HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson)
Subject: Re: Car Batteries die in the Winter - Why?
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company, Corvallis, Oregon USA
Date: Fri, 25 Dec 1992 23:39:42 GMT

csa09@seq1.keele.ac.uk (Paul Singleton) writes:
: From article <Bz7tFD.CF6@ais.org>, by draper@ais.org (Patrick Draper):
: 
: > In cold weather chemical processes generally proceed at a slower rate. A
: > marginal battery in warm weather might not crank out enough juice to turn an
: > engine over in cold weather.
: 
: But wouldn't it warm up as soon as the starter tried to draw current (a
: couple of hundred amps I believe) from it?  Does cold affect its stored
: energy, or just the internal impedance?  Does the EMF depend on temperature?

Neither, really. It affects how fast the chemical reaction can take place.
The energy is still there, it just is not produced rapidly enough.

Bill
From: rf@cl.cam.ac.uk (Robin Fairbairns)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
Subject: Re: Re^2: Electric Field Question
Date: 21 Dec 92 12:37:33 GMT
Organization: U of Cambridge Computer Lab, UK

In article <1992Dec18.111222.29950@prl.dec.com>, skubi@prl.dec.com (Marcin Skubiszewski) writes:
|> In article <4317@novavax.UUCP>, vest@novavax.UUCP (Steven Vest) writes:
|> >>>>   Men have a statistically significant greater incidence of skin cancer
|> >>>>   on the left arm, while women have the same for the right arm. Guess why.
|> > 
|> > Because men usually do the driving for a couple and put their left arms
|> > out the window and vice-versa?
|> 
|> Is the contrary true in England ? Is the contrary true if the woman is a
|> feminist or professional truck driver (or both) ? Is your wife a feminist ?

No.  Nor yet in Scotland, Wales, or any part of Ireland (to the best
of my knowledge).  Rationale (I've posted this once before, but it
plainly didn't sink in):

1) We don't get that much sun (we're a good bit further North than the
   (even remotely) heavily-populated parts of N America, and we have
   the gulf stream to contend with, which tends to give us moist
   summers)
2) Our roads tend to be rather narrow, so that people who drive with
   an arm hanging out of the window lose their arm by interaction with
   oncoming traffic rather than through cancer
--
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: rf@cl.cam.ac.uk (Robin Fairbairns)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
Subject: Re: Electric Field Question
Date: 21 Dec 92 17:29:34 GMT
Organization: U of Cambridge Computer Lab, UK

In article <mcampbel.724947751@eola.cs.ucf.edu>, mcampbel@cs.ucf.edu (Mike Campbell ) writes:
|> rf@cl.cam.ac.uk (that's me, folks) writes:
|> 
|> >No.  Nor yet in Scotland, Wales, or any part of Ireland (to the best
|> >of my knowledge).  Rationale (I've posted this once before, but it
|> >plainly didn't sink in):
|> 
|> >1) We don't get that much sun (we're a good bit further North than the
|> >   (even remotely) heavily-populated parts of N America, and we have
|> >   the gulf stream to contend with, which tends to give us moist
|> >   summers)
|> >2) Our roads tend to be rather narrow, so that people who drive with
|> >   an arm hanging out of the window lose their arm by interaction with
|> >   oncoming traffic rather than through cancer
|> 
|> Oh come on!  Surely the MIRRORS would be hit before the arms...  When we say
|> arms hanging out, we don't mean out parallel to the road!
|>
|> There'd be a LOT of missing mirrors and door handles, (and fenders, and
|> bumpers) is this was even remotely significant.

I have indeed lost a mirror as I drove along a road near my house.
However (as I made clear in my original post), item (2) isn't (shall
we say) quite as _serious_ as item (1).  I do know (at 2nd hand) of
one person who suffered in this way some long time ago.  My father
won't let anyone hang an arm out of the window of a car he's driving
for this reason.

Fwiw, I don't own a car (haven't since the early 70s).  My wife does,
and _its_ mirror would offer very little protection against the
determined disarming car coming in the opposite direction.  (Its door
handles are pretty much flush with the door...)
--
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: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
Subject: Re: More Monty Hall
Date: 24 Dec 1992 19:27:15 GMT
Organization: HST Wide Field/Planetary Camera
Distribution: world
Reply-To: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol1.gps.caltech.edu

In article <1992Dec22.185741.9823@berlioz.nsc.com>, worden@bouncer.nsc.com (Dennis Worden) writes:
>The fact that you now have an open door with a goat behind it does not
>change the fact that you have 2 door and 1 prize.

That's true.  However, the fact that there are two doors and one prize doesn't
mean there's a 50% chance of either door holding the prize.  Your argument
can be extended as follows:
	Tomorrow morning, either the sun will rise, or it won't.

	There are two possible outcomes.

	Therefore, there's a 50% chance the sun won't rise tomorrow.

>The opening of the
>third door only tells you that the prize is not behind that door, it does
>not add any information as to where the prize really is.  Or put it another
>way, if you consider this new information on the same puzzle, why do you
>freeze the probability of the original guess at 33%?  To freeze the original
>probabilities at their "pre-new-information" levels means that your are not
>using that new information.  The new information would apply equally to all
>doors that are left,

No, it doesn't.  Because if the other unopened door held a goat, Monty COULD'VE
opened it.  But whether the door you originally picked holds a goat or not,
Monty CANNOT open that one.  You're trying to treat an asymmetric situation as
if it's symmetric.  The fact that you chose a door before Monty opened one
destroyed the symmetry that's fundamental to your argument.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl J Lydick | INTERnet: CARL@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU | NSI/HEPnet: SOL1::CARL

Disclaimer:  Hey, I understand VAXen and VMS.  That's what I get paid for.  My
understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below).  So
unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me or my
organization responsible for it.  If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can try to
hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with it.
From: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
Subject: Re: Two high tides (Was: Full moon and tides)
Date: 24 Dec 1992 19:04:40 GMT
Organization: HST Wide Field/Planetary Camera
Distribution: world
Reply-To: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol1.gps.caltech.edu

In article <scottj-221292163050@iamac-1.dml.georgetown.edu>, scottj@magic.dml.georgetown.edu (John L. Scott) writes:
>Thanks for the reply.  I got "stretches the earth" from somebody else's
>post.  I took it to mean that the earth's shape was actually deformed to
>the point that it had a noticeable effect of the oceans.  I was skeptical
>of that idea.

You shouldn't've been.  There are tides on land, too, on the order of a couple
of feet.  If the Earth's crust were perfectly rigid, the ocean tides, relative
to the land, would be even higher.  Remember, too, that the oceans are part of
the Earth.  The tides are noticeable simply because the oceans are easier to
stretch than the crust.

>So, are you saying that the moon pulls the earth away from the water on the
>far side?  That certainly sounds reasonable to me.

Yes.  Please see another article I recently posted for the mathematics of it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl J Lydick | INTERnet: CARL@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU | NSI/HEPnet: SOL1::CARL

Disclaimer:  Hey, I understand VAXen and VMS.  That's what I get paid for.  My
understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below).  So
unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me or my
organization responsible for it.  If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can try to
hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with it.
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
From: mcampbel@cs.ucf.edu (Mike Campbell )
Subject: Re: arms and cancers
Organization: University of Central Florida
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1992 15:33:45 GMT

dannyb@panix.com (Daniel Burstein) writes:


>oh, btw, as a paramedic in NYC, I can, indeed, tell of personally treating
>patients who had their arms severly injured when they were hanging on the
>window and met up with a nasty event.


I'm getting the feeling I was misunderstood a bit.  (And I apologize if that
is the case)

I did not mean to imply that the mirrors or door handles offered any sort of
protection to the arms when hanging out, nor that arms never got mangled.

What I meant was that if the roads were SO narrow as to put fear into the
whole UK society over hanging their arms out the window, then the incidence
of missing mirrors would be higher.
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
Subject: Re: Looking for Daniken sceptic
From: Geoff@equinox.gen.nz (Geoff Mccaughan)
Date: 22 Dec 92 18:38:23 +1200
Distribution: alt
Organization: Equinox Networks
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]

Paul Sammy 4th Year iE/CES (ssammy@cs.strath.ac.uk) wrote:

>Hello there.

>I'm looking for a book that purports to reveal the
>inconsistencies and downright lies that Eric Von Daniken
>(allegedly) wrote in his "Gold of the Gods" series.

>I know it exists (I've read it somewhere), but I'm not sure
>of the title or the author.
>I think its called "Gold of the Gods Revealed" or something
>similar.

>If possible I'd like a ISBN and a publisher, so I can order it.

I just had a quick grep of the bookshelf, but can't find my copy 8-(. Anyway
the title of the book I had was "Space gods revealed" [turns Von Daniken
into a pumpkin].

--
Geoff, Sysop Equinox (equinox.gen.nz) +64 (3) 3854406 [4 Lines]
                               Voice: +64 (3) 3852101
        "Hi. You have just entered the fourth dimension. Small isn't it?"
From: sasjec@asimov.unx.sas.com (Jerry M. Cox)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
Subject: Re: Monty Hall/Shell Game..
Date: 24 Dec 92 18:38:35 GMT
Organization: SAS Institute Inc.
Originator: sasjec@asimov.unx.sas.com


In article <1992Dec24.153315.9357@panix.com>, fnord@panix.com (Cliff Heller) writes:
|> In <BzqJx8.3Fv@unx.sas.com> sasjec@asimov.unx.sas.com (Jerry M. Cox) writes:
|>
|> >Odds are that I could stand a review course in probability. But hear me
|> >out anyway :-) 

Thanks for the reveiw course (and hearing me out :-).

|> 
|> [Some Excellent Explicating Deleted]
|>

|> But, Monty
|> >changes the odds when he shows you one of the goats behind one of the
|> >two doors. He removes that door from consideration completely.
|>
|> No one, not even Monty can change the probability of something that you
|> already selected from three choices.  That remains fixed at 1/3.  It cannot
|> change.

And this was my main mistake. Thanks to your explanation, and Mike 
Urban's post of the million door variation on the problem, I see where I 
made my mistake. The probability from the door that Monty opens is all 
shifted to the door he didn't open, it is not spread between the door 
you pick initially and the one he didn't open.

|> --
|>     / \      Reverend fnord                 | "King Kong died for your sins!"
|>    /   \     fnord@panix.com                |
|>   / <0> \                                   | "Don't just eat a hamburger,
|>  /_______\   Church of Obfuscatology, Inc.  |  eat the HELL out of it!"

Gee, I just complimented a person who claims to be a cleric devoted to 
the religious study and promotion of confusing communications on the 
clarity of his explanation. I must be losing it.

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Jerry M. Cox       |"Too often when men stumble over the truth, they  |
|sasjec@unx.sas.com | tend to pick themselves up and hurry off as if   |
|jmcox@eos.ncsu.edu | nothing happened."    --Winston Churchill--      |
|cox-j@osl.ncsu.edu |                                                  |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------|
| My opinions belong only to me! (But I'll give them to you, just ask) |
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
From: mcampbel@cs.ucf.edu (Mike Campbell )
Subject: Re: very cold beer
Organization: University of Central Florida
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 18:06:57 GMT

kpapai@rahul.net (Ken Papai) writes:

>In <Bzon6v.IyM@chinet.chi.il.us> koziarz@chinet.chi.il.us (Louis Koziarz) 
>writes:

>>>>>If you've timed it right, you can pop the top off the bottle and watch
>>>>>as the beer flash-freezes solid in a matter of a seconds. The first time

>>Doesn't the frozen beer/ice expand and break the bottle, or gush out the top?
>>Every beer I've left in the freezer had broken in this manner.

>That's because you're drinking cheap beer.  Good beer does not break the
>glass.  Esp. if you are drinking out of twist-off bottles.  Anyway, beer
>should not be frozen, good beer should be enjoyed at a temp. well above 
>freezing, esp. depending on the beer.  A good bet for most good beers
>is 39 to 46 degrees F.  Just ask the expert.
>-- 
>Ken Papai <kpapai@rahul.net>

What is it about 'good' beer that makes it not expand when frozen?  That's
amazing!  =)

Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
From: koziarz@chinet.chi.il.us (Louis Koziarz)
Subject: Re: very cold beer
Organization: Chinet - Public Access UNIX
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 21:14:35 GMT

Somewhere in cyberspace, the thread bends wildly:
>>That's because you're drinking cheap beer.  Good beer does not break the
>>glass.  Esp. if you are drinking out of twist-off bottles. 

>What is it about 'good' beer that makes it not expand when frozen?  That's
>amazing!  =)

No kidding.  I guess I need to switch brands.  All of mine have water
in them instead of Prestone...
-- 
Louis Koziarz
koziarz@chinet.chi.il.us

Caught a SIGSEGV - .newsrc trashed
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
From: carlf@panix.com (Carl Fink)
Subject: Re: More Monty Hall
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 22:16:10 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC

In <1992Dec22.185741.9823@berlioz.nsc.com> worden@bouncer.nsc.com (Dennis Worden) writes:


[kitten's words deleted for space]

>The fact that you now have an open door with a goat behind it does not
>change the fact that you have 2 door and 1 prize.  The opening of the
>third door only tells you that the prize is not behind that door, it does
>not add any information as to where the prize really is.  Or put it another
>way, if you consider this new information on the same puzzle, why do you
>freeze the probability of the original guess at 33%?  To freeze the original
>probabilities at their "pre-new-information" levels means that your are not
>using that new information.  The new information would apply equally to all
>doors that are left, and adjusts the probability to 50%.  The original
>assumption of 33% chance per door was based upon 3 closed doors.  The new
>question is which of 2 closed doors has the prize.


>-- 
>Dennis Worden, not representing $  When the TEAM succeeds, you succeed,
>anybody, not even himself, in   $  but when the Team fails, you're FIRED.
>any way shape or form.          $  Don't EMAIL me at worden@berlioz.nsc.com

  (I know in advance this is likely a waste of time)

  Let's examine all possible cases, okay?  There are three doors, 
which we will designate alpha, beta, and gamma.  The prize is behind
door gamma, so there are three cases, namely, you pick alpha, you 
pick beta, you pick gamma.

   Case alpha:  you have not picked the prize.  Monty reveals the
goat behind beta.  If you switch, you pick gamma and win.

  Case beta:  you have not picked the prize.  Monty reveals the goat
behind alpha.  If you switch, you win.
 
  Case gamma:  you have picked the prize.  Monty reveals either the
goat behind alpha or the one behind beta.  If you switch, you lose.

  Thus, 2/3 of the time, if you switch, you win.  This constitutes
proof by exhaustion.

  (Don't nitpick that there are cases in which the prizes can be behind 
alpha or beta - those cases reduce to simply a renaming of the doors
in my analysis.)


-- 
Carl Fink          carlf@panix.com, C.FINK4(GEnie), or CF427620I@LIUVAX.BITNET
  "Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our
  inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter
  the state of facts and evidence"     --      John Adams
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
From: scottj@magic.dml.georgetown.edu (John L. Scott)
Subject: Re: Two high tides (Was: Full moon and tides)
Followup-To: alt.folklore.science
Organization: J. Random Misconfigured Site
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 21:33:45 GMT
X-Posted-From: iamac-1.dml.georgetown.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

In article <1h50c7INNees@news.aero.org>, shag@aero.org (Robert M.
Unverzagt) wrote:
> 
> In article <scottj-211292091243@iamac-1.dml.georgetown.edu> scottj@magic.dml.georgetown.edu (John L. Scott) writes:
> > The high tide facing the moon is, of course, explained by the gravitational
> > pull of the moon.  However, there have been at least two explanations for
> > the high tide on the opposite side of the earth:
> > 
> >    A.  The moon stretches the earth
> >    B.  Centrifugal pseudo-force
> > 
> > So... which is it, A, B, both, or neither?
> > 
> Neither.  Well, sort of A, I guess -- it depends what you
> mean by "strethes the earth".  Bad ascii graphics follow:
> 
> 			                            _______
>                               /       \
>           __                 /         \
>          /  \                A    B    C
>          \__/                \         /
>          moon	                \_______/
> 			                             earth
> 
> Points A, B, and C all experience some amount of "pull" from
> the moon.  It's easy to see (as you point out above) that
> point A is pulled more than B, the center of the earth.  It's
> also easy to see from the above diagram that point C feels
> less pull than B;  therefore C "rises" relative to B, just as
> A does.
> 
> Is that what you mean by "stretches the earth"?
> 
> Shag

Thanks for the reply.  I got "stretches the earth" from somebody else's
post.  I took it to mean that the earth's shape was actually deformed to
the point that it had a noticeable effect of the oceans.  I was skeptical
of that idea.

So, are you saying that the moon pulls the earth away from the water on the
far side?  That certainly sounds reasonable to me.

--John L. Scott
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
From: scottj@magic.dml.georgetown.edu (John L. Scott)
Subject: Two high tides (Was: Full moon and tides)
Followup-To: alt.folklore.science
Organization: J. Random Misconfigured Site
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 14:23:30 GMT
X-Posted-From: iamac-1.dml.georgetown.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

The high tide facing the moon is, of course, explained by the gravitational
pull of the moon.  However, there have been at least two explanations for
the high tide on the opposite side of the earth:

   A.  The moon stretches the earth
   B.  Centrifugal pseudo-force

So... which is it, A, B, both, or neither?

--John L. Scott
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
From: loyal@innerdoor.ibm.com (Loyal Gordon Bassett II)
Subject: Monty Hall/Shell Game Probability Maybe
Originator: loyal@smurfette.austin.ibm.com
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 20:41:37 GMT
Organization: IBM AWD Personal Workstations
Keywords: Shell Game, Probability 
Followup-To: loyal@innerdoor.austin.ibm.com



A computer program could emulate this situation with picking two pseudo-random
numbers from 1 to 3.  Or some true random event could be used like quantum
mechanics or something else like a three sided coin or three sided die :) or
maybe a six sided die dividing integrally by two.

The first random number represents the number of the door that has the prize,
and the second is the contestant's choice.  Argue this point for amusement.
Play this with a friend or enemy.  This is where a bad assumption could come
into play.  Blah.  Blah.  Blah.


       1/3        2/3      Chance of Numbers Equal or Not Equal
        =         !=
     ------------------
C   |   L    |     W  |    Result: W-win, L-lose
NC  |   W    |     L  |
     ------------------
Changing/Not Changing your choice

Chance of Winning = (Chance winning changing + Chance winning when not changing)
                    ------------------------------------------------------------
                                               Total chances

                  =  ( 2/3 + 1/3 ) / ( 1/3 + 1/3 + 2/3 + 2/3 )

                  =  1/2         (This is what everyone argues)

Chance of Winning when changing =  Chance winning when change 
                                  -----------------------------
                                   Total Chances when changing

                                = (2/3) / ( 1/3 + 2/3 )

                                = 2/3

---Loyal Gordon Bassett II
These are my opinions and nobody elses except mine.
Have a good day.
Please respond if you have any ideas.  Does it sound like
a cool
idea or what?
Live well party on rock and roll.  Smith says hi.

Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
From: wrd@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Wm. Race Dowling)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
Subject: Re: Perceiving "Neon/Florescent" Colors
Date: 22 Dec 92 04:13:54 GMT
Organization: Carderock Division, Naval Surface Warfare Center
X-Organization: (formerly David Taylor Research Center)

In article <1h5ehoINN707@cronkite.Central.Sun.COM> pstryjew@colsun.Central.Sun.COM writes:
->
->How does the human eye perceive "Neon/Florescent" color (i.e. hot pink, blaze
->orange, the Crayola Florescent Crayons)?  
->
->I assume it has something to do with absorption of UV light, but where in the
->spectrum do they reside?  Are they hiding in the "visible" spectrum?  How are
->the dyes made, I can't make them with additive mixing of the three primaries.
->

I believe they are made by mixing normal dyes with a fluorescing substance
such as phosphorous. Thus it appears that it reflects more light than is
incident on it (actually, it's just convering invisible radiation to light).

-- Race Dowling
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science
From: dannyb@panix.com (Daniel Burstein)
Subject: arms and cancers
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1992 06:57:53 GMT
Organization: Panix, NYC

We've all heard about the studies that claim to show that people who drive
a lot are more likely to get LEFT arm or facial cancers due to sunlight
(UV) exposure.
  
Only problem is, I can't find any of these studies anywhere.  Can anyone
in NETLAND point me to any??

ALSO, wouldn't this mean that people in the countries that drive on the
wrong,  oops,  I meant, other side of the road, develop these problems on
their right arms/face?

Thanks muchly,
Danny

dannyb@panix.com     dburstein@mcimail.com

-----

oh, btw, as a paramedic in NYC, I can, indeed, tell of personally treating
patients who had their arms severly injured when they were hanging on the
window and met up with a nasty event.

Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science