 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Interesting. I've never seen any car where turning the ignition *doesn't*
> disable all the other electrics in the system [including the headlights].
Try to find a car without just a simple radio, one that does other stuff
like sat nav etc. I guess the computer and GPS system etc doesn't respond
well to being switched on for 2 seconds, the turned off for 1 second while
the engine starts, then being switched back on again.
> As I understand it, turning the starter motor requires a massive amount of
> current, and is essentially the *only* reason a car has such a whopping
> great battery in the first place.
Yup.
> (Certainly it's not necessary just to run the spark plugs... or even the
> headlights...)
Of course, once your car engine is running you don't need a battery at all,
that's why racing cars don't have them to save weight.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 02 Apr 2008 21:47:59 +0100, Stephen wrote:
> On 2 Apr 2008 15:41:48 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospam com> wrote:
>
>
>>Do you keep your ers in a jar? ;-)
>
> No, but I have an uncle who keeps his parts in a biscuit tin. We don't
> talk about him tho
> He's F'n crackers :)
LOL!
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"scott" <sco### [at] laptopcom> wrote in message
news:47f368da$1@news.povray.org...
>> I thought the voltage of a battery only decreases if you try to draw
>> current faster than the chemical processes inside the battery can restore
>> it? (I.e., it's a flaw parculiar to chemical batteries.)
>
> No, it decreases the instant start to draw any current. Maybe trying to
> teach you about complex AC circuit theory and power electronics was a bad
> starting point :-)
Believe it or not, I went to college to study electrical engineering - a
big no-go for me, shouldn't have done it. I don't think I did 8 months
before leaving a looong course, and I still learnt zilch. Ah, the youth of
yesterday... :o/
~Steve~
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Darren New" <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote in message
news:47f3a466@news.povray.org...
> Michael Zier wrote:
>> Well, as long as you know which one must be on your account... ;)
>
> I have a book on accounting software that has a page designed to be torn
> out that says
>
> "You must memorize this:
> Account Credit Debit
> Assets Decrease Increase
> Expense Decrease Increase
> Libilities Increase Decrease
Damn, I'm stuffed then...
~Steve~
> ....
> --
> Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
> "That's pretty. Where's that?"
> "It's the Age of Channelwood."
> "We should go there on vacation some time."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Invisible" <voi### [at] devnull> wrote in message
news:47f392bf$1@news.povray.org...
> It's quite simple. All money comes *from* somewhere, and goes *to*
> somewhere else. Conservation of finance! :-D
Nope, there is no such thing as money. Someone posted a great video link
sometime last year(?) where it explains the situation fom the *very* start
of monetarianism.
Yep, we've got it in our pockets in a physical state, but it really isn't
real in the sense of world-wide governments.
~Steve~
> http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
> http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Invisible" <voi### [at] devnull> wrote in message
news:47f35986$1@news.povray.org...
> In my experience - and hell, what would I know about reality? - things
> don't just move of their own accord. There must be a *force* driving them.
> Otherwise we'd all by driving perpetual motion machines to work by now...
YES! Clockwork machines! ;)
~Steve~
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Yep, we've got it in our pockets in a physical state, but it really
> isn't real in the sense of world-wide governments.
If you look on an English bank note, it says "I promise to pay the bearer on
demand the sum of xxx pounds". It basically comes from the fact that in the
old days you would drop off 100 pounds of gold at the bank and they'd give
you a 100 pound "note" that entitled you to the gold. Then people realised
it's easier to just trade these notes rather than actual gold.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott wrote:
>> Yep, we've got it in our pockets in a physical state, but it really
>> isn't real in the sense of world-wide governments.
>
> If you look on an English bank note, it says "I promise to pay the
> bearer on demand the sum of xxx pounds". It basically comes from the
> fact that in the old days you would drop off 100 pounds of gold at the
> bank and they'd give you a 100 pound "note" that entitled you to the
> gold. Then people realised it's easier to just trade these notes rather
> than actual gold.
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
You can buy 3mg of gold off me for 100 GBP if you want. Actually, seeing as
it's Friday I'll give you a special deal and give it to you for half price!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott wrote:
>
> You can buy 3mg of gold off me for 100 GBP if you want. Actually,
> seeing as it's Friday I'll give you a special deal and give it to you
> for half price!
Heh. Like I actually *need* gold for something...
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
