On 21/04/2021 09:57, charles wrote:
our 'copper' exchange is due to be closed in 2016.
I wish I could be living in the past like you


--
€œIt is hard to imagine a more stupid decision or more dangerous way of
making decisions than by putting those decisions in the hands of people
who pay no price for being wrong.€�

Thomas Sowell

In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 21/04/2021 09:57, charles wrote:
our 'copper' exchange is due to be closed in 2016.
I wish I could be living in the past like you

yes should be 2026

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

In article , Steve Walker
writes
On 17/04/2021 10:50, Robin wrote:
On 17/04/2021 10:03, ARW wrote:
On 17/04/2021 09:43, charles wrote:
In article ,
*** ARW wrote:
On 17/04/2021 08:15, Andy Burns wrote:
ARW wrote:

https://goo.gl/maps/WQQhtqdtJCyLf6c77

WTF?

insulating spacers to stop the phases getting too close in the wind?


Yep. I see it when I look further down.

And a customer sent me this last week


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uUowNWSk4uU&ab_channel=BritishPath%C3 %A9

before the days of H&S. No hard hats, no harnesses, even the club hammer
had to safety chain* ----- mmmm


This one has a bloke in a suit going up the pylon

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MGiT...tishPath%C3%A9

The man's got no bloody tie on! Shoddy dress leads to shoddy work.

That's early H&S - you wouldn't want him to risk catching the tie and
hanging himself!

Or setting fire to his tie with his fag.
--
bert

On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 19:21:09 +0100, Peter Able wrote:

On 20/04/2021 16:26, Scott wrote:
On Sun, 18 Apr 2021 09:03:28 +0100, Peter Able wrote:

On 17/04/2021 12:01, Scott wrote:
On Sat, 17 Apr 2021 11:15:53 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

On 17/04/2021 10:06, Peter Able wrote:
If all of your extensions are simply connected across the incoming pair,
then induced hum won't just affect one extension.

I thought about that, and then decided as a statement of fact it was
********.

Consider a set of telephone wires all starred from a single point where
they are all shorted together. Telephones are oin te end of each pair.

One of the wires goes through a transformer that is designed to induce
current in it. The telephone on that wire and that wire alone will see
'hum'.

Except that mine are wired as a spur. I am quite surprised the hum
does not go back the way to number 2.


Philosopher, starting with a false assumption is always a bad start, but
star, daisy-chain or hybrid. Would you describe the path(s) of the
induced currents for no handsets lifted and for each handset in turn lifted?

Scott, have you tried swapping around the handsets? Just a bit more
evidence.

No, but I thought of that as I was watching Netflix. I also found out
if I hold the line the buzzing increases !!! Maybe I am acting as an
aerial.

OK - are you going to try swapping? Is that you holding the 'phone or
the power cable? It'd be interesting to see a sketch of the network of
phones - showing any broadband filters. Is each extension used for
phone only, broadband only, or both? Does any of the network still
include a third, "bell" wire?

I'll try the swapping tonight. The phone has a headset and I was
holding the cable to the headset.

Master socket (filtered) ext 1 ext 2. I had to reconnect the bell
wire as ext 2 does not ring without it. The only broadband filter is
contained in the master socket. The route from ext 1 to ext 2 runs
under the floor close to a ring main and my TV set, which I assume is
the source of the problem.

On 21/04/2021 15:50, Scott wrote:
On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 19:21:09 +0100, Peter Able wrote:

On 20/04/2021 16:26, Scott wrote:
On Sun, 18 Apr 2021 09:03:28 +0100, Peter Able wrote:

On 17/04/2021 12:01, Scott wrote:
On Sat, 17 Apr 2021 11:15:53 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

On 17/04/2021 10:06, Peter Able wrote:
If all of your extensions are simply connected across the incoming pair,
then induced hum won't just affect one extension.

I thought about that, and then decided as a statement of fact it was
********.

Consider a set of telephone wires all starred from a single point where
they are all shorted together. Telephones are oin te end of each pair.

One of the wires goes through a transformer that is designed to induce
current in it. The telephone on that wire and that wire alone will see
'hum'.

Except that mine are wired as a spur. I am quite surprised the hum
does not go back the way to number 2.


Philosopher, starting with a false assumption is always a bad start, but
star, daisy-chain or hybrid. Would you describe the path(s) of the
induced currents for no handsets lifted and for each handset in turn lifted?

Scott, have you tried swapping around the handsets? Just a bit more
evidence.

No, but I thought of that as I was watching Netflix. I also found out
if I hold the line the buzzing increases !!! Maybe I am acting as an
aerial.

OK - are you going to try swapping? Is that you holding the 'phone or
the power cable? It'd be interesting to see a sketch of the network of
phones - showing any broadband filters. Is each extension used for
phone only, broadband only, or both? Does any of the network still
include a third, "bell" wire?

I'll try the swapping tonight. The phone has a headset and I was
holding the cable to the headset.

Master socket (filtered) ext 1 ext 2. I had to reconnect the bell
wire as ext 2 does not ring without it. The only broadband filter is
contained in the master socket. The route from ext 1 to ext 2 runs
under the floor close to a ring main and my TV set, which I assume is
the source of the problem.


Just a couple of observations.

How many phones of the last 25 years need bell wires?

You don't get any significant radiation at "hum" frequencies from TVs -
unless they are similarly ancient Cathode-Ray-Tube ones?

I take it you hear this hum when you've made the call as well as when
you've answered them on the humming ext? Try the ext1 - ext2 handset
swap. Then swap back and try disconnecting the bell wire - everywhere
you can - and then make a call using the hummer - or call yourself from
a mobile and pick-up on the hummer handset, see if the hum is gone.

By the way, what actually is ext2? is it a mains (or anything else)
-connected thing e.g. a fax machine?

PA

On 21/04/2021 09:07, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 20/04/2021 21:40, newshound wrote:
On 20/04/2021 14:08, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 19/04/2021 16:09, newshound wrote:
On 17/04/2021 11:11, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 17/04/2021 09:11, Andy Burns wrote:
ARW wrote:

Andy Burns wrote:

ARW wrote:

https://goo.gl/maps/WQQhtqdtJCyLf6c77
WTF?

insulating spacers to stop the phases getting too close in the
wind?

Yep. I see it when I look further down.
And a customer sent me this last week
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uUow...tishPath%C3%A9


But those "X" spacers which the commentator says are to stop them
shorting the system, are on wires of the same phase!

they are to stop wires *chafing*,when on the same phase.


No, the X spacers for the four conductors on each phase of supergrid
lines give the overall conductor an electric field distribution more
like a larger diameter conductor, reducing the corona losses.

No, that's what 4 wires instead of 1 does... the spacers are to
*keep* them 4 wires...:-) imagine 4 wires that close in a gust of
wind...


I guess
they also reduce the conductor temperature at a given current from
the level if all the aluminium conductor was wrapped around a single
steel (load carrying) core.

Mmm. greater surface to volume? nah. I think that works the other way
cross section goes up as radius squared but area only goes up as radius.

Have I got that right - the cross section of 4 wires is the same as a
single wire twice the diameter so surface area of single wire is 2 pi
D whereas its 4 x pi x D for 4 wires...-oh ok, you are right. All
other things being equal that should run cooler - although from
memory they don't mind them getting hot, its the resistance they
don't like.

Conductor temperature has other significance. They can (and do) carry
more current in the winter than the summer while staying within the
"sag" allowance from thermal expansion. A rare example of Sod getting
it wrong.


Also factor in the mundane. Nice to stock just one kind of overhead
cable and get 4 x current carrying capacity with a few spacers and
different insulators.


You could be right although I suspect that each supergrid voltage has
its own optimised cable. I'm pretty sure the individual insulator
elements in 275kV and 400kV are different (as well as the stringers
being longer for 400).

That is a straw man. times 4 conductors increase powwer capacity *at the
same voltage*

Its a neat way to up the power without having to increase voltages which
would probably in the end cost more


No, it would be cheaper to do that with one fat wire, which would need
slightly more conductor to reduce the heating effect. THE REASON FOR
FOUR SPACED CONDUCTORS WAS TO REDUCE CORONA LOSSES AT 400kV.

On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 19:06:42 +0100, Peter Able wrote:
[snip]

Just a couple of observations.

How many phones of the last 25 years need bell wires?

Probably very few but I think this one does. It stopped ringing then
I found the bell wire had come loose. Now it rings again. It is a
Cable & Wireless CWB 200H.

You don't get any significant radiation at "hum" frequencies from TVs -
unless they are similarly ancient Cathode-Ray-Tube ones?

It's in the kitchen so not a problem. I thought proximity to a ring
main was a problem due to inductive effects like a transformer.

I take it you hear this hum when you've made the call as well as when
you've answered them on the humming ext? Try the ext1 - ext2 handset
swap. Then swap back and try disconnecting the bell wire - everywhere
you can - and then make a call using the hummer - or call yourself from
a mobile and pick-up on the hummer handset, see if the hum is gone.

Yes, incoming and outgoing. I swapped the handsets and the C&W worked
okay at point ext 1. The other phone (BT Relate 250) worked okay at
point ext 2. Given these circumstances, the bell wire does not seem
to be the problem.

By the way, what actually is ext2? is it a mains (or anything else)
-connected thing e.g. a fax machine?

Not mains. The only distinctive feature is the headset. I have tried
again and if I grip the cable to the headset the buzzing gets much
worse. Even at point ext 1, gripping the headset cable creates
humming.

I could buy a replacement headset phone but they seem to be few and
far between and none of them seem to get good reviews.

Are we not getting VOIP by 2025 anyway?

"Andy Burns" wrote in message
...
The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Roger Hayter wrote:

And don't the fibre cables include a steel rope to take the tension?

yes. and a copper pair, too.

Yes, drop wires that they've already installed contain a copper pair, but
will they continue with that now they're going fibre-only and using voip?
I'd have thought they'd want to remove all temptation for the thieves.

There isnt really enough copper in those to interest any thief.

On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 07:49:44 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:


There isnt really enough copper in those to interest any thief.

You ARE clinically insane, you ridiculous auto-contradicting senile cretin!

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

On 21/04/2021 20:50, Scott wrote:
On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 19:06:42 +0100, Peter Able wrote:
[snip]

Just a couple of observations.

How many phones of the last 25 years need bell wires?

Probably very few but I think this one does. It stopped ringing then
I found the bell wire had come loose. Now it rings again. It is a
Cable & Wireless CWB 200H.

You don't get any significant radiation at "hum" frequencies from TVs -
unless they are similarly ancient Cathode-Ray-Tube ones?

It's in the kitchen so not a problem. I thought proximity to a ring
main was a problem due to inductive effects like a transformer.

I take it you hear this hum when you've made the call as well as when
you've answered them on the humming ext? Try the ext1 - ext2 handset
swap. Then swap back and try disconnecting the bell wire - everywhere
you can - and then make a call using the hummer - or call yourself from
a mobile and pick-up on the hummer handset, see if the hum is gone.

Yes, incoming and outgoing. I swapped the handsets and the C&W worked
okay at point ext 1. The other phone (BT Relate 250) worked okay at
point ext 2. Given these circumstances, the bell wire does not seem
to be the problem.

By the way, what actually is ext2? is it a mains (or anything else)
-connected thing e.g. a fax machine?

Not mains. The only distinctive feature is the headset. I have tried
again and if I grip the cable to the headset the buzzing gets much
worse. Even at point ext 1, gripping the headset cable creates
humming.

I could buy a replacement headset phone but they seem to be few and
far between and none of them seem to get good reviews.

Are we not getting VOIP by 2025 anyway?


So the problem appears to be the phone not the extension cabling. Now
you say the effect is related to your closeness to the headset cable.
That reinforces that conclusion. I can find nothing on Google about the
C&W phone - except a site for the 100H - which AVG reckons is infected.

If the C&W can be operated without the headset - try it.

Looking increasingly like a bin job; just what to bin - the headset or
the lot.

PA

On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 16:34:02 +0100, Peter Able wrote:

On 21/04/2021 20:50, Scott wrote:
On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 19:06:42 +0100, Peter Able wrote:
[snip]

Just a couple of observations.

How many phones of the last 25 years need bell wires?

Probably very few but I think this one does. It stopped ringing then
I found the bell wire had come loose. Now it rings again. It is a
Cable & Wireless CWB 200H.

You don't get any significant radiation at "hum" frequencies from TVs -
unless they are similarly ancient Cathode-Ray-Tube ones?

It's in the kitchen so not a problem. I thought proximity to a ring
main was a problem due to inductive effects like a transformer.

I take it you hear this hum when you've made the call as well as when
you've answered them on the humming ext? Try the ext1 - ext2 handset
swap. Then swap back and try disconnecting the bell wire - everywhere
you can - and then make a call using the hummer - or call yourself from
a mobile and pick-up on the hummer handset, see if the hum is gone.

Yes, incoming and outgoing. I swapped the handsets and the C&W worked
okay at point ext 1. The other phone (BT Relate 250) worked okay at
point ext 2. Given these circumstances, the bell wire does not seem
to be the problem.

By the way, what actually is ext2? is it a mains (or anything else)
-connected thing e.g. a fax machine?

Not mains. The only distinctive feature is the headset. I have tried
again and if I grip the cable to the headset the buzzing gets much
worse. Even at point ext 1, gripping the headset cable creates
humming.

I could buy a replacement headset phone but they seem to be few and
far between and none of them seem to get good reviews.

Are we not getting VOIP by 2025 anyway?

So the problem appears to be the phone not the extension cabling. Now
you say the effect is related to your closeness to the headset cable.
That reinforces that conclusion. I can find nothing on Google about the
C&W phone - except a site for the 100H - which AVG reckons is infected.

I tried that too, and another site. One was infected and one took me
to a gambling site.

If the C&W can be operated without the headset - try it.

Done that. It's fine using the handset. To my mind the cable to the
headset is acting as an aerial. It gets much worse if you grip the
cable. Maybe I am acting as an aerial too.

Looking increasingly like a bin job; just what to bin - the headset or
the lot.

I had to replace the headset about a year ago. I think the previous
one did the same. Could this be a characteristic of all headsets? I
could replace the phone but none of the present generation seems to
review well. According to R4 this morning, landlines are a thing of
the past anyway!

On 22/04/2021 18:16, Scott wrote:
On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 16:34:02 +0100, Peter Able wrote:

On 21/04/2021 20:50, Scott wrote:
On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 19:06:42 +0100, Peter Able wrote:
[snip]

Just a couple of observations.

How many phones of the last 25 years need bell wires?

Probably very few but I think this one does. It stopped ringing then
I found the bell wire had come loose. Now it rings again. It is a
Cable & Wireless CWB 200H.

You don't get any significant radiation at "hum" frequencies from TVs -
unless they are similarly ancient Cathode-Ray-Tube ones?

It's in the kitchen so not a problem. I thought proximity to a ring
main was a problem due to inductive effects like a transformer.

I take it you hear this hum when you've made the call as well as when
you've answered them on the humming ext? Try the ext1 - ext2 handset
swap. Then swap back and try disconnecting the bell wire - everywhere
you can - and then make a call using the hummer - or call yourself from
a mobile and pick-up on the hummer handset, see if the hum is gone.

Yes, incoming and outgoing. I swapped the handsets and the C&W worked
okay at point ext 1. The other phone (BT Relate 250) worked okay at
point ext 2. Given these circumstances, the bell wire does not seem
to be the problem.

By the way, what actually is ext2? is it a mains (or anything else)
-connected thing e.g. a fax machine?

Not mains. The only distinctive feature is the headset. I have tried
again and if I grip the cable to the headset the buzzing gets much
worse. Even at point ext 1, gripping the headset cable creates
humming.

I could buy a replacement headset phone but they seem to be few and
far between and none of them seem to get good reviews.

Are we not getting VOIP by 2025 anyway?

So the problem appears to be the phone not the extension cabling. Now
you say the effect is related to your closeness to the headset cable.
That reinforces that conclusion. I can find nothing on Google about the
C&W phone - except a site for the 100H - which AVG reckons is infected.

I tried that too, and another site. One was infected and one took me
to a gambling site.

If the C&W can be operated without the headset - try it.

Done that. It's fine using the handset. To my mind the cable to the
headset is acting as an aerial. It gets much worse if you grip the
cable. Maybe I am acting as an aerial too.

Looking increasingly like a bin job; just what to bin - the headset or
the lot.

I had to replace the headset about a year ago. I think the previous
one did the same. Could this be a characteristic of all headsets? I
could replace the phone but none of the present generation seems to
review well. According to R4 this morning, landlines are a thing of
the past anyway!


Good. As you revealed more and more detail, I was ever more convinced
that this was nothing to do with the cabling running parallel and close
proximity to mains cabling. And I was pretty convinced from the start !

Once upon a time, a hum on a line was usually put down to earth leakage
on one of the pair. I.e. loss of balance. People could live with that
hum; but the internet is no so flexible. BT's response to this was the
"Iplate", a device sandwiched between the Master Socket and your house's
telecom winding. This was advertised as a line re-balancer - which it
was - but it also filtered the bell wire. If you have one it may be
worth trying it - either at the master or the Ext2 socket.

As for why, I assume that there is some electronics between what should
be a balanced system and your ears - maybe in that little bulge on the
headset wiring. I'd guess that some of that circuitry involves some
pretty high impedances - making it more susceptible to fields around it.
As you say, making it work like an aerial.

Just to give an example of this, this PC is connected by twin, screened
cable to my hifi. It works fine - until I pull the jack out of the PC,
when I get a loud hum. Why - when it is, after all, just a couple of
metres of shielded wires?

The amplifier has a relatively high input impedance, so only a little
induced hum current manifests as quite a high voltage (Ohms Law).
Generally PC LINE OUT sockets expect to see about a 32 ohm load. I could
totally fix this by connecting a 33 ohm resistor between each of the
pairs' screen and inner. Just too damn lazy, I guess !

As for landlines, we once had three, now just one. The number we give
third parties is my mobile number, so I guess that we are part of the
transition. It took a long time for me (professional engineer) to
convince my wife that the broadband didn't need its own landline - and
then to convince her that we should integrate landline and internet with
one ISP to radically reduce costs.

We've saved several thousands, since - plus there's the benefit having
the phone available (almost) wherever we are.

Gotta go, three texts already this morning warning me that I'm overdrawn !!!


PA

On 23/04/2021 10:47, Tim Streater wrote:
On 23 Apr 2021 at 09:17:58 BST, Peter Able wrote:

Just to give an example of this, this PC is connected by twin, screened
cable to my hifi. It works fine - until I pull the jack out of the PC,
when I get a loud hum. Why - when it is, after all, just a couple of
metres of shielded wires?

The amplifier has a relatively high input impedance, so only a little
induced hum current manifests as quite a high voltage (Ohms Law).
Generally PC LINE OUT sockets expect to see about a 32 ohm load. I could
totally fix this by connecting a 33 ohm resistor between each of the
pairs' screen and inner. Just too damn lazy, I guess !

It's gonna be the jack, then, innit?

No, not at all

What happens if you use your fingers to
short the contacts on the jack? I'd bet that the hum goes away.

No it doesn't. In fact the hum increases - even when I have all three
parts of the plug squeezed between my thumb and finger. This makes
sense. I referred to this issue in my final paragraph. My thumb and
finger resistance if far greater then 33 ohms - so I increase the size
of the hum "aerial" considerably and offer very little reduction in the
line impedance. Result, more hum.

I'd also bet
it reduces as you move the jack away from the vicinity of the PC. The jack is
picking up hum from the PC.


No it doesn't. The induction is overwhelmingly in the 2 metres of
cable, not in the 0.02 metres of the jack plug - and it is not coming
from the PC. Leave the cable just lying around the room - and switch
off and unplug the PC - no difference.

PA

On 23/04/2021 12:44, Tim Streater wrote:
On 23 Apr 2021 at 11:40:39 BST, Peter Able wrote:

On 23/04/2021 10:47, Tim Streater wrote:
On 23 Apr 2021 at 09:17:58 BST, Peter Able wrote:

Just to give an example of this, this PC is connected by twin, screened
cable to my hifi. It works fine - until I pull the jack out of the PC,
when I get a loud hum. Why - when it is, after all, just a couple of
metres of shielded wires?

The amplifier has a relatively high input impedance, so only a little
induced hum current manifests as quite a high voltage (Ohms Law).
Generally PC LINE OUT sockets expect to see about a 32 ohm load. I could
totally fix this by connecting a 33 ohm resistor between each of the
pairs' screen and inner. Just too damn lazy, I guess !

It's gonna be the jack, then, innit?

No, not at all

What happens if you use your fingers to
short the contacts on the jack? I'd bet that the hum goes away.

No it doesn't. In fact the hum increases - even when I have all three
parts of the plug squeezed between my thumb and finger. This makes
sense. I referred to this issue in my final paragraph. My thumb and
finger resistance if far greater then 33 ohms - so I increase the size
of the hum "aerial" considerably and offer very little reduction in the
line impedance. Result, more hum.

I'd also bet
it reduces as you move the jack away from the vicinity of the PC. The jack is
picking up hum from the PC.

No it doesn't. The induction is overwhelmingly in the 2 metres of
cable, not in the 0.02 metres of the jack plug - and it is not coming
from the PC. Leave the cable just lying around the room - and switch
off and unplug the PC - no difference.

Well I'll be hornswoggled.


You clearly have been - now you know better.

Actually, quite impressed by u.d-i-y. When I post rigorous engineering
explanations and analysis, the responses, elsewhere, are often
completely wrong - and seasoned with personal abuse. The gap between
the actual and the self-perceived knowledge of these individuals is
quite breathtaking. Their manners/bigotry only too typical.

PA

Peter Able wrote:


Actually, quite impressed by u.d-i-y. When I post rigorous engineering
explanations and analysis, the responses, elsewhere, are often
completely wrong - and seasoned with personal abuse. The gap between
the actual and the self-perceived knowledge of these individuals is
quite breathtaking. Their manners/bigotry only too typical.

PA

Give it time, youll find plenty here too sadly.

Tim

--
Please don't feed the trolls

On 23 Apr 2021 13:44:41 GMT, Tim+ wrote:

Peter Able wrote:


Actually, quite impressed by u.d-i-y. When I post rigorous engineering
explanations and analysis, the responses, elsewhere, are often
completely wrong - and seasoned with personal abuse. The gap between
the actual and the self-perceived knowledge of these individuals is
quite breathtaking. Their manners/bigotry only too typical.

PA

Give it time, you’ll find plenty here too sadly.

Yes, Mr P*eler makes some truly erudite contributions :-)

On 23/04/2021 16:36, Scott wrote:
On 23 Apr 2021 13:44:41 GMT, Tim+ wrote:

Peter Able wrote:


Actually, quite impressed by u.d-i-y. When I post rigorous engineering
explanations and analysis, the responses, elsewhere, are often
completely wrong - and seasoned with personal abuse. The gap between
the actual and the self-perceived knowledge of these individuals is
quite breathtaking. Their manners/bigotry only too typical.

PA

Give it time, youll find plenty here too sadly.

Yes, Mr P*eler makes some truly erudite contributions :-)


Indeed, indeed - but I'm still quite impressed !

PA

On 24/04/2021 10:08, Peter Able wrote:
When I post rigorous engineering
explanations and analysis, the responses, elsewhere, are often
completely wrong -

That is probably because so far, your 'rigorous engineering analyses',
posted here, have been completely wrong...

--
€œIt is not the truth of Marxism that explains the willingness of
intellectuals to believe it, but the power that it confers on
intellectuals, in their attempts to control the world. And since...it is
futile to reason someone out of a thing that he was not reasoned into,
we can conclude that Marxism owes its remarkable power to survive every
criticism to the fact that it is not a truth-directed but a
power-directed system of thought.€�
Sir Roger Scruton

On Sat, 24 Apr 2021 10:08:19 +0100, Peter Able wrote:

On 23/04/2021 16:36, Scott wrote:
On 23 Apr 2021 13:44:41 GMT, Tim+ wrote:

Peter Able wrote:

Actually, quite impressed by u.d-i-y. When I post rigorous engineering
explanations and analysis, the responses, elsewhere, are often
completely wrong - and seasoned with personal abuse. The gap between
the actual and the self-perceived knowledge of these individuals is
quite breathtaking. Their manners/bigotry only too typical.

PA

Give it time, you’ll find plenty here too sadly.

Yes, Mr P*eler makes some truly erudite contributions :-)

Indeed, indeed - but I'm still quite impressed !

I am still trying to decide if he is a robot. Artificial intelligence
would be an overstatement though :-)

On 24/04/2021 11:20, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 24/04/2021 10:08, Peter Able wrote:
When I post rigorous engineering
explanations and analysis, the responses, elsewhere, are often
completely wrong -

That is probably because so far, your 'rigorous engineering analyses',
posted here, have been completely wrong...


When you going to respond to my earlier question?

PA