Connect with us

Strange problem with low energy light bulb

Discussion in 'Electronic Repair' started by Seán O'Leathlóbhair, Jun 25, 2007.

  1. Sally

    Sally Guest

    You *like* the foul/fowl language? It must be pleasant at your family
    mealtable, John. In my field and level we regard such indulgences as
    clutter. The pursuit of an intellectual consideration requires meaningful
    expression and entirely precludes it, very word being of value. Strongly
    asserted differences of opinion are very helpful in exploring the truth but
    foul language invariably obscures it. And by the way, attempts to arrive at
    the truth logically involve opinion-holders declaring that they were wrong
    from tem to time (both sides usually (but not always) can't be right). How
    often do you see the abusive posters here stating genuinely that after
    reading the other side they have concluded that they were wrong?
  2. Sally

    Sally Guest

    Murphy's Law! s/be "every"!
  3. Eeyore

    Eeyore Guest

    Do you think it makes sense not to snip so we can see what you're replying to ?

    Top-posting is for lazy arrogant ppl.

  4. Eeyore

    Eeyore Guest

    True what.

    You're comment appears witrhout any context.

  5. Arfa Daily

    Arfa Daily Guest

    Maybe not on *your* group, but on this one, quite often, actually ...

  6. Arfa Daily

    Arfa Daily Guest

    Sorry, but there is a convention - on this group at least, but maybe not on
    yours. I did not specifically say that you were being critical, because I
    did not believe that you particularly were. I just used your post as a
    vehicle to reply to the others that have popped up on this thread now from
    the groups that it's been cross-posted to, and who *are* criticising.

  7. I doubt there is one. The reason prolonged bass might be unsettling is that
    any animal is wary of a conspicuous expenditure of energy, and that really
    IS about as close to a 'universal' 'preference' as we can get. Any agency
    that can conspicously expend energy is potentially a serious risk, either
    because it's a source of elemental power, or because it's aware of its
    power and feels no need to hide it from the world around it.

    The animals with a defensive relation to colour temperature are likely to
    be those that fear fire, or are wary of us because we have learned to use
    fire. That won't likely be evolution (might need an actual genetic record
    to establish that), but it is conditioning, adaptation.

    I don't think we have any imperative that makes us need low colour
    temperatures. We do have an imperative for warmth, and while that comes
    from flame it is possible to connect the two things, but as soon as we get
    warmth some other way, all bets are off.

    It's interesting to look at how other animals relate to tungsten lighting.
    (Crude generalisation alert!) Cats and dogs like it, rats and snakes do
    not. That surely shows that it really doesn't matter half as much as how
    they react to us.

    Preference for higher colour temperatures might be likely based on
    efficient shortwave light making things easily visible. Preference for low
    colour temperatures is mostly symbolic. The purely functional
    basis of the preference for low colour temperatures is itself symbolic,
    many people find 'functional' to be almost a synonym for 'bleak' or
    'dreary'. Possibly because of an aversion to work (which I can understand),
    or more likely because having to ration energy usage implies discomfort.
    There's no reason it should do so though, as in this case we're talking
    about limiting energy expenditure by choice. That's the whole point of
    these new kinds of lamp. Being able to choose leaves us open to new kinds
    of conditioning.
  8. Meat Plow

    Meat Plow Guest

    I thought I was poasting to the Usenets?

  9. John Fields

    John Fields Guest

  10. John Fields

    John Fields Guest


    "grousing", "fowl language", "for the birds"...

    I see you missed the "humor" in those avian references and are
    referring to foul language which hasn't even been used yet, unless I
    missed something.
    Sarcasm, so soon? **** you, Sally! (Now _that's_ an example of
    foul language.)
    It happens on occasion and, since most of USENET considers top
    posting to be abusive or, at the very least, annoying, it makes me
    wonder why you haven't admitted to being wrong about it and changed
    your practice.

    Even Google Groups advises against top posting at:

    "Summarize what you're following up.

    When you click "Reply" under "show options" to follow up an existing
    article, Google Groups includes the full article in quotes, with the
    cursor at the top of the article. Tempting though it is to just
    start typing your message, please STOP and do two things first.
    Look at the quoted text and remove parts that are irrelevant.
    Then, go to the BOTTOM of the article and start typing there.
    Doing this makes it much easier for your readers to get through your
    post. They'll have a reminder of the relevant text before your
    comment, but won't have to re-read the entire article.
    And if your reply appears on a site before the original article
    they'll get the gist of what you're talking about."

    Just consider this post, for example. What I'm doing is called
    "in-line" posting and is basically designed to reply to specific
    areas of a post on a line-by-line basis in order to address each
    point individually. Note that the replies always _follow_ the area
    being commented on, since preceding that area would make no sense
    and would cause the reader unnecessary confusion. Since the reply
    follows the point being discussed it is a type of bottom posting and
    both allow the smooth chronological give-and-take of a thread to be
    easily followed.

    In conclusion, this is not email; it's USENET, and as such no one
    knows when a reader will pick up a post containing subject matter
    with which he's not familiar or where, in time, that post was
    generated. Having to slog through a chronologically reversed post
    to find the beginning of the thread when one is used to the normal
    flow of time is annoying, and inconsiderate of the top poster.

    Also, for your edification, I've rearranged the thread in this post
    in proper chronological order in order that you may see how much
    more smoothly it flows.

  11. Like donkeys who are too damn lazy to type 'people'?

    Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
    prove it.
    Member of DAV #85.

    Michael A. Terrell
    Central Florida
  12. Arfa Daily

    Arfa Daily Guest

    Very nicely summarised ...

  13. JANA

    JANA Guest

    I guess mercury, neon, and xenon gas is good for us to put in to the ground
    and breath.

    I'll leave it at that!!!



    At least that which doesn't settle in your lungs I guess. Current research
    shows micro particulates as being very hazardous.
    Since he provided no epidemiological studies to show the long term *proven*
    effects of any of them on the human body, what exactly are you thanking him
    I'll keep an open mind while awaiting some FACTS.

  14. Guest

    Neon and Xenon are noble gases, read inert.
  15. Wow we had better get moving on having sugar removed from all grocery
    and food outlets.

    Peter Dettmann
  16. D0n Pearce

    D0n Pearce Guest

    (Don Pearce) wrote...

  17. Maybe even new enough that his computer will melt down when he hits a
    real 10,000 post flamefest. ;-)

    Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
    prove it.
    Member of DAV #85.

    Michael A. Terrell
    Central Florida
  18. John Fields

    John Fields Guest

  19. Arny Krueger

    Arny Krueger Guest

    Mercury is naturally ocurring in the ground. Neon and Xenon are inert gasses
    that can only harm living things by displacing gasses in the atmoshphere
    that they need. You can breathe all the Neon and Xenon that you want to,
    provided you also get enough oxygen.
  20. Don Pearce

    Don Pearce Guest

    There have been big problems in Cornwall with radioactive Radon. It
    comes out of the granite and can build up to dangerous levels in

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 (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.
Electronics Point Logo
Continue to site
Quote of the day