A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Techniques
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Fun with exponents



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #191  
Old May 30th 20, 09:55 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Andre Jute[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,422
Default Fun with exponents

On Saturday, May 30, 2020 at 3:17:56 AM UTC+1, Joy Beeson wrote:
On Thu, 28 May 2020 13:07:14 -0700, Jeff Liebermann
wrote:

I get a pop-up for creating an account. After removing the
related cookies, when I hit refresh, the pop-up appears again after 15
seconds. So, I speed read, refresh, speed read, etc. Sigh.


Viewing "no style" removes pop-ups, or at least stops them from
covering what you are trying to read.

Some pop-ups disable keyboard access to the view menu, but the mouse
can get around them.

--
Joy Beeson
joy beeson at comcast dot net
http://wlweather.net/PAGEJOY/


If you have a Mac or at least use the Safari Browser, in the address bar there is on the left a few parallel lines. Clicking this icon gives you a "reading" version, larger text, out to the margins of the window or tablet (well, it works on all my iPads -- I don't have any other tablets), with no sidebars or superimposed advertising.

Andre Jute
I'm not paying to have my blood pressure elevated
Ads
  #192  
Old May 30th 20, 03:19 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Radey Shouman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,747
Default Fun with exponents

John B. writes:

On Fri, 29 May 2020 21:58:39 -0400, Radey Shouman
wrote:

John B. writes:

On Fri, 29 May 2020 20:42:32 -0400, Radey Shouman
wrote:

John B. writes:

On Fri, 29 May 2020 12:56:00 -0400, Radey Shouman
wrote:

Frank Krygowski writes:

On 5/28/2020 8:32 PM, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 28 May 2020 15:40:36 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

On 5/28/2020 3:00 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
AMuzi writes:

On 5/27/2020 7:21 PM, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 27 May 2020 11:42:30 -0500, AMuzi
wrote:

On 5/27/2020 11:29 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/27/2020 11:42 AM, wrote:
On Tuesday, May 26, 2020 at 7:17:19 PM UTC-7, Jeff
Liebermann wrote:
On Tue, 26 May 2020 15:18:53 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

On Tuesday, May 26, 2020 at 10:46:36 AM UTC-7, Jeff
Liebermann wrote:
On Tue, 26 May 2020 08:30:38 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

I have a very low respect for doctors because so few
of them
want to be competent. Top of the list in that category
is Dr. Fauci
of the CDC who has continually acted an expert at
things he knows
very little about.

Dr Fauci has been director of the NIAID (National
Institute of Allergy
and Infectious Diseases) since 1984. He does NOT work
for the CDC.
NIAID is part of the NIH (National Institute of
Health). He's has
been involved with controlling several previous
epidemics, which I
presume qualifies as experience:
https://www.niaid.nih.gov/about/anthony-s-fauci-md-bio
https://www.niaid.nih.gov/about/director
https://www.niaid.nih.gov/about/niaid-history

Can you provide the name of someone in the US who is
better qualified
to discuss pandemics than Dr Fauci?

There is a place for those who sit around, think and
read papers.
I do not deny Fauci that much. But he is not working in
the real world
as many other epidemiologists are and they often
interview them on
FOX and they ALL say what I've been saying. There isn't
much you can
do about a pandemic with a linear growth rate.

I see. You want to be advised on how to protect yourself
from a viral
epidemic by an epidemiologist via Fox News. I don't
think that's what
you intended to say, but that's what you wrote. You also
seem to have
changed your position on Dr Fauci from:

"Dr. Fauci of the CDC(sic) who has continually acted an
expert at things he knows very little about."

to:

"I do not deny Fauci that much."

That's quite a change from calling the leading expert on
infectious
diseases in the US an incompetent, to not denying him
something you
didn't bother to specify. Of course, you're entitled to
have an
opinion about anyone and anything, but I'm also entitled
to discount
your opinion as rubbish. Anyway, kindly stabilize your
opinion about
Dr Fauci. If it's critical, please provide the name of
someone in the
US that is equally or more qualified to advise on how to
handle a
pandemic. Incidentally, I could probably provide some
names in China
that are substantially more qualified and equally
experienced, but
such experts would not be considered as candidates for
advising our
president, who knows more than any or all of them,
Here's one
candidate that might have qualified had he not resigned
for having is
bureau eliminated by the Trump administration:
"A top pandemic expert is leaving the Trump
administration amid the
coronavirus crisis"
https://www.businessinsider.com/top-pandemic-expert-leaving-the-trump-administration-amid-coronavirus-2020-5



No bicycle related content this time. Sorry(tm).

--
Jeff Liebermann

150 Felker St #D
http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

The leading expert? Jeff, that is about the most foolish
thing that you could say. Fauci is NOT an expert. Sitting
around in hallowed halls of government does NOT make you
an expert. The epidemiologists in the field say the
opposite and that you like some sort of moron deny that
they know anything for the simple reason that they are
interviewed on FOX shows that you are nothing more than
some stupid biased punk.

Your homework, Tom:

!) Find or assemble a CV for Dr. Anthony Fauci. I say that
because you obviously know very, very little about him.

2) Find or assemble a CV for the guy you allude to whom Faux
News managed to dig up.

Analyze and compare those to prove to us that your guy with
his predictable complaints is more qualified than Fauci.

We'll even give bonus points for a little more work:

3) Give us your own CV. Show us why we should listen to your
opinions on epidemiology... and history, genetics, theology,
ballistics, human anatomy, politics, engineering, medicine,
sociology, geology, meteorology, technology, etc. You know -
all the other things about which you, as a high school
dropout, claim to be much smarter than hundreds of trained,
experienced, and recognized experts.


Fauci is probably a successful agency administrator and
political survivor who knows something but surely not
everything. Dr John Ionnidis who's no slouch in the area has
different opinions but gets no media traction:

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...ge-establishm/

And yet, countries that did institute a lock down, in a
timely manner,
have noticeably lower cases and deaths.
(please note the phrase "timely manner")


Italy did and lost many. Japan did not and lost few.
Sweden is not out of line to her neighbors and yet still has some GDP
remaining.

There's no correlation. You can imply one as you will but it's not
clear at all that such relationship exists.

You might like this article from the Financial Times:

https://www.ft.com/content/6b4c784e-...2-648ffde71bf0

They show excess mortality statistics for countries where they are
available, and plot versus infections per million on
"lockdown day". In
the absence of a legal lockdown, they use the day when transit usage
fell to 50% of pre-pandemic levels. It's not clear to me
how comparable
the "infections per million" figures are, given the wide variation of
testing capabilities over space and time.

They claim to find a correlation between early lockdown and
lower excess
deaths, but their points are very widely scattered.

Spain comes off worst in excess mortality, followed by the
UK, and then
Italy.

Food for thought:
https://www.ft.com/content/6b4c784e-...2-648ffde71bf0


Regarding testing, I read a report yesterday interviewing
RNs who have tested both positive and negative on different
days, back and forth, for weeks.

I don't know but I'm reasonably certain that any conclusion
based on large population testing is inaccurate.

BTW I'm not disagreeing with you generally, just stopping
short of accepting ratios dependent on current testing.

I have read several news articles stating that some of the testing
does not give accurate results.
https://www.healthline.com/health-ne...u-have-illness
https://abc7.com/covid-19-coronaviru...-core/6112137/
https://www.11alive.com/article/news...4-2297526c0cc0

Yes, as at least one of the articles stated, all lab tests give some
false positives and some false negatives. And interpreting those
results can be mathematically surprising, as the computation known as
Bayes Theorem shows. The less common the disease, the weirder the
math.

Accuracy of the tests is the least of the problem; the big issue is
sampling bias. As far as I can tell, in the US only people that go out
of their way to be tested are -- this is not a random sample at all, and
not representative of the population. There have been a few studies
that tried to sample deliberately, eg on all residents of a Boston
homeless shelter. That one showed a very high number of asymptomatic
cases.


This article has an example:
https://math.hmc.edu/funfacts/medica...bayes-theorem/

But from what I read the U.S. has conducted nearly 17 million tests,
at least 4 times that of any other country except Russia.

Was it all a waste of time and money?

Depends on what you want to do. If you want a good estimate of the
proportion of the total population that is infected, then yes, mostly a
waste of time and money.

Oh! and I thought that the U.S. was, well, bragging about all the
tests. More than any other country in the world.

Here (Thailand) they will only test those who exhibit some symptoms of
the disease. Elevated temperature usually.


In either Thailand or the US estimating the total number of cases is not
the first object of testing.


I don't know about the U.S. but here is used to determine whether you
will be admitted to the hospital.


So if you don't feel sick, you don't get tested. Same here.
  #193  
Old May 30th 20, 06:49 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 884
Default Fun with exponents

On Saturday, May 30, 2020 at 1:46:44 AM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
On Friday, May 29, 2020 at 11:51:59 PM UTC+1, John B. wrote:
On Fri, 29 May 2020 08:36:42 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Thursday, May 28, 2020 at 3:30:53 AM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
On Wednesday, May 27, 2020 at 6:04:58 PM UTC+1, AMuzi wrote:

Further to my last reply, I am not an expert. I do not work
in relevant fields nor read much beyond general coverage and
Science News.

Science? What you want science for? "Science" says we're all already burnt to a frazzle in the global warming.

However, confidence in CDC (and most Governors) is lacking
out here among the population of punished innocents:

https://www.theblaze.com/op-ed/horow...e-is-the-media

Journalists are all "scientists" too. It is in the interest of the Donkey Party to ramp up the media's hysterical fear-mongering, so the media as the publicity department of the Donkey Party are pleased to call themselves, irresponsibly ramp up the fear. Compare the way the media has thugged on Ron de Santis of Florida, by an objective account a very successful governor in these dangerous times, with the way they have idolized Andrew Cuomo, whose cruel (and stupid, and criminal) decisions aggravated matters in New York State. (I'm not even talking about Mayor de Blasio, whose incompetence is murderous.)

I understand that government employees relaxing at home with
full pay and retirees have a much less urgent interest than
people running out of resources right now.

I'm used to sitting in an elegant if somewhat dusty room (I subscribe to the Sherlock Holmes theory of filing -- I know from the depth of the dust on a stack of papers how urgent they must be) starting at a bare (well, actually wallpapered in restful Regency browny-pink stripes with a polished picture rail) or out of the window at the magpies squabbling in the eucalyptus trees. I didn't even notice the first lockdown until it was two weeks in and my wife mentioned it to me when I offered to take her to lunch at a fave restaurant. The police and the Red Cross bring our medicines (and the pharmacy staff anyway picked up prescriptions and delivered medicines before the Wuhan Virus; just another service they offer), the shops we always patronized bring our groceries as they always did, and we hardly notice that there's a problem.

But I'm an economist as well as an artist, and a valid question arises: Considering that the majority of the victims of the Wuhan Virus were elderly and presumably out of the workforce, and that dumb political decisions like Governor Cuomo stuffing sick people back into rest homes, aggravated their chances of dying of the virus, was the lockdown warranted? That is, would the hospitals really have been overwhelmed? If the answer is yes, then no lockdown could easily have led to much larger economic damage -- ask yourself the economic value of an orderly society, which you clearly lose at some point in an out-of-control pandemic. So, the economic damage without a lockdown could have been larger. Emphasis on *could*. That must be weighed against this: without the economic damage of any lockdown (or one starting earlier or later, and for shorter or longer), how many more old people would have died, short of the total breakdown of society I
described earlier in this paragraph? That's the sort of awful and awesome decision democracies elect their chief executives to take.* The present operating conditions of decision-makers is the starkest reminder you can imagine of the historical reality that economics isn't a science (as the mathematical branches insist), but a specialized branch of philosophy.

Good luck with sorting out the reasonable reality from the politics that has since the beginning bedeviled even hard counts, never mind speculative points such as those I just raised.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

Andre Jute
Just as well Mr Trump is a man of action rather than being given to overly much cogitation -- personally, if I were President, I'd hightail it to Canada or England or Australia and offer to be Prime Minister, because their collective-Cabinet-responsibility shares the blame for any decisions in such a loss-loss situation.

Several years ago there was an especially heavy Arctic ice extent. Since these things are cyclic it shouldn't surprise anyone. But there appeared a strong southerly wind that is somewhat unusual. This blew the icepack a mile offshore and immediately the "environmentalists" flocked to the Alaskan northern shore and began taking pictures which they have ever since used to "prove" that global warming is real and exists. How they thought that they could get away with turning a near record ice extent into a total lack of ice in the Arctic ocean only they know. But the public in general didn't fall for it but the articles in Science News have gotten more and more shrill. I think that it was just this last winter they announced that Svalsberg, Norway, was ice free for the first winter on record. Perhaps they should have consulted with the Svalsberg authorities since they had almost record depths of ice there and for the first time in many years could not get off of the island by sea.

I have come to the conclusion that science has died. My wife was a teacher and yesterday she started reading a Tarzan novel from the 1930's. She said that she seriously doubts that people under the age of 40 could even read it. The English is so proper, the grammar so correct that even she has to read every word and not skim them like she does most paperbacks these days.

Watched Funny Girl the other night. This was so phony and belittled reality that one has to wonder why this film was ever made. Fanny Brice was a huckster and she was married before her boyfriend the con artist. Together they attempted to work many cons. Her third husband was Billy Rose the producer and gay guy.

Wouldn't an account of Queen Elizabeth have been far more romantic?

I don't know about you but I have had it with Hollywood gays promoting immorality because they recognize that if they can make it common they wouldn't be criticized as much.

Consider this - 40% of the economy of the "shelter in place" states has disappeared and will take years to recover. This drives the suicide rates up. Paul Ehrlich, a moronic and virtually criminally insane, tenured professor at Stanford in the 1980's was promoting putting sterility agents into reservoirs and poison into food supplies sent to third world countries in order to control what he termed "The Population Bomb". Isn't this virtually the same thing?


Of course it is, you fool. It is the Yellow Buffoon in the White House
trying to eliminate all the Democrats so he can be re-elected.
(and it's taken you all these months to realize it)
--
cheers,

John B.


Are you color-blind as well as a shortass, Slow Johnny? There's nothing yellow about Mr Trump. He is exactly the opposite of a coward.


It doesn't surprise me that some bum living in Thailand has opinions about a President for which he gets his information from the Lame Stream Media. I was somewhat dumbfounded about all of the children posters on a comment section talking about Trump shutting down freedom of the press when he did exactly the opposite with Twitter. His executive order made them able to be sued for censoring information as they so commonly do. No threats, no misinformation and often references for all of it and Twitter will censor it because it doesn't meet their political standards.
  #194  
Old May 30th 20, 06:50 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 884
Default Fun with exponents

On Saturday, May 30, 2020 at 7:19:42 AM UTC-7, Radey Shouman wrote:
John B. writes:

On Fri, 29 May 2020 21:58:39 -0400, Radey Shouman
wrote:

John B. writes:

On Fri, 29 May 2020 20:42:32 -0400, Radey Shouman
wrote:

John B. writes:

On Fri, 29 May 2020 12:56:00 -0400, Radey Shouman
wrote:

Frank Krygowski writes:

On 5/28/2020 8:32 PM, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 28 May 2020 15:40:36 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

On 5/28/2020 3:00 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
AMuzi writes:

On 5/27/2020 7:21 PM, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 27 May 2020 11:42:30 -0500, AMuzi
wrote:

On 5/27/2020 11:29 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/27/2020 11:42 AM, wrote:
On Tuesday, May 26, 2020 at 7:17:19 PM UTC-7, Jeff
Liebermann wrote:
On Tue, 26 May 2020 15:18:53 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

On Tuesday, May 26, 2020 at 10:46:36 AM UTC-7, Jeff
Liebermann wrote:
On Tue, 26 May 2020 08:30:38 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

I have a very low respect for doctors because so few
of them
want to be competent. Top of the list in that category
is Dr. Fauci
of the CDC who has continually acted an expert at
things he knows
very little about.

Dr Fauci has been director of the NIAID (National
Institute of Allergy
and Infectious Diseases) since 1984. He does NOT work
for the CDC.
NIAID is part of the NIH (National Institute of
Health). He's has
been involved with controlling several previous
epidemics, which I
presume qualifies as experience:
https://www.niaid.nih.gov/about/anthony-s-fauci-md-bio
https://www.niaid.nih.gov/about/director
https://www.niaid.nih.gov/about/niaid-history

Can you provide the name of someone in the US who is
better qualified
to discuss pandemics than Dr Fauci?

There is a place for those who sit around, think and
read papers.
I do not deny Fauci that much. But he is not working in
the real world
as many other epidemiologists are and they often
interview them on
FOX and they ALL say what I've been saying. There isn't
much you can
do about a pandemic with a linear growth rate.

I see. You want to be advised on how to protect yourself
from a viral
epidemic by an epidemiologist via Fox News. I don't
think that's what
you intended to say, but that's what you wrote. You also
seem to have
changed your position on Dr Fauci from:

"Dr. Fauci of the CDC(sic) who has continually acted an
expert at things he knows very little about."

to:

"I do not deny Fauci that much."

That's quite a change from calling the leading expert on
infectious
diseases in the US an incompetent, to not denying him
something you
didn't bother to specify. Of course, you're entitled to
have an
opinion about anyone and anything, but I'm also entitled
to discount
your opinion as rubbish. Anyway, kindly stabilize your
opinion about
Dr Fauci. If it's critical, please provide the name of
someone in the
US that is equally or more qualified to advise on how to
handle a
pandemic. Incidentally, I could probably provide some
names in China
that are substantially more qualified and equally
experienced, but
such experts would not be considered as candidates for
advising our
president, who knows more than any or all of them,
Here's one
candidate that might have qualified had he not resigned
for having is
bureau eliminated by the Trump administration:
"A top pandemic expert is leaving the Trump
administration amid the
coronavirus crisis"
https://www.businessinsider.com/top-pandemic-expert-leaving-the-trump-administration-amid-coronavirus-2020-5



No bicycle related content this time. Sorry(tm).

--
Jeff Liebermann

150 Felker St #D
http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

The leading expert? Jeff, that is about the most foolish
thing that you could say. Fauci is NOT an expert. Sitting
around in hallowed halls of government does NOT make you
an expert. The epidemiologists in the field say the
opposite and that you like some sort of moron deny that
they know anything for the simple reason that they are
interviewed on FOX shows that you are nothing more than
some stupid biased punk.

Your homework, Tom:

!) Find or assemble a CV for Dr. Anthony Fauci. I say that
because you obviously know very, very little about him.

2) Find or assemble a CV for the guy you allude to whom Faux
News managed to dig up.

Analyze and compare those to prove to us that your guy with
his predictable complaints is more qualified than Fauci.

We'll even give bonus points for a little more work:

3) Give us your own CV. Show us why we should listen to your
opinions on epidemiology... and history, genetics, theology,
ballistics, human anatomy, politics, engineering, medicine,
sociology, geology, meteorology, technology, etc. You know -
all the other things about which you, as a high school
dropout, claim to be much smarter than hundreds of trained,
experienced, and recognized experts.


Fauci is probably a successful agency administrator and
political survivor who knows something but surely not
everything. Dr John Ionnidis who's no slouch in the area has
different opinions but gets no media traction:

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...ge-establishm/

And yet, countries that did institute a lock down, in a
timely manner,
have noticeably lower cases and deaths.
(please note the phrase "timely manner")


Italy did and lost many. Japan did not and lost few.
Sweden is not out of line to her neighbors and yet still has some GDP
remaining.

There's no correlation. You can imply one as you will but it's not
clear at all that such relationship exists.

You might like this article from the Financial Times:

https://www.ft.com/content/6b4c784e-...2-648ffde71bf0

They show excess mortality statistics for countries where they are
available, and plot versus infections per million on
"lockdown day". In
the absence of a legal lockdown, they use the day when transit usage
fell to 50% of pre-pandemic levels. It's not clear to me
how comparable
the "infections per million" figures are, given the wide variation of
testing capabilities over space and time.

They claim to find a correlation between early lockdown and
lower excess
deaths, but their points are very widely scattered.

Spain comes off worst in excess mortality, followed by the
UK, and then
Italy.

Food for thought:
https://www.ft.com/content/6b4c784e-...2-648ffde71bf0


Regarding testing, I read a report yesterday interviewing
RNs who have tested both positive and negative on different
days, back and forth, for weeks.

I don't know but I'm reasonably certain that any conclusion
based on large population testing is inaccurate.

BTW I'm not disagreeing with you generally, just stopping
short of accepting ratios dependent on current testing.

I have read several news articles stating that some of the testing
does not give accurate results.
https://www.healthline.com/health-ne...u-have-illness
https://abc7.com/covid-19-coronaviru...-core/6112137/
https://www.11alive.com/article/news...4-2297526c0cc0

Yes, as at least one of the articles stated, all lab tests give some
false positives and some false negatives. And interpreting those
results can be mathematically surprising, as the computation known as
Bayes Theorem shows. The less common the disease, the weirder the
math.

Accuracy of the tests is the least of the problem; the big issue is
sampling bias. As far as I can tell, in the US only people that go out
of their way to be tested are -- this is not a random sample at all, and
not representative of the population. There have been a few studies
that tried to sample deliberately, eg on all residents of a Boston
homeless shelter. That one showed a very high number of asymptomatic
cases.


This article has an example:
https://math.hmc.edu/funfacts/medica...bayes-theorem/

But from what I read the U.S. has conducted nearly 17 million tests,
at least 4 times that of any other country except Russia.

Was it all a waste of time and money?

Depends on what you want to do. If you want a good estimate of the
proportion of the total population that is infected, then yes, mostly a
waste of time and money.

Oh! and I thought that the U.S. was, well, bragging about all the
tests. More than any other country in the world.

Here (Thailand) they will only test those who exhibit some symptoms of
the disease. Elevated temperature usually.

In either Thailand or the US estimating the total number of cases is not
the first object of testing.


I don't know about the U.S. but here is used to determine whether you
will be admitted to the hospital.


So if you don't feel sick, you don't get tested. Same here.


It is probably better that you don't get tested. Who knows that use that the Democrats would do to a test that shows that you once had covid-19.

  #195  
Old May 30th 20, 07:18 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Jeff Liebermann
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,018
Default Fun with exponents

On Fri, 29 May 2020 22:17:53 -0400, Joy Beeson
wrote:

On Thu, 28 May 2020 13:07:14 -0700, Jeff Liebermann
wrote:

I get a pop-up for creating an account. After removing the
related cookies, when I hit refresh, the pop-up appears again after 15
seconds. So, I speed read, refresh, speed read, etc. Sigh.


Viewing "no style" removes pop-ups, or at least stops them from
covering what you are trying to read.

Some pop-ups disable keyboard access to the view menu, but the mouse
can get around them.


Good idea and thanks.

No Style is a feature in MS Internet Exploder 11. I don't use IE11.
View - Style - No style

In Firefox, the "reader view" icon in the address bar works and the
article is readable (but is missing all photos).

For Chrome, a browser extension is required. There are about 10 such
extension on the Chrome store web pile. I tried this one, and it
works:
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/reader-view/ecabifbgmdmgdllomnfinbmaellmclnh
Right click, select "Switch to Reader View".

Edge is the MS replacement for IE11 and is based on Chrome. The
aforementioned Chrome extension worked when I tried it.




--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D
http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
  #196  
Old May 30th 20, 08:02 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Jeff Liebermann
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,018
Default Fun with exponents

On Thu, 28 May 2020 19:14:08 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

A bit of Internet wandering shows the groups I could not
remember are thermoplatic and thermoset, the latter being
generally less volatile. There's a NASA paper on outgassing
tests in vacuum for materials used in outer space. Also,
some indication that both thermoplastic urethanes and
thermoset urethanes can have low volatility. It's not such a
bright line between groups as I thought.


The distinction between thermoplastic and thermosetting is that
heating thermoplastic turn it back into a liquid, while heating
thermosetting will cause it to burn or decompose, but not melt. For
example epoxy, silicone, polyurethane, Bakelite, and phenolic are
thermosetting, while the various styrene and polyethylene based
plastics are thermoplastic. There are plastics, such polyester and
urethanes, which have variations that can be either thermoplastic or
thermosetting. Water bottles are usually some form of PE
(polyethylene) and are therefore thermoplastic.

I mentioned the NASA outgassing web site in my previous rant in this
thread:
https://outgassing.nasa.gov
I noticed that LDPE doesn't outgas very much, which makes me wonder
about the outgassing explanation for how it deteriorates.

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D
http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
  #197  
Old May 30th 20, 08:45 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,538
Default Fun with exponents

On 5/29/2020 8:55 PM, John B. wrote:
I thought that the U.S. was, well, bragging about all the
tests. More than any other country in the world.


Well, one weird guy and those deluded by him may be bragging about all
the U.S. COVID tests. But please don't equate him or them with the
country as a whole.


--
- Frank Krygowski
  #198  
Old May 30th 20, 09:47 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
AnotherJim
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7
Default Fun with exponents

I'm hesitant to step into this mud war, but here's a straightforward graph, compiled from government data by Yale Medical school:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graph...ss-deaths-may/

It compares COVID 19 deaths and total recent deaths to expected deaths from historical data. It shows that COVID 19 deaths in excess of expected flu, etc., deaths and that the COVID 19 tabulations are most likely underestimated.

Jim

  #199  
Old May 30th 20, 11:13 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
jOHN b.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,421
Default Fun with exponents

On Sat, 30 May 2020 08:54:43 +0100, Tosspot
wrote:

On 29/05/2020 23.51, John B. wrote:

snip

Of course it is, you fool. It is the Yellow Buffoon in the White House
trying to eliminate all the Democrats so he can be re-elected.
(and it's taken you all these months to realize it)


Point of order, Orange. As in

https://transparent-aluminium.net/wp...st-Signs-2.jpg


Hmmmm Red in this picture
https://www.bangkokpost.com/world/19...-ties-with-who
--
cheers,

John B.

  #200  
Old May 30th 20, 11:14 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
jOHN b.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,421
Default Fun with exponents

On Sat, 30 May 2020 09:09:30 +0100, Tosspot
wrote:

On 30/05/2020 01.55, sms wrote:
On 5/29/2020 3:56 PM, John B. wrote:

snip

But from what I read the U.S. has conducted nearly 17 million tests,
at least 4 times that of any other country except Russia.


But per capita the U.S. is way behind.

Nothing funny about Covid-19 but the lies by Trump are still interesting
to see.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52493073



A whole cottage industry has sprung up fact checking the draft dodger,
but I fear it will need to be industrialised to keep up.


I thought Twitter was keeping him in line?
--
cheers,

John B.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:36 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.