News:

Happy New Year! Yes, the current one, not a previous one; this is a new post, we swear!

Main Menu

Cables suck.

Started by iago, March 17, 2009, 11:02:39 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Chavo

I haven't really kept up with this concept enough, but if I recall correctly there are some pretty major problems with signal interference as well.

iago

Quote from: MyndFyre on March 18, 2009, 12:23:16 PM
I can't speak specifically to the device-end tip, but a lot of plugs do have different plug-ends for that reason.  I've used laptop power supplies that have had 65W, 95W, and 115W; they've all had different power adapter components.  Most contain AC-DC converters for different voltages (commonly 6V and 9V DC), and the size directly impacts heat generation.  Larger surface area enables the use of cheaper components, because the larger surface area enables greater heat conduction.  Some support both 115 and 230 power outlets (such as my cell phone charger) whereas others only support the North American standard.

There's a lot of room for variation. :)
Standardization for the win! Even if there were a handful of standard types/voltages, it would save a ton of trouble.

Camel

Quote from: Sidoh on March 18, 2009, 06:56:57 PM
MyndFyre provided the insight that attenuation is exponential in distance traveled.  This would mean the effects of attenuation become exponentially (c^n) stronger as distance increases.
No, it's (on average; assuming no ferrous metals are interfering) proportional to the square of the distance -- flux through a shell does not change based on radius, so the power density decreases just as the surface area of a shell increases.

<Camel> i said what what
<Blaze> in the butt
<Camel> you want to do it in my butt?
<Blaze> in my butt
<Camel> let's do it in the butt
<Blaze> Okay!

Sidoh

Quote from: Camel on March 20, 2009, 05:29:40 PM
Quote from: Sidoh on March 18, 2009, 06:56:57 PM
MyndFyre provided the insight that attenuation is exponential in distance traveled.  This would mean the effects of attenuation become exponentially (c^n) stronger as distance increases.
No, it's (on average; assuming no ferrous metals are interfering) proportional to the square of the distance -- flux through a shell does not change based on radius, so the power density decreases just as the surface area of a shell increases.

This isn't a subject I find particularly interesting, and I don't claim to be well versed in it.

From a quick glance of the wikipedia article, though, it seems that attenuation can be exponential. :P

Camel

Quote from: Sidoh on March 20, 2009, 06:50:44 PM
From a quick glance of the wikipedia article, though, it seems that attenuation can be exponential. :P

My guess would be that whoever wrote that mistook the meaning of exponential, but I haven't looked at the article so that's just a shot in the dark.

Out of curiosity, which article was it?

<Camel> i said what what
<Blaze> in the butt
<Camel> you want to do it in my butt?
<Blaze> in my butt
<Camel> let's do it in the butt
<Blaze> Okay!

Krazed

Competition creates choice.
It is good to be good, but it is better to be lucky.

iago

Choice isn't necessarily a good thing. For evidence, I present my first post.