On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 04:10:17PM -0900, Ken Irving wrote:
> >> BTW, I agree a bit with an earlier poster that you a being a bit of a
> >> twat. This mailing list isn't really appropriate for epistemological
> >> discussions.
> >
> > Me, three.
>
> One more.
Hm, it's interesting to see how u
On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 06:36:58PM -0500, Napoleon wrote:
> Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
>> On Friday 2008 November 28 15:28, lee wrote:
>>> On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 04:13:21PM -0500, Andrew Reid wrote:
On Friday 28 November 2008 14:10, lee wrote:
> Is it even possible to measure a mere po
On Friday 28 November 2008 16:28, lee wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 04:13:21PM -0500, Andrew Reid wrote:
> > On Friday 28 November 2008 14:10, lee wrote:
> > > Is it even possible to measure a mere potential?
> >
> > You mean, in principle? Of course.
> >
> > Put your two wires of unknown p
On Friday 2008 November 28 17:36, Napoleon wrote:
> Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
> > On Friday 2008 November 28 15:28, lee wrote:
> >> On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 04:13:21PM -0500, Andrew Reid wrote:
> >>> On Friday 28 November 2008 14:10, lee wrote:
> Is it even possible to measure a mere potent
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
On Friday 2008 November 28 15:28, lee wrote:
On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 04:13:21PM -0500, Andrew Reid wrote:
On Friday 28 November 2008 14:10, lee wrote:
Is it even possible to measure a mere potential?
You mean, in principle? Of course.
It takes energy to defec
lee wrote:
On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 04:48:59PM -0500, Napoleon wrote:
lee wrote:
On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 02:43:28PM -0500, Napoleon wrote:
lee wrote:
Is it even possible to measure a mere potential?
Of course. That's what voltage is.
Hm, true, voltage is impossible without current flowing b
On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 04:24:18PM -0600, Kent West wrote:
> I'm no EE, and I may be wrong about this, but I think you're confusing
> "voltage" (difference in potential) with "volt" (a specific amount of
> difference in potential).
You are right, I confused that, sorry.
--
"Don't let them,
>
>
>
> Original Message
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
>Subject: Re: OT: volt and current (ALSA sound recording frustration)
>Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2008 17:16:47 -0200
>
>>lee escreveu:
>>> On Fri, Nov 28, 200
On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 04:14:16PM -0600, lee wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 04:48:59PM -0500, Napoleon wrote:
> > lee wrote:
> >> On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 02:43:28PM -0500, Napoleon wrote:
> >>> lee wrote:
> Is it even possible to measure a mere potential?
> >>> Of course. That's what volta
lee wrote:
On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 04:48:59PM -0500, Napoleon wrote:
lee wrote:
On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 02:43:28PM -0500, Napoleon wrote:
lee wrote:
Is it even possible to measure a mere potential?
Of course. That's what voltage is.
Hm, true, vol
On Friday 2008 November 28 15:28, lee wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 04:13:21PM -0500, Andrew Reid wrote:
> > On Friday 28 November 2008 14:10, lee wrote:
> > > Is it even possible to measure a mere potential?
> >
> > You mean, in principle? Of course.
>
> It takes energy to defect particles o
On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 04:48:59PM -0500, Napoleon wrote:
> lee wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 02:43:28PM -0500, Napoleon wrote:
>>> lee wrote:
Is it even possible to measure a mere potential?
>>> Of course. That's what voltage is.
>>
>> Hm, true, voltage is impossible without current flow
Ken Irving wrote:
On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 01:10:32PM -0600, lee wrote:
On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 06:59:06PM +, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
A voltmeter has two connectors and shows the potential differences
between them.
This is unlike an Ampermeter that shows the current flowing through it.
If y
lee wrote:
On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 02:43:28PM -0500, Napoleon wrote:
lee wrote:
Is it even possible to measure a mere potential?
Of course. That's what voltage is.
Hm, true, voltage is impossible without current flowing because of how
voltage is defined. No current <--> no voltage, and volt
On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 12:19:13PM -0900, Ken Irving wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 01:10:32PM -0600, lee wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 06:59:06PM +, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> >
> > > A voltmeter has two connectors and shows the potential differences
> > > between them.
> > >
> > > This
On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 04:13:21PM -0500, Andrew Reid wrote:
> On Friday 28 November 2008 14:10, lee wrote:
> > Is it even possible to measure a mere potential?
>
> You mean, in principle? Of course.
>
> Put your two wires of unknown potential difference at
> opposite ends of an evacuated t
On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 01:10:32PM -0600, lee wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 06:59:06PM +, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
>
> > A voltmeter has two connectors and shows the potential differences
> > between them.
> >
> > This is unlike an Ampermeter that shows the current flowing through it.
>
> If
On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 02:43:28PM -0500, Napoleon wrote:
> lee wrote:
>> Is it even possible to measure a mere potential?
>
> Of course. That's what voltage is.
Hm, true, voltage is impossible without current flowing because of how
voltage is defined. No current <--> no voltage, and voltage is
s
On Friday 28 November 2008 14:10, lee wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 06:59:06PM +, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> > A voltmeter has two connectors and shows the potential differences
> > between them.
> >
> > This is unlike an Ampermeter that shows the current flowing through it.
>
> If you have a mu
lee wrote:
On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 06:59:06PM +, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
A voltmeter has two connectors and shows the potential differences
between them.
This is unlike an Ampermeter that shows the current flowing through it.
If you have a multimeter that can measure voltage or current, bo
On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 13:10:32 -0600, lee wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 06:59:06PM +, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
>
> > A voltmeter has two connectors and shows the potential differences
> > between them.
> >
> > This is unlike an Ampermeter that shows the current flowing through it.
>
> If y
lee escreveu:
> On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 06:59:06PM +, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
>
>
>> A voltmeter has two connectors and shows the potential differences
>> between them.
>>
>> This is unlike an Ampermeter that shows the current flowing through it.
>>
>
> If you have a multimeter that can m
On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 06:59:06PM +, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> A voltmeter has two connectors and shows the potential differences
> between them.
>
> This is unlike an Ampermeter that shows the current flowing through it.
If you have a multimeter that can measure voltage or current, both
mode
23 matches
Mail list logo
