Author Topic: UH-OH! More bad info for Wunder-Blunder to use!  (Read 56615 times)

Offline JayUtah

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 3814
    • Clavius
Re: UH-OH! More bad info for Wunder-Blunder to use!
« Reply #75 on: November 01, 2014, 05:09:22 PM »
One of my tenants called me over to demonstrate something.  She turned on the electric stove and the hall light came on.  Multiphase wiring can do funny things sometimes.
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams

Offline ka9q

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 3014
Re: UH-OH! More bad info for Wunder-Blunder to use!
« Reply #76 on: November 01, 2014, 05:37:45 PM »
That sounds like a loose neutral, which is potentially very dangerous because it can apply higher-than-normal voltages to certain loads. I'd have it checked right away.

The classic sign of a loose neutral is when lights brighten when certain other loads are switched on.

I discovered one of these in a cousin's apartment. He was deaf, so he didn't notice what I did: a slight sizzling sound from his circuit breaker panel. This was a fairly large apartment complex, where standard practice is to supply 120/208V 3-phase to the building and take two phases to each unit. The neutral has to be brought through as well, and it is never grounded except at the entrance to the building or at the secondary of a transformer. The neutral connection had worked loose in his panel, and that's what I was hearing. This put the two 120V circuits in series across 208V, so depending on the relative loads in each phase one circuit could see much more than 120V. This fried a number of his electronic devices. I think he got his landlord to reimburse him.

« Last Edit: November 01, 2014, 05:44:10 PM by ka9q »

Offline JayUtah

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 3814
    • Clavius
Re: UH-OH! More bad info for Wunder-Blunder to use!
« Reply #77 on: November 01, 2014, 06:56:56 PM »
This was many years ago and has been fixed.  It was indeed tree abrasion of the lines out near the pole.  Two electricians couldn't figure it out, and it was finally the utility company who diagnosed it, found it, and fixed it.
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams

Offline ka9q

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 3014
Re: UH-OH! More bad info for Wunder-Blunder to use!
« Reply #78 on: November 01, 2014, 09:33:20 PM »
This was many years ago and has been fixed.  It was indeed tree abrasion of the lines out near the pole.  Two electricians couldn't figure it out, and it was finally the utility company who diagnosed it, found it, and fixed it.
Probably an abraded or broken neutral line in the secondary (120/240V) circuit. Standard practice in North America is for the utility to ground that line at several poles, and also in the service entrance box to each customer, typically with a strap to a metallic water pipe and/or ground stake (but not a natural gas line). This provides some redundancy in case a few grounds get loose, but usually there's no easy way to know when that's happened until they all fail and somebody notices weird stuff happening.


Offline ka9q

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 3014
Re: UH-OH! More bad info for Wunder-Blunder to use!
« Reply #79 on: November 01, 2014, 09:39:24 PM »
Speaking of power grounding practices, I got interested in the investigation of the Boeing 787 battery fires. When the NTSB released its preliminary findings of fact (sans commentary) I immediately saw evidence of some very large battery ground fault currents flowing through unfused paths. I can't say for sure that these currents directly caused the fire, but they certainly didn't help matters.

I wrote comments to the NTSB pointing out that these fault currents would not have had a complete path had the negative side of the DC power system not been grounded to the battery box and equipment frames. I suggested that it might be time to re-evaluate this apparently standard aviation practice, especially in aircraft with nonconductive structures, but I have heard and seen nothing in response. You wouldn't happen to have any contacts in that agency, would you? I would just like to know that someone gave it some consideration before deciding not to do anything.
« Last Edit: November 01, 2014, 09:44:05 PM by ka9q »

Offline Bryanpoprobson

  • Jupiter
  • ***
  • Posts: 827
  • Another Clown
Re: UH-OH! More bad info for Wunder-Blunder to use!
« Reply #80 on: November 02, 2014, 08:13:44 AM »
Oh dear Adrian (AwE130)has today announced to the world about radiation levels in the VAB's his post comes out of thin air as a statement. But guess as to whose material he has tried to plagiarise. Would love to see Adrians workings lol.

For many years people all over the world are not believing in the Apollo moon landings anymore. In this article we will give you 5000 reasons why the official Apollo moon landing story is a hoax. Information about the inner and outer van Allen radiation belts in the early sixties is reveling the truth.
 
The energies of the protons in the inner zone do not exceed 100 magavolts and the energies of the electrons in the outer zone are less than 100 kilovolts. On the other hand the number of particles is enormous. In the inner zone the flux of protons is about 2 x 10 to the 4/cm squared/second and the flux of the electrons in the outer zone is something like 10 to the 11 electrons/cm squared/second. These numbers have to be compared with the flux of cosmic ray particles from space - about two protons and heavy nuclei/cm squared/second, representing the extent of the radiation to be anticipated in these regions. It is the quantity rather than the energy which gives the radiation zones this special importance and, indeed, danger to living organisms. In terms of common radiation dosage, cosmic rays represent about 0.01 roentgen/hour, compared with the permissible human dosage of 0.3 roentgen/week. In the heart of the outer radiation zone, the dose is about 10 roentgen/hour - 5000 times greater than a human being could stand. The origin of the particles in these radiation zones is not yet finally resolved. The inner zone of protons is stable and constant. This zone seems to contain the same kind of energetic particles and about the same quantity whenever it has been investigated. In contrast with the stability of the inner zone, the outer zone of electrons is extremely unstable and is influenced in some detail by events on the sun. Solar flares and magnetic storms appear to have a controlling influence on this zone of electrons.
 
NASA wants you to believe that the van Allen radiation belts are not dangerous when you pass them quickly. Apollo astronauts must be man of steal or should we say lead? It is time you join the whisper in a journey towards the truth for all mankind.

This can be found on his .com site, but only go there if you have good internet security I've had one bad experience there. Not withstanding the fact that Apollo didn't go through the 'heart' of either the inner or the outer VAB's
« Last Edit: November 02, 2014, 08:16:14 AM by Bryanpoprobson »
"Wise men speak because they have something to say!" "Fools speak, because they have to say something!" (Plato)

Offline Luke Pemberton

  • Uranus
  • ****
  • Posts: 1823
  • Chaos in his tin foil hat
Re: UH-OH! More bad info for Wunder-Blunder to use!
« Reply #81 on: November 02, 2014, 09:05:05 AM »
The energies of the protons in the inner zone do not exceed 100 megvolts and the energies of the electrons in the outer zone are less than 100 kilovolts.

So between Jarrah and Adrian, they cannot arrive at a consistent story for the energy of the protons and electrons. Way to go from the 'two giants' of the hoax theory. You would have thought they would speak to each other to make sure their 'press releases' are the same.

The irony of this is their claim that NASA have kept a hoax secret for 45 years, yet within 1 month they have introduced the most glaring anomaly into their version of events. Thanks for making me laugh, the both of you.
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former - Albert Einstein.

I can calculate the motion of heavenly bodies, but not the madness of people – Sir Isaac Newton.

A polar orbit would also bypass the SAA - Tim Finch

Offline Allan F

  • Saturn
  • ****
  • Posts: 1022
Re: UH-OH! More bad info for Wunder-Blunder to use!
« Reply #82 on: November 02, 2014, 03:41:32 PM »
I don't think they even CAN talk about this amongst their own - it would be an admission to themselves that they don't know what they are talking about.

Well, it is like this: The truth doesn't need insults. Insults are the refuge of a darkened mind, a mind that refuses to open and see. Foul language can't outcompete knowledge. And knowledge is the result of education. Education is the result of the wish to know more, not less.

Offline AstroBrant

  • Mars
  • ***
  • Posts: 260
  • Yes, we did.
Re: UH-OH! More bad info for Wunder-Blunder to use!
« Reply #83 on: November 04, 2014, 12:45:47 AM »
@Bryan,
Did Adrian give a source for his data? I wonder why he used "roentgens."
I mean, where in the world did he get stuff like this?: "In the heart of the outer radiation zone, the dose is about 10 roentgen/hour"
May your skies be clear and your thinking even clearer.
(Youtube: astrobrant2)

Offline Bryanpoprobson

  • Jupiter
  • ***
  • Posts: 827
  • Another Clown
Re: UH-OH! More bad info for Wunder-Blunder to use!
« Reply #84 on: November 04, 2014, 01:45:21 AM »
@Bryan,
Did Adrian give a source for his data? I wonder why he used "roentgens."
I mean, where in the world did he get stuff like this?: "In the heart of the outer radiation zone, the dose is about 10 roentgen/hour"

If you look on his website, a guy called Dave (cough! :) well it seemed as good a name as any) has been asking that very question. But after 20 or more times of asking, he has come up with, "Well where is your Data!" "Can we agree that the data is correct!" and "It comes from Explorer Geiger counter and James Van Allen!"

He has declared this as a nail in the coffin for Apollo, but when it is pointed out no Apollo craft ever entered this region, he goes back to,  "Can we agree that the data is correct!" He is clueless!
"Wise men speak because they have something to say!" "Fools speak, because they have to say something!" (Plato)

Offline Bob B.

  • Jupiter
  • ***
  • Posts: 819
  • Bob the Excel Guru™
    • Rocket & Space Technology
Re: UH-OH! More bad info for Wunder-Blunder to use!
« Reply #85 on: November 04, 2014, 02:02:13 AM »
@Bryan,
Did Adrian give a source for his data? I wonder why he used "roentgens."
I mean, where in the world did he get stuff like this?: "In the heart of the outer radiation zone, the dose is about 10 roentgen/hour"

Dr. Van Allen's used roentgen/hour in some of his early articles (c.1959-61), so Awe130 may have gotten it from one of those, though possibly second hand.  From what I read, Dr. Van Allen's dose rates were computed for the "heart" of the belts, which I assume to be near the geomagnetic equator, and for shielding having a density thickness of only 1 g/cm2.  Neither is applicable to Apollo.

Offline ka9q

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 3014
Re: UH-OH! More bad info for Wunder-Blunder to use!
« Reply #86 on: November 04, 2014, 04:05:59 AM »
I wasn't even aware of the definition of the roentgen until a while ago. I was much more familiar with the rad/rem and their SI counterparts gray/sievert, which are all defined as deposited energy per unit mass (times a dimensionless quality factor for rem and sievert). I didn't know that the roentgen is defined completely differently, and that it wasn't just an older term for rad or rem. So I have to be careful not to mix the two in the older literature that uses the roentgen.



Offline JayUtah

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 3814
    • Clavius
Re: UH-OH! More bad info for Wunder-Blunder to use!
« Reply #87 on: November 04, 2014, 12:27:47 PM »
Roentgens?  That's like measuring fuel flow in hogsheads per fortnight.  (All due deference to you folks in the U.K., but "fortnight" to us in the U.S. seems appropriately archaic.) And yeah, that probably means he's following the Blunder's lead and relying on stuff from the late 1950s.

In all fairness even fair-minded, intelligent people have trouble with the notions of flux and energy, of the Van Allen belts as exhibit widely different measurements of these values based on your location and the solar weather, and of integrated dose as being highly dependent on one's path through three-dimensional space.  Several times I've been asked for "general" figures for "How much radiation is there in the Van Allen belts?" and I do my best to decline to answer, knowing that whatever qualifications I try to apply to an answer will be omitted.  "Jay says there are blah-blah rads..." probably still pops up from time to time.

But that's no excuse for Adrian's consistent and hopeless inability to understand that he is conceptually wrong on nearly every count, on nearly every question he looks at.  He can't be made to understand that he doesn't understand.  He desperately wants a concession on "the data are correct" without being willing to consider that that the data are inapplicable to the problem at hand. To him, "Can we agree that the data are correct?" is indistinguishable from questions of applicability.  To him, "correct" includes "applicable," and it's a massive paradigm shift for him to believe that those may be two separate concepts.

It's really no different than his misunderstanding of the Saturn V issue.  Once he gets it in his head that "Jay admits the plans were lost," there is no prying him loose from his simplistic understanding of how aerospace designs really are documented.  In his mind any concession, no matter how carefully qualified or explained, validates his simplistic misunderstandings.
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams

Offline Bryanpoprobson

  • Jupiter
  • ***
  • Posts: 827
  • Another Clown
Re: UH-OH! More bad info for Wunder-Blunder to use!
« Reply #88 on: November 04, 2014, 01:08:09 PM »

 To him, "Can we agree that the data are correct?" is indistinguishable from questions of applicability.  To him, "correct" includes "applicable," and it's a massive paradigm shift for him to believe that those may be two separate concepts.

It's really no different than his misunderstanding of the Saturn V issue.  Once he gets it in his head that "Jay admits the plans were lost," there is no prying him loose from his simplistic understanding of how aerospace designs really are documented.  In his mind any concession, no matter how carefully qualified or explained, validates his simplistic misunderstandings.

Absolutely Jay, even today he come out with...

You seem very eager to start yelling Apollo was real, but it seems you atnleast agree with this AwE130 website article. 5000 times a human can stand in the heart of the outer radiation belts. When you agree to those number present you will see that Apollo was a hoax. None of you are able to "debunk" those numbers. Hahaha This whisper stuff is really fun, the Pro Apollo side is exposed LOL.

Even though I had not agreed with him in the slightest and told him so.

You seem very eager to say I agree with the Data, when all my posts expose the data as irrelevant and of doubtful origin. Is there something wrong with your reasoning that makes you do this.

But it is all really, so much water off a ducks back.
"Wise men speak because they have something to say!" "Fools speak, because they have to say something!" (Plato)

Offline JayUtah

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 3814
    • Clavius
Re: UH-OH! More bad info for Wunder-Blunder to use!
« Reply #89 on: November 04, 2014, 03:40:42 PM »
"Heart" of the "outer" radiation belts.  Ignorance is such an amusing thing to behold.

So I wonder why the world's entire astrophysics community hasn't latched onto this "obvious" discrepancy and declared Apollo to be a fraud.
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams