Again, a demonstration of knowledge from advertising and emotion. One should know that simple stuff long before denying and attacking. Those most easily brainwashed only understand accusation and personal attacks. MW (watts) is not energy.

6kV exists when something (ie magic power strip protector) foolishly tries to 'block' or 'absorb' a surge. If he reads with intent to learn, then he knows an effective protector never 'blocks' or 'absorbs' a surge. But once brainwashing from advertising takes hold, then reality cannot be learned.

Effective protection is at least 50,000 amps. Then hundreds of thousands of joules (destructive surges) dissipate harmlessly outside. Then even a protector is not damaged. Effective protectors are not rated in joules. Scams are.

If not yet obvious, energy is measured in joules. Power is measured in watts. Effective solutions are measures in amps. Anyone who learned from honest sources would have grasped that simple concept long ago. Brad Humphrey wants to attack and demean. So he *knows* 60MW is energy. He could learn from Richard Harrison, Colin Bayliss, and the so many others who discuss well proven science; were not brainwashed by hearsay, wild speculation, a nasty attitude, and advertising.

Emotions replaced knowledge here long ago. These same people foolishly knew Saddam had WMDs, communists were conspiring in the State Department, and Jews were vermon. They only know what they are first ordered to believe. Somehow watts measure energy - because fables said so.

Don Kelly (another educated by science - not fables) discusses why so little energy can be obtained from lightning:

Since power plants output impressive values (tens of thousands of volts and hundreds of thousands of amps), then those inch diameter, high tension, power cables are instantly destroyed by hundreds of megawatts - using Brad Humphrey's reasoning. One should learn how the world works rather than recite parables. As if megawatts magically measure energy.

Turn in that elementary school graduation certificate. He did not earn it. Or he is only getting senile and nasty.

*Yawn*

Is this real life?

Is this just fantasy?

Caught in a landslide

No escape from reality

And somehow we're back on that topic, lol

Open your eyes
Look up to the skies and see
I'm just a poor boy, I need no sympathy

Because I'm easy come, easy go
A little high (6kV), little low (5VDC).

Since that is the topic. When lightning destroys...

That sound you keep hearing is the jokes flying over your head


But thank you, by comparison you have made Ernie look normal.

:-)



I just looked at westom's profile after noticing he's not open to RC Mail. He also doesn't give an email address. I'm reminded of when I signed up here at RC. Several people seemed to be hiding behind anonymity to carp at others and generally be irritating, and I chose to use my name and show who I am. If people had comments, personal or public, they could communicate them.

And I'm reminded of the Zen story:

I'll bet westom would say that's us. His personal choice to cut off all feedback from us, even in private, makes me think this is him.

Whatever. It's always interesting when he writes.

Neither I nor you have relevance here. Only the science has relevance when one is being logical like an adult. The emotional need to see a face or have some kind of emotional connection. Everything about this topic is openly discussed, well published, is defined by numbers, and can be learned from science even a century ago.

If you want to post insults, then you obviously are a target audience also for talk show wackos who tell you how to feel - who also cannot be bothered with facts and reality.

Topic is clear and obvious - When lightning destroys... When lightning destroys, a human (who is typically so emotional as it even believe advertising) is the reason for that damage. Lightning damage is typically traceable to human mistakes.

Direct lightning strikes without damage are routine when a homeowner spends about $1 per appliance for the superior and easily installed solution. Other similar solution may have averted that pictured damage.

Most here, based upon mockery and denial, clearly are too emotional to learn. And may even foolishly spend tens or even 100 times more money on solutions that do not even claim to be effective. Deny. Too bad. Because they cannot even stay focused on the topic - which was never you nor me nor that wacko extremist who keep posting insults.

Original picture is classic when lightning creates a follow-through current. One can learn from professionals who discuss it. That means discussing the topic. Or one can deny emotionally because they never learned this stuff before. That is what adults do when inspired only by their emotions. Deny. Your choice. Stay on topic. Or waste time on the irrelevant such as who someone is.

What is it about guys named Wes?

Scary

Obviously informed. He does not waste bandwidth attacking the messenger. He posts well proven technology with always required reasons why and numbers.

Why did so many demonstrate so much contempt for the American soldier? Most were ordered to believe Saddam had WMDs. Most ignored facts and numbers that said otherwise. So 5,000 Americans died for no useful purpose. Because most only entertain their emotions, post insults, and never demand what must always exist to have honesty: conclusions that only discuss technology tempered by well proven science and numbers.

How many are so ill informed as to attack a messenger rather than learn the facts? Plenty here. So many never learned what was taught in school science and from obvious lessons from history - ie Saddam's WMDs.

That picture is a classic example of damage from a follow-through current. As discussed by so many professionals even in published engineering books.

One should not hang one's hat on a person with the same name unless one knows details about that person. You've just said that you think a guy who happens to be named Wes was obviously informed. In fact he was uniniformed and really couldn't think logically about futureproofing audio/video installations.


Which, as I have pointed out, don't seem to have made it to the internet. You would have done well to EXPLAIN this concept from your lofty perch. We invite and appreciate people who share information we haven't heard of! I believe you shared two, one might consider it three, words: follow-through current. Writing three words is not sharing. Please share in the future.