On Tuesday, September 10, 2019 at 10:16:05 PM UTC-4, Clare Snyder wrote:
On Tue, 10 Sep 2019 20:16:39 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 10 Sep 2019 09:05:05 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, September 10, 2019 at 11:56:17 AM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tue, 10 Sep 2019 06:40:50 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

An IEEE fellow, professor
of electrical engineering,

I am talking about people in the trade, not some professor who has
never touched a piece of wire.
Terms have meanings. When you have to blur the nomenclature to get
novices to understand you corrupt the meaning of the term.

In other words, you can't handle the most basic electrical engineering
principles that show electrically what that service is. It's like
denying that tissues are actually a soft paper product made from
trees and insisting that they are just Kleenex, that's all they are,
that's all they ever can be, because that's how they are commonly
referred to.


No people in the trade where there is life on the line use very
specific terms. Blurring them to make concepts understandable for new
students or homeowners is not what they choose to do.
Arguing with Trader is like wresting with a pig

Figures that you'd weigh in with a stupid ad hominem attack.

Let's review. An obvious troll posted what was clearly a joke about
two phase. It was ignored, until YOU took the bait, you were so
dumb you not only couldn't see it was a troll but you responded
as if it was a serious remark, where it was obviously a joke.

Then later you posted this:

'The primary of the branch transformer is
accross ONE phase of the ncoming power,and the secondary is center
tapped - providing a "split" phase where each side of the service is
180 degrees out of phase with the other - making the voltage of the
two phases additive. "


Which of course is consistent with exactly what I've been saying.
Yet you then proceed to attack me, when I agree with you. You're
a real piece of work.