Re: Compulsory low-energy light-bulbs


"Mark Horton" <markhorton2@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:ets32r$4ug$2@xxxxxxxxxxx
M.I.5¾ wrote:

"Mark Horton" <markhorton2@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:etp34c$d3n$1@xxxxxxxxxxx

M.I.5¾ wrote:


"Mark Horton" <markhorton2@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:etoksr$81v$4@xxxxxxxxxxx


Aaron B wrote:



"Mark Horton" <markhorton2@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:etog0o$81v$1@xxxxxxxxxxx



Although I doubt you will, as to put it in a nutshell. Cynic and I
are correct, and you are not.




Has anyone thought off the idea that the effect might be visible to
MI53/4 because for some reason his brain is able to detect stobing at
a frequency lower than the vast majority of the populous?


It's not the frequency that's in question. It's the fact that he claims
that normal incandescent lights produce a marked stroboscopic effect
(ie rotating objects appearing stationary) when they do not.

The effect would be more marked if the bulb was an extremely low
Wattage type (like 5W).

And a stroboscopic effect would be observed if the bulb was fed from an
unsmoothed half wave rectifier, so that it would make objects rotating
at 3,000 rpm, look stationary, as the bulb would be flickering at 50Hz
due to the fact that there was no negative half cycle. Giving time
enough for the bulb to cool sufficiently to stop glowing.

But since the bulb will flicker at 100 times a second with a normal UK
ac supply of 50Hz, there is not enough time for the bulb to cool down
sufficiently to stop glowing. So there will not be a true stroboscopic
effect.

Merely a mild synchronous "capture" where the object will not look
stationary, but will look "odd".



Look sunshine, my turntable sits next to a table lamp with a 60 watt
filament bulb in it. The strobe effect of the strobe pattern around the
rim is very visible and stationary. It is just as visible if I turn the
table lamp off and rely on the light from the 100 watt bulb in the lamp
in the ceiling. Neither you, the HSE nor any fancy mathematics can
change that. It's a fact - accept it. I grant you that if you use a
fluoresent lamp instead the bars are more distict, but no more
staionary.


Well you certainly cannot argue with dumb logic like that. M.I.5 3/4 is
right. Everyone else wrong. End of. Forget physics, forget the facts.
Forget everything else, except that M.I.5 3/4 is right, always! Tell me
oh guru! Is the earth still flat where you live?



Look sunshine, hy don't you f***ing well try it for yourself?

Have done years ago. All that happened was there was a mildly synchronous
effect observed on part of the platter. There was certainly never any full
stroboscopic effect.

I work in an industry where people often come up with proofs that
something we have been doing for years s impossible.


What as? Space Cadet in the Twilight Zone? Or as a bodge merchant in a
backstreet death trap?


I work in the design and manufacture of aircraft. Such industry cannot
afford to have such people in it. I would not employ you as people who have
a fixed blinkered vision and are unable to appreciate that there is science
outside of their little bubble are of no use to anyone - certainly not in
this business.

You have decided that you have got some dubious proof that something is
impossible, therefore anyone who observes it must be lying.

Aerodynamics can prove that the bumble bee cannot possibly fly. His small
wings cannot possibly generate anything like the lift necessary to get his
large body off the ground. So if you say that you have ever seen a bumble
bee flying then you must be a liar - I can prove it. The plain reality is
that practice frequently doesn't follow the rules laid down by theory. The
bumble bee never studied aerodynamics so he carries on flying. (This is
known as 'the plight of the bumble bee').

Why do you think that lathes have incandescent bulbs fitted to the chuck
lamp? It's not there to make the lathe look pretty. It's there to make
sure that the lathe chuck does not appear frozen at high speed due to
stroboscopic effects from fluorescent lighting.


Fluoresent lighting is considered by the HSE to make rotating machinery
appear as though it is stationary (at the right speed) to the point of not
moving. A filament lamp can also make it appear stationary, but the
blurring of the visible image makes it clear to the brain that it really is
moving. In practice the blurring from a fluorescent lamp wouldn't convince
me either, but the blurring is somewhat less marked. If fluoresent lighting
completely went out between half cycles, it would still blur as it is lit
for a large part of the cycle. It doesn't completely go out because of
phosphorescence of the fluoresent coating. Turn off a fluoresent lamp in a
completely darkened room. You will discover that the light fall off is
exponential over some considerable time (minutes). Or have you got some
proof that is impossible as well?


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Compulsory low-energy light-bulbs
    ... Has anyone thought off the idea that the effect might be visible to MI53/4 because for some reason his brain is able to detect stobing at a frequency lower than the vast majority of the populous? ... It's the fact that he claims that normal incandescent lights produce a marked stroboscopic effect when they do not. ... And a stroboscopic effect would be observed if the bulb was fed from an unsmoothed half wave rectifier, so that it would make objects rotating at 3,000 rpm, look stationary, as the bulb would be flickering at 50Hz due to the fact that there was no negative half cycle. ... It is just as visible if I turn the table lamp off and rely on the light from the 100 watt bulb in the lamp in the ceiling. ...
    (uk.legal)
  • Re: Compulsory low-energy light-bulbs
    ... that normal incandescent lights produce a marked stroboscopic effect (ie ... The effect would be more marked if the bulb was an extremely low Wattage ... my turntable sits next to a table lamp with a 60 watt ... table lamp off and rely on the light from the 100 watt bulb in the lamp in ...
    (uk.legal)
  • Re: Compulsory low-energy light-bulbs
    ... It's the fact that he claims that normal incandescent lights produce a marked stroboscopic effect when they do not. ... And a stroboscopic effect would be observed if the bulb was fed from an unsmoothed half wave rectifier, so that it would make objects rotating at 3,000 rpm, look stationary, as the bulb would be flickering at 50Hz due to the fact that there was no negative half cycle. ... The strobe effect of the strobe pattern around the rim is very visible and stationary. ... It is just as visible if I turn the table lamp off and rely on the light from the 100 watt bulb in the lamp in the ceiling. ...
    (uk.legal)
  • Re: Compulsory low-energy light-bulbs
    ... that normal incandescent lights produce a marked stroboscopic effect (ie ... The effect would be more marked if the bulb was an extremely low Wattage ... my turntable sits next to a table lamp with a 60 watt ... The strobe effect of the strobe pattern around the rim ...
    (uk.legal)
  • Re: LED light results -- short
    ... It's a spiral tube lamp. ... I don't know where one could get this exact bulb but there is a flood ... quartz halogen with only 13 watts' draw (this includes the 10 watts to ...
    (rec.outdoors.rv-travel)
Loading