More, more! On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 1:29 PM, Ron Nossaman <rnossaman at cox.net> wrote: > Fred Sturm wrote: > > Okay, I thought you had looked at the formula for breaking point in >> Rhodes, and were saying it was the same as Sanderson and/or Hays. >> > > Fred, how does "My numbers correspond to yours for the Rhodes formula" > possibly translate into me claiming that they were the same as the Sanderson > and/or Hays formulas? You aren't making sense at all. Are you all right? > > > So IOW whatever Rhodes is using to get at breaking point is inconsistent >> with Sanderson/Hays/etc. >> > > Yes Fred, those are the very words. Now that you yourself have spoken the > words, can you accept that you, personally, are absolutely correct, that > break% does not, indeed, change with a change in wire size in spite of > others' intuitive belief that it does? > > Congratulations. You've won. > Ron N > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://ptg.org/pipermail/caut.php/attachments/20091207/5541aba0/attachment-0001.htm>
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC