were trying to say.

 

[Chiron]

Some use pedantry to attempt to show how "brilliant" they are. It's one
of Field's trademarks.

IIRC, the word "pedant" has the same root as the word "pederasty."

 

[[email protected]]

Are you saying that voltage squared *equals* power? Because if so, it
doesn't.

I did *NOT* say that. Stop doing a Fields. All things equal, power is
proportional to voltage squared. Voltage squared (divided by resistance) gets
you power.

But what are you saying then? I don't recognize the symbol => - or at
least, I don't know what it is intended to represent.
Implies.

My question was originally about why power couldn't have an RMS value.

....and I answered, it can. You can RMS the number of shoes you can see but
it's rather meaningless. The RMS values of voltage and current have meaning
because (relative, for the pendants out there) power can be inferred from
them. Squaring power gets you nothing useful so RMS power is equally useless.

Someone said it couldn't happen. Someone else said that the calculation
could be performed, but that it had no physical meaning.

I said that. Of course you can do the calculation but you can take the RMS of
sneakers, too.

Upon investigation, I found that the calculation can be performed, and
that the result (RMS power) has a physical meaning. I also found that
this meaning isn't particularly useful, which is probably what people
were trying to say.

Nonsense. What "physical meaning" did you discover that RMS power has?

 

[[email protected]]

IIRC, the word "pedant" has the same root as the word "pederasty."

That thought had crossed my mind too.

 

[[email protected]]

You're a liar, Fields. I never said there was any such thing.

Maybe you ought to get some anger management help before you go
apoplectic, huh?

What a dumbass.
No, it's a fact. How long did you keep up a similar pedantic jag on Larkin's
latching relay? Months? A year? Good grief you're an asshole.

When I post something technical which is non-trivial I usually show my
work in an effort to more efficaciously communicate the factual nature
of the work, while you seem to revel in nothing but name-calling and
blather.

You're *all* blather. Your only purpose here is to show how bloviated you can
be. You and Slowman are two peas.

I certainly don't have anything to worry about. You're nothing but a hacker.

 

[[email protected]]

**** you, Fields. I made no gaffe.

You wrote: "Voltage squared => power" which reads: "Voltage squared is
equal to or greater than power" which is, of course, nonsense.

Par for the course, though.

What a lying shit you are, fields.

 

[[email protected]]

Peck, peck, peck. Any more bright points to make, hen?

 

[[email protected]]

---
In this group, where there are no stupid questions and noobs often ask
questions which indicate their lack of knowledge, what might be
considered pedantry may in actuality be the presentation of subject
matter with enough accuracy and attention to detail to allow them to
learn something.

What a liar, Fields.

---


---

krw seems to resent - well, just about everything - so he comes
through, true to form, sowing discord and spewing vitriol at every
opportunity.

You're nothing but an asshole, Fields. That's all you've ever been and all
you will ever be. You're happy with that, too.

 

[Chiron]

Dionaea muscipula considers it a matter of life and death.

OK, sure... but that's not who's posting here.

 

[Chiron]

I did *NOT* say that. Stop doing a Fields. All things equal, power is
proportional to voltage squared. Voltage squared (divided by
resistance) gets you power.

I phrased it as a question, not as a statement. The reason I did this
was because I did not understand your use of the symbol '=>', as I said.

Implies.

OK. What you wrote is not mathematically accurate, but that's a whole
other story.

...and I answered, it can. You can RMS the number of shoes you can see
but it's rather meaningless. The RMS values of voltage and current have
meaning because (relative, for the pendants out there) power can be
inferred from them. Squaring power gets you nothing useful so RMS power
is equally useless.


I said that. Of course you can do the calculation but you can take the
RMS of sneakers, too.


Nonsense. What "physical meaning" did you discover that RMS power has?

Whatever. I am not going to engage in a flame war with you. You are
certainly entitled to your opinions, but when you dismiss something as
"nonsense" without offering any sort of support, you leave me with no
rejoinder outside of "It's not nonsense." And then we can endlessly say,
"'Tis," "'Tisn't" until the end of time without learning a single thing
about electronics (though it might be instructive about human nature).

I've already participated in more than my fair share of flame wars. Not
one of them did a thing for me; I never learned from them, didn't become
a better person, nothing. Oh, except I did learn (after way more time
than it should have taken) that I was utterly wasting my time.

So be well, Godspeed, and all that. No hard feelings, no malice, and no
thanks to the flame war.

 

[Chiron]

You wrote: "Voltage squared => power" which reads: "Voltage squared is
equal to or greater than power" which is, of course, nonsense.

Actually, that symbol often does mean "implies," which is how KRT
explained it to me. It's a reasonable use of the symbol, and also one
that makes more sense than "equal to or greater than." Anyway, that's
usually written as '>='.