Nit-picking

After a Computer crash and the demise of civilization, it was learned
Loren Pechtel <lorenpechtel.RemoveThis@hotmail.invalid.com> wrote on Fri, 27 Jul
2007 18:29:05 -0700 in alt.books.david-weber :
>
>>>> As I remember, "one tiny batch" was not 100% lethal. So, was the 1,000:1
>>>> out of that batch, or over all?
>>>
>>> I think it's that batch. All the survivors came from that batch and
>>> yet it's still that lethal.
>>
>>That's a bit odd, it should be evolving.
>
>Remember, it detects wrong DNA in her--it probably detects defects in
>itself also.

It doesn't detect "wrong" DNA. it detects non-compatible proteins
and attacks them. Call it the ultimate in tissue rejection.
The "problem" is that it is continually "fixing" things. So if you
have a congenital defect, it will repair any corrective surgery so that
you conform to the original blueprints (your DNA). God help you if you
have an impacted wisdom tooth. Every few years, you have to have that
bugger taken out. Again.
Or other problems. Congenital or other intrinsic problems, that can
be corrected by surgery.

tschus
pyotr

--
pyotr filipivich
The two oldest cliches in the book are "The Good Old Days were
better." and "After all, these are Modern TImes."
 >> Stay informed about: Nit-picking 

On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 18:29:05 -0700, Loren Pechtel
<lorenpechtel.RemoveThis@hotmail.invalid.com> wrote:

>But the power coming off the generator isn't at those insane voltages.
>It's stepped up to those voltages to make it cheaper to send it across
>the country.

Not to make it "cheaper" - to make it "possible".

Copper losses - losses due to line resistance - vary directly as the
square of the current, which in turn varies inversely as the voltage
for the same power - power dissipated due to resistance is equal to
resistance times the square of current. SO if you tried to send a
megawatt at, say 200V, current would have to be 5000 amps.

If total line resistance at that current were .01 ohm, you'd be
dissipating 250,000 watts (25%) over the length of the line, with a 50
volt (25%) voltage drop over the length of the line. Not only is that
an unacceptable percentage of loss, it would heat up the lines
somewhat, to say the least...

Now, send your megawatt down the line at 20Kv. Current is now 50
Amps. Power dissipated in copper losses is 25 watts (.0025%). Voltage
drop is 200 v (1%).

This is why Westinghouse's AC distribution system won out over
Edison's DC - there is no convenient way to run long-distance
transmission at those levels and then step it down to end-user levels
using DC, but transformers are (relatively) cheap.

--
mike weber (fairportfan@gmail.com)
============================
My Website: http://electronictiger.com
===================================
No use looking for the answers when the questions are in doubt - Fred leBlanc, "The Love of My Life"
 >> Stay informed about: Nit-picking 

On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 18:29:05 -0700, Loren Pechtel
<lorenpechtel RemoveThis @hotmail.invalid.com> wrote:

>On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 08:26:13 -0500, BillGill <billnews2 RemoveThis @cox.net>
>wrote:
>
>>mike weber wrote:
>>> On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 20:35:34 -0700, Gunfighter40
>>> <waltbj01 RemoveThis @mindspring.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> FWIW 1.2G is no big deal. It's the same G you would experience in an
>>>> airplane making a level turn banking about 33 degrees. (1/#g = cos
>>>> bank angle). I dare say humans would adjust fairly quickly. Good place
>>>> for boot camp?
>>>
>>> About like a 200 pound man carrying forty pounds of weights in a vest
>>> at all times for physical conditioning.
>>>
>>Ok, so a whole lot of tourists are going to the planet
>>to toughen up for their atheletic events. I still don't
>>think it is going to be a major tourist destination.
>
>I have my doubts about that--it would mess up their reflexes as they
>would adapt to the higher g.

Not long - and probably a lot less than going the other way and
adapting to low G or no G at all.

At least you're not going to bounce off the ground or float away if
you forget and move too fast. (In "Moon is a Harsh Mistress",
Heinlein mentions a new chum who tries to run down a ramp in Luna City
and winds up floating and breaks an arm.)

And gravity is going to be more important than inertia; most people
have no real concept of the difference between mass and weight;
there's a bit in another Heinlein story - "Delilah and the Space
Rigger", maybe - in which someone working in zero G loses his legs
when he's crushed between the space construction job he's working on
and a load of girders, which he got moving with a [long, steady] pull
and thought he could stop as easily with a single short push...

--
mike weber (fairportfan@gmail.com)
============================
My Website: http://electronictiger.com
===================================
No use looking for the answers when the questions are in doubt - Fred leBlanc, "The Love of My Life"
 >> Stay informed about: Nit-picking 

mike weber <fairportfan.TakeThisOut@gmail.com> wrote in
news:cn4na39rfeeumfv0v59nhh27mi6oa3lup2@4ax.com:

> And gravity is going to be more important than inertia; most people
> have no real concept of the difference between mass and weight;
> there's a bit in another Heinlein story - "Delilah and the Space
> Rigger", maybe - in which someone working in zero G loses his legs
> when he's crushed between the space construction job he's working on
> and a load of girders, which he got moving with a [long, steady] pull
> and thought he could stop as easily with a single short push...
>

Hazel to Castor in _The Rolling Stones_ when they were recovering the bicyles
they had jettisoned.

David Wright Sr.
 >> Stay informed about: Nit-picking 

On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 20:35:34 -0700, Gunfighter40
<waltbj01.RemoveThis@mindspring.com> wrote:

>FWIW 1.2G is no big deal. It's the same G you would experience in an
>airplane making a level turn banking about 33 degrees. (1/#g = cos
>bank angle). I dare say humans would adjust fairly quickly. Good place
>for boot camp?
>Walt BJ

probably wouldn't make for a tourist paradise if you consider anything
active fun. might well not be good for you longterm either as it
would be hard on the joints etc especially if you already had
something of a spare tire to lug about.
 >> Stay informed about: Nit-picking 

In article <cd7na39qdufe1u5hnsoo7prd6vvishdevp RemoveThis @4ax.com>,
Brian McDonald <Brian_knowspam.McDonald RemoveThis @shaw.ca> wrote:

> On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 20:35:34 -0700, Gunfighter40
> <waltbj01 RemoveThis @mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> >FWIW 1.2G is no big deal. It's the same G you would experience in an
> >airplane making a level turn banking about 33 degrees. (1/#g = cos
> >bank angle). I dare say humans would adjust fairly quickly. Good place
> >for boot camp?
> >Walt BJ
>
> probably wouldn't make for a tourist paradise if you consider anything
> active fun. might well not be good for you longterm either as it
> would be hard on the joints etc especially if you already had
> something of a spare tire to lug about.

Depends on the activity. Extra gravity wouldn't make much difference to
activities like swimming.

--
Quando omni flunkus moritati
Visit the Buffy Body Count at <http://homepage.mac.com/dsample/>
 >> Stay informed about: Nit-picking 

On Sat, 28 Jul 2007 19:24:46 +0000, "David Wright Sr."
<dwrightsr.TakeThisOut@alltel.net> wrote:

>mike weber <fairportfan.TakeThisOut@gmail.com> wrote in
>news:cn4na39rfeeumfv0v59nhh27mi6oa3lup2@4ax.com:
>
>> And gravity is going to be more important than inertia; most people
>> have no real concept of the difference between mass and weight;
>> there's a bit in another Heinlein story - "Delilah and the Space
>> Rigger", maybe - in which someone working in zero G loses his legs
>> when he's crushed between the space construction job he's working on
>> and a load of girders, which he got moving with a [long, steady] pull
>> and thought he could stop as easily with a single short push...
>>
>
>Hazel to Castor in _The Rolling Stones_ when they were recovering the bicyles
>they had jettisoned.
>
Right.

But i think there's something similar in "Delilah...", too.

--
mike weber (fairportfan@gmail.com)
============================
My Website: http://electronictiger.com
===================================
No use looking for the answers when the questions are in doubt - Fred leBlanc, "The Love of My Life"
 >> Stay informed about: Nit-picking 

mike weber wrote:
> On Sat, 28 Jul 2007 19:24:46 +0000, "David Wright Sr."
> <dwrightsr.RemoveThis@alltel.net> wrote:

>> Hazel to Castor in _The Rolling Stones_ when they were recovering the bicyles
>> they had jettisoned.
>>
> Right.
>
> But i think there's something similar in "Delilah...", too.
>

I still haven't figured where the note came from.
 >> Stay informed about: Nit-picking 

On Sun, 29 Jul 2007 07:32:54 -0700, Offbreed
<offbreed_106 DeleteThis @hotmail.com> wrote:

>mike weber wrote:
>> On Sat, 28 Jul 2007 19:24:46 +0000, "David Wright Sr."
>> <dwrightsr DeleteThis @alltel.net> wrote:
>
>>> Hazel to Castor in _The Rolling Stones_ when they were recovering the bicyles
>>> they had jettisoned.
>>>
>> Right.
>>
>> But i think there's something similar in "Delilah...", too.
>>
>
>I still haven't figured where the note came from.


Seems to me that there's a scene of Hazel acting extremely innocent.

(Took me a minute to recall the note.)

--
mike weber (fairportfan@gmail.com)
============================
My Website: http://electronictiger.com
===================================
No use looking for the answers when the questions are in doubt - Fred leBlanc, "The Love of My Life"
 >> Stay informed about: Nit-picking 

mike weber <fairportfan.TakeThisOut@gmail.com> wrote:
[ Reducing losses due to higher voltage ]
>This is why Westinghouse's AC distribution system won out over
>Edison's DC - there is no convenient way to run long-distance
>transmission at those levels and then step it down to end-user levels
>using DC, but transformers are (relatively) cheap.

Minor correction, replace is with was...

Nowadays it's not that complicated to do the required DC/DC
conversions, though it's of course still more complicated than a
transformer.

And high-voltage DV power lines has considerable benefits compared to
AC power lines for certain applications. It started with sea cables
and then connections between different "power islands", where an AC
link would have to go AC/DC/AC somewhere *anyway* to adjust for phase
and frequency difference.

But the lower losses and lower capital cost (less copper/aluminium and
smaller pylons) means that it's also starting to make inroads into
long distance lines (where the AC/DC and DC/AC converter cost and
losses is less of a factor).

Wikipedia lists ~50 km as the submarine break-even and 600-800 km for
overhead lines, though new technology can make much shorter links
economical (<50 km).

Also, an existing three-phase AC line could be converted to tripole
which would add up to 80% carrying capacity which could make it very
interesting from that reason alone, it's new enough that it's not been
used commercially yet but it will.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-voltage_direct_current
 >> Stay informed about: Nit-picking 

On Sun, 29 Jul 2007 14:41:07 GMT, Torbjorn Lindgren <tl.DeleteThis@none.invalid>
wrote:

>mike weber <fairportfan.DeleteThis@gmail.com> wrote:
>[ Reducing losses due to higher voltage ]
>>This is why Westinghouse's AC distribution system won out over
>>Edison's DC - there is no convenient way to run long-distance
>>transmission at those levels and then step it down to end-user levels
>>using DC, but transformers are (relatively) cheap.
>
>Minor correction, replace is with was...
>
>Nowadays it's not that complicated to do the required DC/DC
>conversions, though it's of course still more complicated than a
>transformer.
>

[snip interesting info]

>
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-voltage_direct_current

Neet.

What i said was basically what the Navy taught me (with additional
reading on my own when i was in high school and later, too) forty
years ago.

Ships and aircraft tend to use 400Hz power because transformers can be
smaller and lighter than for 60Hz...

--
mike weber (fairportfan@gmail.com)
============================
My Website: http://electronictiger.com
===================================
No use looking for the answers when the questions are in doubt - Fred leBlanc, "The Love of My Life"
 >> Stay informed about: Nit-picking 

On Sat, 28 Jul 2007 15:02:31 -0400, mike weber <fairportfan.RemoveThis@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 18:29:05 -0700, Loren Pechtel
><lorenpechtel.RemoveThis@hotmail.invalid.com> wrote:
>
>>But the power coming off the generator isn't at those insane voltages.
>>It's stepped up to those voltages to make it cheaper to send it across
>>the country.
>
>Not to make it "cheaper" - to make it "possible".
>
>Copper losses - losses due to line resistance - vary directly as the
>square of the current, which in turn varies inversely as the voltage
>for the same power - power dissipated due to resistance is equal to
>resistance times the square of current. SO if you tried to send a
>megawatt at, say 200V, current would have to be 5000 amps.

Square?!?!

>If total line resistance at that current were .01 ohm, you'd be
>dissipating 250,000 watts (25%) over the length of the line, with a 50
>volt (25%) voltage drop over the length of the line. Not only is that
>an unacceptable percentage of loss, it would heat up the lines
>somewhat, to say the least...
>
>Now, send your megawatt down the line at 20Kv. Current is now 50
>Amps. Power dissipated in copper losses is 25 watts (.0025%). Voltage
>drop is 200 v (1%).

You *COULD* put some big fat wires up there.

It's just a lot cheaper to step it up.
 >> Stay informed about: Nit-picking 

On Sat, 28 Jul 2007 15:09:07 -0400, mike weber <fairportfan.RemoveThis@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 18:29:05 -0700, Loren Pechtel
><lorenpechtel.RemoveThis@hotmail.invalid.com> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 08:26:13 -0500, BillGill <billnews2.RemoveThis@cox.net>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>mike weber wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 20:35:34 -0700, Gunfighter40
>>>> <waltbj01.RemoveThis@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> FWIW 1.2G is no big deal. It's the same G you would experience in an
>>>>> airplane making a level turn banking about 33 degrees. (1/#g = cos
>>>>> bank angle). I dare say humans would adjust fairly quickly. Good place
>>>>> for boot camp?
>>>>
>>>> About like a 200 pound man carrying forty pounds of weights in a vest
>>>> at all times for physical conditioning.
>>>>
>>>Ok, so a whole lot of tourists are going to the planet
>>>to toughen up for their atheletic events. I still don't
>>>think it is going to be a major tourist destination.
>>
>>I have my doubts about that--it would mess up their reflexes as they
>>would adapt to the higher g.
>
>Not long - and probably a lot less than going the other way and
>adapting to low G or no G at all.

For what the average person does I don't think it would be much of an
issue. For an athletic competition, though...

>At least you're not going to bounce off the ground or float away if
>you forget and move too fast. (In "Moon is a Harsh Mistress",
>Heinlein mentions a new chum who tries to run down a ramp in Luna City
>and winds up floating and breaks an arm.)

I never bought that one. You're going to fall slower than you would
on Earth, you have more time to arrange yourself to land properly. I
would expect spectacular tumbles but few broken bones.

>And gravity is going to be more important than inertia; most people
>have no real concept of the difference between mass and weight;
>there's a bit in another Heinlein story - "Delilah and the Space
>Rigger", maybe - in which someone working in zero G loses his legs
>when he's crushed between the space construction job he's working on
>and a load of girders, which he got moving with a [long, steady] pull
>and thought he could stop as easily with a single short push...

Agreed--this could easily be deadly in zero-g.
 >> Stay informed about: Nit-picking