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

[Chiron]

You two should decide on who's going to be the geezer and who's going to
be the punk and get a room...

John, I don't mind when someone disagrees with me. If I knew so much,
I'd be teaching, not asking for help on a "basics" newsgroup. I know I
don't know everything. At times I wonder whether I know *anything*.

I have learned two of the most useful phrases in the English language.
One of them is, "I don't know." The other is, "I was wrong." Amazingly,
these two phrases can put a stop to all kinds of rancorous disputes.

I make a special effort to treat people respectfully, even if they
disagree with me, even if they are a bit snippy with me. In return, I
expect the same treatment.

I am a pretty simple guy. If someone starts to treat me with disrespect,
I take a moment to comment on it (as I am doing now). I ask - in a
respectful manner - that they be respectful. Often that's all it takes.
Lots of people will treat me with respect when they understand that I
intend to treat them the same way.

Unfortunately, there are a few who prefer to use abuse.

I don't know whether you are willing to treat me with respect, or whether
you will insist on being disrespectful. I can only ask that you be
respectful, and hope for the best. So please - treat me with the respect
that I give you. If you feel I have been disrespectful, then please call
me out on it. Maybe I phrased something sloppily so it sounded nasty;
maybe I really *was* being disrespectful. I'm human. I **** up
sometimes, despite my best efforts. But if I do, I will either explain
myself, or - if I see I *was* disrespectful - I will say yet another
useful English phrase. That one is, "I'm sorry."

I've had way more experience with flame wars than is healthy for a
person, far more than I ever should have. It did me not the least bit of
good, just wasted much of my precious time. It's not how I want to spend
my time any more. That's why I use the killfile. It keeps me from
wasting more time doing something that no one benefits from.

So I hope you'll choose to be respectful. But if not, then peace. I
wish you well, and good luck, and all that. No hard feelings either way.

 

[Chiron]

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.

OK, that's a good point. I hadn't thought of that.

Still, sometimes pedantry offers unnecessary details that a new person
might find confusing.

 

[Chiron]

On Wed, 11 Apr 2012 20:34:32 +0000, Chiron wrote:

That should be "KRW"'; sorry about that.

 

[[email protected]]

Yes, though it's not surprising you know nothing about the subject.

Now _that's_ either an intentional red herring or a sample of your
abysmal ignorance.

Yours, asshole.

Although the former isn't out of the question - considering your
posting history - I think the latter is more likely, you poor deluded
loon.

AlwaysWrong. Cluck. Cluck. Cluck.

Run this:

Nope.

 

[[email protected]]

Then it's a strawman, liar.

Go back and you'll see that I was replying Jamie's post, not yours.

You just did, liar.

---


---
Ad hominem attack again???
Fact.

You really are a one-trick pony.

IKWYABWAI does suit your "intelligence".

Facts are facts.

Well, at least you've got _that_ going for you.

Honesty, certainly.

You remember the relay thread huh? Must have made quite an impression
on you.

You kept it going long enough with your pedantry.

Regardless of Larkin's smoke and mirrors I stood my ground and proved
Larkin wrong, so why does it matter so much to you how long it lasted?

Pure pedantry on your part. You just *must* impress the newbs. Everyone else
knows you're a hack.

Afraid the same thing'll happen to you?

Afraid of you? LOL!

No. Fact.

For you, it probably is. Hairballs like your ZCD are proof of hackery.

 

[[email protected]]

I made none.

Do yourself a favor; look it up and post back with what you find, OK?

What a dumbass.

You're a lying piece of shit, Fields. Even a first year college kid knows
"=>" means "implies". Of course, since you never went to college...

 

[[email protected]]

---
I agree with you on the ">=" part of it, but from:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mathematical_symbols

the implication krw ascribed to => seems to be invalid.

Had he written: "The quotient of the voltage across a resistive load
squared and then divided by the resistance of the load is equal to the
power dissipated by the load.", any ambiguity would have been
resolved.

But no, he chose to refrain from admitting his error and to defend his
position with ad hominem attacks instead of logic.

You're, of course, wrong, AlwaysWrong.

What more needs to be said?

Hopefully you'll never say anything again.

 

[[email protected]]

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.


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

It *is* mathematically accurate. Logic is math.

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).

It's *NOT* an opinion. It's a fact. What meaning did you find? How the hell
can I offer support for a position when you won't say what you found?

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.

Oh, well. Wander in the dark with Fields.

 

[[email protected]]

I'd far rather be a Larkin wannabe than a Fields. Wow! No contest!

 

[[email protected]]

Now you even sound like DimBulb. It figures.

You're happy with that, too.

Happy? What an idiot.

If that were my lot in life I'd be serving a useful function so sure,
why not?

Yes, it would be a big improvement for you.

What I'm happiest about though, is that I'm not you.

We're *both* tickled pink!

What an asshole.

 

[Chiron]

It's *NOT* an opinion. It's a fact. What meaning did you find? How
the hell can I offer support for a position when you won't say what you
found?

Well, as I said, I am not going to engage in a flame war with you. Your
statements are opinions. Your equations, if correct, are facts.

Oh, well. Wander in the dark with Fields.

Refusing to participate in an idiotic flame war is hardly "wandering in
the dark." In fact, a case could be made that it's *refusing* to wander
in the dark.

Be well.

 

[Jasen Betts]

On Wed, 11 Apr 2012 15:24:39 -0500, John Fields

You're a lying piece of shit, Fields. Even a first year college kid knows
"=>" means "implies". Of course, since you never went to college...

but it doesn't

implies is normally used with truth values, it's not defined for scalars.
and the presence of a voltage (even a ssquared one) does not imply a flow
of energy.

the symbol you want is ∠(which looks a bit like a lower case alpha)

 

[[email protected]]

but it doesn't
Wrong.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_logic_symbols

implies is normally used with truth values, it's not defined for scalars.
and the presence of a voltage (even a ssquared one) does not imply a flow
of energy.

the symbol you want is ? (which looks a bit like a lower case alpha)

Sorry, it's not on my keyboard. "=>" should get the meaning across to even a
moron. If someone doesn't understand they can ask, assuming they're not a
pendant cruising to boost their ego, like Fields (and apparently, you).

 

[[email protected]]

Well, as I said, I am not going to engage in a flame war with you. Your
statements are opinions. Your equations, if correct, are facts.

My statements about RMS, power, and voltage (squared) are *facts*. There are
no opinions, here. If you found some moron who believes there is something
meaningful about RMS power, let us all in on the joke.

Refusing to participate in an idiotic flame war is hardly "wandering in
the dark." In fact, a case could be made that it's *refusing* to wander
in the dark.

You *still* refuse to answer the question. I think you're the troll, here.

Be well.

I am very, thank you.

 

[[email protected]]

---
What's moronic is your using a symbol which has nothing to do with
whatever point it is you're trying to make and then calling someone
else a moron because they can't read your mind and they dare to
question your use of the symbol.

Peck, peck, peck. Of course you're wrong but the pendant won't give it up.
You have too much to "lose" if you stopped yapping.

And, besides, voltage squared doesn't imply power any more than
resistance does, so, for clarity, what you should have used was
E²/R = P or even - if you wanted to be tricky dickie - E²/R => P.

More bullshit.

In any case, you've become terminally boring with your never-ending
witless buffoonery, so into my filter you go.

Then leave. No one, other than your ego, is forcing you to reply to my posts.

 

[Fred Abse]

Power factor is the Cosine of the angle between VA and Watts

Only if everything is sinusoidal. Harmonics and DC components screw that
up.

Power factor = True Power / Apparent power = Watts / Volt-amperes. in all
cases.

 

[Fred Abse]

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.

Only in the case of sinusoidal quantities is power factor equal to cos(phi).

The broad definition is: true power / apparent power. Where there are
harmonics present, such as where the load is nonlinear, for example a
rectifier, cos (phi) is not the full story,

 

[Fred Abse]

The boss
doesn't trust recent graduates (recent ~= 20-30 years). ;-)

I didn't know you worked for me ;-)

 

[Fred Abse]

These are all pretty fundamental concepts that don't require much
preparation except for some math.

Perzactly.

 

[Fred Abse]

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.

It isn't pedantry, it's basic electrical principles. Something that is
widely misunderstood, misinterpreted, and misused. Largely due to
inadequate explanation at the foundation stage.

It can be very difficult to explain to someone without a grounding in
basic calculus.