Science desk | ||
---|---|---|
< September 19 | << Aug | September | Oct >> | September 21 > |
Welcome to the Wikipedia Science Reference Desk Archives |
---|
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages. |
Are the main problems basically to do with accidentally setting your legs and ass on fire and/or running out of fuel in mid-air and dropping like a stone? Anyone able to explain in layman's terms? Thanks. - 84.51.162.182 ( talk) 01:39, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
I can find only pictures in the internet where is his clock shown in a case and it really looks like some kind of a bomb... But tell me, what can his clock do, what a Rolex doesn´t? I can´t believe that all this cables are only to show the timer at the display. This clock must be able to do something, what a rolex doesn´t. What is it? Has somebody of you seen his clock working?-- Hijodetenerife ( talk) 21:47, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
Tell me, how does it look like a bomb? Which bomb has gigantic LED displays? Which bomb contains no explosives? Which bomb has no sealed containers? Which bomb is contained in a pencil case? Which bomb plugs into AC power? Is there a terrorist who has to plug his bomb into the nearest power outlet to make it work? If you think this looks like a bomb, you are simply wrong--it looks nothing like one. This is what a bomb looks like: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a5/IED_Baghdad_from_munitions.jpg http://www.columbine-online.com/attack/columbine-attack-bombs.htm http://images1.browardpalmbeach.com/imager/margate-man-tried-to-kill-lovers-husband/u/original/6467222/pipe_bomb_oct.jpg http://pl.b5z.net/i/u/6070324/i/ec/OTA-977_Pipe_Bombs_and_Cut-Aways_i2_ezr.jpg As for "I can't believe that all this cables are only to show the timer at the display," take apart an alarm clock and you'll see just as many cables. If you can come up with a clock that doesn't require as many cables, please let us know. -- Bowlhover ( talk) 09:46, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
The charge was a "hoax bomb." They knew it wasn't a bomb but the question is about intent. Most threats including bomb threats are not real but that doesn't mean the provocateur has not committed a crime. Even if he play-dough with wires in it, that wouldn't make it a bomb either but the same reaction (or harsher). "It's a clock with play-dough." This is basically a zero-tolerance policy and applies to all kinds of innocent items. A second-grader was suspended for chewing his pop-tart into a shape of a gun and pointing it at kids. Nobody is afraid of the pop-tart but he still got suspended. And everyone is familiar with "joking" policy at a TSA checkpoint - joke and you don't fly. -- DHeyward ( talk) 04:30, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
Saying the child "pretend he had build it remain unknown", is not sufficiently supported by the evidence. "pretend" implies there was intentional disinformation, yet as even Dawkins has acknowledged, we are referring to a 14 year old child and even though it may be a little odd for a 14 year old with a good level of English to call the clock an invention or saying he built it when it appears he mostly disassembled an existing clock, we don't know what was meant my these statements. Also, AFAIK, we don't know, and may never know, precisely what was said, for example, to the engineering teacher about the clock, and it seems a little strong IMO to say he "pretend"ed he built it based on statements given after the shitstorm, even if it happens he did knowingly mislead after being overwhelmed by the attention.
Also, we should remember that whatever the politics of the parents, we can't assume their actions are mostly a result of any political leanings, as opposed to an obvious desire to protect their kids (whether or not their actions are good or achieve that).
P.S. Given how litigious things can be in the US, am I the only one surprised neither teacher apparently made a fuss over there being potentially exposed live wires on this device which the kid was apparently plugging in to show people? Well it's possible the engineering teacher did say have concerns about this, I'm not sure if we know precisely why they said the clock should be kept in the backpack.
Although the most surprising thing to me was to learn that it's apparently somewhat common in the US, unlike what's shown in TV shows which admitedly are normally set in New York or perhaps California, that the police can detain a child and question them about their alleged offending without an adult or someone to represent the interests of the child present. [3] [4]. Seems a little odd to make such a big deal about the Mirandi Warning, but not worry about whether the person is likely to understand it all. As far as I know, in NZ it's generally expected an adult will be present to help the child [5].
Admitedly there was dispute over whether a parent was specifically asked for which I believe normally should be granted, and other aspects over how this was handled [6] although I appreciate this is complicated by the fact police can't release all details due to confidentiality requirements. I'm presuming of course there was the intention that the questioning would potentially lead to a charge, and also as BenRG and others have said, no one believe there was an imminent threat.
An electromagnet consists of a coil through which a current passes. This can be made more effective by putting a metal core in the coil. But what if you use a magnet for a core? Would that make any sense? And could you then (partially) de-activate the magnet by passing a 'counter-current' through the coil? Probably a useless thought, but I was just wondering. DirkvdM ( talk) 10:26, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
Note that the link in the title redirects to "magnetic water treatment", which I don't think is the same thing. Here's a link to what I mean: [7], which appears to be a production model, not the theoretical magnetic model. It boasts it can take the excess minerals out of hard water without adding salt. So, does it use a positively charged plate and a negative plate ? If so, wouldn't the plates need to be frequently replaced, and wouldn't hydrogen and oxygen also be produced by the electrolysis of water ? StuRat ( talk) 14:23, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
I have doubts that the device works anywhere near as good as the video claims (if at all), particularly all the claims about the water feeling "silkier" and reducing eczema, skin feeling smoother etc, but I don't see where it "boasts it can take the excess minerals out of hard water without adding salt".
On the contrary, the video seems to imply the calcium and magnesium ions aren't removed, it specifically mentions them being "healthy" and the device being an alternative to water softening (point blank).
The text also compares it to water softeners and "non-intrusive to the water" (whatever that's supposed to mean, but I guess anything reducing the calcium and magnesium ion concentration could be consider intrusive).
The closest seems to be "solves hard water problems without the need for chemicals, salt or maintenance", but that says "problems", which seems to imply it's supposed to solve the problems caused by hard water, rather than hard water being a problem that needs to be solved (i.e. it's making the hard water soft).
There are also ones claiming to use an EM wave. And of course all the magnetic ones our article talks about, which have been scamming people since 1998 [9] and probably long before. Most sources do talk about these magnetic ones which seems to be most common and definite bullshit (the alleged wonders of magnetic crap are so common, I was fairly sure of this before even reading even our article).
I had a strong feeling the Scaleblaster was the same, but it's useful to establish how the device is claiming to work (if they do claim a method), otherwise supporters and salespeople will just claim "sure the magnetic ones are bullshit, but our ones...".
Notably, the science part of their website just repeats the same crap as in their video with no evidence of studies or anything supporting even the basic claim of sonic waves reducing adhesion [10]. (There's also IMO a strong implication the calcium is semi permanently alternated to be non-adhesive ala homepathy etc, rather than just a temporary effect in water that is significantly affected by the sonic waves.)
This is perhaps one area where ScaleBlaster are "smarter" than Scalewatcher. Unlike Scalewatcher who claim to work by Magnetohydrodynamics, Scale Blaster just mention sonic waves and reducing adhesion, which sounds bullshit but there's no principle people can easily check to confirm it is. They also avoided such obvious junk as "The signal consists of a frequency modulated (FM) wave form within the audio frequency (AF) bandwidth. This inaudible sonic frequency signal...".
Nil Einne ( talk) 15:34, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
Note that it also doesn't claim to simple reduce scaling by a small percentage, it claims to eliminate it as your own quote shows. Or more clearly "Lime scale will no longer form in the pipes or on equipment that comes in contact with hard water. This results in the lowering of the saturation level of hard water, so that new lime scale is prevented and any existing scale is removed."
Scaleblaster evidently do make some magnetic devices for industrial use. But the possible effectiveness of some industrial magnetic devices for a specific purpose i.e. reducing scaling, tells us nothing about the effectiveness of a device which doesn't even use magnetic fields, and for other purposes.
The claim of the magnetic devices reducing scale may very well not be pseudoscience, but the other claims do appear to be, that's why many sources rightfully call them so. Beyond the two I included above ( [11] [12]), there's also [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] and many more. (This isn't that different from acknowledging that increased vitamin C consumption whether via supplements or fresh fruits will have some benefits from people who are deficient, but claims like it will cure cancer are largely pseudoscience.)
In fact, if you take a careful read of those sources, not all of them are really talking about the other purported effects. There's quite strong scepticism about whether the basic claim namely in reducing scaling really happens much even with the magnetic devices. The sources mention problems with some of the published science such as poor controls (e.g. failing to establish that it's actually the magnetic field, instead of something about the redesign required to install the device or construction of the device which the water passes through that reduces scaling), as well as the fact that the number of published science on negative results tends to outweight the positive.
One other big problem with the field already discussed is the tendency of manufacturers to come up with highly exaggerated claims of effectiveness, and bullshit other myriad benefits particularly for residential devices. As well as manufacturer's absurd claims of how their devices work rather than simply saying they don't know, but here's the high quality published evidence they do. Funnily your own source says "Owing to several parameters responsible for de-scaling, the superiority of one mode of operation over another is therefore difficult to predict". But of course if someone claims their device works, they should be able to come up with some evidence of how well their device works and predictions don't matter any more. There should be some industrial standard or several if some devices are more effective in differing circumstances, even if just defacto ones for how to compare the effectiveness of these devices, but apparently there isn't.
So even though certain magnetic treatments may reduce scaling in certain circumstances, there's a good chance even many of the industrial ones don't actually work much. Let alone the residential devices not all of which even claim to use magnetic fields (like the one discussed here which just to repeat for the final time, claims to use sonic waves).
Science desk | ||
---|---|---|
< September 19 | << Aug | September | Oct >> | September 21 > |
Welcome to the Wikipedia Science Reference Desk Archives |
---|
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages. |
Are the main problems basically to do with accidentally setting your legs and ass on fire and/or running out of fuel in mid-air and dropping like a stone? Anyone able to explain in layman's terms? Thanks. - 84.51.162.182 ( talk) 01:39, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
I can find only pictures in the internet where is his clock shown in a case and it really looks like some kind of a bomb... But tell me, what can his clock do, what a Rolex doesn´t? I can´t believe that all this cables are only to show the timer at the display. This clock must be able to do something, what a rolex doesn´t. What is it? Has somebody of you seen his clock working?-- Hijodetenerife ( talk) 21:47, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
Tell me, how does it look like a bomb? Which bomb has gigantic LED displays? Which bomb contains no explosives? Which bomb has no sealed containers? Which bomb is contained in a pencil case? Which bomb plugs into AC power? Is there a terrorist who has to plug his bomb into the nearest power outlet to make it work? If you think this looks like a bomb, you are simply wrong--it looks nothing like one. This is what a bomb looks like: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a5/IED_Baghdad_from_munitions.jpg http://www.columbine-online.com/attack/columbine-attack-bombs.htm http://images1.browardpalmbeach.com/imager/margate-man-tried-to-kill-lovers-husband/u/original/6467222/pipe_bomb_oct.jpg http://pl.b5z.net/i/u/6070324/i/ec/OTA-977_Pipe_Bombs_and_Cut-Aways_i2_ezr.jpg As for "I can't believe that all this cables are only to show the timer at the display," take apart an alarm clock and you'll see just as many cables. If you can come up with a clock that doesn't require as many cables, please let us know. -- Bowlhover ( talk) 09:46, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
The charge was a "hoax bomb." They knew it wasn't a bomb but the question is about intent. Most threats including bomb threats are not real but that doesn't mean the provocateur has not committed a crime. Even if he play-dough with wires in it, that wouldn't make it a bomb either but the same reaction (or harsher). "It's a clock with play-dough." This is basically a zero-tolerance policy and applies to all kinds of innocent items. A second-grader was suspended for chewing his pop-tart into a shape of a gun and pointing it at kids. Nobody is afraid of the pop-tart but he still got suspended. And everyone is familiar with "joking" policy at a TSA checkpoint - joke and you don't fly. -- DHeyward ( talk) 04:30, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
Saying the child "pretend he had build it remain unknown", is not sufficiently supported by the evidence. "pretend" implies there was intentional disinformation, yet as even Dawkins has acknowledged, we are referring to a 14 year old child and even though it may be a little odd for a 14 year old with a good level of English to call the clock an invention or saying he built it when it appears he mostly disassembled an existing clock, we don't know what was meant my these statements. Also, AFAIK, we don't know, and may never know, precisely what was said, for example, to the engineering teacher about the clock, and it seems a little strong IMO to say he "pretend"ed he built it based on statements given after the shitstorm, even if it happens he did knowingly mislead after being overwhelmed by the attention.
Also, we should remember that whatever the politics of the parents, we can't assume their actions are mostly a result of any political leanings, as opposed to an obvious desire to protect their kids (whether or not their actions are good or achieve that).
P.S. Given how litigious things can be in the US, am I the only one surprised neither teacher apparently made a fuss over there being potentially exposed live wires on this device which the kid was apparently plugging in to show people? Well it's possible the engineering teacher did say have concerns about this, I'm not sure if we know precisely why they said the clock should be kept in the backpack.
Although the most surprising thing to me was to learn that it's apparently somewhat common in the US, unlike what's shown in TV shows which admitedly are normally set in New York or perhaps California, that the police can detain a child and question them about their alleged offending without an adult or someone to represent the interests of the child present. [3] [4]. Seems a little odd to make such a big deal about the Mirandi Warning, but not worry about whether the person is likely to understand it all. As far as I know, in NZ it's generally expected an adult will be present to help the child [5].
Admitedly there was dispute over whether a parent was specifically asked for which I believe normally should be granted, and other aspects over how this was handled [6] although I appreciate this is complicated by the fact police can't release all details due to confidentiality requirements. I'm presuming of course there was the intention that the questioning would potentially lead to a charge, and also as BenRG and others have said, no one believe there was an imminent threat.
An electromagnet consists of a coil through which a current passes. This can be made more effective by putting a metal core in the coil. But what if you use a magnet for a core? Would that make any sense? And could you then (partially) de-activate the magnet by passing a 'counter-current' through the coil? Probably a useless thought, but I was just wondering. DirkvdM ( talk) 10:26, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
Note that the link in the title redirects to "magnetic water treatment", which I don't think is the same thing. Here's a link to what I mean: [7], which appears to be a production model, not the theoretical magnetic model. It boasts it can take the excess minerals out of hard water without adding salt. So, does it use a positively charged plate and a negative plate ? If so, wouldn't the plates need to be frequently replaced, and wouldn't hydrogen and oxygen also be produced by the electrolysis of water ? StuRat ( talk) 14:23, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
I have doubts that the device works anywhere near as good as the video claims (if at all), particularly all the claims about the water feeling "silkier" and reducing eczema, skin feeling smoother etc, but I don't see where it "boasts it can take the excess minerals out of hard water without adding salt".
On the contrary, the video seems to imply the calcium and magnesium ions aren't removed, it specifically mentions them being "healthy" and the device being an alternative to water softening (point blank).
The text also compares it to water softeners and "non-intrusive to the water" (whatever that's supposed to mean, but I guess anything reducing the calcium and magnesium ion concentration could be consider intrusive).
The closest seems to be "solves hard water problems without the need for chemicals, salt or maintenance", but that says "problems", which seems to imply it's supposed to solve the problems caused by hard water, rather than hard water being a problem that needs to be solved (i.e. it's making the hard water soft).
There are also ones claiming to use an EM wave. And of course all the magnetic ones our article talks about, which have been scamming people since 1998 [9] and probably long before. Most sources do talk about these magnetic ones which seems to be most common and definite bullshit (the alleged wonders of magnetic crap are so common, I was fairly sure of this before even reading even our article).
I had a strong feeling the Scaleblaster was the same, but it's useful to establish how the device is claiming to work (if they do claim a method), otherwise supporters and salespeople will just claim "sure the magnetic ones are bullshit, but our ones...".
Notably, the science part of their website just repeats the same crap as in their video with no evidence of studies or anything supporting even the basic claim of sonic waves reducing adhesion [10]. (There's also IMO a strong implication the calcium is semi permanently alternated to be non-adhesive ala homepathy etc, rather than just a temporary effect in water that is significantly affected by the sonic waves.)
This is perhaps one area where ScaleBlaster are "smarter" than Scalewatcher. Unlike Scalewatcher who claim to work by Magnetohydrodynamics, Scale Blaster just mention sonic waves and reducing adhesion, which sounds bullshit but there's no principle people can easily check to confirm it is. They also avoided such obvious junk as "The signal consists of a frequency modulated (FM) wave form within the audio frequency (AF) bandwidth. This inaudible sonic frequency signal...".
Nil Einne ( talk) 15:34, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
Note that it also doesn't claim to simple reduce scaling by a small percentage, it claims to eliminate it as your own quote shows. Or more clearly "Lime scale will no longer form in the pipes or on equipment that comes in contact with hard water. This results in the lowering of the saturation level of hard water, so that new lime scale is prevented and any existing scale is removed."
Scaleblaster evidently do make some magnetic devices for industrial use. But the possible effectiveness of some industrial magnetic devices for a specific purpose i.e. reducing scaling, tells us nothing about the effectiveness of a device which doesn't even use magnetic fields, and for other purposes.
The claim of the magnetic devices reducing scale may very well not be pseudoscience, but the other claims do appear to be, that's why many sources rightfully call them so. Beyond the two I included above ( [11] [12]), there's also [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] and many more. (This isn't that different from acknowledging that increased vitamin C consumption whether via supplements or fresh fruits will have some benefits from people who are deficient, but claims like it will cure cancer are largely pseudoscience.)
In fact, if you take a careful read of those sources, not all of them are really talking about the other purported effects. There's quite strong scepticism about whether the basic claim namely in reducing scaling really happens much even with the magnetic devices. The sources mention problems with some of the published science such as poor controls (e.g. failing to establish that it's actually the magnetic field, instead of something about the redesign required to install the device or construction of the device which the water passes through that reduces scaling), as well as the fact that the number of published science on negative results tends to outweight the positive.
One other big problem with the field already discussed is the tendency of manufacturers to come up with highly exaggerated claims of effectiveness, and bullshit other myriad benefits particularly for residential devices. As well as manufacturer's absurd claims of how their devices work rather than simply saying they don't know, but here's the high quality published evidence they do. Funnily your own source says "Owing to several parameters responsible for de-scaling, the superiority of one mode of operation over another is therefore difficult to predict". But of course if someone claims their device works, they should be able to come up with some evidence of how well their device works and predictions don't matter any more. There should be some industrial standard or several if some devices are more effective in differing circumstances, even if just defacto ones for how to compare the effectiveness of these devices, but apparently there isn't.
So even though certain magnetic treatments may reduce scaling in certain circumstances, there's a good chance even many of the industrial ones don't actually work much. Let alone the residential devices not all of which even claim to use magnetic fields (like the one discussed here which just to repeat for the final time, claims to use sonic waves).