On 2018-12-23 2:43 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 22:55:20 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-22 3:45 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 22:35:19 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-22 3:24 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 21:04:56 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-22 1:55 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 20:52:12 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-22 1:50 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 03:25:19 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-21 6:54 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 18:37:18 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-20 11:23 a.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 18:14:07 -0000, %
wrote:

On 2018-12-20 10:08 a.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 17:04:50 -0000, Sir Gaygory's Owner's
Owner
�笛
wrote:

œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡ it's peak value at exactly the same time.
That's
how you
get 240V,
œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡ 120+120 = 240.

they know a lot about this over in alt.checkmate

What the **** are all those stars for?

i want them there

Why?

i charge a fee to answer questions

Go **** yourself.

now why would i do that when i'm having so much fun ****ing you

If you'd been ****ing me I'd have felt something.

you did that's why you were hollering and screaming and twitching
around
like now

No that's the drugs.

leave them alone then if they're fk'ing you

The positives outweigh the negatives.

i'm not a weight watcher

Weight is irrelevant, although smoking does lower your weight.

if it's irrelevant why did you say it

You're the one that brought up weight.

you said outweigh first

"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news
On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 17:38:42 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 23:33:40 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 23:01:40 -0000, Rod Speed

wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in
message
news On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 21:18:35 -0000, Rod Speed

wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in
message
news On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 02:55:55 -0000, Rod Speed

wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in
message
news why does google have 4.5 million results for the car light
flicker?

Just a few mindlessly ranting freaks, like you.

I must have asked about 30 people I know about it, and about half
agreed
it was irritating.

The technical term for that is 'pathetically inadequate sample'

I've done statistics at uni,

And clearly the whole lot went right over your head, as always.

I know what an adequate sample is.

You clearly don't with that steaming turd above.

Well I understand this,

No you do not.

How can you possibly know if I don't?

From that stupid claim of yours above.

It's your end that's stupid.

Everyone can see for themselves who the stupid is, you.

do you?

Corse I do.

Don't believe you.

You have always been, and always will be, completely and utterly
irrelevant. What you may or may not claim to believe in spades.

Stop backpedalling

Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed drunken psychotic fantasys.

and discuss your shortfall properly.

There is no shortfall of mine.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sample...pothesis_tests

To make it easier for you:
https://www.qualtrics.com/blog/calculating-sample-size/

For example, with the world population of 7.5 billion, to be 90% sure
you
only have an error margin of 10%, you only need 63 people in your
sample.

So yours is clearly a pathetically inadequate sample.

It's half of what's required for the above accuracy. I don't need that
much accuracy. Even if I was 20% out, then saying that 50% of people
can
see flicker means that 40% can. 40% is a big enough part of the
population to cater for.

Thanks for that completely superfluous
proof that you don't in fact have a ****ing
clue about even the most basic statistics.

If you did, you'd tell me what I did wrong.

Already did.

If half could actually see car lights flicker, the
designers wouldn't have designed them like that.

Economy.

Doesn't cost anymore to say double the pulse
rate so that even freaks like you can't see it.

I assume the higher switching speed needs better transistors etc.

You're wrong with the rates involved.

Funny how they don't all do it.

Because the designers can't see it and didnt bother to research
what flicker fusion thresholds are out there with you freaks.

Funny how it's only recently we've had them fast enough to make switch
mode power supplies and smaller coils possible.

Those operate at much higher rates again.

In spades with movies in movie theaters. That frame
rate was chosen because most couldn't see that flicker.

Not the same thing.

Corse its still flicker for freaks.

It's less visible.

Still visible for freaks.

Why do you persist in calling half the population freaks,

It isnt anything even remotely like half the population.

who can all see something you can't?

Because thats what they are, freaks.

Is a dog a freak because it can smell better than we can?

No, because its only the freaks of dogs that can't.

Or does it perhaps have the ability to detect what we miss?

Yes they do with sound unless they have gone deaf.
My parents believed that dogs had ESP because they
can work out when one of them is coming home long
before any human can. The answer is trivial, the dog
can hear the family vehicle long before a human can.

LED lights on cars are deliberately pulsed to get more effective
brightness (as far as the human eye is concerned, peak brightness is
what enables you to see better) from the same LEDs with less heat.
But LEDs go completely off between pulses.

And so doubling the pulse rate doesn't cost anymore.

Movie theatres (you mean cinemas,

No I do not.

theatres are for plays, they have a stage,

Movie theaters arent for plays and they don't have stages.

you're talking American)

Wrong, as always.

Cinema = big screen and projector.
Theatre = stage with live actors.

Wrong, as always.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theatre

"Theatre or theater[1] is a collaborative form of fine art that uses live
performers, typically actors or actresses, to present the experience of a
real or imagined event before a live audience in a specific place, often a
stage. The performers may communicate this experience to the audience
through combinations of gesture, speech, song, music, and dance. Elements
of art, such as painted scenery and stagecraft such as lighting are used
to enhance the physicality, presence and immediacy of the experience.[2]
The specific place of the performance is also named by the word "theatre"
as derived from the Ancient Greek θÎ*ατÏ�ον (théatron, "a place for
viewing"), itself from θεάομαι (theáomai, "to see", "to watch", "to
observe")."

Thats just one type of theater, stupid. Even you
must be aware of operating theaters which have
no stage and no play being performed.

Pity about
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theatre_(disambiguation)

don't illuminate the screen with LEDs.

Duh. And irrelevant to whether the frame rate was
chosen because most don't see any flicker with it.
Flicker didn't only happen with LEDs, stupid.

They happen more so as they switch on and off instantly.

Wrong, as always.

LEDs switch on ad off faster than any other form of light, that is an
indisputable fact.

Irrelevant to the fact that it isnt how quickly
they switch that matters, its the pulse RATE
that determines how visible the flicker is.

Why do you think Panasonic made a 100Hz TV?

Because some freaks can see flicker at 50Hz and are free to pay more
for
something faster.

Being able to detect something you can't makes them better than you.

Even sillier than you usually manage and that's saying
something. Much worse in fact when car lights flicker.

Perhaps you should ditch your sense of smell, because smelling things
you
don't like is annoying.

There is nothing that I find annoying about any
smell except a big rotting animal corpse in hot
weather and that's so rare that it just isnt a problem.

Being able to detect (and being annoyed about) something that smells bad
is a good thing.

Wrong, as always, particularly with stuff like paint etc.

It makes you want to get rid of it.

No need to get rid of an animal corpse.

And a damned nuisance with fresh paint etc.

I poison mice because its more convenient to
do that than to fart around with traps and never
have a problem with any smell from dead ones.

More fun to trap them and watch them slowly die.

Only for psychopaths.

Nevermind the advantage of smell....

Why do you think Iiyama made 90Hz monitors?

Because some freaks can see flicker at 50Hz and
are free to pay more for something faster.

High frequency monitors were very popular.

Not because many ever saw any flicker.

There would be no other reason.

Wrong, as always.

And it was proven that low frequency ones cause headaches and eye damage
for people using them all day in offices.

Bull****.

No it isn't.

Corse it is.

Go do some research

Did that before you were even born thanks. NO ONE
ever got any eye damage from lower frequency monitors.

and stop yourself being so utterly clueless.

You're the one with that problem, as always.

At my first place of work it was actually one of the regulations that
anyone could request a higher frequency monitor if they believed it was
annoying or giving them headaches.

That operation actually was that stupid ? Irrelevant
to your stupid pig ignorant claim about eye damage.

....and much better air in here again!

--
Richard addressing Rot Speed:
"**** you're thick/pathetic excuse for a troll."
MID:

....and nothing's left!

--
FredXX to Rot Speed:
"You are still an idiot and an embarrassment to your country. No wonder
we shippe the likes of you out of the British Isles. Perhaps stupidity
and criminality is inherited after all?"
Message-ID:

On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 22:28:10 -0000, Rod Speed wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news
On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 17:38:42 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 23:33:40 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 23:01:40 -0000, Rod Speed

wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in
message
news On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 21:18:35 -0000, Rod Speed

wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in
message
news On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 02:55:55 -0000, Rod Speed

wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in
message
news why does google have 4.5 million results for the car light
flicker?

Just a few mindlessly ranting freaks, like you.

I must have asked about 30 people I know about it, and about half
agreed
it was irritating.

The technical term for that is 'pathetically inadequate sample'

I've done statistics at uni,

And clearly the whole lot went right over your head, as always.

I know what an adequate sample is.

You clearly don't with that steaming turd above.

Well I understand this,

No you do not.

How can you possibly know if I don't?

From that stupid claim of yours above.

It's your end that's stupid.

Everyone can see for themselves who the stupid is, you.

do you?

Corse I do.

Don't believe you.

You have always been, and always will be, completely and utterly
irrelevant. What you may or may not claim to believe in spades.

Stop backpedalling

Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed drunken psychotic fantasys.

and discuss your shortfall properly.

There is no shortfall of mine.

You always give up and quote the same "insults" when you don't have an answer. I have you backed into a corner because you haven't a ****ing clue what you're talking about. You're so predictable.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sample...pothesis_tests

To make it easier for you:
https://www.qualtrics.com/blog/calculating-sample-size/

For example, with the world population of 7.5 billion, to be 90% sure
you
only have an error margin of 10%, you only need 63 people in your
sample.

So yours is clearly a pathetically inadequate sample.

It's half of what's required for the above accuracy. I don't need that
much accuracy. Even if I was 20% out, then saying that 50% of people
can
see flicker means that 40% can. 40% is a big enough part of the
population to cater for.

Thanks for that completely superfluous
proof that you don't in fact have a ****ing
clue about even the most basic statistics.

If you did, you'd tell me what I did wrong.

Already did.

No, you gave no information, you just said "bull****" etc.

If half could actually see car lights flicker, the
designers wouldn't have designed them like that.

Economy.

Doesn't cost anymore to say double the pulse
rate so that even freaks like you can't see it.

I assume the higher switching speed needs better transistors etc.

You're wrong with the rates involved.

Funny how they don't all do it.

Because the designers can't see it and didnt bother to research
what flicker fusion thresholds are out there with you freaks.

A designer who only designs something to be suitable for himself is an idiot.

Funny how it's only recently we've had them fast enough to make switch
mode power supplies and smaller coils possible.

Those operate at much higher rates again.

There must be a reason they don't just make them switch very fast, perhaps it wears the LED out?

In spades with movies in movie theaters. That frame
rate was chosen because most couldn't see that flicker.

Not the same thing.

Corse its still flicker for freaks.

It's less visible.

Still visible for freaks.

Why do you persist in calling half the population freaks,

It isnt anything even remotely like half the population.

Yes it is, by simple observation of those around you. Don't you ever talk to anyone?

who can all see something you can't?

Because thats what they are, freaks.

Is a dog a freak because it can smell better than we can?

No, because its only the freaks of dogs that can't.

Ah, so you just accept the majority as being correct. So Einstein was a freak because he was one of very few people who was that clever. You would have had him burned at the stake wouldn't you? I mean it's not normal to be that clever, there must be something wrong with him, best we get rid of him?

Or does it perhaps have the ability to detect what we miss?

Yes they do with sound unless they have gone deaf.
My parents believed that dogs had ESP because they
can work out when one of them is coming home long
before any human can. The answer is trivial, the dog
can hear the family vehicle long before a human can.

Which makes them useful, they can do something we can't. A human who could do the same would be equally useful, yet you'd call them a freak.

LED lights on cars are deliberately pulsed to get more effective
brightness (as far as the human eye is concerned, peak brightness is
what enables you to see better) from the same LEDs with less heat..
But LEDs go completely off between pulses.

And so doubling the pulse rate doesn't cost anymore.

Movie theatres (you mean cinemas,

No I do not.

theatres are for plays, they have a stage,

Movie theaters arent for plays and they don't have stages.

you're talking American)

Wrong, as always.

Cinema = big screen and projector.
Theatre = stage with live actors.

Wrong, as always.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theatre

"Theatre or theater[1] is a collaborative form of fine art that uses live
performers, typically actors or actresses, to present the experience of a
real or imagined event before a live audience in a specific place, often a
stage. The performers may communicate this experience to the audience
through combinations of gesture, speech, song, music, and dance. Elements
of art, such as painted scenery and stagecraft such as lighting are used
to enhance the physicality, presence and immediacy of the experience.[2]
The specific place of the performance is also named by the word "theatre"
as derived from the Ancient Greek θÎ*ατÏ�ον (théatron, "a place for
viewing"), itself from θεάομαι (theáomai, "to see", "to watch", "to
observe")."

Thats just one type of theater, stupid. Even you
must be aware of operating theaters which have
no stage and no play being performed.

They also have live people in them. A cinema just plays a film, no people are present.

Pity about
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theatre_(disambiguation)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Movie_theater , linked from your own link.
"A movie theater (American English),[1] cinema (British English)[2] or cinema hall (Indian English)[3] is a building that contains an auditorium for viewing films (also called movies) for entertainment."
Only Americans get it wrong. The language is English, not American.
Australia is a British colony, not an American one, you even use our Queen ffs.

don't illuminate the screen with LEDs.

Duh. And irrelevant to whether the frame rate was
chosen because most don't see any flicker with it.
Flicker didn't only happen with LEDs, stupid.

They happen more so as they switch on and off instantly.

Wrong, as always.

LEDs switch on ad off faster than any other form of light, that is an
indisputable fact.

Irrelevant to the fact that it isnt how quickly
they switch that matters, its the pulse RATE
that determines how visible the flicker is.

Bull****. Consider a variable duty cycle. As that approaches 1, there's no flicker. Clearly LEDs have a much lower duty cycle than that. A decent phosphor coating on a CRT will have a duty cycle of say 0.8 to 0.9, which will be much harder to see flickering.

Why do you think Panasonic made a 100Hz TV?

Because some freaks can see flicker at 50Hz and are free to pay more
for
something faster.

Being able to detect something you can't makes them better than you..

Even sillier than you usually manage and that's saying
something. Much worse in fact when car lights flicker.

Perhaps you should ditch your sense of smell, because smelling things
you
don't like is annoying.

There is nothing that I find annoying about any
smell except a big rotting animal corpse in hot
weather and that's so rare that it just isnt a problem.

Being able to detect (and being annoyed about) something that smells bad
is a good thing.

Wrong, as always, particularly with stuff like paint etc.

Paint doesn't smell bad. Bad smells mean something is harmful, like ****.

On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 21:50:39 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-23 2:43 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 22:55:20 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-22 3:45 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 22:35:19 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-22 3:24 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 21:04:56 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-22 1:55 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 20:52:12 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-22 1:50 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 03:25:19 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-21 6:54 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 18:37:18 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-20 11:23 a.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 18:14:07 -0000, %
wrote:

On 2018-12-20 10:08 a.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 17:04:50 -0000, Sir Gaygory's Owner's
Owner
�笛
wrote:

œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡ it's peak value at exactly the same time.
That's
how you
get 240V,
œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡ 120+120 = 240.

they know a lot about this over in alt.checkmate

What the **** are all those stars for?

i want them there

Why?

i charge a fee to answer questions

Go **** yourself.

now why would i do that when i'm having so much fun ****ing you

If you'd been ****ing me I'd have felt something.

you did that's why you were hollering and screaming and twitching
around
like now

No that's the drugs.

leave them alone then if they're fk'ing you

The positives outweigh the negatives.

i'm not a weight watcher

Weight is irrelevant, although smoking does lower your weight.

if it's irrelevant why did you say it

You're the one that brought up weight.

you said outweigh first

Maybe you should look up what that word means.

On 2018-12-23 5:33 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 21:50:39 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-23 2:43 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 22:55:20 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-22 3:45 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 22:35:19 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-22 3:24 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 21:04:56 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-22 1:55 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 20:52:12 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-22 1:50 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 03:25:19 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-21 6:54 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 18:37:18 -0000, %
wrote:

On 2018-12-20 11:23 a.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 18:14:07 -0000, %
wrote:

On 2018-12-20 10:08 a.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 17:04:50 -0000, Sir Gaygory's Owner's
Owner
�笛
wrote:

œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡ it's peak value at exactly the same time.
That's
how you
get 240V,
œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡ 120+120 = 240.

they know a lot about this over in alt.checkmate

What the **** are all those stars for?

i want them there

Why?

i charge a fee to answer questions

Go **** yourself.

now why would i do that when i'm having so much fun ****ing you

If you'd been ****ing me I'd have felt something.

you did that's why you were hollering and screaming and twitching
around
like now

No that's the drugs.

leave them alone then if they're fk'ing you

The positives outweigh the negatives.

i'm not a weight watcher

Weight is irrelevant, although smoking does lower your weight.

if it's irrelevant why did you say it

You're the one that brought up weight.

you said outweigh first

Maybe you should look up what that word means.

maybe , but i won't

"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news
On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 22:28:10 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news
On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 17:38:42 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 23:33:40 -0000, Rod Speed

wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in
message
news On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 23:01:40 -0000, Rod Speed

wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in
message
news On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 21:18:35 -0000, Rod Speed

wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in
message
news On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 02:55:55 -0000, Rod Speed

wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in
message
news why does google have 4.5 million results for the car light
flicker?

Just a few mindlessly ranting freaks, like you.

I must have asked about 30 people I know about it, and about
half
agreed
it was irritating.

The technical term for that is 'pathetically inadequate sample'

I've done statistics at uni,

And clearly the whole lot went right over your head, as always.

I know what an adequate sample is.

You clearly don't with that steaming turd above.

Well I understand this,

No you do not.

How can you possibly know if I don't?

From that stupid claim of yours above.

It's your end that's stupid.

Everyone can see for themselves who the stupid is, you.

do you?

Corse I do.

Don't believe you.

You have always been, and always will be, completely and utterly
irrelevant. What you may or may not claim to believe in spades.

Stop backpedalling

Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed drunken psychotic
fantasys.

and discuss your shortfall properly.

There is no shortfall of mine.

You always give up and quote the same "insults" when you don't have an
answer.

Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed drunken psychotic fantasys.

I have you backed into a corner

Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed drunken psychotic fantasys.

because you haven't a ****ing clue what you're talking about. You're so
predictable.

You never could bull**** your way out of a wet paper bag.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sample...pothesis_tests

To make it easier for you:
https://www.qualtrics.com/blog/calculating-sample-size/

For example, with the world population of 7.5 billion, to be 90%
sure
you
only have an error margin of 10%, you only need 63 people in your
sample.

So yours is clearly a pathetically inadequate sample.

It's half of what's required for the above accuracy. I don't need
that
much accuracy. Even if I was 20% out, then saying that 50% of people
can
see flicker means that 40% can. 40% is a big enough part of the
population to cater for.

Thanks for that completely superfluous
proof that you don't in fact have a ****ing
clue about even the most basic statistics.

If you did, you'd tell me what I did wrong.

Already did.

No, you gave no information,

Just another of your bare faced lies.

you just said "bull****" etc.

Everyone can see for themselves what I actually said.

If half could actually see car lights flicker, the
designers wouldn't have designed them like that.

Economy.

Doesn't cost anymore to say double the pulse
rate so that even freaks like you can't see it.

I assume the higher switching speed needs better transistors etc.

You're wrong with the rates involved.

Funny how they don't all do it.

Because the designers can't see it and didnt bother to research
what flicker fusion thresholds are out there with you freaks.

A designer who only designs something to be suitable for himself

They aint doing anything even remotely like that.

is an idiot.

Freaks that demand that everything must be designed
for the most extreme freaks are terminal ****wits.

Funny how it's only recently we've had them fast enough to make switch
mode power supplies and smaller coils possible.

Those operate at much higher rates again.

There must be a reason they don't just make them switch very fast,

The ones that you can see flicker dont switch very fast,
just a bit faster than those that you can see flicker.

perhaps it wears the LED out?

No it does not. The reason is as I stated, the designer didnt
bother to research what freaks can still see flicker wise.

In spades with movies in movie theaters. That frame
rate was chosen because most couldn't see that flicker.

Not the same thing.

Corse its still flicker for freaks.

It's less visible.

Still visible for freaks.

Why do you persist in calling half the population freaks,

It isnt anything even remotely like half the population.

Yes it is, by simple observation of those around you.

No one else I know sees flicker with car lights.

Don't you ever talk to anyone?

Corse I do and you can see me doing that, ****wit.

who can all see something you can't?

Because thats what they are, freaks.

Is a dog a freak because it can smell better than we can?

No, because its only the freaks of dogs that can't.

Ah, so you just accept the majority as being correct.

It isnt about being correct.

So Einstein was a freak

Corse he was, mentally.

because he was one of very few people who was that clever.

Duh.

You would have had him burned at the stake wouldn't you?

If you can't do any better than this mindless
**** I will be flushing your **** where it belongs.

I mean it's not normal to be that clever,

Duh.

there must be something wrong with him, best we get rid of him?

There you go, off in your pathetic little drug
crazed drunken psychotic fantasyland, as always.

Or does it perhaps have the ability to detect what we miss?

Yes they do with sound unless they have gone deaf.
My parents believed that dogs had ESP because they
can work out when one of them is coming home long
before any human can. The answer is trivial, the dog
can hear the family vehicle long before a human can.

Which makes them useful, they can do something we can't.

Which might just be why we use them to sniff out stupid
druggys like you at airports and other places, stupid.

A human who could do the same would be equally useful,

Nothing useful about seeing car lights flickering, ****wit.

yet you'd call them a freak.

I call a freak a freak and drug crazed drunken
psychotics drug crazed drunken psychotics, freak.

LED lights on cars are deliberately pulsed to get more effective
brightness (as far as the human eye is concerned, peak brightness is
what enables you to see better) from the same LEDs with less heat.
But LEDs go completely off between pulses.

And so doubling the pulse rate doesn't cost anymore.

Movie theatres (you mean cinemas,

No I do not.

theatres are for plays, they have a stage,

Movie theaters arent for plays and they don't have stages.

you're talking American)

Wrong, as always.

Cinema = big screen and projector.
Theatre = stage with live actors.

Wrong, as always.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theatre

"Theatre or theater[1] is a collaborative form of fine art that uses
live
performers, typically actors or actresses, to present the experience of
a
real or imagined event before a live audience in a specific place, often
a
stage. The performers may communicate this experience to the audience
through combinations of gesture, speech, song, music, and dance.
Elements
of art, such as painted scenery and stagecraft such as lighting are used
to enhance the physicality, presence and immediacy of the experience.[2]
The specific place of the performance is also named by the word
"theatre"
as derived from the Ancient Greek θÎ*ατÏ�ον (théatron, "a place for
viewing"), itself from θεάομαι (theáomai, "to see", "to watch", "to
observe")."

Thats just one type of theater, stupid. Even you
must be aware of operating theaters which have
no stage and no play being performed.

They also have live people in them.

So do plenty of non theaters.

A cinema just plays a film, no people are present.

No one watching the movie at all eh ?

Completely off with the ****ing fairys, as always.

Pity about
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theatre_(disambiguation)

don't illuminate the screen with LEDs.

Duh. And irrelevant to whether the frame rate was
chosen because most don't see any flicker with it.
Flicker didn't only happen with LEDs, stupid.

They happen more so as they switch on and off instantly.

Wrong, as always.

LEDs switch on ad off faster than any other form of light, that is an
indisputable fact.

Irrelevant to the fact that it isnt how quickly
they switch that matters, its the pulse RATE
that determines how visible the flicker is.

Bull****. Consider a variable duty cycle.

That isnt the reason some car lights
flicker for you and others dont.

As that approaches 1, there's no flicker. Clearly LEDs have a much lower
duty cycle than that.

LCD screens dont.

A decent phosphor coating on a CRT will have a duty cycle of say 0.8 to
0.9,

CRTs dont have a duty cycle.

which will be much harder to see flickering.

Wrong, as always.

Why do you think Panasonic made a 100Hz TV?

Because some freaks can see flicker at 50Hz and are free to pay more
for
something faster.

Being able to detect something you can't makes them better than you.

Even sillier than you usually manage and that's saying
something. Much worse in fact when car lights flicker.

Perhaps you should ditch your sense of smell, because smelling things
you
don't like is annoying.

There is nothing that I find annoying about any
smell except a big rotting animal corpse in hot
weather and that's so rare that it just isnt a problem.

Being able to detect (and being annoyed about) something that smells bad
is a good thing.

Wrong, as always, particularly with stuff like paint etc.

Paint doesn't smell bad.

Wrong, as always.

Bad smells mean something is harmful, like ****.

**** isnt harmful when you are just smelling it.

And durians smell awful but are fine to eat.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Durian

It makes you want to get rid of it.

No need to get rid of an animal corpse.

Disease.

Just another of your pathetic little drug
crazed drunken pig ignorant fantasys.

And a damned nuisance with fresh paint etc.

I poison mice because its more convenient to
do that than to fart around with traps and never
have a problem with any smell from dead ones.

More fun to trap them and watch them slowly die.

Only for psychopaths.

Mice are vermin,

Some have them as pets.

why would you care about them?

I dont, I poison them. But I'm not a psychopath so I dont
catch them and get off on watching them die slowly.

Anyway you have no problem killing them, yet you won't torture them first?

Because I am not a psychopath.

Death is 1 billion times worse than torture.

Irrelevant to whether only a psychopath gets off
on catching mice and watching them die slowly.

I'd much rather you tortured me then let me live, than kill me instantly.

Doesnt matter what some psychopath would rather.

Nevermind the advantage of smell....

Why do you think Iiyama made 90Hz monitors?

Because some freaks can see flicker at 50Hz and
are free to pay more for something faster.

High frequency monitors were very popular.

Not because many ever saw any flicker.

There would be no other reason.

Wrong, as always.

State the other reason then.

Already did.

[FFS this is like getting blood out of a stone]

And it was proven that low frequency ones cause headaches and eye
damage
for people using them all day in offices.

Bull****.

No it isn't.

Corse it is.

Go do some research

Did that before you were even born thanks. NO ONE
ever got any eye damage from lower frequency monitors.

https://www.webmd.com/eye-health/com...ision-syndrome

Just because some ****wit claims something...

and stop yourself being so utterly clueless.

You're the one with that problem, as always.

At my first place of work it was actually one of the regulations that
anyone could request a higher frequency monitor if they believed it was
annoying or giving them headaches.

That operation actually was that stupid ? Irrelevant
to your stupid pig ignorant claim about eye damage.

Funny how the better monitors took the headaches away.

Funny how no one ever got any eye damage with the standard ones.

..
--
Richard addressing Rot Speed:
"**** you're thick/pathetic excuse for a troll."
MID:

On Mon, 24 Dec 2018 00:45:17 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-23 5:33 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 21:50:39 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-23 2:43 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 22:55:20 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-22 3:45 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 22:35:19 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-22 3:24 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 21:04:56 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-22 1:55 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 20:52:12 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-22 1:50 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 03:25:19 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-21 6:54 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 18:37:18 -0000, %
wrote:

On 2018-12-20 11:23 a.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 18:14:07 -0000, %
wrote:

On 2018-12-20 10:08 a.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 17:04:50 -0000, Sir Gaygory's Owner's
Owner
�笛
wrote:

œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡ it's peak value at exactly the same time.
That's
how you
get 240V,
œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡ 120+120 = 240.

they know a lot about this over in alt.checkmate

What the **** are all those stars for?

i want them there

Why?

i charge a fee to answer questions

Go **** yourself.

now why would i do that when i'm having so much fun ****ing you

If you'd been ****ing me I'd have felt something.

you did that's why you were hollering and screaming and twitching
around
like now

No that's the drugs.

leave them alone then if they're fk'ing you

The positives outweigh the negatives.

i'm not a weight watcher

Weight is irrelevant, although smoking does lower your weight.

if it's irrelevant why did you say it

You're the one that brought up weight.

you said outweigh first

Maybe you should look up what that word means.

maybe , but i won't

Bathe in ignorance.

On 2018-12-24 5:09 a.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2018 00:45:17 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-23 5:33 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 21:50:39 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-23 2:43 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 22:55:20 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-22 3:45 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 22:35:19 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-22 3:24 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 21:04:56 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-22 1:55 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 20:52:12 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-22 1:50 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 03:25:19 -0000, %
wrote:

On 2018-12-21 6:54 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 18:37:18 -0000, %
wrote:

On 2018-12-20 11:23 a.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 18:14:07 -0000, %
wrote:

On 2018-12-20 10:08 a.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 17:04:50 -0000, Sir Gaygory's
Owner's
Owner
�笛
wrote:

œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡ it's peak value at exactly the same time.
That's
how you
get 240V,
œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡ 120+120 = 240.

they know a lot about this over in alt.checkmate

What the **** are all those stars for?

i want them there

Why?

i charge a fee to answer questions

Go **** yourself.

now why would i do that when i'm having so much fun
****ing you

If you'd been ****ing me I'd have felt something.

you did that's why you were hollering and screaming and
twitching
around
like now

No that's the drugs.

leave them alone then if they're fk'ing you

The positives outweigh the negatives.

i'm not a weight watcher

Weight is irrelevant, although smoking does lower your weight.

if it's irrelevant why did you say it

You're the one that brought up weight.

you said outweigh first

Maybe you should look up what that word means.

maybe , but i won't

Bathe in ignorance.

i don't bathe in other peoples posts

On Mon, 24 Dec 2018 12:55:21 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-24 5:09 a.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2018 00:45:17 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-23 5:33 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 21:50:39 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-23 2:43 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 22:55:20 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-22 3:45 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 22:35:19 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-22 3:24 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 21:04:56 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-22 1:55 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 20:52:12 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-22 1:50 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 03:25:19 -0000, %
wrote:

On 2018-12-21 6:54 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 18:37:18 -0000, %
wrote:

On 2018-12-20 11:23 a.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 18:14:07 -0000, %
wrote:

On 2018-12-20 10:08 a.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 17:04:50 -0000, Sir Gaygory's
Owner's
Owner
�笛
wrote:

œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡ it's peak value at exactly the same time.
That's
how you
get 240V,
œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡ 120+120 = 240.

they know a lot about this over in alt.checkmate

What the **** are all those stars for?

i want them there

Why?

i charge a fee to answer questions

Go **** yourself.

now why would i do that when i'm having so much fun
****ing you

If you'd been ****ing me I'd have felt something.

you did that's why you were hollering and screaming and
twitching
around
like now

No that's the drugs.

leave them alone then if they're fk'ing you

The positives outweigh the negatives.

i'm not a weight watcher

Weight is irrelevant, although smoking does lower your weight.

if it's irrelevant why did you say it

You're the one that brought up weight.

you said outweigh first

Maybe you should look up what that word means.

maybe , but i won't

Bathe in ignorance.

i don't bathe in other peoples posts

What substance do you prefer to bathe in?

On 2018-12-24 6:54 a.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2018 12:55:21 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-24 5:09 a.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2018 00:45:17 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-23 5:33 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 21:50:39 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-23 2:43 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 22:55:20 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-22 3:45 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 22:35:19 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-22 3:24 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 21:04:56 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-22 1:55 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 20:52:12 -0000, %
wrote:

On 2018-12-22 1:50 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 03:25:19 -0000, %
wrote:

On 2018-12-21 6:54 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 18:37:18 -0000, %
wrote:

On 2018-12-20 11:23 a.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 18:14:07 -0000, %

wrote:

On 2018-12-20 10:08 a.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 17:04:50 -0000, Sir Gaygory's
Owner's
Owner
�笛
wrote:

œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡ it's peak value at exactly the same time.
That's
how you
get 240V,
œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡ 120+120 = 240.

they know a lot about this over in alt.checkmate

What the **** are all those stars for?

i want them there

Why?

i charge a fee to answer questions

Go **** yourself.

now why would i do that when i'm having so much fun
****ing you

If you'd been ****ing me I'd have felt something.

you did that's why you were hollering and screaming and
twitching
around
like now

No that's the drugs.

leave them alone then if they're fk'ing you

The positives outweigh the negatives.

i'm not a weight watcher

Weight is irrelevant, although smoking does lower your weight.

if it's irrelevant why did you say it

You're the one that brought up weight.

you said outweigh first

Maybe you should look up what that word means.

maybe , but i won't

Bathe in ignorance.

i don't bathe in other peoples posts

What substance do you prefer to bathe in?

it depends what i'm trying to bathe now open your mouth so i can wash this

On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 22:28:10 -0000, Rod Speed wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news
On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 17:38:42 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 23:33:40 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news Why do you think Iiyama made 90Hz monitors?

Because some freaks can see flicker at 50Hz and
are free to pay more for something faster.

High frequency monitors were very popular.

Not because many ever saw any flicker.

There would be no other reason.

Wrong, as always.

Getting back to the subject of the LEDs.... I decided I needed an oscilloscope. Just got one for £19 from China! Little portable thing that runs off a PP3 9V battery. Fairly basic, but it measures up to 200kHz waveforms.
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/283094513911

On Mon, 24 Dec 2018 13:55:45 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-24 6:54 a.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2018 12:55:21 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-24 5:09 a.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2018 00:45:17 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-23 5:33 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 21:50:39 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-23 2:43 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 22:55:20 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-22 3:45 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 22:35:19 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-22 3:24 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 21:04:56 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-22 1:55 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 20:52:12 -0000, %
wrote:

On 2018-12-22 1:50 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 03:25:19 -0000, %
wrote:

On 2018-12-21 6:54 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 18:37:18 -0000, %
wrote:

On 2018-12-20 11:23 a.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 18:14:07 -0000, %

wrote:

On 2018-12-20 10:08 a.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 17:04:50 -0000, Sir Gaygory's
Owner's
Owner
�笛
wrote:

œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡ it's peak value at exactly the same time.
That's
how you
get 240V,
œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡ 120+120 = 240.

they know a lot about this over in alt.checkmate

What the **** are all those stars for?

i want them there

Why?

i charge a fee to answer questions

Go **** yourself.

now why would i do that when i'm having so much fun
****ing you

If you'd been ****ing me I'd have felt something.

you did that's why you were hollering and screaming and
twitching
around
like now

No that's the drugs.

leave them alone then if they're fk'ing you

The positives outweigh the negatives.

i'm not a weight watcher

Weight is irrelevant, although smoking does lower your weight..

if it's irrelevant why did you say it

You're the one that brought up weight.

you said outweigh first

Maybe you should look up what that word means.

maybe , but i won't

Bathe in ignorance.

i don't bathe in other peoples posts

What substance do you prefer to bathe in?

it depends what i'm trying to bathe now open your mouth so i can wash this

I don't want a clean mouth.

On 2018-12-24 10:24 a.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2018 13:55:45 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-24 6:54 a.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2018 12:55:21 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-24 5:09 a.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2018 00:45:17 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-23 5:33 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 21:50:39 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-23 2:43 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 22:55:20 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-22 3:45 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 22:35:19 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-22 3:24 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 21:04:56 -0000, %
wrote:

On 2018-12-22 1:55 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 20:52:12 -0000, %
wrote:

On 2018-12-22 1:50 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 03:25:19 -0000, %
wrote:

On 2018-12-21 6:54 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 18:37:18 -0000, %

wrote:

On 2018-12-20 11:23 a.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 18:14:07 -0000, %

wrote:

On 2018-12-20 10:08 a.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 17:04:50 -0000, Sir Gaygory's
Owner's
Owner
�笛
wrote:

œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡ it's peak value at exactly the same
time.
That's
how you
get 240V,
œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡ 120+120 = 240.

they know a lot about this over in alt.checkmate

What the **** are all those stars for?

i want them there

Why?

i charge a fee to answer questions

Go **** yourself.

now why would i do that when i'm having so much fun
****ing you

If you'd been ****ing me I'd have felt something.

you did that's why you were hollering and screaming and
twitching
around
like now

No that's the drugs.

leave them alone then if they're fk'ing you

The positives outweigh the negatives.

i'm not a weight watcher

Weight is irrelevant, although smoking does lower your weight.

if it's irrelevant why did you say it

You're the one that brought up weight.

you said outweigh first

Maybe you should look up what that word means.

maybe , but i won't

Bathe in ignorance.

i don't bathe in other peoples posts

What substance do you prefer to bathe in?

it depends what i'm trying to bathe now open your mouth so i can wash
this

I don't want a clean mouth.

no one said you did , you gotta slow down ,
don't start answering until after you read it and get it clearly

"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news
On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 22:28:10 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news
On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 17:38:42 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 23:33:40 -0000, Rod Speed

wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in
message
news Why do you think Iiyama made 90Hz monitors?

Because some freaks can see flicker at 50Hz and
are free to pay more for something faster.

High frequency monitors were very popular.

Not because many ever saw any flicker.

There would be no other reason.

Wrong, as always.

Getting back to the subject of the LEDs.... I decided I needed an
oscilloscope. Just got one for £19 from China! Little portable thing
that runs off a PP3 9V battery. Fairly basic, but it measures up to
200kHz waveforms.
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/283094513911

Yeah, some surprisingly cheap ones around.

I actually have a proper dual channel cro, ex TV repair operation.

On Mon, 24 Dec 2018 19:13:58 -0000, Rod Speed wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news
On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 22:28:10 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 17:38:42 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 23:33:40 -0000, Rod Speed

wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in
message
news Why do you think Iiyama made 90Hz monitors?

Because some freaks can see flicker at 50Hz and
are free to pay more for something faster.

High frequency monitors were very popular.

Not because many ever saw any flicker.

There would be no other reason.

Wrong, as always.

Getting back to the subject of the LEDs.... I decided I needed an
oscilloscope. Just got one for £19 from China! Little portable thing
that runs off a PP3 9V battery. Fairly basic, but it measures up to
200kHz waveforms.
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/283094513911

Yeah, some surprisingly cheap ones around.

I actually have a proper dual channel cro, ex TV repair operation.

Have you ever used one of those cheap ones? Are they any good?

On Mon, 24 Dec 2018 17:33:43 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-24 10:24 a.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2018 13:55:45 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-24 6:54 a.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2018 12:55:21 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-24 5:09 a.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2018 00:45:17 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-23 5:33 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 21:50:39 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-23 2:43 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 22:55:20 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-22 3:45 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 22:35:19 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-22 3:24 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 21:04:56 -0000, %
wrote:

On 2018-12-22 1:55 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 20:52:12 -0000, %
wrote:

On 2018-12-22 1:50 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 03:25:19 -0000, %
wrote:

On 2018-12-21 6:54 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 18:37:18 -0000, %

wrote:

On 2018-12-20 11:23 a.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 18:14:07 -0000, %

wrote:

On 2018-12-20 10:08 a.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 17:04:50 -0000, Sir Gaygory's
Owner's
Owner
�笛
wrote:

œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡ it's peak value at exactly the same
time.
That's
how you
get 240V,
œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡ 120+120 = 240.

they know a lot about this over in alt.checkmate

What the **** are all those stars for?

i want them there

Why?

i charge a fee to answer questions

Go **** yourself.

now why would i do that when i'm having so much fun
****ing you

If you'd been ****ing me I'd have felt something.

you did that's why you were hollering and screaming and
twitching
around
like now

No that's the drugs.

leave them alone then if they're fk'ing you

The positives outweigh the negatives.

i'm not a weight watcher

Weight is irrelevant, although smoking does lower your weight.

if it's irrelevant why did you say it

You're the one that brought up weight.

you said outweigh first

Maybe you should look up what that word means.

maybe , but i won't

Bathe in ignorance.

i don't bathe in other peoples posts

What substance do you prefer to bathe in?

it depends what i'm trying to bathe now open your mouth so i can wash
this

I don't want a clean mouth.

no one said you did , you gotta slow down ,
don't start answering until after you read it and get it clearly

There's not much to get in your posts.

On Mon, 24 Dec 2018 19:13:58 -0000, Rod Speed wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news
On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 22:28:10 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 17:38:42 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 23:33:40 -0000, Rod Speed

wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in
message
news Why do you think Iiyama made 90Hz monitors?

Because some freaks can see flicker at 50Hz and
are free to pay more for something faster.

High frequency monitors were very popular.

Not because many ever saw any flicker.

There would be no other reason.

Wrong, as always.

Getting back to the subject of the LEDs.... I decided I needed an
oscilloscope. Just got one for £19 from China! Little portable thing
that runs off a PP3 9V battery. Fairly basic, but it measures up to
200kHz waveforms.
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/283094513911

Yeah, some surprisingly cheap ones around.

I actually have a proper dual channel cro, ex TV repair operation.

It's amazing what you can find online, for example this lump of uninteresting rock for only £900!
https://www.gumtree.com/p/for-sale/l...ook/1324758553

"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news
On Mon, 24 Dec 2018 19:13:58 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news
On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 22:28:10 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 17:38:42 -0000, Rod Speed

wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in
message
news On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 23:33:40 -0000, Rod Speed

wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in
message
news Why do you think Iiyama made 90Hz monitors?

Because some freaks can see flicker at 50Hz and
are free to pay more for something faster.

High frequency monitors were very popular.

Not because many ever saw any flicker.

There would be no other reason.

Wrong, as always.

Getting back to the subject of the LEDs.... I decided I needed an
oscilloscope. Just got one for £19 from China! Little portable thing
that runs off a PP3 9V battery. Fairly basic, but it measures up to
200kHz waveforms.
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/283094513911

Yeah, some surprisingly cheap ones around.

I actually have a proper dual channel cro, ex TV repair operation.

Have you ever used one of those cheap ones?

No.

Are they any good?

Yeah, have seen some who have said they
work fine for audio type frequencys.
From memory someone in here has one.

On Mon, 24 Dec 2018 19:45:04 -0000, Rod Speed wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news
On Mon, 24 Dec 2018 19:13:58 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 22:28:10 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 17:38:42 -0000, Rod Speed

wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in
message
news On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 23:33:40 -0000, Rod Speed

wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in
message
news Why do you think Iiyama made 90Hz monitors?

Because some freaks can see flicker at 50Hz and
are free to pay more for something faster.

High frequency monitors were very popular.

Not because many ever saw any flicker.

There would be no other reason.

Wrong, as always.

Getting back to the subject of the LEDs.... I decided I needed an
oscilloscope. Just got one for £19 from China! Little portable thing
that runs off a PP3 9V battery. Fairly basic, but it measures up to
200kHz waveforms.
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/283094513911

Yeah, some surprisingly cheap ones around.

I actually have a proper dual channel cro, ex TV repair operation.

Have you ever used one of those cheap ones?

No.

Are they any good?

Yeah, have seen some who have said they
work fine for audio type frequencys.
From memory someone in here has one.

Well it says up to 200kHz. I'd be using it for mains frequencies, or SMPS frequencies, or perhaps audio, or diagnosing car faults. Can't think of anything over 200kHz I'd use it for, that would be ham radio etc.

On 2018-12-24 12:31 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2018 17:33:43 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-24 10:24 a.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2018 13:55:45 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-24 6:54 a.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2018 12:55:21 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-24 5:09 a.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2018 00:45:17 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-23 5:33 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 21:50:39 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-23 2:43 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 22:55:20 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-22 3:45 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 22:35:19 -0000, %
wrote:

On 2018-12-22 3:24 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 21:04:56 -0000, %
wrote:

On 2018-12-22 1:55 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 20:52:12 -0000, %
wrote:

On 2018-12-22 1:50 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 03:25:19 -0000, %

wrote:

On 2018-12-21 6:54 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 18:37:18 -0000, %

wrote:

On 2018-12-20 11:23 a.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 18:14:07 -0000, %

wrote:

On 2018-12-20 10:08 a.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 17:04:50 -0000, Sir Gaygory's
Owner's
Owner
�笛
wrote:

œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡ it's peak value at exactly the same
time.
That's
how you
get 240V,
œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡ 120+120 = 240.

they know a lot about this over in alt.checkmate

What the **** are all those stars for?

i want them there

Why?

i charge a fee to answer questions

Go **** yourself.

now why would i do that when i'm having so much fun
****ing you

If you'd been ****ing me I'd have felt something.

you did that's why you were hollering and screaming and
twitching
around
like now

No that's the drugs.

leave them alone then if they're fk'ing you

The positives outweigh the negatives.

i'm not a weight watcher

Weight is irrelevant, although smoking does lower your weight.

if it's irrelevant why did you say it

You're the one that brought up weight.

you said outweigh first

Maybe you should look up what that word means.

maybe , but i won't

Bathe in ignorance.

i don't bathe in other peoples posts

What substance do you prefer to bathe in?

it depends what i'm trying to bathe now open your mouth so i can wash
this

I don't want a clean mouth.

no one said you did , you gotta slow down ,
don't start answering until after you read it and get it clearly

There's not much to get in your posts.

that doesn't change how you should approach them

On Mon, 24 Dec 2018 20:03:09 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-24 12:31 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2018 17:33:43 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-24 10:24 a.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2018 13:55:45 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-24 6:54 a.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2018 12:55:21 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-24 5:09 a.m., William Gothberg wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2018 00:45:17 -0000, % wrote:

On 2018-12-23 5:33 p.m., William Gothberg wrote:
Maybe you should look up what that word means.

maybe , but i won't

Bathe in ignorance.

i don't bathe in other peoples posts

What substance do you prefer to bathe in?

it depends what i'm trying to bathe now open your mouth so i can wash
this

I don't want a clean mouth.

no one said you did , you gotta slow down ,
don't start answering until after you read it and get it clearly

There's not much to get in your posts.

that doesn't change how you should approach them

It changes the amount of effort I need to make to interpret them.

On Mon, 24 Dec 2018 02:20:29 -0000, Rod Speed wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news
On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 22:28:10 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 17:38:42 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 23:33:40 -0000, Rod Speed

wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in
message
news On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 23:01:40 -0000, Rod Speed

wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in
message
news On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 21:18:35 -0000, Rod Speed

wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in
message
news On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 02:55:55 -0000, Rod Speed

wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in
message
news why does google have 4.5 million results for the car light
flicker?

Just a few mindlessly ranting freaks, like you.

I must have asked about 30 people I know about it, and about
half
agreed
it was irritating.

The technical term for that is 'pathetically inadequate sample'

I've done statistics at uni,

And clearly the whole lot went right over your head, as always..

I know what an adequate sample is.

You clearly don't with that steaming turd above.

Well I understand this,

No you do not.

How can you possibly know if I don't?

From that stupid claim of yours above.

It's your end that's stupid.

Everyone can see for themselves who the stupid is, you.

do you?

Corse I do.

Don't believe you.

You have always been, and always will be, completely and utterly
irrelevant. What you may or may not claim to believe in spades.

Stop backpedalling

Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed drunken psychotic
fantasys.

and discuss your shortfall properly.

There is no shortfall of mine.

You always give up and quote the same "insults" when you don't have an
answer.

Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed drunken psychotic fantasys.

QED.

I have you backed into a corner

Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed drunken psychotic fantasys.

QED.

because you haven't a ****ing clue what you're talking about. You're so
predictable.

You never could bull**** your way out of a wet paper bag.

QED.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sample...pothesis_tests

To make it easier for you:
https://www.qualtrics.com/blog/calculating-sample-size/

For example, with the world population of 7.5 billion, to be 90%
sure
you
only have an error margin of 10%, you only need 63 people in your
sample.

So yours is clearly a pathetically inadequate sample.

It's half of what's required for the above accuracy. I don't need
that
much accuracy. Even if I was 20% out, then saying that 50% of people
can
see flicker means that 40% can. 40% is a big enough part of the
population to cater for.

Thanks for that completely superfluous
proof that you don't in fact have a ****ing
clue about even the most basic statistics.

If you did, you'd tell me what I did wrong.

Already did.

No, you gave no information,

Just another of your bare faced lies.

you just said "bull****" etc.

Everyone can see for themselves what I actually said.

If you did, you could repeat it, but since you didn't, you cannot.

If half could actually see car lights flicker, the
designers wouldn't have designed them like that.

Economy.

Doesn't cost anymore to say double the pulse
rate so that even freaks like you can't see it.

I assume the higher switching speed needs better transistors etc.

You're wrong with the rates involved.

Funny how they don't all do it.

Because the designers can't see it and didnt bother to research
what flicker fusion thresholds are out there with you freaks.

A designer who only designs something to be suitable for himself

They aint doing anything even remotely like that.

is an idiot.

Freaks that demand that everything must be designed
for the most extreme freaks are terminal ****wits.

Except there are way more people with decent eyesight than you think.

Funny how it's only recently we've had them fast enough to make switch
mode power supplies and smaller coils possible.

Those operate at much higher rates again.

There must be a reason they don't just make them switch very fast,

The ones that you can see flicker dont switch very fast,
just a bit faster than those that you can see flicker.

So very easy to do then. They should all do it.

perhaps it wears the LED out?

No it does not. The reason is as I stated, the designer didnt
bother to research what freaks can still see flicker wise.

The data is readily available on google.

If you think I'm a one off....
https://www.thenakedscientists.com/f...?topic=45126.0
https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/th...ker..17817137/
https://electronics.stackexchange.co...owmotion-slomo
https://news.wisc.edu/curiosities-wh...his-dangerous/

As mentioned in some of the links, they can actually be quite dangerous and should be banned before loads of people get killed. Only a monumental idiot would make lights that anyone could see as flashing.

In spades with movies in movie theaters. That frame
rate was chosen because most couldn't see that flicker.

Not the same thing.

Corse its still flicker for freaks.

It's less visible.

Still visible for freaks.

Why do you persist in calling half the population freaks,

It isnt anything even remotely like half the population.

Yes it is, by simple observation of those around you.

No one else I know sees flicker with car lights.

People can see 2000 per second if they're moving their eyes.

https://theconversation.com/the-scie...fix-them-81639

"Scientists used to think we could see no more than about 90 flashes of light a second but now we know its more like 2,000 because the eyes move so rapidly when we change gaze from one point to another. During the eye movement, the flicker of light creates a pattern that we can see. And this has some surprising consequences for our health thanks to the way some types of lighting can affect us. In particular, it could discourage people from using more energy-saving LED lightbulbs.

To find out, my colleagues and I asked people to make a saccade across a flickering source of light and to report when they could see a pattern of multiple images of the light during the eye movement. When the light flickered 1,000 times a second the pattern could clearly be seen. At about 3,000 per second, the images became invisible.

In contrast, some LEDs flash only 400 times per second. This flicker is still far too rapid to be seen directly, but some people can see multiple images of the lamps every time they make a saccade, which is unpleasantly distracting. The flickering of these LEDs may limit the uptake of the bulbs, just as many people dislike energy-saving fluorescent lamps.

When you buy an LED bulb, you currently have no way of telling whether or not it will flicker. But there are already standards for LEDs that would limit flicker to acceptable levels. So ensuring these are met could make a big difference to our attempt to make our homes and workplaces more energy efficient."

Don't you ever talk to anyone?

Corse I do and you can see me doing that, ****wit.

Then I guess you only know those with poor eyesight.

who can all see something you can't?

Because thats what they are, freaks.

Is a dog a freak because it can smell better than we can?

No, because its only the freaks of dogs that can't.

Ah, so you just accept the majority as being correct.

It isnt about being correct.

So Einstein was a freak

Corse he was, mentally.

because he was one of very few people who was that clever.

Duh.

You would have had him burned at the stake wouldn't you?

If you can't do any better than this mindless
**** I will be flushing your **** where it belongs.

I pointed out that Einstein was cleverer than most, and you said that made him a freak. You lose, big time.

I mean it's not normal to be that clever,

Duh.

there must be something wrong with him, best we get rid of him?

There you go, off in your pathetic little drug
crazed drunken psychotic fantasyland, as always.

Or does it perhaps have the ability to detect what we miss?

Yes they do with sound unless they have gone deaf.
My parents believed that dogs had ESP because they
can work out when one of them is coming home long
before any human can. The answer is trivial, the dog
can hear the family vehicle long before a human can.

Which makes them useful, they can do something we can't.

Which might just be why we use them to sniff out stupid
druggys like you at airports and other places, stupid.

A human who could do the same would be equally useful,

Nothing useful about seeing car lights flickering, ****wit.

It means they can see reality, not something your brain made up.

yet you'd call them a freak.

I call a freak a freak and drug crazed drunken
psychotics drug crazed drunken psychotics, freak.

You call anyone that can do something you can't a freak. What about someone who can lift twice the weight of someone else his size? Is he a freak or just stronger and more useful? What about someone who can play tennis well because his reactions are twice as fast as yours? Is he a freak too?

LED lights on cars are deliberately pulsed to get more effective
brightness (as far as the human eye is concerned, peak brightness is
what enables you to see better) from the same LEDs with less heat.
But LEDs go completely off between pulses.

And so doubling the pulse rate doesn't cost anymore.

Movie theatres (you mean cinemas,

No I do not.

theatres are for plays, they have a stage,

Movie theaters arent for plays and they don't have stages.

you're talking American)

Wrong, as always.

Cinema = big screen and projector.
Theatre = stage with live actors.

Wrong, as always.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theatre

"Theatre or theater[1] is a collaborative form of fine art that uses
live
performers, typically actors or actresses, to present the experience of
a
real or imagined event before a live audience in a specific place, often
a
stage. The performers may communicate this experience to the audience
through combinations of gesture, speech, song, music, and dance.
Elements
of art, such as painted scenery and stagecraft such as lighting are used
to enhance the physicality, presence and immediacy of the experience.[2]
The specific place of the performance is also named by the word
"theatre"
as derived from the Ancient Greek θÎ*ατÏ�ον (théatron, "a place for
viewing"), itself from θεάομαι (theáomai, "to see", "to watch", "to
observe")."

Thats just one type of theater, stupid. Even you
must be aware of operating theaters which have
no stage and no play being performed.

They also have live people in them.

So do plenty of non theaters.

A cinema just plays a film, no people are present.

No one watching the movie at all eh ?

On the ****ing stage obviously.

Completely off with the ****ing fairys, as always.

No, you're using US English and that's all there is to it.

UK: Cinema = for films, Theatre = for plays.
US: Movie theatre = for films, Theatre = for plays.

We invented the language, the Americans ****ed it up. You're using the wrong one.

Pity about
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theatre_(disambiguation)

don't illuminate the screen with LEDs.

Duh. And irrelevant to whether the frame rate was
chosen because most don't see any flicker with it.
Flicker didn't only happen with LEDs, stupid.

They happen more so as they switch on and off instantly.

Wrong, as always.

LEDs switch on ad off faster than any other form of light, that is an
indisputable fact.

Irrelevant to the fact that it isnt how quickly
they switch that matters, its the pulse RATE
that determines how visible the flicker is.

Bull****. Consider a variable duty cycle.

That isnt the reason some car lights
flicker for you and others dont.

I haven't finished yet, read the next line.

As that approaches 1, there's no flicker. Clearly LEDs have a much lower
duty cycle than that.

LCD screens dont.

They aren't LEDs.

A decent phosphor coating on a CRT will have a duty cycle of say 0.8 to
0.9,

CRTs dont have a duty cycle.

Of course they ****ing do! Show a white screen on a CRT. Put the image onto a scope using a light detector. The light obviously comes on full brightness on each scan, then must drift off dimmer ready for the next frame.

which will be much harder to see flickering.

Wrong, as always.

Are you being deliberately obtuse or are you just ****ing thick?
A duty cycle of 0.1 will flicker more than a duty cycle of 0.9!

Why do you think Panasonic made a 100Hz TV?

Because some freaks can see flicker at 50Hz and are free to pay more
for
something faster.

Being able to detect something you can't makes them better than you.

Even sillier than you usually manage and that's saying
something. Much worse in fact when car lights flicker.

Perhaps you should ditch your sense of smell, because smelling things
you
don't like is annoying.

There is nothing that I find annoying about any
smell except a big rotting animal corpse in hot
weather and that's so rare that it just isnt a problem.

Being able to detect (and being annoyed about) something that smells bad
is a good thing.

Wrong, as always, particularly with stuff like paint etc.

Paint doesn't smell bad.

Wrong, as always.

Most people consider biological smells, like dog ****, to be repulsive. But they consider artificial smells, like marker pens, nice.

Bad smells mean something is harmful, like ****.

**** isnt harmful when you are just smelling it.

It warns you not to eat it. When you go to take a bite of food, if it smells bad, you don't put it in your mouth as it's probably gone off.

And durians smell awful but are fine to eat.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Durian

The plant is most likely trying to put animals off eating it.

It makes you want to get rid of it.

No need to get rid of an animal corpse.

Disease.

Just another of your pathetic little drug
crazed drunken pig ignorant fantasys.

So you think it's ok to have dead bodies lying around your house? You're getting worse Rod. Have you got dementia?

And a damned nuisance with fresh paint etc.

I poison mice because its more convenient to
do that than to fart around with traps and never
have a problem with any smell from dead ones.

More fun to trap them and watch them slowly die.

Only for psychopaths.

Mice are vermin,

Some have them as pets.

Some people keep spiders as pets ffs.

why would you care about them?

I dont, I poison them. But I'm not a psychopath so I dont
catch them and get off on watching them die slowly.

Either you care about them or you don't.

Anyway you have no problem killing them, yet you won't torture them first?

Because I am not a psychopath.

Death is 1 billion times worse than torture.

Irrelevant to whether only a psychopath gets off
on catching mice and watching them die slowly.

Anyone with any sense knows that killing it is 1 billion times worse, so the torture doesn't matter.

I'd much rather you tortured me then let me live, than kill me instantly.

Doesnt matter what some psychopath would rather.

Nevermind the advantage of smell....

Why do you think Iiyama made 90Hz monitors?

Because some freaks can see flicker at 50Hz and
are free to pay more for something faster.

High frequency monitors were very popular.

Not because many ever saw any flicker.

There would be no other reason.

Wrong, as always.

State the other reason then.

Already did.

I'm still waiting....

[FFS this is like getting blood out of a stone]

And it was proven that low frequency ones cause headaches and eye
damage
for people using them all day in offices.

Bull****.

No it isn't.

Corse it is.

Go do some research

Did that before you were even born thanks. NO ONE
ever got any eye damage from lower frequency monitors.

https://www.webmd.com/eye-health/com...ision-syndrome

Just because some ****wit claims something...

Actually many many people. It's damn easy to find thousands of references that support my claims. Just admit you're wrong.

and stop yourself being so utterly clueless.

You're the one with that problem, as always.

At my first place of work it was actually one of the regulations that
anyone could request a higher frequency monitor if they believed it was
annoying or giving them headaches.

That operation actually was that stupid ? Irrelevant
to your stupid pig ignorant claim about eye damage.

Funny how the better monitors took the headaches away.

Funny how no one ever got any eye damage with the standard ones.

You don't need eye damage to give you a headache.

On Mon, 24 Dec 2018 02:20:29 -0000, Rod Speed wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news
On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 22:28:10 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 17:38:42 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 23:33:40 -0000, Rod Speed

wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in
message
news On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 23:01:40 -0000, Rod Speed

wrote:

If half could actually see car lights flicker, the
designers wouldn't have designed them like that.

Economy.

Doesn't cost anymore to say double the pulse
rate so that even freaks like you can't see it.

I assume the higher switching speed needs better transistors etc.

You're wrong with the rates involved.

Funny how they don't all do it.

Because the designers can't see it and didnt bother to research
what flicker fusion thresholds are out there with you freaks.

A designer who only designs something to be suitable for himself

They aint doing anything even remotely like that.

is an idiot.

Freaks that demand that everything must be designed
for the most extreme freaks are terminal ****wits.

https://www.ledsmagazine.com/article...t-engines.html

"Human vision is adversely affected by light fluctuations at frequencies up to 200 Hz, even though people can only directly perceive fluctuations at frequencies up to about 70 Hz. The fundamentals of the sensitivity of the human eye to rapidly changing light (transient light artifacts or TLAs) as a function of frequency have been well known to science for a decade or more. Despite this, the lighting industry has so far limited itself to only characterizing light sources over the range of frequencies which the human eye can perceive directly. This range is below 100 Hz. However, it is well documented that human visual performance is degraded by the presence of light fluctuations at frequencies in the range from 100 to 200 Hz. Here we will describe a new flicker metric/tool that includes consideration of higher frequencies and further discuss an AC-LED light engine relative to performance against the new metric."

"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news
On Mon, 24 Dec 2018 02:20:29 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news
On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 22:28:10 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 17:38:42 -0000, Rod Speed

wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in
message
news On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 23:33:40 -0000, Rod Speed

wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in
message
news On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 23:01:40 -0000, Rod Speed

wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in
message
news On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 21:18:35 -0000, Rod Speed

wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in
message
news On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 02:55:55 -0000, Rod Speed

wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote
in
message
news why does google have 4.5 million results for the car light
flicker?
reams of your **** flushed where it belongs

If half could actually see car lights flicker, the
designers wouldn't have designed them like that.

Economy.

Doesn't cost anymore to say double the pulse
rate so that even freaks like you can't see it.

I assume the higher switching speed needs better transistors etc.

You're wrong with the rates involved.

Funny how they don't all do it.

Because the designers can't see it and didnt bother to research
what flicker fusion thresholds are out there with you freaks.

A designer who only designs something to be suitable for himself

They aint doing anything even remotely like that.

is an idiot.

Freaks that demand that everything must be designed
for the most extreme freaks are terminal ****wits.

Except there are way more people with decent eyesight than you think.

Easy to claim.

Funny how it's only recently we've had them fast enough to make switch
mode power supplies and smaller coils possible.

Those operate at much higher rates again.

There must be a reason they don't just make them switch very fast,

The ones that you can see flicker dont switch very fast,
just a bit faster than those that you can see flicker.

So very easy to do then. They should all do it.

You get no say on what they get to do.

perhaps it wears the LED out?

No it does not. The reason is as I stated, the designer didnt
bother to research what freaks can still see flicker wise.

The data is readily available on google.

Irrelevant to the fact that the worst designers didnt bother.

If you think I'm a one off....
https://www.thenakedscientists.com/f...?topic=45126.0
https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/th...cker.17817137/
https://electronics.stackexchange.co...owmotion-slomo
https://news.wisc.edu/curiosities-wh...his-dangerous/

As mentioned in some of the links, they can actually be quite dangerous

Thats bull****. If they actually were, the car standards would ban them.

and should be banned before loads of people get killed.

Loads of people arent killed by them.

Only a monumental idiot would make lights that anyone could see as
flashing.

They dont realise that a few freaks see them flashing.

In spades with movies in movie theaters. That frame
rate was chosen because most couldn't see that flicker.

Not the same thing.

Corse its still flicker for freaks.

It's less visible.

Still visible for freaks.

Why do you persist in calling half the population freaks,

It isnt anything even remotely like half the population.

Yes it is, by simple observation of those around you.

No one else I know sees flicker with car lights.

People can see 2000 per second if they're moving their eyes.

Clearly not a big enough problem to see it mandated with car lights.

https://theconversation.com/the-scie...fix-them-81639

"Scientists used to think we could see no more than about 90 flashes of
light a second but now we know its more like 2,000 because the eyes move
so rapidly when we change gaze from one point to another. During the eye
movement, the flicker of light creates a pattern that we can see. And this
has some surprising consequences for our health thanks to the way some
types of lighting can affect us. In particular, it could discourage people
from using more energy-saving LED lightbulbs.

Hardly the end of civilisation as we know it.

To find out, my colleagues and I asked people to make a saccade across a
flickering source of light and to report when they could see a pattern of
multiple images of the light during the eye movement. When the light
flickered 1,000 times a second the pattern could clearly be seen. At about
3,000 per second, the images became invisible.

In contrast, some LEDs flash only 400 times per second. This flicker is
still far too rapid to be seen directly, but some people can see multiple
images of the lamps every time they make a saccade, which is unpleasantly
distracting.

They are free to buy ones that dont have that effect.

The flickering of these LEDs may limit the uptake of the bulbs, just as
many people dislike energy-saving fluorescent lamps.

Hardly the end of civilisation as we know it.

When you buy an LED bulb, you currently have no way of telling whether or
not it will flicker.

Dont need to when you buy them from an operation
like Aldi which is happy to do a full return if you
decide you dont like it when you try it.

But there are already standards for LEDs that would limit flicker to
acceptable levels. So ensuring these are met could make a big difference
to our attempt to make our homes and workplaces more energy efficient."

Depends on how may find they dont like that effect.

Don't you ever talk to anyone?

Corse I do and you can see me doing that, ****wit.

Then I guess you only know those with poor eyesight.

Nothing poor about eyesight that doesnt see car lights flicker.

who can all see something you can't?

Because thats what they are, freaks.

Is a dog a freak because it can smell better than we can?

No, because its only the freaks of dogs that can't.

Ah, so you just accept the majority as being correct.

It isnt about being correct.

So Einstein was a freak

Corse he was, mentally.

because he was one of very few people who was that clever.

Duh.

You would have had him burned at the stake wouldn't you?

If you can't do any better than this mindless
**** I will be flushing your **** where it belongs.

I pointed out that Einstein was cleverer than most, and you said that made
him a freak.

Corse it does.

And then you went on with that **** about burning him at
the stake and **** like that will be flushed where it belongs.

You lose, big time.

Only in your pathetic little drug crazed drunken psychotic fantasyland.

I mean it's not normal to be that clever,

Duh.

there must be something wrong with him, best we get rid of him?

There you go, off in your pathetic little drug
crazed drunken psychotic fantasyland, as always.

Or does it perhaps have the ability to detect what we miss?

Yes they do with sound unless they have gone deaf.
My parents believed that dogs had ESP because they
can work out when one of them is coming home long
before any human can. The answer is trivial, the dog
can hear the family vehicle long before a human can.

Which makes them useful, they can do something we can't.

Which might just be why we use them to sniff out stupid
druggys like you at airports and other places, stupid.

A human who could do the same would be equally useful,

Nothing useful about seeing car lights flickering, ****wit.

It means they can see reality, not something your brain made up.

But they dont when the flash rate is higher.

yet you'd call them a freak.

I call a freak a freak and drug crazed drunken
psychotics drug crazed drunken psychotics, freak.

You call anyone that can do something you can't a freak.

Just another of your bare faced lies/pathetic excuses for a troll.

What about someone who can lift twice the weight of someone else his size?
Is he a freak

Corse he is.

or just stronger and more useful?

Or both. But there is nothing useful about
the freaks who see car lights flickering.

What about someone who can play tennis well because his reactions are
twice as fast as yours? Is he a freak too?

Nothing to do with my reactions, what matters is how common
that is in the general population. Of course someone who is only
say 1% of the population is a freak. He may or may not be a useful
freak. Einstein obviously was, but someone who sees car light
flickering clearly isnt a useful freak and is in fact a useless freak.

LED lights on cars are deliberately pulsed to get more effective
brightness (as far as the human eye is concerned, peak brightness
is
what enables you to see better) from the same LEDs with less heat.
But LEDs go completely off between pulses.

And so doubling the pulse rate doesn't cost anymore.

Movie theatres (you mean cinemas,

No I do not.

theatres are for plays, they have a stage,

Movie theaters arent for plays and they don't have stages.

you're talking American)

Wrong, as always.

Cinema = big screen and projector.
Theatre = stage with live actors.

Wrong, as always.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theatre

"Theatre or theater[1] is a collaborative form of fine art that uses
live
performers, typically actors or actresses, to present the experience
of
a
real or imagined event before a live audience in a specific place,
often
a
stage. The performers may communicate this experience to the audience
through combinations of gesture, speech, song, music, and dance.
Elements
of art, such as painted scenery and stagecraft such as lighting are
used
to enhance the physicality, presence and immediacy of the
experience.[2]
The specific place of the performance is also named by the word
"theatre"
as derived from the Ancient Greek θÎ*ατÏ�ον (théatron, "a place for
viewing"), itself from θεάομαι (theáomai, "to see", "to watch", "to
observe")."

Thats just one type of theater, stupid. Even you
must be aware of operating theaters which have
no stage and no play being performed.

They also have live people in them.

So do plenty of non theaters.

A cinema just plays a film, no people are present.

No one watching the movie at all eh ?

On the ****ing stage obviously.

Completely off with the ****ing fairys, as always.

No, you're using US English and that's all there is to it.

UK: Cinema = for films, Theatre = for plays.
US: Movie theatre = for films, Theatre = for plays.

We invented the language,

Wrong, as always. Most of it you clowns stole from wherever.

the Americans ****ed it up.

Even more of a pathetic excuse for a troll than you usually manage.

Even a terminal ****wit such as yourself uses stuff they added
like ok, airport, TV. sitcom, soup for some TV series etc etc etc.

You're using the wrong one.

You are wrong, as always.

Pity about
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theatre_(disambiguation)

don't illuminate the screen with LEDs.

Duh. And irrelevant to whether the frame rate was
chosen because most don't see any flicker with it.
Flicker didn't only happen with LEDs, stupid.

They happen more so as they switch on and off instantly.

Wrong, as always.

LEDs switch on ad off faster than any other form of light, that is an
indisputable fact.

Irrelevant to the fact that it isnt how quickly
they switch that matters, its the pulse RATE
that determines how visible the flicker is.

Bull****. Consider a variable duty cycle.

That isnt the reason some car lights
flicker for you and others dont.

I haven't finished yet, read the next line.

Get ****ed, again.

As that approaches 1, there's no flicker. Clearly LEDs have a much
lower duty cycle than that.

LCD screens dont.

They aren't LEDs.

A decent phosphor coating on a CRT will have a duty cycle of say 0.8 to
0.9,

CRTs dont have a duty cycle.

Of course they ****ing do!

No they dont. The phosphor brightness decays, there is no duty cycle.

Show a white screen on a CRT. Put the image onto a scope using a light
detector. The light obviously comes on full brightness on each scan, then
must drift off dimmer ready for the next frame.

That isnt duty cycle, thats decay.

And there isnt even any decay with LCDs.

which will be much harder to see flickering.

Wrong, as always.

Are you being deliberately obtuse or are you just ****ing thick?
A duty cycle of 0.1 will flicker more than a duty cycle of 0.9!

There is no duty cycle with CRTs.

Why do you think Panasonic made a 100Hz TV?

Because some freaks can see flicker at 50Hz and are free to pay
more
for
something faster.

Being able to detect something you can't makes them better than you.

Even sillier than you usually manage and that's saying
something. Much worse in fact when car lights flicker.

Perhaps you should ditch your sense of smell, because smelling
things
you
don't like is annoying.

There is nothing that I find annoying about any
smell except a big rotting animal corpse in hot
weather and that's so rare that it just isnt a problem.

Being able to detect (and being annoyed about) something that smells
bad
is a good thing.

Wrong, as always, particularly with stuff like paint etc.

Paint doesn't smell bad.

Wrong, as always.

Most people consider biological smells, like dog ****, to be repulsive.

Not repulsive so much as better when its not there.

But they consider artificial smells, like marker pens, nice.

Now try that with chlorine or even just bleach.

Bad smells mean something is harmful, like ****.

**** isnt harmful when you are just smelling it.

It warns you not to eat it.

Pity about durians.

When you go to take a bite of food, if it smells bad, you don't put it in
your mouth as it's probably gone off.

Pity about durians.

And durians smell awful but are fine to eat.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Durian

The plant is most likely trying to put animals off eating it.

Wrong, as always.

It makes you want to get rid of it.

No need to get rid of an animal corpse.

Disease.

Just another of your pathetic little drug
crazed drunken pig ignorant fantasys.

So you think it's ok to have dead bodies lying around your house?

Irrelevant to whether there is any disease involved.

reams of your **** flushed where it belongs

And a damned nuisance with fresh paint etc.

I poison mice because its more convenient to
do that than to fart around with traps and never
have a problem with any smell from dead ones.

More fun to trap them and watch them slowly die.

Only for psychopaths.

Mice are vermin,

Some have them as pets.

Some people keep spiders as pets ffs.

They do indeed, and snakes too.

Just because you **** your pants when you see one...

why would you care about them?

I dont, I poison them. But I'm not a psychopath so I dont
catch them and get off on watching them die slowly.

Either you care about them or you don't.

Its never that black and white.

Anyway you have no problem killing them, yet you won't torture them
first?

Because I am not a psychopath.

Death is 1 billion times worse than torture.

Irrelevant to whether only a psychopath gets off
on catching mice and watching them die slowly.

Anyone with any sense knows that killing it is 1 billion times worse, so
the torture doesn't matter.

Only a psychopath gets off on catching
mice and watching them die slowly.

I kill them the least effort way and thats by putting
out poison and adding more if its consumed.

I'd much rather you tortured me then let me live, than kill me
instantly.

Doesnt matter what some psychopath would rather.

Nevermind the advantage of smell....

Why do you think Iiyama made 90Hz monitors?

Because some freaks can see flicker at 50Hz and
are free to pay more for something faster.

High frequency monitors were very popular.

Not because many ever saw any flicker.

There would be no other reason.

Wrong, as always.

State the other reason then.

Already did.

I'm still waiting....

You need to hold your breath.

[FFS this is like getting blood out of a stone]

And it was proven that low frequency ones cause headaches and eye
damage
for people using them all day in offices.

Bull****.

No it isn't.

Corse it is.

Go do some research

Did that before you were even born thanks. NO ONE
ever got any eye damage from lower frequency monitors.

https://www.webmd.com/eye-health/com...ision-syndrome

Just because some ****wit claims something...

Actually many many people.

None actually with your stupid claim about eye damage. If they
really did damage eyes, they wouldn't be allowed to sell them.

It's damn easy to find thousands of references that support my claims.

Not one with that stupid claim about eye damage.

Just admit you're wrong.

I'm not with eye damage.

and stop yourself being so utterly clueless.

You're the one with that problem, as always.

At my first place of work it was actually one of the regulations that
anyone could request a higher frequency monitor if they believed it
was
annoying or giving them headaches.

That operation actually was that stupid ? Irrelevant
to your stupid pig ignorant claim about eye damage.

Funny how the better monitors took the headaches away.

Funny how no one ever got any eye damage with the standard ones.

You don't need eye damage to give you a headache.

You were the one making the stupid claim about eye damage.

"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news
On Mon, 24 Dec 2018 02:20:29 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news
On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 22:28:10 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 17:38:42 -0000, Rod Speed

wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in
message
news On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 23:33:40 -0000, Rod Speed

wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in
message
news On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 23:01:40 -0000, Rod Speed

wrote:

If half could actually see car lights flicker, the
designers wouldn't have designed them like that.

Economy.

Doesn't cost anymore to say double the pulse
rate so that even freaks like you can't see it.

I assume the higher switching speed needs better transistors etc.

You're wrong with the rates involved.

Funny how they don't all do it.

Because the designers can't see it and didnt bother to research
what flicker fusion thresholds are out there with you freaks.

A designer who only designs something to be suitable for himself

They aint doing anything even remotely like that.

is an idiot.

Freaks that demand that everything must be designed
for the most extreme freaks are terminal ****wits.

https://www.ledsmagazine.com/article...t-engines.html

"Human vision is adversely affected by light fluctuations at frequencies
up to 200 Hz, even though people can only directly perceive fluctuations
at frequencies up to about 70 Hz.

You're free to only buy what you like to use.

The fundamentals of the sensitivity of the human eye to rapidly changing
light (transient light artifacts or TLAs) as a function of frequency have
been well known to science for a decade or more. Despite this, the
lighting industry has so far limited itself to only characterizing light
sources over the range of frequencies which the human eye can perceive
directly. This range is below 100 Hz. However, it is well documented that
human visual performance is degraded by the presence of light fluctuations
at frequencies in the range from 100 to 200 Hz. Here we will describe a
new flicker metric/tool that includes consideration of higher frequencies
and further discuss an AC-LED light engine relative to performance against
the new metric."

On Mon, 24 Dec 2018 23:07:07 -0000, Rod Speed wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news
On Mon, 24 Dec 2018 02:20:29 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 22:28:10 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 17:38:42 -0000, Rod Speed

wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in
message
news On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 23:33:40 -0000, Rod Speed

wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in
message
news On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 23:01:40 -0000, Rod Speed

wrote:

If half could actually see car lights flicker, the
designers wouldn't have designed them like that.

Economy.

Doesn't cost anymore to say double the pulse
rate so that even freaks like you can't see it.

I assume the higher switching speed needs better transistors etc.

You're wrong with the rates involved.

Funny how they don't all do it.

Because the designers can't see it and didnt bother to research
what flicker fusion thresholds are out there with you freaks.

A designer who only designs something to be suitable for himself

They aint doing anything even remotely like that.

is an idiot.

Freaks that demand that everything must be designed
for the most extreme freaks are terminal ****wits.

https://www.ledsmagazine.com/article...t-engines.html

"Human vision is adversely affected by light fluctuations at frequencies
up to 200 Hz, even though people can only directly perceive fluctuations
at frequencies up to about 70 Hz.

You're free to only buy what you like to use.

And you're free to be ignorant and believe that only a very small number of people are affected.

However, I'm not free to make everyone else's car have decent lighting. I have to put up with inferior **** by designers without a ****ing clue how the human eye works.

The fundamentals of the sensitivity of the human eye to rapidly changing
light (transient light artifacts or TLAs) as a function of frequency have
been well known to science for a decade or more. Despite this, the
lighting industry has so far limited itself to only characterizing light
sources over the range of frequencies which the human eye can perceive
directly. This range is below 100 Hz. However, it is well documented that
human visual performance is degraded by the presence of light fluctuations
at frequencies in the range from 100 to 200 Hz. Here we will describe a
new flicker metric/tool that includes consideration of higher frequencies
and further discuss an AC-LED light engine relative to performance against
the new metric."

"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news
On Mon, 24 Dec 2018 23:07:07 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news
On Mon, 24 Dec 2018 02:20:29 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 22:28:10 -0000, Rod Speed

wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in
message
news On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 17:38:42 -0000, Rod Speed

wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in
message
news On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 23:33:40 -0000, Rod Speed

wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in
message
news On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 23:01:40 -0000, Rod Speed

wrote:

If half could actually see car lights flicker, the
designers wouldn't have designed them like that.

Economy.

Doesn't cost anymore to say double the pulse
rate so that even freaks like you can't see it.

I assume the higher switching speed needs better transistors etc.

You're wrong with the rates involved.

Funny how they don't all do it.

Because the designers can't see it and didnt bother to research
what flicker fusion thresholds are out there with you freaks.

A designer who only designs something to be suitable for himself

They aint doing anything even remotely like that.

is an idiot.

Freaks that demand that everything must be designed
for the most extreme freaks are terminal ****wits.

https://www.ledsmagazine.com/article...t-engines.html

"Human vision is adversely affected by light fluctuations at frequencies
up to 200 Hz, even though people can only directly perceive fluctuations
at frequencies up to about 70 Hz.

You're free to only buy what you like to use.

And you're free to be ignorant and believe that only a very small number
of people are affected.

That was a comment about car lights, ****wit.

However, I'm not free to make everyone else's car have decent lighting.

Yep, no one is silly enough to pander to freaks.

I have to put up with inferior **** by designers without a ****ing clue
how the human eye works.

No you dont, you are free to top yourself any time you like.

The fundamentals of the sensitivity of the human eye to rapidly changing
light (transient light artifacts or TLAs) as a function of frequency
have
been well known to science for a decade or more. Despite this, the
lighting industry has so far limited itself to only characterizing light
sources over the range of frequencies which the human eye can perceive
directly. This range is below 100 Hz. However, it is well documented
that
human visual performance is degraded by the presence of light
fluctuations
at frequencies in the range from 100 to 200 Hz. Here we will describe a
new flicker metric/tool that includes consideration of higher
frequencies
and further discuss an AC-LED light engine relative to performance
against
the new metric."

On Tue, 25 Dec 2018 00:11:56 -0000, Rod Speed wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news
On Mon, 24 Dec 2018 23:07:07 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news On Mon, 24 Dec 2018 02:20:29 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 22:28:10 -0000, Rod Speed

wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in
message
news On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 17:38:42 -0000, Rod Speed

wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in
message
news On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 23:33:40 -0000, Rod Speed

wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in
message
news On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 23:01:40 -0000, Rod Speed

wrote:

If half could actually see car lights flicker, the
designers wouldn't have designed them like that.

Economy.

Doesn't cost anymore to say double the pulse
rate so that even freaks like you can't see it.

I assume the higher switching speed needs better transistors etc.

You're wrong with the rates involved.

Funny how they don't all do it.

Because the designers can't see it and didnt bother to research
what flicker fusion thresholds are out there with you freaks.

A designer who only designs something to be suitable for himself

They aint doing anything even remotely like that.

is an idiot.

Freaks that demand that everything must be designed
for the most extreme freaks are terminal ****wits.

https://www.ledsmagazine.com/article...t-engines.html

"Human vision is adversely affected by light fluctuations at frequencies
up to 200 Hz, even though people can only directly perceive fluctuations
at frequencies up to about 70 Hz.

You're free to only buy what you like to use.

And you're free to be ignorant and believe that only a very small number
of people are affected.

That was a comment about car lights, ****wit.

What makes you think I don't know that? Are you really that incapable of following a conversation?

However, I'm not free to make everyone else's car have decent lighting.

Yep, no one is silly enough to pander to freaks.

Your jealousy is incredible. I can see what you can't, that makes ME superior, idiot.

I have to put up with inferior **** by designers without a ****ing clue
how the human eye works.

No you dont, you are free to top yourself any time you like.

And the driver of the car I collide with when distracted by the flashing LEDs.

The fundamentals of the sensitivity of the human eye to rapidly changing
light (transient light artifacts or TLAs) as a function of frequency
have
been well known to science for a decade or more. Despite this, the
lighting industry has so far limited itself to only characterizing light
sources over the range of frequencies which the human eye can perceive
directly. This range is below 100 Hz. However, it is well documented
that
human visual performance is degraded by the presence of light
fluctuations
at frequencies in the range from 100 to 200 Hz. Here we will describe a
new flicker metric/tool that includes consideration of higher
frequencies
and further discuss an AC-LED light engine relative to performance
against
the new metric."

On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 04:22:39 -0000, Clare Snyder wrote:

On Wed, 19 Dec 2018 19:36:51 -0000, "William Gothberg" "William
wrote:

On Wed, 19 Dec 2018 17:47:17 -0000, trader_4 wrote:

On Wednesday, December 19, 2018 at 11:35:06 AM UTC-5, William Gothberg wrote:
On Wed, 19 Dec 2018 16:21:41 -0000, Mark Lloyd wrote:

On 12/19/18 6:01 AM, William Gothberg wrote:

[snip]

They probably are fairly crude. I know they flicker, for example if I
use my cordless drill, the chuck appears to spin the wrong way under the
LED lighting.
I remember seeing that with a washing machine (under fluorescent
lights). As the tub was slowing down, the row of holes around the tub
would appear to reverse direction. Same thing with (spoked) wagon wheels
in movies.

It looks absolutely ridiculous with modern cars with LED headlights in films. How hard can it be to put a smoothing capacitor on the output of the power supply?

I've never noticed that. Any films come to mind?

A lot of Top Gear programs showing the DRLs of cars fitted with LEDs. With a feature film, they might take the time/trouble/money to do something to stop it.

It seems especially
weird, since cars have a 12V supply with a big battery to smooth
anything out. I guess the power supply that reduces that to whatever
the LED headlights use though might have a switching power supply these
days too.

AFAIK it's deliberate, making the LEDs operate brighter than they are capable of, but only 1/4 of the time. Our eyes just see the brightest part of the cycle, so we think they're four times brighter than the LED is really capable of, without overheating itself.

That is PWM Overdrive. Peak junction current is over the nominal
rating, but the average power consumption is below nominalmaximum
current - and the peak lumen output is significantly enhanced without
reducing the junction life appreciably.
THIS would definitely cause flicker as there is a "significant" dead
period between the "strobe flashes"

Agreed, although Rod thinks only freaks can see it.

I wonder why none of my houselights use this? Do car lights have to make more brightness from a smaller area? Or would flickery houselights annoy people more?

If it's the extra brightness, I don't understand - because I have a torch with a single LED and parabolic reflector that gives out 20W equivalent without overdrive. Simply have three such lamps with their own little (only 1.5 inches across) reflector next to each other to make the headlamp.

On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 04:16:35 -0000, Clare Snyder wrote:

On Wed, 19 Dec 2018 10:21:41 -0600, Mark Lloyd
wrote:

On 12/19/18 6:01 AM, William Gothberg wrote:

[snip]

They probably are fairly crude. I know they flicker, for example if I
use my cordless drill, the chuck appears to spin the wrong way under the
LED lighting.
I remember seeing that with a washing machine (under fluorescent
lights). As the tub was slowing down, the row of holes around the tub
would appear to reverse direction. Same thing with (spoked) wagon wheels
in movies.

[snip]
Very obvious with flourescents.

Fluorescents can operate from DC, but you'd need a resistive ballast, which wastes energy. But you could use an invertor to make very high frequency AC to stop visible flicker.

"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news
On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 04:22:39 -0000, Clare Snyder
wrote:

On Wed, 19 Dec 2018 19:36:51 -0000, "William Gothberg" "William
wrote:

On Wed, 19 Dec 2018 17:47:17 -0000, trader_4
wrote:

On Wednesday, December 19, 2018 at 11:35:06 AM UTC-5, William Gothberg
wrote:
On Wed, 19 Dec 2018 16:21:41 -0000, Mark Lloyd
wrote:

On 12/19/18 6:01 AM, William Gothberg wrote:

[snip]

They probably are fairly crude. I know they flicker, for example
if I
use my cordless drill, the chuck appears to spin the wrong way
under the
LED lighting.
I remember seeing that with a washing machine (under fluorescent
lights). As the tub was slowing down, the row of holes around the
tub
would appear to reverse direction. Same thing with (spoked) wagon
wheels
in movies.

It looks absolutely ridiculous with modern cars with LED headlights in
films. How hard can it be to put a smoothing capacitor on the output
of the power supply?

I've never noticed that. Any films come to mind?

A lot of Top Gear programs showing the DRLs of cars fitted with LEDs.
With a feature film, they might take the time/trouble/money to do
something to stop it.

It seems especially
weird, since cars have a 12V supply with a big battery to smooth
anything out. I guess the power supply that reduces that to whatever
the LED headlights use though might have a switching power supply these
days too.

AFAIK it's deliberate, making the LEDs operate brighter than they are
capable of, but only 1/4 of the time. Our eyes just see the brightest
part of the cycle, so we think they're four times brighter than the LED
is really capable of, without overheating itself.

That is PWM Overdrive. Peak junction current is over the nominal
rating, but the average power consumption is below nominalmaximum
current - and the peak lumen output is significantly enhanced without
reducing the junction life appreciably.
THIS would definitely cause flicker as there is a "significant" dead
period between the "strobe flashes"

Agreed, although Rod thinks only freaks can see it.

Its true with car lights.

I wonder why none of my houselights use this?

Hues bulbs do, you can see that by waving something non
transparent past a bulb when looking directly at a lighted bulb.

Your strip house lights have far more leds so don't need to.

Do car lights have to make more brightness from a smaller area?

Corse they do.

Or would flickery houselights annoy people more?

They don't with Hue bulbs.

If it's the extra brightness, I don't understand

As always.

because I have a torch with a single LED and parabolic reflector that
gives out 20W equivalent without overdrive. Simply have three such lamps
with their own little (only 1.5 inches across) reflector next to each
other to make the headlamp.

Even you should have noticed that car headlights are much brighter.

On Tue, 25 Dec 2018 17:33:52 -0000, Rod Speed wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news
On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 04:22:39 -0000, Clare Snyder
wrote:

On Wed, 19 Dec 2018 19:36:51 -0000, "William Gothberg" "William
wrote:

On Wed, 19 Dec 2018 17:47:17 -0000, trader_4
wrote:

On Wednesday, December 19, 2018 at 11:35:06 AM UTC-5, William Gothberg
wrote:
On Wed, 19 Dec 2018 16:21:41 -0000, Mark Lloyd
wrote:

On 12/19/18 6:01 AM, William Gothberg wrote:

[snip]

They probably are fairly crude. I know they flicker, for example
if I
use my cordless drill, the chuck appears to spin the wrong way
under the
LED lighting.
I remember seeing that with a washing machine (under fluorescent
lights). As the tub was slowing down, the row of holes around the
tub
would appear to reverse direction. Same thing with (spoked) wagon
wheels
in movies.

It looks absolutely ridiculous with modern cars with LED headlights in
films. How hard can it be to put a smoothing capacitor on the output
of the power supply?

I've never noticed that. Any films come to mind?

A lot of Top Gear programs showing the DRLs of cars fitted with LEDs.
With a feature film, they might take the time/trouble/money to do
something to stop it.

It seems especially
weird, since cars have a 12V supply with a big battery to smooth
anything out. I guess the power supply that reduces that to whatever
the LED headlights use though might have a switching power supply these
days too.

AFAIK it's deliberate, making the LEDs operate brighter than they are
capable of, but only 1/4 of the time. Our eyes just see the brightest
part of the cycle, so we think they're four times brighter than the LED
is really capable of, without overheating itself.

That is PWM Overdrive. Peak junction current is over the nominal
rating, but the average power consumption is below nominalmaximum
current - and the peak lumen output is significantly enhanced without
reducing the junction life appreciably.
THIS would definitely cause flicker as there is a "significant" dead
period between the "strobe flashes"

Agreed, although Rod thinks only freaks can see it.

Its true with car lights.

You're obviously wrong, just by the number of articles on the internet about it.

I wonder why none of my houselights use this?

Hues bulbs do, you can see that by waving something non
transparent past a bulb when looking directly at a lighted bulb.

Your strip house lights have far more leds so don't need to.

Do car lights have to make more brightness from a smaller area?

Corse they do.

Or would flickery houselights annoy people more?

They don't with Hue bulbs.

They don't annoy YOU. They probably annoy others.

If it's the extra brightness, I don't understand

As always.

because I have a torch with a single LED and parabolic reflector that
gives out 20W equivalent without overdrive. Simply have three such lamps
with their own little (only 1.5 inches across) reflector next to each
other to make the headlamp.

Even you should have noticed that car headlights are much brighter.

A car headlight SHOULD be 60W equivalent. So 6W of LEDs, or a few of my torches per lamp. Quite possible to just have three reflectors just like my torch, mounted together.

"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news
On Tue, 25 Dec 2018 17:33:52 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news
On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 04:22:39 -0000, Clare Snyder
wrote:

On Wed, 19 Dec 2018 19:36:51 -0000, "William Gothberg" "William
wrote:

On Wed, 19 Dec 2018 17:47:17 -0000, trader_4
wrote:

On Wednesday, December 19, 2018 at 11:35:06 AM UTC-5, William
Gothberg
wrote:
On Wed, 19 Dec 2018 16:21:41 -0000, Mark Lloyd
wrote:

On 12/19/18 6:01 AM, William Gothberg wrote:

[snip]

They probably are fairly crude. I know they flicker, for example
if I
use my cordless drill, the chuck appears to spin the wrong way
under the
LED lighting.
I remember seeing that with a washing machine (under fluorescent
lights). As the tub was slowing down, the row of holes around the
tub
would appear to reverse direction. Same thing with (spoked) wagon
wheels
in movies.

It looks absolutely ridiculous with modern cars with LED headlights
in
films. How hard can it be to put a smoothing capacitor on the
output
of the power supply?

I've never noticed that. Any films come to mind?

A lot of Top Gear programs showing the DRLs of cars fitted with LEDs.
With a feature film, they might take the time/trouble/money to do
something to stop it.

It seems especially
weird, since cars have a 12V supply with a big battery to smooth
anything out. I guess the power supply that reduces that to whatever
the LED headlights use though might have a switching power supply
these
days too.

AFAIK it's deliberate, making the LEDs operate brighter than they are
capable of, but only 1/4 of the time. Our eyes just see the brightest
part of the cycle, so we think they're four times brighter than the
LED
is really capable of, without overheating itself.

That is PWM Overdrive. Peak junction current is over the nominal
rating, but the average power consumption is below nominalmaximum
current - and the peak lumen output is significantly enhanced without
reducing the junction life appreciably.
THIS would definitely cause flicker as there is a "significant" dead
period between the "strobe flashes"

Agreed, although Rod thinks only freaks can see it.

Its true with car lights.

You're obviously wrong,

We'll see...

just by the number of articles on the internet about it.

That's just the freaks howling about seeing it.

I wonder why none of my houselights use this?

Hues bulbs do, you can see that by waving something non
transparent past a bulb when looking directly at a lighted bulb.

Your strip house lights have far more leds so don't need to.

Do car lights have to make more brightness from a smaller area?

Corse they do.

Or would flickery houselights annoy people more?

They don't with Hue bulbs.

They don't annoy YOU. They probably annoy others.

You wont find anyone saying that they annoy them on the net.

If it's the extra brightness, I don't understand

As always.

because I have a torch with a single LED and parabolic reflector that
gives out 20W equivalent without overdrive. Simply have three such
lamps
with their own little (only 1.5 inches across) reflector next to each
other to make the headlamp.

Even you should have noticed that car headlights are much brighter.

A car headlight SHOULD be 60W equivalent.

Wrong, as always.

So 6W of LEDs, or a few of my torches per lamp.

Your torches are lying about them being 20W equivalents.

Quite possible to just have three reflectors just like my torch, mounted
together.

Yes, but that's nothing like what real headlights produce light wise.

On Tue, 25 Dec 2018 18:33:27 -0000, Rod Speed wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news
On Tue, 25 Dec 2018 17:33:52 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 04:22:39 -0000, Clare Snyder
wrote:

On Wed, 19 Dec 2018 19:36:51 -0000, "William Gothberg" "William
wrote:

On Wed, 19 Dec 2018 17:47:17 -0000, trader_4
wrote:

On Wednesday, December 19, 2018 at 11:35:06 AM UTC-5, William
Gothberg
wrote:
On Wed, 19 Dec 2018 16:21:41 -0000, Mark Lloyd
wrote:

On 12/19/18 6:01 AM, William Gothberg wrote:

[snip]

They probably are fairly crude. I know they flicker, for example
if I
use my cordless drill, the chuck appears to spin the wrong way
under the
LED lighting.
I remember seeing that with a washing machine (under fluorescent
lights). As the tub was slowing down, the row of holes around the
tub
would appear to reverse direction. Same thing with (spoked) wagon
wheels
in movies.

It looks absolutely ridiculous with modern cars with LED headlights
in
films. How hard can it be to put a smoothing capacitor on the
output
of the power supply?

I've never noticed that. Any films come to mind?

A lot of Top Gear programs showing the DRLs of cars fitted with LEDs.
With a feature film, they might take the time/trouble/money to do
something to stop it.

It seems especially
weird, since cars have a 12V supply with a big battery to smooth
anything out. I guess the power supply that reduces that to whatever
the LED headlights use though might have a switching power supply
these
days too.

AFAIK it's deliberate, making the LEDs operate brighter than they are
capable of, but only 1/4 of the time. Our eyes just see the brightest
part of the cycle, so we think they're four times brighter than the
LED
is really capable of, without overheating itself.

That is PWM Overdrive. Peak junction current is over the nominal
rating, but the average power consumption is below nominalmaximum
current - and the peak lumen output is significantly enhanced without
reducing the junction life appreciably.
THIS would definitely cause flicker as there is a "significant" dead
period between the "strobe flashes"

Agreed, although Rod thinks only freaks can see it.

Its true with car lights.

You're obviously wrong,

We'll see...

just by the number of articles on the internet about it.

That's just the freaks howling about seeing it.

If it were a small number of freaks, there wouldn't so many articles and studies into it. It is a large percentage of the population that can see it. Way more than the percentage of vegetarians and disabled, yet they both get catered for.

I wonder why none of my houselights use this?

Hues bulbs do, you can see that by waving something non
transparent past a bulb when looking directly at a lighted bulb.

Your strip house lights have far more leds so don't need to.

Do car lights have to make more brightness from a smaller area?

Corse they do.

Or would flickery houselights annoy people more?

They don't with Hue bulbs.

They don't annoy YOU. They probably annoy others.

You wont find anyone saying that they annoy them on the net.

Depends just how flickery they are. If the frequency is high enough, they won't bother anyone. Can you set something up to test the light output (or the voltage to the LEDs) with a scope?

If it's the extra brightness, I don't understand

As always.

because I have a torch with a single LED and parabolic reflector that
gives out 20W equivalent without overdrive. Simply have three such
lamps
with their own little (only 1.5 inches across) reflector next to each
other to make the headlamp.

Even you should have noticed that car headlights are much brighter.

A car headlight SHOULD be 60W equivalent.

Wrong, as always.

Back in the days of incandescent lights on cars, every single car had a 55W/60W bulb for it's headlights. 55W for dip and 60W for full.

So 6W of LEDs, or a few of my torches per lamp.

Your torches are lying about them being 20W equivalents.

Actually the lie says they're 60W. I measured them as 20W. They consume 2W and give out 20W equivalent.

Quite possible to just have three reflectors just like my torch, mounted
together.

Yes, but that's nothing like what real headlights produce light wise.

A real headlight should produce the same amount of light as a 55W incandescent, which requires about 5.5W of LEDs. Easy to arrange that with reflectors and cooling without pulsing.

"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news
On Tue, 25 Dec 2018 18:33:27 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news
On Tue, 25 Dec 2018 17:33:52 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 04:22:39 -0000, Clare Snyder
wrote:

On Wed, 19 Dec 2018 19:36:51 -0000, "William Gothberg" "William
wrote:

On Wed, 19 Dec 2018 17:47:17 -0000, trader_4
wrote:

On Wednesday, December 19, 2018 at 11:35:06 AM UTC-5, William
Gothberg
wrote:
On Wed, 19 Dec 2018 16:21:41 -0000, Mark Lloyd
wrote:

On 12/19/18 6:01 AM, William Gothberg wrote:

[snip]

They probably are fairly crude. I know they flicker, for
example
if I
use my cordless drill, the chuck appears to spin the wrong way
under the
LED lighting.
I remember seeing that with a washing machine (under fluorescent
lights). As the tub was slowing down, the row of holes around
the
tub
would appear to reverse direction. Same thing with (spoked)
wagon
wheels
in movies.

It looks absolutely ridiculous with modern cars with LED
headlights
in
films. How hard can it be to put a smoothing capacitor on the
output
of the power supply?

I've never noticed that. Any films come to mind?

A lot of Top Gear programs showing the DRLs of cars fitted with
LEDs.
With a feature film, they might take the time/trouble/money to do
something to stop it.

It seems especially
weird, since cars have a 12V supply with a big battery to smooth
anything out. I guess the power supply that reduces that to
whatever
the LED headlights use though might have a switching power supply
these
days too.

AFAIK it's deliberate, making the LEDs operate brighter than they
are
capable of, but only 1/4 of the time. Our eyes just see the
brightest
part of the cycle, so we think they're four times brighter than the
LED
is really capable of, without overheating itself.

That is PWM Overdrive. Peak junction current is over the nominal
rating, but the average power consumption is below nominalmaximum
current - and the peak lumen output is significantly enhanced without
reducing the junction life appreciably.
THIS would definitely cause flicker as there is a "significant" dead
period between the "strobe flashes"

Agreed, although Rod thinks only freaks can see it.

Its true with car lights.

You're obviously wrong,

We'll see...

just by the number of articles on the internet about it.

That's just the freaks howling about seeing it.

If it were a small number of freaks, there wouldn't so many articles and
studies into it.

Bull****.

It is a large percentage of the population that can see it.

Easy to claim.

Way more than the percentage of vegetarians and disabled,

Easy to claim.

yet they both get catered for.

Because in the case of the disabled, it stops them getting
around. Being a freak that sees some car lights flicker doesn't.

In the case of vegetarians, pandering to them sees them
buy what you are flogging and avoids them going to
some other place that does pander to their freakishness.

I wonder why none of my houselights use this?

Hues bulbs do, you can see that by waving something non
transparent past a bulb when looking directly at a lighted bulb.

Your strip house lights have far more leds so don't need to.

Do car lights have to make more brightness from a smaller area?

Corse they do.

Or would flickery houselights annoy people more?

They don't with Hue bulbs.

They don't annoy YOU. They probably annoy others.

You wont find anyone saying that they annoy them on the net.

Depends just how flickery they are. If the frequency is high enough, they
won't bother anyone.

I meant that you wont be able to find anyone saying
that the Hue bulbs annoy them by flickering on the
net. Philips must have designed them properly.

Can you set something up to test the light output (or the voltage to the
LEDs) with a scope?

Not easily. The scope probes are hiding
and the scope is too, even tho its pretty big.

If it's the extra brightness, I don't understand

As always.

because I have a torch with a single LED and parabolic reflector that
gives out 20W equivalent without overdrive. Simply have three such
lamps with their own little (only 1.5 inches across) reflector next to
each other to make the headlamp.

Even you should have noticed that car headlights are much brighter.

A car headlight SHOULD be 60W equivalent.

Wrong, as always.

Back in the days of incandescent lights on cars, every single car had a
55W/60W bulb for it's headlights.

That's a lie too.

55W for dip and 60W for full.

So 6W of LEDs, or a few of my torches per lamp.

Your torches are lying about them being 20W equivalents.

Actually the lie says they're 60W. I measured them as 20W. They consume
2W and give out 20W equivalent.

You don't know that last.

Quite possible to just have three reflectors just like my torch, mounted
together.

Yes, but that's nothing like what real headlights produce light wise.

A real headlight should produce the same amount of light as a 55W
incandescent,

They don't all produce the same.

which requires about 5.5W of LEDs.

There you go, mangling the real story, as always.

Easy to arrange that with reflectors and cooling without pulsing.

Yeah, yeah, none of the designed of car headlights
have a ****ing clue. Some unemployable drunken
druggy chav knows it all. Yeah, right.

On Tue, 25 Dec 2018 21:00:53 -0000, Rod Speed wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news
On Tue, 25 Dec 2018 18:33:27 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news On Tue, 25 Dec 2018 17:33:52 -0000, Rod Speed
wrote:



"William Gothberg" "William wrote in message
news On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 04:22:39 -0000, Clare Snyder
wrote:

On Wed, 19 Dec 2018 19:36:51 -0000, "William Gothberg" "William
wrote:

On Wed, 19 Dec 2018 17:47:17 -0000, trader_4
wrote:

On Wednesday, December 19, 2018 at 11:35:06 AM UTC-5, William
Gothberg
wrote:
On Wed, 19 Dec 2018 16:21:41 -0000, Mark Lloyd
wrote:

On 12/19/18 6:01 AM, William Gothberg wrote:

[snip]

They probably are fairly crude. I know they flicker, for
example
if I
use my cordless drill, the chuck appears to spin the wrong way
under the
LED lighting.
I remember seeing that with a washing machine (under fluorescent
lights). As the tub was slowing down, the row of holes around
the
tub
would appear to reverse direction. Same thing with (spoked)
wagon
wheels
in movies.

It looks absolutely ridiculous with modern cars with LED
headlights
in
films. How hard can it be to put a smoothing capacitor on the
output
of the power supply?

I've never noticed that. Any films come to mind?

A lot of Top Gear programs showing the DRLs of cars fitted with
LEDs.
With a feature film, they might take the time/trouble/money to do
something to stop it.

It seems especially
weird, since cars have a 12V supply with a big battery to smooth
anything out. I guess the power supply that reduces that to
whatever
the LED headlights use though might have a switching power supply
these
days too.

AFAIK it's deliberate, making the LEDs operate brighter than they
are
capable of, but only 1/4 of the time. Our eyes just see the
brightest
part of the cycle, so we think they're four times brighter than the
LED
is really capable of, without overheating itself.

That is PWM Overdrive. Peak junction current is over the nominal
rating, but the average power consumption is below nominalmaximum
current - and the peak lumen output is significantly enhanced without
reducing the junction life appreciably.
THIS would definitely cause flicker as there is a "significant" dead
period between the "strobe flashes"

Agreed, although Rod thinks only freaks can see it.

Its true with car lights.

You're obviously wrong,

We'll see...

just by the number of articles on the internet about it.

That's just the freaks howling about seeing it.

If it were a small number of freaks, there wouldn't so many articles and
studies into it.

Bull****.

Tell me, out of interest, when you watch TV at the usual (before HD) 25fps interlaced, can you see that it's made up of seperate images? Can you notice that a moving object jumps a few inches at a time across the screen?