From: Hammo on 8 Feb 2007 08:56
On 9/2/07 12:34 AM, in article
> "Nev.." <idiot(a)mindless.com> wrote:
>> I think you've been reading too many physics books and you've lost sight
>> of reality. Are you saying that if I measure something once per second
>> and then multiply that by 3600 my result is not an accurate measure of an
>> hourly rate? Do you think the computer controlling the fuel rate just
> No; it actuates the injector the exact amount that it's been told to for the
> conditions it's measured.
> It then displays the exact mpg (L/Hr, Km per kilojoule or whatever) that's
> it's been told to display too.
> But it doesn't have any idea what a litre actually is and it certainly
> doean't have any ability to actually measure one!
It's measured, but it can't measure?
From: atec "atec77 on 8 Feb 2007 08:58
Andrew McKenna wrote:
> sharkey wrote:
>> Andrew McKenna <NOcmorSPAM3047(a)NObigpond.SPAMnet.au> wrote:
>>> I think your critics are thinking of their bicycles with dynamo
>>> powered headlights :-) More electrical load might make you discover
>>> that you need to push harder to achieve the same results but there's
>>> no way the dynamo itself gets harder to spin.
>> What? You need to push harder to spin it but it doesn't get harder to
> No, you need to push harder to get the result if you add electrical
> load. It cannot possibly get harder to spin.
Now thats wrong in so many ways .
From: Nev.. on 8 Feb 2007 09:01
> "Nev.." <idiot(a)mindless.com> wrote in
>> G-S wrote:
>>> We have flow rate meters at work that are sensitive enough to measure
>>> this effect.
>> So does my car.
> In your dreams perhaps.
>> It doesn't measure any change.
> That's 'cos it's not sensitive enough to measure this effect.
You're the one who suggested the people should go out to their garage
and perform the experiment for themselves with their cars. :)
From: Dale Porter on 8 Feb 2007 15:53
"Hammo" <hbaj2006(a)aapt.net.au> wrote
>> Yes I agree; evaporation cause waste too.
>> Why are pretending that the quantity affects whether that's true or not?
> ....no-one expects a Spanish inquisition, in fact those that do......
> ..and waste suggests that someone has determined the amount, and attributed
> it to being something that is significant.
That it has been attributed to being something that is significant was merely your assumption.
>Plus there are situations where
> it is bollocks.
Equally there are situations where it is not bollocks and where quantity is irrelevant, no matter how much you throw a tanty, stamp
your feet and proclaim it to be so..
> Cos it's all about ME! (and Dale is getting sooky).
I must have hit a nerve there if you've resorted to dragging it throughout the thread. You still haven't cottoned on to intentions
and what I was on about in the first place with that comment. C'mon Hammo, it's obvious if you think about it. Keep trying.
Maybe I should have given you a smiley face to help you.
GPX250 -> CBR600 -> VTR1000 + VT250F-J
From: Peter Cremasco on 8 Feb 2007 16:16
On Thu, 08 Feb 2007 13:04:45 GMT, "Knobdoodle" <knobdoodle(a)hotmail.com>
>"MrMoped" <MrMoped49(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>> Simple physics really! When switched on, the headlamp assembly pushes the
>> light beams forward (this is particularly noticable in the absence of
>> daylight), this is called an action. So using Newtons third law which
>> states that for every action there must be an equal and opposite reaction,
>> the same force applied by the headlamp to push the light beams is then
>> also applied to the vehicle, pushing it back! Extra petrol is used to
>> overcome the force applied by the headlamps.
>But you've got red ones pushing you from behind and EVERYONE knows red ones
No no no! You need blue paint at the back, and red paint at the front.
Blue light has more energy than red, so the blue light reflecting
backwards would push you forward faster than the red light reflecting
from the front could push you back. Sheesh!
PeterC [aka MildThing]
'01 Yamaha FJR1300