In ,
Doug Miller typed:
In article , "Twayne"
wrote:
In
,
terry typed:
On Dec 24, 12:56 am, (Doug Miller) wrote:
In article ,
wrote:
And the double pole brakers can (and should) be used with split
receptacles, but NEVER with different circuits physically in
different parts of the house.

Piffle. That is *not* a requirement of the U.S. NEC -- it might be
of the CEC,
I don't know, but it's definitely not a requirement here.

There's nothing wrong with running a 3-wire circuit from the panel
to a point some distance away, then splitting it out into two
individual circuits that go
in opposite directions.

If this is not a troll?

Either that or someone very ignorant or who wishes to create dangers
for other people who might follow the advice.

Twayne, you have no idea what you're talking about. Google "Edison
circuit" or "multiwire branch circuit", and stop giving electrical
advice. You're
completely ignorant.

Got reiteritus? Can't recall what you've already said? What about an
Edison ckt would you like to discuss? DC? AC? Audio noise? Symmetry?
Doubling the power of a 120Vac ckt? Where the number of neutrals define such
a ckt? Transverse & longitudinal loading? Maybe Differential mode? RF
filtering? The inherent dangers of working on an Edison ckt? Live Neutral,
dead Hot? Something in the ESH bulletins? Physics, so far, still holds on
this world and certain things are just going to happen based on other
things.
They all fit and are part of it. Because you're too thick to understand
the dangers of the OP's situation is your problem, not mine. Edison ckts are
inherently dangerous to humans working on them and when you consider the
other angles of the op's query, he's in a rather dangerous situation.
So I'd suggest that you are the one who needs to spend some time in
research to determine what your reaility really is.
Then of course you should stop trolling as food if going to become very
scarce and you'll never find a way to overcome your impotence here. If
ignorance is bliss, I see you must be a very happy person.


--
--
We've already reached
tomorrow's yesterday
but we're still far away from
yesterday's tomorrow.