Burnie,
I didn't receive your PM but I sent you a PM with my email address. Just reply to the email address I sent and I'll get you fixed up.
SXmini M Class (TEMP CONTROL)
- Thread starter whitewidows
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Burnie,
I didn't receive your PM but I sent you a PM with my email address. Just reply to the email address I sent and I'll get you fixed up.
I have no electrical background, but to simplify, just set the joule amount to the same amount you would set watts. Yihi decided for whatever reason to base their scale on energy per second instead of power.
By saying I was "confused" I was being kind. In fact I have a problem with an engineering company redefining fundamental definitions for the sake of marketing. Just so we are clear on that.
The real difference between watts and joules is time. One watt is an instantaneous measurement of Amps * Volts and a Joule is a watt for for one second Amps * Volts * seconds.
The only thing that the Joule tells you that the Watt doesn't is how much power you have used. 1 joule = 1 Watt for 1 second. So for all practical purposes if you set you SX to 20 joules and hold the button for 1 second it is exactly the same amount of energy as setting a mod to 20 watts and holding the button for 1 second.
The amount of energy used is why the power company charges you for kilowatt hours. They want you to pay for the amount of energy used which is is directly related to the length of time you use the energy. If you used 1 kilowatt without reference to time no one know how much you used. Did you turn the light on for one millisecond or one day? This is also why YiHi claims the Joule is a better measurement of heat produced. If you say you fired a mod at 20 watts but you don't know how long that power was applied then you don't know how much heat was produced. A one micro second burst at 20 watts produces almost know heat but 20 Joules will produce a significant amount of heat because the because by definition 20 Joules is 20 Watts applied for 1 second.
I am starting to confuse myself to I will stop now but setting your mod to 20 joules and thinking of it as 20 watts is perfectly acceptable and for all practical purposes is the same thing.
This is my opinion and not an invitation to debate the subject. I will listen to anyones opinion but lets not turn this into a debate - if we do it will never end and life is too short for that besides the WEB is full of explanations of the difference between the two measurement.
If you want to pick up a fight, I advise you to read the general rule section. Baiting is against the rules and handled accordingly.
By your reply, I deduct you're most likely underaged because you were born in a world of led lighting and lumens and don't appear to know how things worked 40 years ago. This forum is for 18+ so you're also in violation in that regard too.
In the "good old" days, all we had where standard incandescent light bulbs where luminosity directly correlated to power. Nobody would buy a 25w light bulb to have more light than a 100W light bulb. Does Watt translate to luminosity? No, but back then, it generally was directly related. If I felt I didn't have enough light in my bathroom with a 25w light bulb, I would go out and buy a 60 or 100w one.
If I had 10x 40w light bulbs at my home, I knew that they would cost me in my electricity bill around 400w for each hour I kept them on.
Now if you want to argue about watts, watts hour or joules, you're only 3 or 4 months late. This has been debated to death and led nowhere.
I hate converting temperatures to fahrenheit but if I have a mod that only supports this awkward and nonsense scale, I have no choice and suck it up if I want to use that particular mod. If you disagree so much with joules and are wasting everyone's time with this, there are a bunch of other mods out there that use watts. Just go out and buy them.
Have a nice weekend.
Regards
Tony
Sent from my keyboard through my phone or something like that.
Tony having lived my whole life in the US I find it odd that anyone would want to use Celsius (Centigrade) who lives outside of the US. This is my bubble and I expect the whole world to live by my standards. lol
On a serious note, I wish the US would convert. This has dragged on too long and I think it is time for the world to unite on these standards. Well, most of the world has already done that outside of the US. But I do like Fahrenheit for more finer outdoor temperature statements. When I go to Asia and taking in the daytime heat, one "C" degree higher in temp equals 2 in "F" and that one degree is noticeable. Other than that, can't we all just get along?
Now, where did I put my metric wrenches?...
Tony having lived my whole life in the US I find it odd that anyone would want to use Celsius (Centigrade) who lives outside of the US. This is my bubble and I expect the whole world to live by my standards. lol
On a serious note, I wish the US would convert. This has dragged on too long and I think it is time for the world to unite on these standards. Well, most of the world has already done that outside of the US. But I do like Fahrenheit for more finer outdoor temperature statements. When I go to Asia and taking in the daytime heat, one "C" degree higher in temp equals 2 in "F" and that one degree is noticeable. Other than that, can't we all just get along?
Now, where did I put my metric wrenches?...
Jim,
I agree about one world wide standard but I am like you I would prefer Fahrenheit. Celsius is just too compressed for me. In an "F" world 75.3 degrees is dumb but in a "C" world (for me) it is almost required to get a good feel for what the temperature really is i.e. 24.05556
Compressed for what? Ambient temperature? 30C is warm, 18C is cold. 16C is colder than 18C. I can't tell apart 18C from 18.5C, I really can'tJim,
I agree about one world wide standard but I am like you I would prefer Fahrenheit. Celsius is just too compressed for me. In an "F" world 75.3 degrees is dumb but in a "C" world (for me) it is almost required to get a good feel for what the temperature really is i.e. 24.05556
If it's 40C or 41C outside, I'm sweating anyway [emoji14]
I guess it just depends on what you know and are used to.
Meters, millimeters, km, litres etc just seem so simple and decimal based anything else is just confusing. I can easily convert 100.000 meters in 100km by just dropping zeros. If I had to convert 100.000 feet in miles, my brain would melt in the process.
Regards
Tony
Sent from my keyboard through my phone or something like that.
Jim,
I agree about one world wide standard but I am like you I would prefer Fahrenheit. Celsius is just too compressed for me. In an "F" world 75.3 degrees is dumb but in a "C" world (for me) it is almost required to get a good feel for what the temperature really is i.e. 24.05556
Celsius? Farenheit? Meh, those are so uncool. Those who are hip all know that the Delisle temperature scale is where it's at these days!
Celsius? Farenheit? Meh, those are so uncool. Those who are hip all know that the Delisle temperature scale is where it's at these days!
Yoz,
I had to look that up of course.
"The Delisle scale places the water freezing point at 150 °D, and water boiling point at 0 °D. Therefore at higher Delisle numbers correspond lower temperatures. It was invented by Joseph-Nicolas Delisle, a French astronomer."
That Frenchman must have had one too many bottles of wine when he dreamed that up.
How about a new temp scale the "Holman"...where the boiling point of water is 200 Holmans....I could accept that no problem.Jim,
I agree about one world wide standard but I am like you I would prefer Fahrenheit. Celsius is just too compressed for me. In an "F" world 75.3 degrees is dumb but in a "C" world (for me) it is almost required to get a good feel for what the temperature really is i.e. 24.05556
It's close enough to the temp scale I'm accustomed to so I know when It's 110 Holmans outside...I need to stay inside.
Duane
I have much to say about your reply quoted here. For now I will remind you that the discussion of Celsius vs Fahrenheit has been debated here numerous times. For example, on April 14 when you picked the same fight about it. And I think you've been around long enough to know that the mere mention of F vs C is guaranteed to start a fight. And I fail to see how that was remotely connected to my comment about the factual misuse of "Joules". Who is doing the baiting here?????
So who is picking fights here? You may wish to review the rules here yourself. And these are not my rules but rules you are imposing on me, such as apparently I am unable to discuss anything buried in the 7500 preceding replies here. Those are not my rules, nor do I agree with them. I just think it is fair to request that you adhere to your own self imposed rules.
And I am in my late 50s, as my profile factually and clearly indicates. Did you not bother to look, or was that a back handed insult intended to "pick a fight"? *I* did not pick a fight. I merely asked if anyone else had an issue with the obvious misuse of the term. Which has resulted in great confusion, as evidenced in HolmanGT's recent reply, and numerous others here. I suspect because he is unwilling to simply suggest that the emperor has no clothes here. But the mob of fanboys will attack anyone that suggests otherwise, as I did.
It was not I that tried a strategy of Revisionist History to pick a fight about this. I merely challenged you to support your revisionist assertion with a credible link. In fact no one has ever specified a light bulb in watt-hours. It's been watts since Edison. And the lumens argument is a total Red Herring and simply irrelevant to my post.
In fact I did buy a different mod, mainly because the more I read in this thread the more credibility issues I came up with. Issues such as lack of warranty disclosure and how they went about the titanium update, which IMHO was very unprofessional and not becoming of a company marketing a device at 4x the cost of many of their competitors. I wanted to buy this product but I just couldn't.
How about a new temp scale the "Holman"...where the boiling point of water is 200 Holmans....I could accept that no problem.
It's close enough to the temp scale I'm accustomed to so I know when It's 110 Holmans outside...I need to stay inside.
Duane
I don't know why Duane but I am pretty partial to the "Holman" scale. It just kind of has a pleasant ring to it.
IDK but I am so used to using Joules I just set it and forget it. As far as the Ti mode for me I am using Vape Mesh 26awg 5 wraps spaced 3mm .275 ohm and I wick all 3 the same with KGD all come out withing .005ohms of each other. For my vaping I can either use Ni mode 270 13J or Ti mode 460-470 13J get the same vape. It's pretty much the same vape I get with 28awg NI200 at 390 12J .07ohm coil so if you consider that good in Ti mode then it is just as good in Ni mode. Neither one is right. I'm happy with the way it vapes in Ni mode but would be just as happy in Ti mode because it is the same. Now if I could vape at 390 13J in Ti mode I would consider it good.
Hey...you don't want anyone to define their units in terms of energy because you are comfortable with power....so what? Many folks are comfortable with energy...so what?
Sometimes miles per hour makes more sense for a given measurement than miles. Let's quit arguing about who's comfortable with what measurement term. Not everyone needs to see things with your eyes, or with mine.
Duane
Pretty much all measurements related to human perception are arbitrary and have flaws. Celsius is based on a range determined by the freezing and boiling point of water, which doesn't make all that much sense for human beings. Fahrenheit is more sensible in that regard (cold day vs. hot day in Berlin), but then both suffer by using graduations that are imperceptible to human beings. One can argue that an idealized temperature scale is one where a one degree change in temperature is perceptible.
As for metric being based on base 10, that makes math easy, but doesn't fit the scale of human perception either. There is a reason why people, even after conversion to metric, still have a preference for using English-style measurements. That is because we strongly perceive differences based on doubling or halving. Languages often reflect this fact, as there are typically many more words for having twice of something (e.g., pair, deuce, couple, twin) compared to other combinations. We started off understating one of something, double of something, and a lot of something, after which we then developed more complex (but less perceptible) number systems to describe our environment.
In the end, whatever measurement system we use, despite their flaws, we often end up converting it to how we actually perceive the environment. In metric, the meter is often impractical for many measurements, so they often use centimeters or millimeters instead. In Imperial, it is funky to convert feet to miles, but we don't really think of the two in the same context (e.g., feet/inches is what we use to describe measurements around us, miles are something we use to describe traveling long distances). The same is true with metric users: No European is going to say, "Oh, town hall, that's 361,528 centimeters from here."
Are you really suggesting that fundamental engineering definitions are opinions, to be used however one wishes?
Miles per hour (or some other unit of measure equivalent) is the *only* way to describe rate of speed. Miles (or some UOM equivalent) is the only way to measure distance. It is not a matter of what one is "comfortable with".
I'm going to start a campaign for the new Holman temperature scale. Conversion from Celsius to Holman and back is easy for everyone.Pretty much all measurements related to human perception are arbitrary and have flaws. Celsius is based on a range determined by the freezing and boiling point of water, which doesn't make all that much sense for human beings. Fahrenheit is more sensible in that regard (cold day vs. hot day in Berlin), but then both suffer by using graduations that are imperceptible to human beings. One can argue that an idealized temperature scale is one where a one degree change in temperature is perceptible.
As for metric being based on base 10, that makes math easy, but doesn't fit the scale of human perception either. There is a reason why people, even after conversion to metric, still have a preference for using English-style measurements. That is because we strongly perceive differences based on doubling or halving. Languages often reflect this fact, as there are typically many more words for having twice of something (e.g., pair, deuce, couple, twin) compared to other combinations. We started off understating one of something, double of something, and a lot of something, after which we then developed more complex (but less perceptible) number systems to describe our environment.
In the end, whatever measurement system we use, despite their flaws, we often end up converting it to how we actually perceive the environment. In metric, the meter is often impractical for many measurements, so they often use centimeters or millimeters instead. In Imperial, it is funky to convert feet to miles, but we don't really think of the two in the same context (e.g., feet/inches is what we use to describe measurements around us, miles are something we use to describe traveling long distances). The same is true with metric users: No European is going to say, "Oh, town hall, that's 361,528 centimeters from here."
Duane
Pretty much all measurements related to human perception are arbitrary and have flaws. Celsius is based on a range determined by the freezing and boiling point of water, which doesn't make all that much sense for human beings. Fahrenheit is more sensible in that regard (cold day vs. hot day in Berlin), but then both suffer by using graduations that are imperceptible to human beings. One can argue that an idealized temperature scale is one where a one degree change in temperature is perceptible.
As for metric being based on base 10, that makes math easy, but doesn't fit the scale of human perception either. There is a reason why people, even after conversion to metric, still have a preference for using English-style measurements. That is because we strongly perceive differences based on doubling or halving. Languages often reflect this fact, as there are typically many more words for having twice of something (e.g., pair, deuce, couple, twin) compared to other combinations. We started off understating one of something, double of something, and a lot of something, after which we then developed more complex (but less perceptible) number systems to describe our environment.
In the end, whatever measurement system we use, despite their flaws, we often end up converting it to how we actually perceive the environment. In metric, the meter is often impractical for many measurements, so they often use centimeters or millimeters instead. In Imperial, it is funky to convert feet to miles, but we don't really think of the two in the same context (e.g., feet/inches is what we use to describe measurements around us, miles are something we use to describe traveling long distances). The same is true with metric users: No European is going to say, "Oh, town hall, that's 361,528 centimeters from here."
"No European is going to say, "Oh, town hall, that's 361,528 centimeters from here."
Tony does.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked