On 5 Sep 2009 14:38:14 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:

>On Sat, 05 Sep 2009 19:18:46 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>
>>>> I marked it with a handkerchief tied to a stick.
>>>
>>>No other clue, then? ;-)
>>>
>> No and you better hurry before Sabrina takes her $10 worth.
>
>Is that all that's in the pot? ;-)
>

I can't remember.
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On Sat, 05 Sep 2009 19:49:45 +0100, Stephen wrote:

> On 5 Sep 2009 14:38:14 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> 
>>On Sat, 05 Sep 2009 19:18:46 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>>
>>>>> I marked it with a handkerchief tied to a stick.
>>>>
>>>>No other clue, then? ;-)
>>>>
>>> No and you better hurry before Sabrina takes her $10 worth.
>>
>>Is that all that's in the pot? ;-)
>>
>>
> I can't remember.

How long ago did you place it? ;-)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On 5 Sep 2009 15:49:28 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:

>On Sat, 05 Sep 2009 19:49:45 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>
>> On 5 Sep 2009 14:38:14 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>> 
>>>On Sat, 05 Sep 2009 19:18:46 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> I marked it with a handkerchief tied to a stick.
>>>>>
>>>>>No other clue, then? ;-)
>>>>>
>>>> No and you better hurry before Sabrina takes her $10 worth.
>>>
>>>Is that all that's in the pot? ;-)
>>>
>>>
>> I can't remember.
>
>How long ago did you place it? ;-)
>
About 6 o'clock this morning.

I'm not really cruel. I just can't remember the name of the fairy tale where the
hero tricked a pixie out of the crock of gold at the bottom of the rainbow. He
then buried it in a field marked with a handkerchief tied to a stick. When he
came back to recover it the whole field was planted with sticks which had
handkerchiefs tied to them.
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On Sat, 05 Sep 2009 21:11:57 +0100, Stephen wrote:

> On 5 Sep 2009 15:49:28 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> 
>>On Sat, 05 Sep 2009 19:49:45 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>>
>>> On 5 Sep 2009 14:38:14 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>>> 
>>>>On Sat, 05 Sep 2009 19:18:46 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>> I marked it with a handkerchief tied to a stick.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>No other clue, then? ;-)
>>>>>>
>>>>> No and you better hurry before Sabrina takes her $10 worth.
>>>>
>>>>Is that all that's in the pot? ;-)
>>>>
>>>>
>>> I can't remember.
>>
>>How long ago did you place it? ;-)
>>
> About 6 o'clock this morning.

Hmmm, so that would be......Aldwych? <gd&rvvf>

> I'm not really cruel. I just can't remember the name of the fairy tale
> where the hero tricked a pixie out of the crock of gold at the bottom of
> the rainbow. He then buried it in a field marked with a handkerchief
> tied to a stick. When he came back to recover it the whole field was
> planted with sticks which had handkerchiefs tied to them.

LOL

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On 5 Sep 2009 16:17:11 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:

>Hmmm, so that would be......Aldwych? <gd&rvvf>

Buzz - Repetition ;)
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>> One thing I haven't figured out is why poisonous prey animals (frogs, 
>> butterflies, etc) wind up being brightly colored.
> 
>   AFAIK the bright colors work as a warning signal. Predators learn to
> distinguish the poisonous prey by their color.
> 
>   It would make little sense to just have poison but otherwise look edible.
> Both predator and prey get killed. With a warning color both live.
> 
>   (By this logic it would follow that some species mimic the color of
> poisonous species. I wonder if there are examples of this.)
> 

Another way to look at it is that poisonous animals can be any color 
they want. They already have a defense system (the poison) and don't 
require a second one. Non-poisonous animals lack this defense system, so 
they need to be doubly careful. What they need is their own, *different* 
defense system (the blending in part) so *they* don't get eaten.

Also, as far as the color-as-warning-system goes, it's not like the prey 
animals decided one day that they wanted to be bright yellow or bright 
red. Rather, the predator animal needed help distinguishing poisonous 
animals from non-poisonous ones in order for *it* to survive. Predators 
who didn't learn to distinguish them died and failed to pass on their 
genes, resulting in future generations with a better ability to make the 
color distinctions. Since these future generations are better able to 
distinguish by color, a *second* result is that fewer bright-colored 
poisonous prey animals get eaten. Thus, there's a kind of feedback loop, 
and the behavior of the predator animal (the behavior of the prey animal 
is generally irrelevant) influences the evolution of the prey animal 
along two separate axes.

Finally, only animals that are poisonous *when eaten* (or maybe, low on 
the food chain) tend to be brightly-colored. Animals that use poison to 
*kill their prey* (or, high on the food chain) are not brightly-colored.

-Mike

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson wrote:
> Yeah, but it still would want to go to ground, and the water doesn't 
> provide a grounding influence that's stronger than staying with the wire.
> 
> Jim

You win the thread! There's less resistance along the current path (the 
wire) then the sheet of water.

-Mike

Post a reply to this message

Mike Raiford wrote:
> Invisible wrote:
>>
>> You're aware that those cables are carrying several *million* volts?
>>
> 
> At most about 500kV. Typically 250kV. ;) Not millions.
> 
>>
>> Well, this stuff clearly works - it's just a mystery to me *why* it 
>> works. ;-)
> 
> Physics is why it works ;)
> 

Does voltage even matter in this case? Isn't amperage the important bit?

-Mike

Post a reply to this message

On Sat, 05 Sep 2009 17:47:55 -0400, SharkD <mik### [at] gmailcom> wrote:

>Mike Raiford wrote:
>> Invisible wrote:
>>>
>>> You're aware that those cables are carrying several *million* volts?
>>>
>> 
>> At most about 500kV. Typically 250kV. ;) Not millions.
>> 
>>>
>>> Well, this stuff clearly works - it's just a mystery to me *why* it 
>>> works. ;-)
>> 
>> Physics is why it works ;)
>> 
>
>Does voltage even matter in this case? Isn't amperage the important bit?
>
Yesss and Nooo ;)

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On Sat, 05 Sep 2009 21:33:01 +0100, Stephen wrote:

> On 5 Sep 2009 16:17:11 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> 
>>Hmmm, so that would be......Aldwych? <gd&rvvf>
> 
> Buzz - Repetition ;)

Dammit! ;-)

Victoria, then. ;-)

Jim

Post a reply to this message