HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rkimm@ameris.ameritech.com (Robert L. Kimmel)
Subject: Re: Celsius and Farenheit Scale Determination
Organization: Ameritech, Hoffman Estates, IL
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 19:01:16 GMT

mcp@netcom.com (Craig Presnell) writes:

>An interesting historical question came up in physics class
>today concerning the determination of the Farenheit temperature
>scale. The celsius scale was determined by making 0 degrees the
>same as freezing water, and 100 degrees equal to boiling water and
>equally dividing the points in between. Apparently Farenheit had the
>same idea, but wanted something colder to be 0 degress, so alcohol
>and ice were used. The question is, what was used to determine the
>upper end of the scale ?

>Several text books were researched, but nothing came up.

>Thanks for all replies!

The totally unauthorized, unverified version I had heard is that 100 F
was supposed to be body temperature (it's a little bit off).

BK
From: "al sorhaindo" <al.sorhaindo@execnet.com>
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
Subject: champagne bottles won
Date: 9 Jan 93 04:43:44 EST
Reply-To: "al sorhaindo" <al.sorhaindo@execnet.com>
Distribution: alt
Organization: Executive Networks Information

F->    Subject: Champagne bottles won't go flat with spoons?


This question just appeared in the Science Q & A column of the 
"New York Times."  (January 5, 1993, Science section)

I just glanced at the answer.

The columnist's reply was along the lines of, "The spoon probably will
not increase the life of the bubbles, but it would be fun to experiment!"
He then went on to propose a scientific test which would naturally
include drinking the champagne.
---
  DeLuxe 1.21 #11688  
--
Executive Network Information System  (914) 667-4567
International ILink Host
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
From: polowin@chem.queensu.ca (Joel Polowin)
Subject: Re: Celsius and Farenheit Scale Determination
Organization: Dept. of Chemistry, Queen's University
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 16:23:56 GMT

In article <1993Jan12.150027.13866@kakwa.ucs.ualberta.ca> DMARTIN@vm.ucs.UAlberta.CA writes:
>> From: mcp@netcom.com (Craig Presnell)
>> equally dividing the points in between. Apparently Farenheit had the
>> same idea, but wanted something colder to be 0 degress, so alcohol
>> and ice were used. The question is, what was used to determine the
>> upper end of the scale ?
>
>Body temperature, or so I understand. With a "normal" body temperature of
>98.6, calling it 100 isn't that far off.

From _A History of Chemistry_ by J.R. Partington, Vol. 2, p. 747:

  Daniel Gabriel Fahrenheit (Danzig, 14 May 1686 - in Holland, 16
  September 1736) was the first to produce consistently reading
  thermometers, first filled with spirit of wine, later with mercury
  (1714-15), and introduced a temperature scale.  In 1724 he gave
  the freezing point of water as 32', the boiling-point at 28 in.
  mercury pressure 212', the body temperature 96', and 0' the
  temperature of a mixture of ice, water, and sal ammoniac or
  common salt...

Joel Polowin
polowin@silicon.chem.queensu.ca, polowin@chem.queensu.ca,
polowinj@qucdn.queensu.ca
Xref: sparky alt.folklore.science:4570 sci.physics:22152 sci.electronics:22087 sci.energy:6661
From: rlcarr@animato.network23.com (Rich Carreiro)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science,sci.physics,sci.electronics,sci.energy
Followup-To: alt.folklore.science
Subject: Tesla Coil
Distribution: world
X-NewsSoftware: GRn 1.16f (10.17.92) by Mike Schwartz & Michael B. Smith
Date: 6 Jan 93 00:21:46 EST
Organization: The Other Side of Life

Hello.
A few questions on Tesla Coils...

(1) What's the theory of operation of them?  As I understand it, they
    are high-voltage, high-frequency sources.  How the high voltage is
    obtained is obvious; the heard of the thing is an air-core step-up
    transformer.  But where does the high frequency come in?  Is it as
    simple as feeding the output of a high-frequency oscillator into an
    air-core transformer with a high step-up ratio, or is it more complicated?
    I vaguely remember hearing something that a capacitor was needed; that 
    the capacitor and the primary coil formed an LC circuit that resonated
    at the desired high frequency.  Then a high-voltage source (like a
    transformer to drive neon tubes)  and a spark gap is used to energize
    the LC circuit; since the spark will have output at many frequencies,
    including the resonant freq. of the LC circuit.  Thus the 
    capacitor-primary coil circuit resonates and that is stepped up to
    a respectable voltage in the secondary.
    Am I totally out to lunch?  How does it really work?

(2) Anyone have a schematic for a Tesla coil?  Even if it doesn't have
    actual component values, a symbolic schematic would be nice.

(3) Anyone actually have instructions on how to build one?  I'd like to
    be able to build a coil that could throw off 6-inch to 1-foot sparks.
    Is this unrealistic?

(4) As for more mundane high voltages, what's a good place to get something
    to push 120 Volts to say, 15-20KVolts?  I've heard that transformers that
    drive neon lights (like in bars and stores) are good for this.  Are there
    any other sources?   Where do science museums get the transformers they
    use for things like Jacob's Ladder displays, for example?

(5) And yes, I realize how dangerous some of this stuff can be.

(6) Please email -- if there is interest, I'll summarize to the net.

Thanks in advance -- I appreciate any help you all can give.

-- 
Rich Carreiro                                  Home: (401)841-8514
rlcarr@animato.network23.com
uunet.uu.net!animato!rlcarr
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
From: baylor@NEBULA.SSD.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM
Subject: Re: Celsius and Farenheit Scale Determination
Reply-To: baylor@NEBULA.SSD.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM
Organization: LMSC, Sunnyvale, California
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 23:20:23 GMT

In article <1993Jan12.150027.13866@kakwa.ucs.ualberta.ca>, DMARTIN@vm.ucs.UAlberta.CA writes:
>> From: mcp@netcom.com (Craig Presnell)
>> equally dividing the points in between. Apparently Farenheit had the
>> same idea, but wanted something colder to be 0 degress, so alcohol
>> and ice were used. The question is, what was used to determine the
>> upper end of the scale ?
>
>Body temperature, or so I understand. With a "normal" body temperature of
>98.6, calling it 100 isn't that far off.

The story I'd heard was that the lower limit, at zero, was a mixture 
of ice, water and salt (brine), and the upper limit (at 8 dozen
degrees -- 96) was "the temperature of healthy Englishman, taken
in the armpit." (Armpit temperatures are about 1 degree F lower than
oral, which are about 1 degree F lower than rectal). I think there may 
have been some adjustments later when it was discovered that the 
freezing and boiling point of water were almost exactly 180 degrees
different.
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science,sci.physics,sci.electronics,sci.energy
From: Jeffrey Luszcz <jrl2@cornell.edu>
Subject: Re: Tesla Coil
X-Xxdate: Wed, 6 Jan 93 12: 05:20 GMT
Nntp-Posting-User: jrl2@cornell.edu
Organization: Cornell University
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1.1d7
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 18:01:42 GMT

In article <rlcarr.09j9@animato.network23.com> Rich Carreiro,
rlcarr@animato.network23.com writes:
>(4) As for more mundane high voltages, what's a good place to get
something
>    to push 120 Volts to say, 15-20KVolts?  I've heard that transformers
that
>    drive neon lights (like in bars and stores) are good for this.  Are
there
>    any other sources?   Where do science museums get the transformers
they
>    use for things like Jacob's Ladder displays, for example?
>

 In high school (in my much stupider days) we used an old oil
burner transformer and two metal coat hangers to make a jacobs 
latter.
    
        \    *    /
         \ {   }/
          \     /
            \ /
         [ oil ]

    
  Worked pretty well and I old was only shocked once. 

   -Jeff Luszcz
    cc2x@vax5.cit.cornell.edu
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
From: jbm@hal.trl.OZ.AU (Jacques Guy)
Subject: Re: Champagne bottles won't go flat with spoons?
Organization: Telecom Research Labs, Melbourne, Australia
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1993 02:02:44 GMT


Someone asked "But would it work with a fork, a knife?"

And someone else: "Does it need to be an alcoholic beverage?  
Would it work with a 2L of Pepsi or Coke?"

My heart bleeds at the thought of those destitute people, who can't 
afford a fork, a knife, a bottle of beer, and one of Coke, and try
it out themselves.

These are hard times, hard times.

Would the fortunate owners of knifes and forks please team up
with the few rich enough to afford a bottle each of beer, Coke,
and Pepsi, and tell our two penniless fellow-netters?
From: mcp@netcom.com (Craig Presnell)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
Subject: Celsius and Farenheit Scale Determination
Date: 12 Jan 93 03:08:55 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)

An interesting historical question came up in physics class
today concerning the determination of the Farenheit temperature
scale. The celsius scale was determined by making 0 degrees the
same as freezing water, and 100 degrees equal to boiling water and
equally dividing the points in between. Apparently Farenheit had the
same idea, but wanted something colder to be 0 degress, so alcohol
and ice were used. The question is, what was used to determine the
upper end of the scale ?

Several text books were researched, but nothing came up.

Thanks for all replies!


-- 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
><         Craig Presnell          ><    mcp@netcom.netcom.com     >< 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
From: DMARTIN@vm.ucs.UAlberta.CA
Subject: Re: Celsius and Farenheit Scale Determination
Organization: University Of Alberta, Edmonton
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 14:56:34 GMT

> From: mcp@netcom.com (Craig Presnell)
> equally dividing the points in between. Apparently Farenheit had the
> same idea, but wanted something colder to be 0 degress, so alcohol
> and ice were used. The question is, what was used to determine the
> upper end of the scale ?

Body temperature, or so I understand. With a "normal" body temperature of
98.6, calling it 100 isn't that far off.
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
From: mcampbel@cs.ucf.edu (Mike Campbell )
Subject: Re: Champagne bottles won't go flat with spoons?
Organization: University of Central Florida
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 13:47:05 GMT

judson@watserv.ucr.edu (Mike Judson) writes:

>> 
>> >I missed the past discussion. I have tried the spoon trick with a bottle
>> >of beer, and it did work. The beer was not flat 24 hours after the spoon
>> >was put in. I don't think it would last for days, but the spoon definitely
>> >prolonged the beers carbonated life (so to speak). I too want to know,
>> >how does it work?

>But would it work with a fork?  Or a knife?

Does it need to be an alcoholic beverage?  Would it work with a 2L of
Pepsi or Coke?
Lines: 29
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 15:27:16 MST
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
From: $stephan@sasb.byu.edu (Stephan Fassmann, Software)
Subject: Re: Celsius and Farenheit Scale Determination
Organization: BYU

In article <1993Jan12.030855.26809@netcom.com> mcp@netcom.com (Craig Presnell) writes:
>From: mcp@netcom.com (Craig Presnell)
>Subject: Celsius and Farenheit Scale Determination
>Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 03:08:55 GMT
>An interesting historical question came up in physics class
>today concerning the determination of the Farenheit temperature
>scale. The celsius scale was determined by making 0 degrees the
>same as freezing water, and 100 degrees equal to boiling water and
>equally dividing the points in between. Apparently Farenheit had the
>same idea, but wanted something colder to be 0 degress, so alcohol
>and ice were used. The question is, what was used to determine the
>upper end of the scale ?
>
>Several text books were researched, but nothing came up.
>
>Thanks for all replies!
>
>
>-- 
>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
>><         Craig Presnell          ><    mcp@netcom.netcom.com     >< 
>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Well, according to my Chem teacher the bottom end of the scale was set by 
the ice cream industry, the coldest you could get with ice and salt. The 
upper end was set by the medical profession, the average fever temperature 
of a cold. I don't know if this is acurate but it seems likely for some 
reason.

Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
From: jbm@hal.trl.OZ.AU (Jacques Guy)
Subject: Re: Champagne bottles won't go flat with spoons?
Organization: Telecom Research Labs, Melbourne, Australia
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 23:22:59 GMT

frank@rover.uchicago.edu (Frank - Hardware Hacker - Borger) writes:


>	The hypothesis is very simple. The spoon must interfere with the
>	nucleation process. Hypothesis expansion follows:

>	A/ Spoon collects bubbles (we've all seen this,) and slows down the
>	   rate of bubble formation by trapping the bubbles due to increased
>	   surface tension.

>	B/ Spoon collects bubbles, and resultant supply of microscopic dust
>	   particles which are sources of nucleation. (Normally after bubble
>	   bursts, dust particle drops down, becomes source of another bubble,
>	   but particle adheres to spoon, no longer is active nucleation site.)

>	Ok folks, now what?

I am no physicist, alas, but, in case A/, what would cause the increase in
surface tension? The handle of the spoon does not normally touch the
surface of the liquid. (This is probubbly a silly remark of mine, in
my unwashed ways, I'd think that the spoon touching the liquid would
decrease surface tension...)

I used to, still do, think that it had to do with ionization -- a sort
of weak electrolytic effect. But again, I am a complete ignoramus in
those matters. It's curiosity that prevents me from keeping my mouth
shut.
From: rauchfuss@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Brian Rauchfuss)
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 22:35:33 GMT
Subject: Re: Malthusians are mistaken
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science

In alt.folklore.science, dani@netcom.com (Dani Zweig) writes:

> jfe7w@fulton.seas.Virginia.EDU (John Fletcher Elder):
> >In poor countries with subsistence farming and low industry, children
> >are early on a net asset, able to help in the fields and home.
> 
> I've seen this statement literally dozens of times.  Alt.folklore.science
> is as good a place for it as any.  Beyond "everybody knows", is there any
> evidence for it?  If arable land is in short supply and labor is not,
> then it would be at least as plausible to argue that children are *not*
> a net asset early on.

Actually a slightly altered version is true:  In lands where agricultural land
is commonly owned, more children will mean more food when they get old enough
to work the land.  Where land is privately owned, more children will not mean a
bigger harvest.  Scientific American had a paper on this a couple of years
back, looking at population controls and countries where they were complete
failures.  I do not have any information on non-agriculturally based societies.

> Dani Zweig
> dani@netcom.com
> 
>    God helpe the man so wrapt in Errours endless traine  -- Edmund Spenser

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Brian Rauchfuss (Smokefoot)  "... the world could change in the blink
brian@hpfcbdr.fc.hp.com           of an eye."
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
From: tobis@skool.ssec.wisc.edu (Michael Tobis)
Subject: Re: Champagne bottles won't go flat with spoons?
Organization: U.Wis.-Madison; Atmospheric & Oceanic Sciences
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 04:49:42 GMT

In article <1993Jan4.224119.8039@trl.oz.au>, jbm@hal.trl.OZ.AU (Jacques Guy) writes:
|> 
|> It works. To paraphrase a well-known saying, the proof of the
|> bubbling is in the drinking. So try it. Better still, test
|> it. You'll need two fridges, same size, same make, either
|> empty or loaded with exactly the same contents. Two bottles
|> of champagne or sparkling wine, opened at the same time
|> and same temperature. Drink half of each (or pour half of
|> each out into the sink if you're religion forbids you 
|> touching the stuff). Now put each bottle into one fridge
|> and wait 24 hours. Take them out, look, pour a glass
|> from each, look at the rise of the bubbles, taste them.

Why do I need two refrigerators? (And didn't you forget the spoon?)

mt

Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
From: jbm@hal.trl.OZ.AU (Jacques Guy)
Subject: Re: Champagne bottles won't go flat with spoons?
Organization: Telecom Research Labs, Melbourne, Australia
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 22:50:43 GMT

tobis@skool.ssec.wisc.edu (Michael Tobis) writes,
about my experimental conditions for assessing the
effect of spoons on bubbly stuff:


>Why do I need two refrigerators? (And didn't you forget the spoon?)

It's a short story, even though this topic is old. At least
a year ago there was the same discussion, perhaps on another
newsgroup, and some smartass from the CSIRO (an Australian
agronomical research centre), riled me about carrying out
a controlled experiment, with two bottles open, one with
a spoon, another without, in the same fridge. 

Nothing irks me more than people who will say "that can't 
be true" before even trying. And, in this particular case,
it's neither expensive (beer will do), nor requires fine
measuring apparatus: you just cannot miss the difference,
after 24 hours. Champagne gone flat is champagne gone flat,
period, whereas the one with a spoon in it, 24 hours later,
is still as sparkling as it was the moment you poured.

But the fellow in question insisted on a controlled experiment.
So I mailed back to him: "Yes, by all means, we must carry
out a controlled experiment. However, we mustn't put both
bottles in the same fridge. Who knows if the presence of
a spoon in one bottle does not affect the other? So we
need two fridges. Further, they must be loaded with exactly
the same foodstuff, in the same positions, and kept 
precisely at the same temperatures [here followed a list
of the necessary apparatus, and, among the foodstuff needed,
I'd listed truffles, foie gras, caviar...]. Last but not
least, a scientific experiment must be repeatable. Doing
it once is just not right. So, as soon as you've kindly
provided me with two cases each of a variery of French,
Australian, Spanish, Rumanian, and Californian champagne,
and sufficient quantities of the foodstuffs listed about,
two frost-free fridges (1200 litres) of identical make 
and model..... I shall carry out this much needed controlled
experiment, and let you know the results obtained."

I'm still waiting for the Dom Perignon, truffles, foie gras,
and, even, the necessary frost-free fridges. 

Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
From: cad28526@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Chuck Douglas)
Subject: Re: Champagne bottles won't go flat with spoons?
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 23:33:58 GMT

judson@watserv.ucr.edu (Mike Judson) writes:

>In article <5JAN199311091764@rover.uchicago.edu> frank@rover.uchicago.edu  
>(Frank - Hardware Hacker - Borger) writes:
>> In article <1993Jan4.225818.8575@cssc-syd.tansu.com.au>,  
>mos@cssc-syd.tansu.com.au (Michael O'Sullivan) writes...
>> >rf@cl.cam.ac.uk (Robin Fairbairns) writes:
>> 
>> >I missed the past discussion. I have tried the spoon trick with a bottle
>> >of beer, and it did work. The beer was not flat 24 hours after the spoon
>> >was put in. I don't think it would last for days, but the spoon definitely
>> >prolonged the beers carbonated life (so to speak). I too want to know,
>> >how does it work?

>But would it work with a fork?  Or a knife?

It might work with a fork.  You would probably have problems with the
knife becuase it would slip all the way into the bottle.  It seems to
me that the spoon is used because it is far easier to remove from the
bottle when you want to start drinking again (the bowl of the spoon
won't go down the neck.  A knife might.  For that matter, a fork might
go down the next if it is too small.)
-- 
Chuckers -- a computer operator/programmer/benthic sorter/emaciated aryan.
cad28526@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu	          |"You know I'll give you everything
Novanet:  douglas/o/nova douglas/cerl/nova|I've got for a little peace of mind!"
douglas-cerl OR douglas-o@nova.novanet.org|--"I'm So Tired" by The Beatles
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
From: hketola@agsm.ucla.edu (Heikki Ketola)
Subject: Champagne bottles won't go flat with spoons?
Date: 3 Jan 93 21:57:59 PST

I guess this is the season in the Western World to address this
important question that puzzles the hell out out of me.

If you cannot finish a bottle of champagne you might want to recap the
bottle.  Presumably we all have tried that once,  and I guess we left
it at that  -it is hard to recap a champagne bottle.  So what can you
do?  You certainly don't want to waste the bottle by leaving it open
-it would taste like a can of flat Coke the next day.

I have observed people from both the US and Germany solving this
problem this way:  they stick a spoon (handle down) in the champagne
bottle and claim without a blink of the eye that the spoon prevents
the  champagne from going flat.  Mind you,  with any stretch of
imagination you cannot call the spoon a tight fit.

Do you folks believe in this?  I can't believe that it works,  but
then being a cheapskate I am I haven't done any empirical experiments
either. It just cannot work  -or can it?

Heikki
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
From: rf@cl.cam.ac.uk (Robin Fairbairns)
Subject: Re: Champagne bottles won't go flat with spoons?
Organization: U of Cambridge Computer Lab, UK
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 12:30:47 GMT

In article <hketola.726126290@uclagsm>, hketola@agsm.ucla.edu (Heikki Ketola) writes:
|> If you cannot finish a bottle of champagne you might want to recap the
|> bottle.  Presumably we all have tried that once,  and I guess we left
|> it at that  -it is hard to recap a champagne bottle.  So what can you
|> do?  You certainly don't want to waste the bottle by leaving it open
|> -it would taste like a can of flat Coke the next day.

Actually, (proper) champagne tends to go flat rather slowly.  I've
heard that there is some sort of compound formed between the alcohol
and the carbon dioxide (hydrogen bonding would seem to me to be the
only obvious candidate).  You may believe that or not as you choose.

As for tasting like flat Coke: surely it would have to taste like
carbonated Coke beforehand?  Since I uniformly avoid carbonated (as
opposed to fermented-fizzy) drinks, I'm not really qualified to judge,
but would people _buy_ champagne if it could be substituted by some
cheap sticky brown gloop?

|> I have observed people from both the US and Germany solving this
|> problem this way:  they stick a spoon (handle down) in the champagne
|> bottle and claim without a blink of the eye that the spoon prevents
|> the  champagne from going flat.  Mind you,  with any stretch of
|> imagination you cannot call the spoon a tight fit.
|> 
|> Do you folks believe in this?  I can't believe that it works,  but
|> then being a cheapskate I am I haven't done any empirical experiments
|> either. It just cannot work  -or can it?

This topic has been discussed here in the past.  I don't believe the
supposed effect, but people _do_ swear by it.  If champagne doesn't go
flat anyway, sticking a spoon in the neck of the bottle will surely
(as it were) _work_.
--
Robin (Campaign for Real Radio 3) Fairbairns       rf@cl.cam.ac.uk
U of Cambridge Computer Lab, Pembroke St, Cambridge  CB2 3QG, UK
"They had twelve years to lay in wait for us" - Bush supporter on Nov 4
From: rauchfuss@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Brian Rauchfuss)
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 22:21:24 GMT
Subject: Re: Global Sterilization (was Re: The Marching Morons)
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA