Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+Conservation\s+of\s+Energy\!\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+Conservation\s+of\s+Energy\!\s*$/: 20 ]

Total 20 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [Amps] Conservation of Energy! (score: 1): Author: Colin Lamb <k7fm@teleport.com>; Date: Sun, 6 Dec 2009 06:06:41 -0800 (GMT-08:00); I was listening a few moments ago in the Extra Class section of 40 meters and two US hams were talking about amps. One has an amp wired for 120. The other ham said that he would not even think about; /archives//html/Amps/2009-12/msg00154.html (7,581 bytes)
2. Re: [Amps] Conservation of Energy! (score: 1): Author: George <K4GVT@comcast.net>; Date: Sun, 06 Dec 2009 09:17:37 -0500; WATTS did he say :-) Truly a grim reality showing a lack of technical ability in a hobby that is based on being technically astute! I hope they never open their amp's. 73, George K4GVT ______________; /archives//html/Amps/2009-12/msg00155.html (7,799 bytes)
3. Re: [Amps] Conservation of Energy! (score: 1): Author: "Bill W5WVO" <w5wvo@cybermesa.net>; Date: Sun, 6 Dec 2009 08:03:22 -0700; [Sigh] Ham radio hasn't been "based on being technically astute" in a long time. The FCC currently states that the sole reason for license examinations is to try to ensure that licensees can operate; /archives//html/Amps/2009-12/msg00159.html (9,817 bytes)
4. Re: [Amps] Conservation of Energy! (score: 1): Author: "Carl" <km1h@jeremy.mv.com>; Date: Sun, 6 Dec 2009 10:25:04 -0500; Bless the ARRL and FCC for opening the flood gates of incompetence. Thats a goodly part of the reason I rarely operate HF SSB, except for a new country, and spend most of my carbon credits on AM and; /archives//html/Amps/2009-12/msg00160.html (8,795 bytes)
5. Re: [Amps] Conservation of Energy! (score: 1): Author: "K1TTT" <K1TTT@ARRL.NET>; Date: Sun, 06 Dec 2009 15:33:21 +0000; Well, actually you could make some argument that running on 120v instead of 240v increases the I^2R losses in both the transformer and power line to the amp. But I doubt that you would notice that in; /archives//html/Amps/2009-12/msg00161.html (7,691 bytes)
6. Re: [Amps] Conservation of Energy! (score: 1): Author: "WA3GIN" <wa3gin@comcast.net>; Date: Sun, 6 Dec 2009 10:47:25 -0500; Bill, True enough, but like most everything else the government attempts to do, it has never been in the lead with regard to the detailed development of any effort in any venue. In our case the FCC s; /archives//html/Amps/2009-12/msg00162.html (10,456 bytes)
7. Re: [Amps] Conservation of Energy! (score: 1): Author: "Mike" <noddy1211@sbcglobal.net>; Date: Sun, 6 Dec 2009 08:08:11 -0800; Maybe those are special guys, and are billed in the Amps they use and not Kilowatt hours like the rest of us: -) Actually running the amp on 240vac maybe could cost more in the long run because the A; /archives//html/Amps/2009-12/msg00164.html (8,933 bytes)
8. Re: [Amps] Conservation of Energy! (score: 1): Author: "Carl Clawson" <carlclawson@verizon.net>; Date: Sun, 06 Dec 2009 08:10:06 -0800; There is another aspect to this sad yet funny tale, which is rampant in our society: innumeracy. People generally have no sense of magnitudes or estimation skills. When the newspaper accidentally pri; /archives//html/Amps/2009-12/msg00165.html (8,323 bytes)
9. Re: [Amps] Conservation of Energy! (score: 1): Author: "Gary Smith" <wa6fgi@sbcglobal.net>; Date: Sun, 6 Dec 2009 09:02:04 -0800; How in the H did these guys pass their lower class licensees ??? This is basic Ohm's law for Pete's sake !! 73, Gary...wa6fgi I was listening a few moments ago in the Extra Class section of 40 meters; /archives//html/Amps/2009-12/msg00166.html (8,881 bytes)
10. Re: [Amps] Conservation of Energy! (score: 1): Author: "Jim Forsyth" <mail@jimforsyth.com>; Date: Sun, 6 Dec 2009 09:20:17 -0800; Hmm, sounds like you don't know what Ohms law is. Jim, AF6O _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps; /archives//html/Amps/2009-12/msg00167.html (9,642 bytes)
11. Re: [Amps] Conservation of Energy! (score: 1): Author: Roger <sub1@rogerhalstead.com>; Date: Sun, 06 Dec 2009 15:31:08 -0500; When working in the shop I leave the rig on some where between 7.150 and 7.165. 40 is still behaving much like 20 in the higher portion of the sunspot cycle, but it does it in the middle of the night; /archives//html/Amps/2009-12/msg00175.html (10,644 bytes)
12. Re: [Amps] Conservation of Energy! (score: 1): Author: Roger <sub1@rogerhalstead.com>; Date: Sun, 06 Dec 2009 15:47:58 -0500; It's higher than that in California as I've seen reports of up to 38 cents per KWH during peak demand. Here it's roughly 10 cents per KWH At the legal limit of 1500 PEP out and a 20% duty cycle you a; /archives//html/Amps/2009-12/msg00176.html (10,794 bytes)
13. Re: [Amps] Conservation of Energy! (score: 1): Author: Jeff Carter <amps@hidden-valley.com>; Date: Sun, 6 Dec 2009 16:28:33 -0500; I hope they do. Jeff/KD4RBG _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps; /archives//html/Amps/2009-12/msg00177.html (8,528 bytes)
14. Re: [Amps] Conservation of Energy! (score: 1): Author: Manfred Mornhinweg <manfred@ludens.cl>; Date: Sun, 06 Dec 2009 18:56:41 +0000; The dumbness around can be astonishing. In my neck of the woods (Chile), there is a new fashion among hams. They found out that 100 watt radios don't produce a constant 100W output on SSB, but do so; /archives//html/Amps/2009-12/msg00180.html (9,410 bytes)
15. Re: [Amps] Conservation of Energy! (score: 1): Author: "Bill, W6WRT" <dezrat1242@yahoo.com>; Date: Sun, 06 Dec 2009 17:38:28 -0800; ORIGINAL MESSAGE: REPLY: Thanks for posting that, Dave, you beat me to it. Those guys on 40 meters are right. Other things being equal, for a given power output, running anything off 240 volts is mor; /archives//html/Amps/2009-12/msg00182.html (9,112 bytes)
16. [Amps] Conservation of Energy! (score: 1): Author: Dennis OConnor <ad4hk2004@yahoo.com>; Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2009 04:48:17 -0800 (PST); Whilst doing a search on super capacitors (just a bit of self education on a device I know little about), I came across chat groupies on the topic who believe that super capacitors provide more energ; /archives//html/Amps/2009-12/msg00187.html (6,944 bytes)
17. Re: [Amps] Conservation of Energy! (score: 1): Author: donroden@hiwaay.net; Date: Mon, 07 Dec 2009 11:27:30 -0600; And the losses due to the heating...... how do they reclaim the heat and the losses ? Don WA4NPL _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@contesting.com http://lists.con; /archives//html/Amps/2009-12/msg00194.html (8,179 bytes)
18. Re: [Amps] Conservation of Energy! (score: 1): Author: "Bill, W6WRT" <dezrat1242@yahoo.com>; Date: Mon, 07 Dec 2009 12:30:01 -0800; ORIGINAL MESSAGE: REPLY: Junk science is everywhere, even occasionally on this reflector. :-) 73, Bill W6WRT _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@contesting.com http; /archives//html/Amps/2009-12/msg00197.html (8,079 bytes)
19. Re: [Amps] Conservation of Energy! (score: 1): Author: Steve Thompson <g8gsq@f2s.com>; Date: Mon, 07 Dec 2009 23:04:41 +0000; The original discussion revolved around 120V costing twice as much. That's a lot of I^2R! Steve _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@contesting.com http://lists.con; /archives//html/Amps/2009-12/msg00201.html (8,885 bytes)
20. Re: [Amps] Conservation of Energy! (score: 1): Author: "Bill, W6WRT" <dezrat1242@yahoo.com>; Date: Mon, 07 Dec 2009 16:15:52 -0800; ORIGINAL MESSAGE: REPLY: You're right, it isn't double but it is more - a little. 73, Bill W6WRT _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@contesting.com http://lists.con; /archives//html/Amps/2009-12/msg00206.html (8,438 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1]