Upload
Login or register

thenez

Last status update:
-
Date Signed Up:5/04/2011
Last Login:8/25/2016
FunnyJunk Career Stats
Comment Ranking:#5986
Highest Content Rank:#7428
Highest Comment Rank:#3206
Content Thumbs: 3 total,  37 ,  40
Comment Thumbs: 4216 total,  5513 ,  1297
Content Level Progress: 0% (0/59)
Level 0 Content: Untouched account → Level 1 Content: New Here
Comment Level Progress: 1% (1/100)
Level 236 Comments: Ambassador Of Lulz → Level 237 Comments: Ambassador Of Lulz
Subscribers:0
Content Views:5602
Times Content Favorited:1 times
Total Comments Made:2038
FJ Points:478

  • Views: 1702
    Thumbs Up 10 Thumbs Down 2 Total: +8
    Comments: 6
    Favorites: 1
    Uploaded: 09/23/15
    Help me Help me
  • Views: 776
    Thumbs Up 3 Thumbs Down 4 Total: -1
    Comments: 2
    Favorites: 0
    Uploaded: 09/23/15
    It's too late It's too late

latest user's comments

#308 - **thenez used "*roll picture*"** **thenez rolled image ** 08/21/2016 on Your new tattoo 0
#19 - what would be the point of a thread limit on fj?  [+] (1 new reply) 08/19/2016 on Ding Dong The Witch Is Dead +9
User avatar
#32 - europe (08/19/2016) [-]
Ask admin
There used to not be one is just a stupidly large one where even with a beefy computer you'd have trouble loading the page
Now the thread limit is really small
#14 - i get it 08/03/2016 on (oc) Stand By For Titanfall +3
#16 - Obviously, but you didn't specify whether or not the LED bulb …  [+] (2 new replies) 07/31/2016 on coolsville -4
User avatar
#21 - chimpaflimp (07/31/2016) [-]
It's implied in within the context of the sentence AND the content, you tectonic wankfuck.
User avatar
#22 - servernotfound (07/31/2016) [-]
Thank you for that brilliant addition to my insul library
#14 - My led bulb cost me $10, where the **** are you that led bulbs…  [+] (4 new replies) 07/31/2016 on coolsville -2
User avatar
#15 - TheMather (07/31/2016) [-]
There's a difference between bulbs for streetlights and for lamps you know.
User avatar
#16 - thenez (07/31/2016) [-]
Obviously, but you didn't specify whether or not the LED bulb was streetlamp grade or for home use.
User avatar
#21 - chimpaflimp (07/31/2016) [-]
It's implied in within the context of the sentence AND the content, you tectonic wankfuck.
User avatar
#22 - servernotfound (07/31/2016) [-]
Thank you for that brilliant addition to my insul library
#147 - **thenez used "*roll picture*"** **thenez rolled image ** 07/30/2016 on War Were Declared 0
#34 - Are we saying that electricity cannot arc through a perfect va…  [+] (3 new replies) 07/27/2016 on Electricity finding the... 0
#35 - karlossacramento (07/27/2016) [-]
Alright, we both have completely different intuitions to think about the problem.

Right off the bat, from how I understand your take on this: yes you can have an ark, considering the method I believe you are thinking of.

I also think we have a common ground: we think about insulators as materials, which do not conduct electricity, no matter how high the voltage you apply.

The way we differ in our take is that you probably think about one specific way to apply voltage to a system, which is the only form of "voltage" source most people are familiar with: Introduce charged materials into the system, e.g. wires or electrodes. However introducing these kinds of electrical sources to the inherently destroys the vacuum.

Voltage, in it's purest form, is simply a difference of the electrical potential you apply to a system. There are methods to accomplish that without destroying the vacuum. Using a method (the common methods used in everyday electronics) which is able to create an arc inherently destroys the vacuum in the first place.
#73 - anon (07/27/2016) [-]
I think we could have summed this up with...yes an arc can be sent across a vacuum...but as soon as you do it, it is no longer a vacuum therefore you aren't sending it across a vacuum.
#98 - karlossacramento (07/27/2016) [-]
No you misunderstood. The moment you use a method which allows the creation of arks, regardless of whether or not they are created, violates the vacuum.
#29 - So I guess vacuum tubes and CRTs aren't a thing?  [+] (5 new replies) 07/27/2016 on Electricity finding the... +1
#33 - karlossacramento (07/27/2016) [-]
Those are misleading names. The vacuum tubes and CRT's are not vacuum, they contain long=lived electrons (e.g. the electron cloud around the emitter of the CRT) which can therefore conduct electrity. Again, real vacuum is a no brainer, since it does not contain long-lived sub-atomic particles and can therefore not conduct electricity.
User avatar
#34 - thenez (07/27/2016) [-]
Are we saying that electricity cannot arc through a perfect vacuum even through high voltage?
#35 - karlossacramento (07/27/2016) [-]
Alright, we both have completely different intuitions to think about the problem.

Right off the bat, from how I understand your take on this: yes you can have an ark, considering the method I believe you are thinking of.

I also think we have a common ground: we think about insulators as materials, which do not conduct electricity, no matter how high the voltage you apply.

The way we differ in our take is that you probably think about one specific way to apply voltage to a system, which is the only form of "voltage" source most people are familiar with: Introduce charged materials into the system, e.g. wires or electrodes. However introducing these kinds of electrical sources to the inherently destroys the vacuum.

Voltage, in it's purest form, is simply a difference of the electrical potential you apply to a system. There are methods to accomplish that without destroying the vacuum. Using a method (the common methods used in everyday electronics) which is able to create an arc inherently destroys the vacuum in the first place.
#73 - anon (07/27/2016) [-]
I think we could have summed this up with...yes an arc can be sent across a vacuum...but as soon as you do it, it is no longer a vacuum therefore you aren't sending it across a vacuum.
#98 - karlossacramento (07/27/2016) [-]
No you misunderstood. The moment you use a method which allows the creation of arks, regardless of whether or not they are created, violates the vacuum.
#5 - Why the red thumbs? He's not wrong.  [+] (22 new replies) 07/27/2016 on Electricity finding the... +30
#22 - karlossacramento (07/27/2016) [-]
actually, he is. He assumes there are no absolute insulators, which is a wrong assumption. Easiest example: vacuum.
#75 - coffinsalesman has deleted their comment.
#64 - Millybays (07/27/2016) [-]
Electricity can actually pass through a vacuum, it'll create a stream of charged particles but won't be visible because there is no atoms for it to ionize.
User avatar
#42 - produktr (07/27/2016) [-]
Vacuum *is* nothing (no air, not anything).
So *nothing* can completely stop electricity
User avatar
#91 - cognosceteipsum (07/27/2016) [-]
Vacuum isn't empty though
#67 - anon (07/27/2016) [-]
Wrong electrical gradients exist across vacuums, & they are very handy as they offer no electrical resistance (think back to cathode ray tubes, they are evacuated and serve very well for directing electrons off a cathode across electrical and magnetic gradients in the vacumn over to the anode where electrons transduce their energy to photons kind of the perfect transport medium provided you can the electrons away from the edges (pretty much what particle accelerators are all about)
#51 - anon (07/27/2016) [-]
*picture of dude from futurama*

You're correct, the best kind of correct.
#78 - mrpotatofudge (07/27/2016) [-]
Heres some shit i guess

Season 2 Episode 11 : How Hermes requisitioned his groove back

Link to watch said video: kisscartoon.me/Cartoon/Futurama-Season-02/Episode-011-How-Hermes-Requisitioned-His-Groove-Back?id=1288

Youtube and pic
the meme version isnt from the exact clip surprisingly
Technically Correct  Futurama
#71 - hiukuss has deleted their comment.
#72 - anon (07/27/2016) [-]
no, that image is of is the guy from the bearocrat's office. It's the episode where Hermes gets replaced by an uptight woman who has a thing for Fry
#44 - karlossacramento (07/27/2016) [-]
kek except vacuum isn't really nothing
#50 - darkfizz (07/27/2016) [-]
A vacuum is the absence of everything, so yes, it is really nothing.
#55 - karlossacramento (07/27/2016) [-]
Absence of matter. Meaning absence of long-lived particles. This does not take into account absence of virtual particles and interacting fields. "Nothing" would imply it has absolutely no physical relevance, which is wrong.
#37 - anon (07/27/2016) [-]
only it's impossible to reach an absolute vacuum.
User avatar
#41 - geofalke (07/27/2016) [-]
*currently* impossible.

just because we don't have it now, and have no idea of when we might be able to, doesn't mean we should stop trying.
User avatar
#59 - mrlosthaze (07/27/2016) [-]
the reason why a total vacuum is impossible is because there is nothing you could contain it in that wouldn't leach molecules into it through radioactive decay. the closest you could get would be at the center of a very large explosion where all atoms and molecules were temporarily blown away, but that would only last for a super short time.
User avatar
#29 - thenez (07/27/2016) [-]
So I guess vacuum tubes and CRTs aren't a thing?
#33 - karlossacramento (07/27/2016) [-]
Those are misleading names. The vacuum tubes and CRT's are not vacuum, they contain long=lived electrons (e.g. the electron cloud around the emitter of the CRT) which can therefore conduct electrity. Again, real vacuum is a no brainer, since it does not contain long-lived sub-atomic particles and can therefore not conduct electricity.
User avatar
#34 - thenez (07/27/2016) [-]
Are we saying that electricity cannot arc through a perfect vacuum even through high voltage?
#35 - karlossacramento (07/27/2016) [-]
Alright, we both have completely different intuitions to think about the problem.

Right off the bat, from how I understand your take on this: yes you can have an ark, considering the method I believe you are thinking of.

I also think we have a common ground: we think about insulators as materials, which do not conduct electricity, no matter how high the voltage you apply.

The way we differ in our take is that you probably think about one specific way to apply voltage to a system, which is the only form of "voltage" source most people are familiar with: Introduce charged materials into the system, e.g. wires or electrodes. However introducing these kinds of electrical sources to the inherently destroys the vacuum.

Voltage, in it's purest form, is simply a difference of the electrical potential you apply to a system. There are methods to accomplish that without destroying the vacuum. Using a method (the common methods used in everyday electronics) which is able to create an arc inherently destroys the vacuum in the first place.
#73 - anon (07/27/2016) [-]
I think we could have summed this up with...yes an arc can be sent across a vacuum...but as soon as you do it, it is no longer a vacuum therefore you aren't sending it across a vacuum.
#98 - karlossacramento (07/27/2016) [-]
No you misunderstood. The moment you use a method which allows the creation of arks, regardless of whether or not they are created, violates the vacuum.
#268 - Picture 07/24/2016 on Be reborn here! 0