"Jethro_uk" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 30 Mar 2021 16:34:17 +0100, Brian Gaff \(Sofa\) wrote:

I'm always wary of so called safety devices that rely on electronics.
That is why I used to pull out the breaker on that circuit completely.
OK some bodger might have routed a live from a different ring, but very
unlikely.

Electrician we had in to *quickly* do a fix in order to allow me to
decorate made a point of taking the fuse out of the fusebox and putting
it in his pocket.

He was in his 50s and said as an apprentice, someone he worked with
removed a fuse to work on a circuit in a factory or warehouse. Sadly
someone came along, saw the open fusebox and removed fuse and put it back
and closed it.

My mum had a friend who had a son a few years younger than me. When Mark was
about three, he happened to be passing the fuse box in the under-stairs
cupboard and "helpfully" turned on the main switch that the electrician had
turned off while he was working on a circuit. The electrician (who lived at
the house which backed onto ours) survived unscathed, but he was not best
pleased!

As an aside, mum's friend used to complain that if I was left alone at her
house when I was little, I'd get up to mischief - pouring salt into the
sugar bowl, screwing up (literally!) the tension on her sewing machine,
spilling her perfume on the dressing table taking the varnish off the wood,
etc. Then when her son got to the age I'd been, *he* started with pranks - I
know he put a stick in her twin-tub washing machine, jammed the paddle and
therefore the motor and caused smoke to come out of the machine; and there
were many other things. So she had to admit that it was not just me but
"all" boys who got into mischief at that age. The one that took longest to
diagnose and fix was probably a genuine accident: he was playing in their
car and accidentally dislodged a wire under the dashboard with his foot
(though no-one knew that at the time), causing half the electrics to fail -
not irreparably, but until the wire was found where a plug and socket had
been pulled apart.

Now tell me that girls *never* do that, ever ;-)

On 30/03/2021 18:24, HVS wrote:
On 30 Mar 2021, NY wrote

The English language really does need another word to mean
"received a serious *but non-fatal* electric shock". Maybe we
should avoid being King Canutes, and accept that people will use
"electrocuted" for the non-fatal meaning, and devise a new wording
such as "electrocuted to death".

"Electrocuted to death" is in fairly common use -- but it hasnn't
solved the problem, as "electrocution" continues to be used for both
fatal and non-fatal shocks.

Similar ambiguity when it is said that someone has been "shot".

--
Max Demian

"Brian Gaff (Sofa)" wrote in message
...
Are the old argument on here of whether a neon screwdriver is a blessing
or a curse then...
ISTR being told that you should test an exposed wire (????) with the
back
of your hand so that any muscle reaction will not cause you to grab hold
of it.

I'd rather test it with a neon screwdriver.

The worst safety device is one that cannot be relied on. I bought a
proximity detector (induction) "pen" from B&Q for tracing live wires in
plaster to determine where it is safe to drill or hammer in picture hooks. I
quickly realised that it was worse that useless because it seemed to detect
some wires are great distance (making it vey difficult to determine the
maximum point where the wire lies) or else it failed to detect "known-live"
things like putting it close to a mains socket or a trailing appliance lead.

That went in the bin. It said "test it every time on a known live item
before using for tracing" - but if it fails to detect that known live, it's
useless. Especially if the known live *does* get detected (so you know the
device is working) but it fails to detect a live that you are testing.

A neon, for an exposed wire/terminal, is much more reliable, though you
still need an induction device for finding buried wires.

Should induction devices be able to detect wires which are live but have no
current flowing through them?

"Brian Gaff (Sofa)" wrote in message
...
I've always found dc shocks worse than ac ones which do often send you
off, I guess it very much depends on which muscles and in what mode they
operate.

Yes I've heard it said that DC is worse that AC of the same RMS or even peak
voltage, because AC pulses which a) is easier to feel quickly, and b) tends
to allow the muscles to un-spasm briefly. I wonder if there's any truth in
the supposition that opposite cycles may make your muscles clench and
unclench? or do both positive and negative cycles make the muscles clench in
the same direction rather than relaxing?


On 29/03/2021 23:32, soup wrote:
Whilst a shock from 240V CAN kill how often does that actually happen
and how many just get thrown across the room into a foetal position
whimpering and crying until the arm unknots and the tingling feeling
goes away.

I've never had the experience of being "thrown across the room". The worst
was a nasty gash on my hand as I pulled my hand away when I got a shock, and
caught it on a (non-live) bit of metal casing of something.

"Max Demian" wrote in message
...
On 30/03/2021 18:24, HVS wrote:
On 30 Mar 2021, NY wrote

The English language really does need another word to mean
"received a serious *but non-fatal* electric shock". Maybe we
should avoid being King Canutes, and accept that people will use
"electrocuted" for the non-fatal meaning, and devise a new wording
such as "electrocuted to death".

"Electrocuted to death" is in fairly common use -- but it hasnn't
solved the problem, as "electrocution" continues to be used for both
fatal and non-fatal shocks.

Similar ambiguity when it is said that someone has been "shot".

Ambiguous, yes. But I wouldn't say that "shot" (non-fatally) was wrong
usage, just that "shot" *is* ambiguous and I would always clarify "shot
dead" or "shot but survived".

"Electrocution" is different. That really needs a different word for
"shocked but survived". We need to invent such a word ;-)

In message , NY writes
"Max Demian" wrote in message
...
On 30/03/2021 18:24, HVS wrote:
On 30 Mar 2021, NY wrote

The English language really does need another word to mean
"received a serious *but non-fatal* electric shock". Maybe we
should avoid being King Canutes, and accept that people will use
"electrocuted" for the non-fatal meaning, and devise a new wording
such as "electrocuted to death".

"Electrocuted to death" is in fairly common use -- but it hasnn't
solved the problem, as "electrocution" continues to be used for both
fatal and non-fatal shocks.

Similar ambiguity when it is said that someone has been "shot".

Ambiguous, yes. But I wouldn't say that "shot" (non-fatally) was wrong
usage, just that "shot" *is* ambiguous and I would always clarify "shot
dead" or "shot but survived".

"Electrocution" is different. That really needs a different word for
"shocked but survived". We need to invent such a word ;-)

Electrified?

--
Tim Lamb

On 29/03/2021 23:32, soup wrote:
Many have had a 'belt' from domestic 240Volt wiring through bad luck,
bad judgment or plain stupidity .
Â*Whilst a shock from 240V CAN kill how often does that actually happen
and how many just get thrown across the room into a foetal position
whimpering and crying until the arm unknots and the tingling feeling
goes away.

A couple of years ago (which seems like only yesterday to me...)
BigClive posted up a video on this.

Can I let go of 10mA mains (240V 50Hz) current? (Do NOT try this!)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-5R-KBa18ME

--
Adrian C

On 31/03/2021 13:49, NY wrote:
"Max Demian" wrote in message
...
On 30/03/2021 18:24, HVS wrote:
On 30 Mar 2021, NY wrote

The English language really does need another word to mean
"received a serious *but non-fatal* electric shock". Maybe we
should avoid being King Canutes, and accept that people will use
"electrocuted" for the non-fatal meaning, and devise a new wording
such as "electrocuted to death".

"Electrocuted to death" is in fairly common use -- but it hasnn't
solved the problem, as "electrocution" continues to be used for both
fatal and non-fatal shocks.

Similar ambiguity when it is said that someone has been "shot".

Ambiguous, yes. But I wouldn't say that "shot" (non-fatally) was wrong
usage, just that "shot" *is* ambiguous and I would always clarify "shot
dead" or "shot but survived".

"Electrocution" is different. That really needs a different word for
"shocked but survived". We need to invent such a word ;-)

How about "hanged"?

On 31/03/2021 13:49, NY wrote:
"Max Demian" wrote in message
...
On 30/03/2021 18:24, HVS wrote:
On 30 Mar 2021, NY wrote

The English language really does need another word to mean
"received a serious *but non-fatal* electric shock". Maybe we
should avoid being King Canutes, and accept that people will use
"electrocuted" for the non-fatal meaning, and devise a new wording
such as "electrocuted to death".

"Electrocuted to death" is in fairly common use -- but it hasnn't
solved the problem, as "electrocution" continues to be used for both
fatal and non-fatal shocks.

Similar ambiguity when it is said that someone has been "shot".

Ambiguous, yes. But I wouldn't say that "shot" (non-fatally) was wrong
usage, just that "shot" *is* ambiguous and I would always clarify "shot
dead" or "shot but survived".

"Electrocution" is different. That really needs a different word for
"shocked but survived". We need to invent such a word ;-)

I think that is at least adjacent to Canute-like as major dictionaries
(including the OED) have already recognised that in practice use it to
cover death and [serious] injury. But I also think you have a perfect
right to lobby for a body similar to the Académie Française with
whatever statutory backing you think fit. Eg. fines for misusing
"screw" and "bolt"

--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid

On 2021-03-30, Steve Walker wrote:

On 30/03/2021 10:06, Adam Funk wrote:
On 2021-03-30, Jethro_uk wrote:

On Mon, 29 Mar 2021 23:32:04 +0100, soup wrote:

Many have had a 'belt' from domestic 240Volt wiring through bad luck,
bad judgment or plain stupidity .
Whilst a shock from 240V CAN kill how often does that actually happen
and how many just get thrown across the room into a foetal position
whimpering and crying until the arm unknots and the tingling feeling
goes away.

Well didn't an MPs daughter die of a 240V shock in a domestic incident ?

And Keith Relf formerly of the Yardbirds was killed in an electrocution
at his home (so presumably 240V).

When I was at Uni a lecturer mentioned checking out a neighbours cooker
that was "buzzy" when you touched it. He found there was no earth and
600V potential between it and the sink ...

OK, you've got my curiosity --- how do you get a 600 V difference
inside one house?

More than one phase (not in most houses, but definitely in some);

IIRC, that's 415 V.

transformers; charged capacitors.

I suppose you could get a fault in an appliance to do something like that.



In my case an induced supply - I have a cable connecting my boiler (in
the kitchen) to a control box (in a bedroom). It is one continuous run,
no connections en-route and there are no other connections to the
boiler. It runs alongside other mains cables and if I isolate it at the
control box end, that cable and the boiler electrics float at around 90V
- which may not be in phase with other, nearby supplies.

Well, that could get up to 330 V (if it's completely out of phase).


Similarly, I had an out of use UHF aerial splitter under the floor, that
always floated high enough to give you a good belt, despite the cables
being connected to nothing else!

Well, that's weird.

On 2021-03-30, Theo wrote:

Adam Funk wrote:
On 2021-03-30, Jethro_uk wrote:
When I was at Uni a lecturer mentioned checking out a neighbours cooker
that was "buzzy" when you touched it. He found there was no earth and
600V potential between it and the sink ...

OK, you've got my curiosity --- how do you get a 600 V difference
inside one house?

I can manage 415v. Next door is TNCS (earth connected to neutral) but has a
break in their neutral, so when they turn the cooker on the earth becomes
live with phase L1.

You and your neighbour share a water pipe. Through your neighbour's earth
bonding, the water pipe is now live with their phase L1. The water pipe
doesn't have good conduction to earth potential (during a drought, say).

You're on a different phase L2, and so a fault on your cooker exposes live
parts at L2. The sink is joined to the water pipe at potential of L1, and
so there's 415v between cooker and sink. You don't have (good) earth
bonding.

I could get to 586v if it was being rectified and smoothed. I doubt it was
though

Yeah, 415 I could understand (in unusual inter-house situations).

On 2021-03-30, Jethro_uk wrote:

On Tue, 30 Mar 2021 10:16:43 +0100, Jeff Layman wrote:

On 29/03/2021 23:32, soup wrote:
Many have had a 'belt' from domestic 240Volt wiring through bad luck,
bad judgment or plain stupidity .
Whilst a shock from 240V CAN kill how often does that actually
happen
and how many just get thrown across the room into a foetal position
whimpering and crying until the arm unknots and the tingling feeling
goes away.

As a very young child I got a nasty jolt from putting my fingers in a
lamp bayonet socket. I didn't do that again! But the worst shock was
when, as a young teenager into hobby electronics, I was making a small
valve-based transmitter. I was holding the HV DC +ve lead (about 350V)
and went to move the large smoothing electrolytic the -ve was soldered
to. I didn't know that the -ve and metal case were often connected. My
hand clamped around the electro so that I could not release it, but very
fortunately my biceps muscle also contracted and I involuntarily threw
the electro across the room, thus breaking the connection. It was one
hell of a shock, and I was very lucky the connection had been broken.

ISTR being told that you should test an exposed wire (????) with the back
of your hand so that any muscle reaction will not cause you to grab hold
of it.

Better testing devices are now available (but I'm told my grandfather
used to use that kind of technique to check whether wiring was on or
off).

On 2021-03-30, Jethro_uk wrote:

On Tue, 30 Mar 2021 10:06:28 +0100, Adam Funk wrote:

On 2021-03-30, Jethro_uk wrote:

On Mon, 29 Mar 2021 23:32:04 +0100, soup wrote:

Many have had a 'belt' from domestic 240Volt wiring through bad luck,
bad judgment or plain stupidity .
Whilst a shock from 240V CAN kill how often does that actually
happen
and how many just get thrown across the room into a foetal position
whimpering and crying until the arm unknots and the tingling feeling
goes away.

Well didn't an MPs daughter die of a 240V shock in a domestic incident
?

And Keith Relf formerly of the Yardbirds was killed in an electrocution
at his home (so presumably 240V).

When I was at Uni a lecturer mentioned checking out a neighbours cooker
that was "buzzy" when you touched it. He found there was no earth and
600V potential between it and the sink ...

OK, you've got my curiosity --- how do you get a 600 V difference inside
one house?

I have no idea exactly. We were discussing "earths" and the fact that
your earth and my earth may not be the same. Isn't that why there's earth
bonding everywhere ?

ICBW, but ISTR that potential variations in the actual Earth caused
one of the big blackouts in the USA or Canada decades ago. However,
that's a voltage over a much larger distance than from a house's cable
entry to the kitchen.



It was thanks to this lecturer that I always factor a sudden loss of
power and services into a building that can last a day into my BCP/DR
planning. "Murphy and his jackhammer" were a recurring theme ...

"Robin" wrote in message
...
But I also think you have a perfect right to lobby for a body similar to
the Académie Française with whatever statutory backing you think fit. Eg.
fines for misusing "screw" and "bolt"

Or "plug", "socket" and (the ultimate abomination) "plug socket" ;-)

Language evolves. France has solved the problem with the Académie Française
which tries to fossilise the language and which wants people to use a French
word rather than one borrowed from English if possible (eg "ordinateur"
versus "computer" or "PC"; "mégaoctet" rather than "megabyte" etc). At least
they allow "le weekend" rather than "le fin de la semaine" ;-) German is a
bit easier in that you just string nouns together to create a new meaning,
without all the "of the" superfluity.

We solve the problem by (for most of the population) just not caring -
giving words new meanings that they didn't have before. Trying telling
people that "cheap at half the price" and "I could care less" don't make
logical sense and that it should be "cheap at twice the price" and "I
couldn't care less".

Hopefully "inflammable" will be expunged from the English language one day
(prefer "flammable" and its opposite "NON-flammable") because too many
people thought the "in" meant "not" and therefore interpreted "inflammable"
as "non-flammable". That's where a little knowledge really can be dangerous!

On 31/03/2021 15:36, Adam Funk wrote:
On 2021-03-30, Jethro_uk wrote:

On Tue, 30 Mar 2021 10:16:43 +0100, Jeff Layman wrote:

On 29/03/2021 23:32, soup wrote:
Many have had a 'belt' from domestic 240Volt wiring through bad luck,
bad judgment or plain stupidity .
Whilst a shock from 240V CAN kill how often does that actually
happen
and how many just get thrown across the room into a foetal position
whimpering and crying until the arm unknots and the tingling feeling
goes away.

As a very young child I got a nasty jolt from putting my fingers in a
lamp bayonet socket. I didn't do that again! But the worst shock was
when, as a young teenager into hobby electronics, I was making a small
valve-based transmitter. I was holding the HV DC +ve lead (about 350V)
and went to move the large smoothing electrolytic the -ve was soldered
to. I didn't know that the -ve and metal case were often connected. My
hand clamped around the electro so that I could not release it, but very
fortunately my biceps muscle also contracted and I involuntarily threw
the electro across the room, thus breaking the connection. It was one
hell of a shock, and I was very lucky the connection had been broken.

ISTR being told that you should test an exposed wire (????) with the back
of your hand so that any muscle reaction will not cause you to grab hold
of it.

Better testing devices are now available (but I'm told my grandfather
used to use that kind of technique to check whether wiring was on or
off).

So did my grandfather. Unfortunately for other people, he seemed to be
electricity proof and what he could touch without a problem would give
others a hell of a belt.

On 2021-03-31, Steve Walker wrote:

On 31/03/2021 15:36, Adam Funk wrote:
On 2021-03-30, Jethro_uk wrote:

On Tue, 30 Mar 2021 10:16:43 +0100, Jeff Layman wrote:

On 29/03/2021 23:32, soup wrote:
Many have had a 'belt' from domestic 240Volt wiring through bad luck,
bad judgment or plain stupidity .
Whilst a shock from 240V CAN kill how often does that actually
happen
and how many just get thrown across the room into a foetal position
whimpering and crying until the arm unknots and the tingling feeling
goes away.

As a very young child I got a nasty jolt from putting my fingers in a
lamp bayonet socket. I didn't do that again! But the worst shock was
when, as a young teenager into hobby electronics, I was making a small
valve-based transmitter. I was holding the HV DC +ve lead (about 350V)
and went to move the large smoothing electrolytic the -ve was soldered
to. I didn't know that the -ve and metal case were often connected. My
hand clamped around the electro so that I could not release it, but very
fortunately my biceps muscle also contracted and I involuntarily threw
the electro across the room, thus breaking the connection. It was one
hell of a shock, and I was very lucky the connection had been broken.

ISTR being told that you should test an exposed wire (????) with the back
of your hand so that any muscle reaction will not cause you to grab hold
of it.

Better testing devices are now available (but I'm told my grandfather
used to use that kind of technique to check whether wiring was on or
off).

So did my grandfather. Unfortunately for other people, he seemed to be
electricity proof and what he could touch without a problem would give
others a hell of a belt.

"Don't do this!"

Max Demian wrote:

Jethro_uk wrote:

ISTR being told that you should test an exposed wire (????) with the back
of your hand so that any muscle reaction will not cause you to grab hold
of it.

I'd rather test it with a neon screwdriver.

We were told similar by our physics master, except I don't think the
advice was to regularly use the back of your hand instead of a neon
tester, just that if ever you were in a situation where you *had* to
find out whether something was live or not, and you had no alternative,
then use the back of your hand rather than pinching it between fingers,
or sticking your tongue on it!

In article , NY wrote:
"Robin" wrote in message
...
But I also think you have a perfect right to lobby for a body similar
to the Académie Française with whatever statutory backing you think
fit. Eg. fines for misusing "screw" and "bolt"

Or "plug", "socket" and (the ultimate abomination) "plug socket" ;-)

Language evolves. France has solved the problem with the Académie
Française which tries to fossilise the language and which wants people
to use a French word rather than one borrowed from English if possible
(eg "ordinateur" versus "computer" or "PC"; "mégaoctet" rather than
"megabyte" etc). At least they allow "le weekend" rather than "le fin de
la semaine" ;-)

I can remember reading a French electronic equipment manual " Un
amplificateur du type bootstrap"

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

On 31/03/2021 15:33, Adam Funk wrote:
Similarly, I had an out of use UHF aerial splitter under the floor, that
always floated high enough to give you a good belt, despite the cables
being connected to nothing else!
Well, that's weird.

In 55 years as an aerial installer I never came across such a thing.
Sounds like there actually was a connection to the mains hidden away
somewhere.

Bill

On 31/03/2021 14:10, Tim Lamb wrote:

Electrified?


Electrifried?

Bill

On 31/03/2021 18:17, Andy Burns wrote:
Max Demian wrote:

Jethro_uk wrote:

ISTR being told that you should test an exposed wire (????) with the
back
of your hand so that any muscle reaction will not cause you to grab hold
of it.

I'd rather test it with a neon screwdriver.

We were told similar by our physics master, except I don't think the
advice was to regularly use the back of your hand instead of a neon
tester, just that if ever you were in a situation where you *had* to
find out whether something was live or not, and you had no alternative,
then use the back of your hand rather than pinching it between fingers,
or sticking your tongue on it!

I wonder how many kids of nowadays test PP3 batteries that way?

In article ,
williamwright wrote:
On 31/03/2021 15:33, Adam Funk wrote:
Similarly, I had an out of use UHF aerial splitter under the floor, that
always floated high enough to give you a good belt, despite the cables
being connected to nothing else!
Well, that's weird.

In 55 years as an aerial installer I never came across such a thing.
Sounds like there actually was a connection to the mains hidden away
somewhere.

Bill

In the analogue days we sometimes got hum on our pictures. Only after it
has been raining, I eventually traced the fault, The 120v on the VCR's
aerial connector found its way to my mast head preamp and then found a path
to ground down the wet wall of the house. This created a 2v drop between
the output and input connections. I earthed the coax outer at the bottom
and the problem went away. The VCR could only provide about 30uA.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

On 31/03/2021 18:44, williamwright wrote:
On 31/03/2021 15:33, Adam Funk wrote:
Similarly, I had an out of use UHF aerial splitter under the floor, that
always floated high enough to give you a good belt, despite the cables
being connected to nothing else!
Well, that's weird.

In 55 years as an aerial installer I never came across such a thing.
Sounds like there actually was a connection to the mains hidden away
somewhere.

No, definitely not.

One lead (from the aerial) from the back of the house straight to the
splitter. Cut off at the wall, as I was building a conservatory and it
was in the way. No need to replace it as I was using satellite by then.

As they were not in use, I cut off two of the the three cables from the
splitter to the sockets, at the socket end, so that I could use the
back-boxes for satellite connections.

The third cable went to an aerial socket for the PC and was again not
used, but left connected to the socket.

All this was under the same through-room and while lying (it's too low
to sit) at the splitter, you could see the entire run of all three cables.

I can only think that one of the cables was coupling to one or more
parallel mains cables and giving enough volts, but with negligible
current, to give you a jolt if you touched the splitter.

Definitely nothing to do with static either, as once you'd touched it,
touching again immediately would give you another jolt.

"NY" wrote in message
...
"Robin" wrote in message
...
But I also think you have a perfect right to lobby for a body similar to
the Académie Française with whatever statutory backing you think fit.
Eg. fines for misusing "screw" and "bolt"

Or "plug", "socket" and (the ultimate abomination) "plug socket" ;-)

Language evolves. France has solved the problem with the Académie
Française which tries to fossilise the language and which wants people to
use a French word rather than one borrowed from English if possible (eg
"ordinateur" versus "computer" or "PC"; "mégaoctet" rather than "megabyte"
etc). At least they allow "le weekend" rather than "le fin de la semaine"
;-) German is a bit easier in that you just string nouns together to
create a new meaning, without all the "of the" superfluity.

We solve the problem by (for most of the population) just not caring -
giving words new meanings that they didn't have before. Trying telling
people that "cheap at half the price" and "I could care less" don't make
logical sense and that it should be "cheap at twice the price" and "I
couldn't care less".

Hopefully "inflammable" will be expunged from the English language one day
(prefer "flammable"

Its flammable that is dying out.

and its opposite "NON-flammable") because too many people thought the "in"
meant "not" and therefore interpreted "inflammable" as "non-flammable".
That's where a little knowledge really can be dangerous!

On Thu, 1 Apr 2021 06:52:50 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:


Its flammable that is dying out.

You'd better worry how MANY people hope you will be "dying out" soon,
obnoxious senile pest!

--
Kerr-Mudd,John addressing the auto-contradicting senile cretin:
"Auto-contradictor Rod is back! (in the KF)"
MID:

"Rod Speed" wrote in message
...
Hopefully "inflammable" will be expunged from the English language one
day (prefer "flammable"

Its flammable that is dying out.

"Flammable" is the official word used in Health and Safety briefings
(https://www.hse.gov.uk/fireandexplosion/about.htm) and the Fire Brigade
(https://www.firesafe.org.uk/safe-wor...e-substances/). It
will take longer for "inflammable" to disappear from "folk vocabulary".

As long as no-one equates "inflammable" with "non-flammable", it's fine. But
anyone who thinks they are safe with a product that is (wrongly) labelled
"inflammable" is in for a nasty surprise. There was a big campaign about
"inflammable" as part of product labelling a few years ago.

It's like when you're in Germany and need an emergency exit, you have to
tell yourself that "Notausgang" does *not* mean "this is *not* an emergency
exit - find another way out" but instead means "this is the emergency exit",
because "Not" is German for "emergency". The same is true in either Norway
or Denmark (I forget which), except it's "nod" rather than "not" followed by
their word for "exit". Strange the things you notice on coach trips -
because I always have a quick look when I get on a coach or a train to see
where the emergency exits are. Not that I'm obsessed, but I have a quick
glance as I'm walking down the aisle.

"Fredxx" wrote in message
...
We were told similar by our physics master, except I don't think the
advice was to regularly use the back of your hand instead of a neon
tester, just that if ever you were in a situation where you *had* to find
out whether something was live or not, and you had no alternative, then
use the back of your hand rather than pinching it between fingers, or
sticking your tongue on it!

I wonder how many kids of nowadays test PP3 batteries that way?

I knew a woman at university who could feel very low voltages with her bare
fingers (no need for tongues!). She could tell instantly whether an AA
battery was fully charged or almost flat. She always touched a door handle
or a car door with her elbow through her clothes to discharge most of the
static charge that she may have acquired walking across a carpet or from the
tyres rolling on the road.

"williamwright" wrote in message
...
On 31/03/2021 14:10, Tim Lamb wrote:

Electrified?


Electrifried?

Thank you, Bill. *That's* the word the English language needs ;-) Nice one!

On 31/03/2021 22:00, NY wrote:
"Rod Speed" wrote in message
...
Hopefully "inflammable" will be expunged from the English language
one day (prefer "flammable"

Its flammable that is dying out.

"Flammable" is the official word used in Health and Safety briefings
(https://www.hse.gov.uk/fireandexplosion/about.htm) and the Fire Brigade
(https://www.firesafe.org.uk/safe-wor...e-substances/).
It will take longer for "inflammable" to disappear from "folk vocabulary".

As long as no-one equates "inflammable" with "non-flammable", it's fine.
But anyone who thinks they are safe with a product that is (wrongly)
labelled "inflammable" is in for a nasty surprise. There was a big
campaign about "inflammable" as part of product labelling a few years ago.

It's like when you're in Germany and need an emergency exit, you have to
tell yourself that "Notausgang" does *not* mean "this is *not* an
emergency exit - find another way out" but instead means "this is the
emergency exit", because "Not" is German for "emergency". The same is
true in either Norway or Denmark (I forget which), except it's "nod"
rather than "not" followed by their word for "exit". Strange the things
you notice on coach trips - because I always have a quick look when I
get on a coach or a train to see where the emergency exits are. Not that
I'm obsessed, but I have a quick glance as I'm walking down the aisle.

One of the things we a instructed to do at work is assess anywhere we
go, other companies, sites, hotels, etc. for exit routes and risks as
soon as we arrive.

NY wrote
Rod Speed wrote

Hopefully "inflammable" will be expunged from the English language one
day (prefer "flammable"

Its flammable that is dying out.

"Flammable" is the official word used in Health and Safety briefings
(https://www.hse.gov.uk/fireandexplosion/about.htm) and the Fire Brigade
(https://www.firesafe.org.uk/safe-wor...e-substances/).

Irrelevant to the use in the english language.

It will take longer for "inflammable" to disappear from "folk vocabulary".

It wont disappear, you watch. Flammable is much more likely to.

As long as no-one equates "inflammable" with "non-flammable", it's fine.
But anyone who thinks they are safe with a product that is (wrongly)
labelled "inflammable" is in for a nasty surprise. There was a big
campaign about "inflammable" as part of product labelling a few years ago.

And that had no effect on what happens with the language.

It's like when you're in Germany and need an emergency exit, you have to
tell yourself that "Notausgang" does *not* mean "this is *not* an
emergency exit - find another way out" but instead means "this is the
emergency exit", because "Not" is German for "emergency". The same is true
in either Norway or Denmark (I forget which), except it's "nod" rather
than "not" followed by their word for "exit". Strange the things you
notice on coach trips - because I always have a quick look when I get on a
coach or a train to see where the emergency exits are. Not that I'm
obsessed, but I have a quick glance as I'm walking down the aisle.

We dont have that problem in english.

"NY" wrote in message
...
"williamwright" wrote in message
...
On 31/03/2021 14:10, Tim Lamb wrote:

Electrified?


Electrifried?

Thank you, Bill. *That's* the word the English language needs ;-) Nice
one!

We mostly use zapped in normal conversation
as opposed to more formal stuff like the media.

On Thu, 1 Apr 2021 09:34:35 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:



We mostly use

Who's that "we" you are constantly hallucinating about, senile troll?
There's no "we" for a sociopath like you! Nobody identifies with you!

--
Norman Wells addressing trolling senile Rodent:
"Ah, the voice of scum speaks."
MID:

On Thu, 1 Apr 2021 09:32:59 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:


FLUSH the abnormal trolling senile asshole's latest troll**** unread

--
about senile Rot Speed:
"This is like having a conversation with someone with brain damage."
MID:

On 31/03/2021 22:00, NY wrote:
"Rod Speed" wrote in message
...
Hopefully "inflammable" will be expunged from the English language
one day (prefer "flammable"

Its flammable that is dying out.

"Flammable" is the official word used in Health and Safety briefings
(https://www.hse.gov.uk/fireandexplosion/about.htm) and the Fire Brigade
(https://www.firesafe.org.uk/safe-wor...e-substances/).
It will take longer for "inflammable" to disappear from "folk vocabulary".

As long as no-one equates "inflammable" with "non-flammable", it's fine.
But anyone who thinks they are safe with a product that is (wrongly)
labelled "inflammable" is in for a nasty surprise. There was a big
campaign about "inflammable" as part of product labelling a few years ago.

It's like when you're in Germany and need an emergency exit, you have to
tell yourself that "Notausgang" does *not* mean "this is *not* an
emergency exit - find another way out" but instead means "this is the
emergency exit", because "Not" is German for "emergency". The same is
true in either Norway or Denmark (I forget which), except it's "nod"
rather than "not" followed by their word for "exit". Strange the things
you notice on coach trips - because I always have a quick look when I
get on a coach or a train to see where the emergency exits are. Not that
I'm obsessed, but I have a quick glance as I'm walking down the aisle.

Teh most famous German I never heard of is Herr Eingang - they named
thousands of streets after him...


--
To ban Christmas, simply give turkeys the vote.

On 31/03/2021 23:34, Rod Speed wrote:
"NY" wrote in message
...
"williamwright" wrote in message
...
On 31/03/2021 14:10, Tim Lamb wrote:

Electrified?


Electrifried?

Thank you, Bill. *That's* the word the English language needs ;-) Nice
one!

We mostly use zapped in normal conversation
as opposed to more formal stuff like the media.

Zapping is when you change channels with the TV remote. Don't you
Aussies have a word ending with "o" for it?

--
Max Demian

On 31/03/2021 16:37, NY wrote:
"Robin" wrote in message
...
But I also think you have a perfect right to lobby for a body similar
to the Académie Française with whatever statutory backing you think
fit.Â* Eg. fines for misusing "screw" and "bolt"

Or "plug", "socket" and (the ultimate abomination) "plug socket" ;-)

Language evolves. France has solved the problem with the Académie
Française which tries to fossilise the language and which wants people
to use a French word rather than one borrowed from English if possible
(eg "ordinateur" versus "computer" or "PC"; "mégaoctet" rather than
"megabyte" etc). At least they allow "le weekend" rather than "le fin de
la semaine" ;-)Â* German is a bit easier in that you just string nouns
together to create a new meaning, without all the "of the" superfluity.


Presumably they now have Le Plug, and La Socket :-)

On 31/03/2021 17:39, Steve Walker wrote:
On 31/03/2021 15:36, Adam Funk wrote:
On 2021-03-30, Jethro_uk wrote:

On Tue, 30 Mar 2021 10:16:43 +0100, Jeff Layman wrote:

On 29/03/2021 23:32, soup wrote:
Many have had a 'belt' from domestic 240Volt wiring through bad luck,
bad judgment or plain stupidity .
Â*Â*Â*Â* Whilst a shock from 240V CAN kill how often does that actually
Â*Â*Â*Â* happen
and how many just get thrown across the room into a foetal position
whimpering and crying until the arm unknots and the tingling feeling
goes away.

As a very young child I got a nasty jolt from putting my fingers in a
lamp bayonet socket. I didn't do that again! But the worst shock was
when, as a young teenager into hobby electronics, I was making a small
valve-based transmitter. I was holding the HV DC +ve lead (about 350V)
and went to move the large smoothing electrolytic the -ve was soldered
to. I didn't know that the -ve and metal case were often connected. My
hand clamped around the electro so that I could not release it, but
very
fortunately my biceps muscle also contracted and I involuntarily threw
the electro across the room, thus breaking the connection. It was one
hell of a shock, and I was very lucky the connection had been broken.

ISTR being told that you should test an exposed wire (????) with the
back
of your hand so that any muscle reaction will not cause you to grab hold
of it.

Better testing devices are now available (but I'm told my grandfather
used to use that kind of technique to check whether wiring was on or
off).

So did my grandfather. Unfortunately for other people, he seemed to be
electricity proof and what he could touch without a problem would give
others a hell of a belt.

Ex IT colleague went to work for London underground. He got the chance
to go into the tunnels one night and to test that the power was off they
had an ancient bit of wood with a number of bayonet-fitting bulbs
fitted along it, connecting the power rail to the running rail.

Andrew wrote:

Ex IT colleague went to work for London underground. He got the chance
to go into the tunnels one night and to test that the power was off they
had an ancient bit of wood with a number of bayonet-fitting bulbs
fitted along it, connecting the power rail to the running rail.

As featured on Blue Peter ...

On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 06:01:39 +1100, "Rod Speed"
wrote:

Brian Gaff (Sofa) wrote

Erm well are you suggesting bridging them with a charged up hv capacitor?
Not nice, and probably dangerous, at least the ladies only picked them up
in one hand then very quickly dropped them and swore.

Real ladies never swear.

They only swear when it slips out.

If they do they get de tiared, rather like being
defrocked.

"Jethro_uk" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 22:06:03 +0100, NY wrote:

"Fredxx" wrote in message
...
We were told similar by our physics master, except I don't think the
advice was to regularly use the back of your hand instead of a neon
tester, just that if ever you were in a situation where you *had* to
find out whether something was live or not, and you had no
alternative, then use the back of your hand rather than pinching it
between fingers, or sticking your tongue on it!

I wonder how many kids of nowadays test PP3 batteries that way?

I knew a woman at university who could feel very low voltages with her
bare fingers (no need for tongues!). She could tell instantly whether an
AA battery was fully charged or almost flat. She always touched a door
handle or a car door with her elbow through her clothes to discharge
most of the static charge that she may have acquired walking across a
carpet or from the tyres rolling on the road.

SWMBO used to (interesting it's no longer the case) be able to sense
electric storms long before they happened.

My theory was it something to do with the ****ed nerves of MS being more
sensitive to electrickery.

There could well be a lot of truth to this. The woman I knew had
"hypermobile joints" (she could bend her hands a long way backwards at the
wrists etc) and later in life developed a strange syndrome which meant that
if she was ever injured (or had surgery) she would feel the pain for a long
time after the wound had healed - which was bad news as she needed an
operation for something and decided that the normally short-term pain of an
incision would go on for so long afterwards that she couldn't face the
operation.