 |
Don
Lancaster's Guru's Lair What's New? 2006 Archive |
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
January 2 2007
Closed out the 2006 What's New blog entries as two files.
http://www.tinaja.com/whtnu06a.asp is January to June
and http://www.tinaja.com/whtnu06 is July to December.
Clicking on whtnu06b gives you whtnu06. We will probably
split 2007 into more than two sections to try and keep the
file sizes down. Our goal is new and useful content daialy.
January 1 2007
Turns out that PostScript gladly reports integers up to
two billion or so to full accuracy. So the trick to picking
up another two decimal points of floating point reported
precision is to normalize each real to an integer in the
ten to hundred million range, convert it to a string, and
then dink around with the string to replace the decimal
point and sign.
Here's a simple and preliminary example that is only
good for reals between 1.0000000 and 9.9999999...
/unitsto8dp { dup 0 le /isneg exch store
abs /val exch store /workstr val 10000000
mul cvi 20 string cvs store isneg {(-)}{( )}
ifelse workstr 0 1 getinterval mergestr
(.) mergestr workstr 1 workstr length 1 sub
getinterval mergestr 20 string cvs } store
This routine uses my mergestr routine from my
Gonzo Utilities...
/mergestr {2 copy length exch length add
string dup dup 4 3 roll 4 index length exch
putinterval 3 1 roll exch 0 exch putinterval
} def
I'll try to work up a GuruGram on a more general
solution.
December 31, 2006
I feel it is a good rule to always typeset first and edit
last. The exact arrangement and appearance of your
work is equally important as the words themselves.
And yes, spelling counts.
December 30, 2006
Spam seems to be accelerating at an insane pace,
and it is not too difficult to predict an imminent and
total collapse of the web because of it.
At present, we receive something like 2000 spam
messages a day, most of which are trapped by our
ISP filtering. Compared to a few dozen worthwhile
messages.
The alarming thing is that the spam to useful ratio
is dramatically accelerating. Further, the spam feeds
on itself. Since everybody now recognizes the tricks
to bypass the spam filters ( .GIF files, misspellings,
random words, repeated contacts, etc etc...) many more
spam messages have to be sent out to get even
remotely near their previous return.
The solution is simple: No more email arriving with
postage due.
December 29, 2006
There is apparently now a New England NEEIC
alternative to the California PIER new energy grants.
December 28, 2006
Overheard some alternate energy enthusiasts who
were lavishly praising Sterling engines as the
ultimate solution to low delta-t energy recovery.
It quickly became obvious that they did not have
the faintest clue of the underlying thermodynamics
or economics.
To date, the Sterling engine has been one of the
largest and most monumental engineering ratholes
of all times. Here is why...
Carnot Matters -- There is a fundamental and
unavoidable law of thermodynamics that says
the best possible efficiency of any heat engine
is proportional to the absolute temperature
delta fraction. Thus your best possible efficiency
a 20 degree rise at 70 degree F room temperature
would be 20/(459+70) = 3.8 percent. And no
real world system can be even this good.
Efficiency Matters --As efficiency goes down,
the size and complexity of the energy recovery
device will disproportionately increase in a
hyperbolic or worse manner for a given set of
recovery values. Which is why absolutely free
pv solar panels of less than six percent efficiency
are totally commercially useless.
Amortization Matters -- If your energy recovery
device is producing an average of two cents worth
of electricity per day and your total cost of ownership
is three cents per day, you have a gasoline destroying
net energy sink. The longer you run it, the more
gasoline you destroy
Gotchas Matter -- A Sterling engine needs a
special part called a regenerator. Regenerators
have to be long and thin and short and fat.
They also have to be very good conductors of
heat and outstanding insulators. Extreme
engineering compromise is needed and nobody
has come up with a good regeneration solution
to date.
Much more in our Energy Fundamentals tutorial.
December 27, 2006
Got some demo code tentatively working for
some ultrafast Magic Sinewave solutions given
a good initial guess. It seems hundreds or even
thousands of times faster than before.
It is based on factoring the equations into a
guess cosine and an error term that ( presently )
is slope estimated. Rearranging the terms
and substituting leaves n linear equations in
n unknowns. This is easily and quickly solvable
by Gauss Jordan elimination.
At present, the solution is "not quite" one step.
A few iterations are still required. But they
do quickly drive the distortion down to all
zeros out to fifteen decimal places, and the
amplitude to a similarly exact value.
It sure is satisfying to see all those zeros.
And nothing but zeros on the forced harmonic
terms. Often with five or fewer passes.
I suspect an exact one step solution exists.
Fully deterministic for a valid initial guess.
Instead of a slope approximation of minus the
sine, a trig identity of cos (a+b) = cos(a)cos(b) -
sin(a)sin(b) might prove of value. But it seems
like there might be a second factor or some
larger interfering error yet to be discovered.
Preliminary code can be made available to
Synergetics Partners and associates at present.
Some useful things the faster code may assist
with: Exploring sinewaves with many hundreds
and possibly thousands of harmonics zeroed.
This would dramatically simplify filtering,
offer wide frequency operation, and raising of
uncontrolled harmonics out of the audio range.
At the cost of reduced efficiency and fancier
chips/programming.
And discovering scalable code for variable n
that does not require extensive reworking for
each and every n to be analyzed.
And finding new classes of Magic Sinewave solutions
beyond the six or so that are presently known.
Something that would give a "suppressed carrier"
would certainly be handy. Possibly with two pulses
of the "wrong" polarity early in the mix. Or of
multi amplitude stepped supply solutions.
A Magic Sinewave intro appears here.
December 26, 2006
Can the math precision and accuracy of PostScript
be improved? Its out-of-the-box six decimal point
reported answers were not quite good enough for at
least some of my Magic Sinewave research.
A case can be made that more than six decimal
results would only lengthen font files without any
measurable result in most graphic applications.
But 31 bit plus sign math should be good for two
billion states, or over nine decimal points. Minus
where they stopped in any of their transcendental
approximation algorithms. And minus what their
floating point routines allow..
Here's a preliminary experiment: The square root
of two in PS returns 1.41421 . Rounding to four
decimal places and subtracting gives .0000135899.
Combining the two returns 1.4142 1358 99. Compared
against the "real" answer of 1.4142 1356 23. Which
is right on at eight decimal places, and not too bad
at nine.
A simple text reformatter that does the combinations
for you should be possible. And based on our Gonzo
mergestr convenience operator.
Again, you would have to compare exactly what you
wanted against the individual algorithms in use for the
fancier functions.
Adobe does state a precision of "approximately" eight
decimal digits. And apparently are using single precision
IEEE 754 floating point. Because of a "normalization"
scheme in this, they are able to make several bits serve
double uses, resulting in the claimed precision.
Possibly more later.
December 25, 2006
Do we have yet another bogus water powered car
fiasco coming down? The known ( and repeatedly
remeasured zillions of times daily ) energy density
of STP hydrogen is 2.7 watthours per STP liter
electrically recoverable or 3.3 watthours per liter
total energy.
This company appears to claim to be able to input
1.0 watthours of electricity to produce 3.3 watthours
of stored hydrogen energy. In an electrolysis related
process.
Although a stunning reversal of centuries of electrochem
and thermodynamic research is one dim possibility, I feel
that much more likely explanations are (A) the usual
ho-hum incompetent measurement of oddball waveshapes,
(B) having water vapor or other gas components in
the output stream, or (C) being yet another in a countless
stream of attempted ripoff scams.
Their 2.5x improvement claim is remarkably similar to
the difference you would expect between average and
rms currents in a typical pulse waveform situation.
As we've seen before, "perfect" and "free" electrolysis
is totally useless when powered from high value sources
such as pv solar, wind, or grid. Because of the staggering
loss of exergy. Thermodynamic fundamentals guarantee
that a kilowatt hour of electricity is ridiculously more
valuable than a kilowatt hour of unstored hydrogen gas.
The process is pretty much the same as 1:1 converting
US dollars into Mexican Pesos.
And that is before amortization and maintenance.
Further, if this is an onboard vehicle system, the fanbelt
alone guarantees that no more than homeopathic placebo
quantities of hydrogen can be produced. As we have seen
here in the November 19th entry.
More on energy fundamentals here, on bogus water
powered scams here, and on bashing pseudoscience
here.
December 24, 2006
Nissan may have just come up with a stunning hybrid
vehicle engineering breakthrough: A motor with two
rotors and one stator. Each rotor can run at different
speeds, and either can act as a generator.
Firstoff, this solves the differential problem in spades.
The ultimate in electronically controlled positraction.
Secondly, generation from an ICE and regenerative
braking from the wheels can be handled by the same unit.
At substantially reduced cost and weight and complexity.
December 23, 2006 ( Please read yesteday's entry first )
Continuing our Gauss-Jordan tutorial, but this time
the Jordan part. When we last left off, we had a
( relabeled ) array of...
[ 1 c01 c02 c03 c04 j05 ]
[ 0 1 c12 c13 c14 j15 ]
[ 0 0 1 c23 c24 j25 ]
[ 0 0 0 1 c34 j35 ]
[ 0 0 0 0 1 z ]
where cxx is the row and column coefficient for
the left side equation terms, and jxx is the
similar row and column coefficient for the right
side equation term.
The usual way to solve this is by back substitution.
Start off with y = j35 - z*c34 and so on. And then
work your way up a row at a time, making more
complex calculations until you have v through z
all solved.
The Jordan approach starts off the same way, but
it works one column at a time, greatly simplifying
computer programming. Especially if more than
one n x n equation set is to be accommodated.
The rule is that any constant can be subtracted
from one term in the left side of the equation if
the same constant is subtracted from the right
side of the equation.
Subtract z*c34 from row 4...
[ 1 c01 c02 c03 c04 k05 ]
[ 0 1 c12 c13 c14 k15 ]
[ 0 0 1 c23 c24 k25 ]
[ 0 0 0 1 0 y ]
[ 0 0 0 0 1 z ]
So far, this is the same as the usual back substitution.
We now can observe y by inspection The difference
with Jordan is to continue with columns instead of
rows. Modify the rows by subtracting z*c24, z*c14,
and z*c04 to get...
[ 1 c01 c02 c03 0 m05 ]
[ 0 1 c12 c13 0 m15 ]
[ 0 0 1 c23 0 m25 ]
[ 0 0 0 1 0 y ]
[ 0 0 0 0 1 z ]
Next, modify column three by subtracting
y*c23, y*c13, and y*c03. And then column
two by subtracting x*c12 and x*c02. And
finally column one by subtracting w*c01
to get...
[ 1 0 0 0 0 v ]
[ 0 1 0 0 0 w ]
[ 0 0 1 0 0 x ]
[ 0 0 0 1 0 y ]
[ 0 0 0 0 1 z ]
Your values v through z are now instantly
readable by inspection.
Once again, the Jordan method takes just as
many calculations as back substitution, but it
greatly simplifies computation in that loops do
not have any multiple calculations or complicated
cross-coefficients in them.
December 22, 2006
Finally figured out what the "Jordan" part of Gauss
Jordan elimination is all about. Turns out that while
there are just as many calculations that are just as
complex as plain old back substitution, those calcs
lend themselves to much simpler and more easily
automated computer loops.
Consider five linear equations in five unknowns...
A0*v + B0*w + C0*x +D0*y + E0*z = K0
A1*v + B1*w + C1*x +D1*y + E1*z = K1
A2*v + B2*w + C2*x +D2*y + E2*z = K2
A3*v + B3*w + C3*x +D3*y + E3*z = K3
A4*v + B4*w + C4*x +D4*y + E4*z = K4
While all sorts of solution methods exist, we seek
one that is computationally efficient. If we dink
around with some manipulations ahead of time, we
can eventually end up with a solution that will be
obvious by inspection!
Arrange the coefficients into a group of arrays...
[ A0 B0 C0 D0 E0 K0 ]
[ A1 B1 C1 D1 E1 K1 ]
[ A2 B2 C2 D2 E2 K2 ]
[ A3 B3 C3 D3 E3 K3 ]
[ A4 B4 C4 D4 E4 K4 ]
[ A4 B4 C4 D4 E4 K4 ]
The rules for our "Gauss" part of rearrangement
are that any row can be scaled by any constant term
by term without changing the results.
And that any row can be subtracted from any other
row term by term and substituted. Again without
changing the results.
In interests of sanity, let "~" be any coefficient
that resulted from previous manipulation. Scale the
top row by dividing by its initial value...
[ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ]
[ A1 B1 C1 D1 E1 K1 ]
[ A2 B2 C2 D2 E2 K2 ]
[ A3 B3 C3 D3 E3 K3 ]
[ A4 B4 C4 D4 E4 K4 ]
Scale the top row by A1 and subtract it from the
next row down and replacing...
[ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ]
[ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ]
[ A2 B2 C2 D2 E2 K2 ]
[ A3 B3 C3 D3 E3 K3 ]
[ A4 B4 C4 D4 E4 K4 ]
Similarly, scale the top row by A2 subtract it from
the middle row. Then scale by A3 for row 3 and A4
for row4...
[ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ]
[ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ]
[ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ]
[ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ]
[ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ]
Now, scale the second row down by its first nonzero
coefficient...
[ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ]
[ 0 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ]
[ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ]
[ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ]
[ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ]
Next, force zeros in the second column the same we
we did with the first, but using the second row for
subtraction and substitution...
[ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ]
[ 0 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ]
[ 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ]
[ 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ]
[ 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ]
Keep working your way through the array, this time
scaling the third row down by its first nonzero term and
then using scaled subtractions to zero out everything
below in the same column.
Eventually, you should end up with...
[ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ]
[ 0 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ]
[ 0 0 1 ~ ~ ~ ]
[ 0 0 0 1 ~ ~ ]
[ 0 0 0 0 1 ~ ]
This completes the Gauss part of the process.
The lower right squiggle will be z by inspection!
From here, we can use back substitution or the
Jordan scheme. More on Jordan tomorrow.
December 21, 2006
Computing power has gotten FUNDAMENTALLY
INSANE.
Just realized I was sitting here solving 14 linear
equations in 14 unknowns to 64 bit precision. And
worrying about how I was going to speed up the
algorithm to get under 120 milliseconds. And being
upset that 32-bit math, while useful, was not quite
good enough to do the job at hand.
That, of course, is while limping along on an ancient
( almost two years old! ) 750 MHz machine. Compared
to back in college where I would spend hours with a
K&E log log duplex decitrig slide rule along with the
Mathematical Tables from the Handbook of Chemistry
and Physics to try and solve a simple transmission line
problem. To three percent accuracy.
Just about anybody now has personal computing power
that is unimaginably beyond the best available to only
the biggest schools or corporations a very few years
ago.
Which tells us that these days, if you have a problem,
throw some math at it. Another ten million calculations
is simply not that big a deal anymore. Brute force
reigns supreme.
And no telling where it will lead.
Places where bunches of intense math have proved both
interesting and popular include my Fun with Fields and
my ongoing Magic Sinewave alternate energy research.
Other technological breakthroughs reviewed here.
And more math stuff here and here.
December 20, 2006
Outside of the thousand cases of White Tiger Energy
Drink, Arizona Auctions seem to be in the middle
of their usual year end lull.
The recent military surplus changes seem to be
pretty much implemented. Per this map, it seems
that mil surplus bargains have completely vanished
in places like Arizona or New Mexico. While very
much increasing in areas like West Florida and
Central Pennsylvania.
Part of their "efficiency improvement" involves
transshipping unsold surplus nearly a thousand miles
from Southern Arizona to Northern Utah.
Your tax dollars at work.
As we have already seen, additional details are here
and here. Not sure where this will leave Government
Liquidation. Dollar volume at several of their manned
sites clearly appears to have dropped precipitously.
December 19, 2006
An interesting story on America's highest value
farm crop. Now exceeding both wheat and corn
combined. Mostly due to the enormously lucrative
DHS and DEA subsidies and price supports. Plus,
of course, absolutely superb 100% tax credits. Can
ethanol production from it be all that far behind?
Do these farmers really need all that federal aid?
December 18, 2006
Found and verified an even better and much
faster route to Magic Sinewave solutions.
Factor the equations into present angle +
slope*xoffset. Regroup the present angles
to the right side, leaving 14 linear equations
in 14 unknowns. Solve by using Gaussian
Elimination and Back Substitution.
Note that the fundamental error can be included
in a "pseudo distortion" error array. This
eliminates the amplitude variation we got with
the present methods. Note also that the slope
of cos(5x) is -5sin(5x) and similar.
I've got this working beautifully in PostScript,
except it is maddeningly at the PS math 32-bit
limit. I find PostScript infinitely more intuitive
and friendly than JavaScript when it comes to
exploring math options.
At any rate, the results seem incredibly fast
converging, likely needing only a single pass.
At speeds hundreds or thousands of times
faster than before.
Further work probably depends upon your
funded support.
December 17, 2006
So, what are the other "secret stuff things
to do" in the Gila Valley?
Sadly, our two best wild hot springs are no
more. But here's my own selection of good
stuff that is still here...
~ MGIO observatory tours
~ Discovery park simulator and telescope
~ Mount Graham aerial tramway
~ Gila Box Riparian Area
~ Hot well dunes recreation area
~ Eden hotel & hot spring ( restricted )
~ Arivaipa Canyon
~ The legendary 4WD "Rug Road"
~ Bonita Creek
~ Frey Mesa Falls
~ Morenci Mine tour
~ Eurofresh tours
~ Black Hills Rockhounding
~ Bear Springs ( restricted )
~ Mazuma mine scam ( restricted )
~ Ash Creek Flumes
~ Kennedy Peak
~ Bear Canyon
~ Needle's Eye
~ West End Mines
~ Oak Grove Canyon
~ Willcox to Bonita bicycle loop
~ Cluff Ranch Wildlife Area
~ Mcilheney water scam
~ Tollhouse Canyon
~ San Carlos Lake
~ Upper Lower Middle Box
~ Cedar Springs
~ Crystal Hills ( restricted )
~ Pima Gap
~ Round Mountain Rockhounding
~ Morenci Crystal Cave
~ Frey Lake
~ Grantham Cave
~ Fisherman's Point
~ Stockton Wash
~ Gila Box float trips
~ Buford Canyon
~ EAC Library
~ Secret hidden springs with fish
~ Mesquite Bosque
~ Spring Canyon
~ El Capitan Canyon
~ York Valley bicycle loop
~ Roper and Gillard hot springs
~ Back Country Byway
~ Arizona Eastern Railroad ridealong?
~ Mt. Graham Ice Caves
~ Red Knolls pseudokarst
~ Safford Valley Grids
~ Eagle Creek Bat Cave ( restricted )
~ Guthrie Peak
~ Cliffton Historic District
~ Johnny Creek Loop ( restricted )
~ Obscure Gila River access points
~ Roper Lake
~ Hidden streams near Treasure Park
~ Lower Marijilda Crossing
~ Round the Mountain tinajas
~ High Creek Road
~ McEwen ruin
~ The "lost" CCC camp
~ San Simon dam
~ Marijilda Ruin
~ Lebanon Reservoirs
~ Pima Museum
~ Table Mountain Mines
~ Abandoned old highway 70 bicycling
~ Engle Orchard
~ Deadman Ditch
~ Old Safford Bridges
~ Big Lue Mountains
~ Prehistoric agave roasting rings
~ Bramaham Cave ( permit required )
~ Allen Reservoir
~ Bear Flat
~ Riggs Lake
~ Whitlock Cinega Hot Lake
~ Webb Peak Lookout
~ San Jose hot well
~ EAC Anthropological Exhibits
~ Zeolite beds
~ Carter Sawmill
~ Shingle Mill Canyon
~ C119 at Pima International Airport
~ Goat Hill ruin
~ H X Dam
~ Taylor Pass
~ Greasewood Range
~ Dutch Henry Trail
~ Pima Badlands
~ Muleshoe Preserve
~ Arivaipa Ghost Town
~ Old Morenci Trail ( restricted )
~ Turtle Mountain
~ Flying Butress Dam
~ Dankworth Ponds
~ Guthrie
~ Paddy's River
~ U of A agricultural Research Station
~ Apache Box Buddhist Retreat
~ Mt. Graham sawmill
~ Bear Basin
~ Toppy's Cave
~ Wood Canyon
~ Deadman Falls
~ Grahm County Historical Society Museum
~ Santa Teresa Rock Climbing
~ West Peak
~ Amerind Foundation
~ Copper Canyon
~ Old Marble Quarry
~ China Peak Observatory
~ Redfield Canyon
~ Power's Garden
~ Fishhooks Wilderness
~ Whitlock Mountain Ski Condos
~ Day Mine Road
Are we there yet?
December 16, 2006
Here in the Gila Valley, it is not all that unusual
to come across prehistoric potsherds dating from
the twelfth or thirteenth century. Potsherds have
a unique property in that the pots are extremely
delicate and break easily, but the broken pieces
are virtually indestructible. And keep forever.
Many potsherds can be dated and time stamped.
Relatively through style, art, temper, thickness,
tradeware routes, rim finish, color, slip, history,
and such. And absolutely datable by way of
thermoluminescence or paleomagnetism. And
association datable by using tree rings or C14
techniques. And, of course, stratigraphy.
With one exception, the Gila Valley is somewhat
of an archaeological backwater. Only a few dozen
mid sized sites are known, and most of them are
more "interesting" rather than spectacular. Most
artifacts seem to be more of the "steal the plans"
variety or imported from elsewhere.
That exception is collectively called the Safford
Valley Grids. These are rectangular groupings of
"fields" formed by removing rocks from their
centers and carefully and completely bordering.
There are many thousands of these, typically
grouped by the dozens or hundreds. But sometimes
occurring in singles. Often 15 by 20 feet or so.
These show up quite clearly on Google Maps.
They are invariably sited on mesa top like
benches of very carefully selected Gradual
slope and aspect and soils. Typical absence
of other artifacts and their arrangement
strongly suggests some agricultural use,
Such as dry farming or hand irrigating.
Obviously, countless hours of engineering and
use and maintenance went into their use.
A mystery to me is why they would piss around
with infertile and rocky benches of poor soils,
limited rainfall, and sparse vegetation. When there
was a perfectly good river and easily irrigated
fertile bottomlands a few hundred yards away.
One offered explanation is that malaria or other
fatal diseases frequented the "vapors" of the
bottomlands. Another is the seasonal variability
and violent floods of the Gila River itself.
The definitive reference on these is The Safford
Valley Grids, available as U of A Press Anthro
Papers #70. Many of the sites are easily visited
by a mile or two dayhike. Most are on public lands.
December 15, 2006
One of the least expected sources for genuine
new energy developments is Keelynet.
Among all of the pseudoscience dreaming
and perpetual motion scams, enough real
developments accidentally sneak through to
make this site worth a daily visit.
December 14, 2006
As mentioned before, at one time I was very
big on Book-on-Demand publishing. But
these days, I strongly feel that ALL dead tree
books are clearly doomed. Given the near
certainty of an upcoming decent reader, the
advantages of eBooks utterly overwhelm.
There are several interesting directions in
BOD that seem worth investigating, though.
The first of these is Lulu. Which is basically
an online vanity publisher. Who can handle
book production and marketing for you in
any quantity at rates that are not totally
outrageous.
The second is good old Gigabooks. Who
show you how to use classic hand bookbinding
techniques for your own low end, low cost,
( but highly labor intensive ) publishing.
The key ingredient for BOD that never showed
up and likely never will is a $500 book finishing
machine that trims and binds on a desktop. With
perfect bound hard and softbound quality and
appearance comparable to bookstore standards.
Meanwhile, high end solutions abound that make
absolutely no economic sense to me. Such as
the Espresso Machine from OnLine Books. And
costing a mere $100,000.
Let's see. Say you finance one of these at 10
percent for 5 years. Your monthly payment will
be $2124.50. Which means if you sell a thousand
books per month, the machine alone will cost you
$2.13 per book. Assuming, no scrap, free labor,
no down time, no royalties, no rent, and absolutely
free materials.
And assuming the book world will not be totally
and radically different within 5 years.
A thousand books per month, consistently day in
and day out is a huge number. Also, a thousand
books per month is thirty books per day. Or roughly
four books per hour. If it takes more than fifteen
minutes per book total production, the machine will
be unable to exceed a thousand books per month.
Thus clearly boxing itself into a financial corner.
December 14, 2006
The latest issue of Science magazine gives
further credibility that ethanol from corn
under US farm conditions is simply a fifteen
billion dollar vote buying scam.
Your tax dollars at work.
Tilman, Hill, and Lehman, vol 314, 8 December
2006 pp 1598-1600. "Carbon-Negative Biofuels
from Low-Input High-Diversity Grassland
Biomass".
In which they find out that plain old wild grass in
mixed species on largely unattended marginal
non-croplands completely and utterly blows US
ethanol from corn away. While also providing
carbon sequestering in the roots of the perennial
crops. With insanely lower new energy inputs.
More in our Energy Fundamentals tutorial.
December 13, 2006
Added additional links to our Arizona Auction
Resources page.
Your own custom regional auction finder can be
created for you per these details.
I can do this for you a lot faster, cheaper, and better
than you can. But if you must make up your own, here
is how to go about it:
Start the listing with the National Auctioneers
Association and your local equivalent to the
Arizona Auctioneers Association. Then compile
a list of local auctioneers from their members
listings that have web sites. Visit the sites to
make sure they are currently active. Eliminate
any realtor sites that do not also have estate sales.
Or any superspecialized services not of interest.
Then compile a list of national auctioneers that
may be active in your areas. This is similar to
the middle column of our typical listings. Next,
compile a list of links to all of your state's
universities, community colleges, schools,
cities, towns and counties. email any likely
candidates to find out when and how their surplus
property is disposed of.
Then add the other web auction finder resources.
Most of these could not find a pig in a disphan
when it comes to Arizona auctions. Typically there
will be 65 to 150 Arizona auctions announced at
any one time. See how many you can find how
fast without my help.
Then go on to column three. Where you get a
national newspaper list, a state newspaper list,
and links to all of the Craig's List resources
nearby.
Next, you go through each and every newspaper
for your state, finding which ones have active
classified sections and which of those have enough
auction listings to be worthwhile. Some newspapers
(but only those that wish to survive for a few more
weeks) will also have web access to their display
ads as well. Be sure to seek these out and link them.
You might also want to create a list of all of the major
companies and employers in your area. Again to
seek out which have surplus property routinely
disposed of.
Finally, you recheck each and every listing, asking
all auction sites to put you on their email lists.
December 12, 2006
Google just released the beta of their new Patents
Search page. As usual, it looks like this will
completely blow away the earlier patent resources.
Winners, of course, are in the marketplace and
losers and failures are in the patent repositories.
For most individuals and small scale startups
most of the time, any involvement whatsoever with
patents and patenting are virtually certain to result
in a net loss of time, energy, money, and sanity.
Per this tutorial. Or in the very few instances
when a patent may make sense, this one.
More on our Patents library page. More on
product development on our Blatant Opportunist
and GuruGram library pages.
December 11, 2006
What you may be used to and works really well in
one computer language may end up with lots of
rude surprises in another.
I'm very much a manic fan of PostScript, and use
it for just about all of my general purpose computing
needs. But our Magic Sinewave work demanded
some 64 bit math and web page interactivity that is
better met by JavaScript. So, I have been using
both of these recently, even letting PostScript write
the JavaScript code for me.
I lost a bunch of time yesterday over JavaScript
apparently being unable to find its own variables.
Turns out this is a normal and expected "feature"
instead of a bug.
In PostScript, any variable inside any proc will
be freely available to any other proc. Unless you
go out of your way to isolate it with saves and
restores. There is rarely any need to predeclare
your variables in PostScript. In fact, this is
pretty much unheard of.
But with JavaScript, a variable used inside a
function is ONLY available to that function on a
local basis. Other portions of the code will be
unable to reach that variable and generate a
"not found" error message.
Thus, for most JavaScript uses most of the
time, predeclaring your variables at the beginning
of your code is a must. Using the var directive.
A second major surprise is that PostScript's math
functions are directly in degrees, while JavaScript
uses radians. The adjustment is to multiply all
JavaScript degree values by pi/180.
I sorely miss an equivalent to {} forall. And JS
is much fussier over syntax. Its parenthesis can
have multiple meanings as well. And the dup ==
debugger in PS seems more useful than the alert
in JS. Especially since I've found no way to cut
and paste out of a JS alert. Except by hand.
More on PostScript in our Beginner Stuff and
our Gonzo Utilities.
December 10, 2006
The holiest mantra of card carrying members of the
Church of the Latter Day Crackpots ( for whom, of
course, Nikoli Tesla is the patron saint ) is "But you
have not done the experiment!"
Well, firstoff, extraordinary claims ALWAYS demand
extraordinary proof. Secondly, it's ALWAYS up to the
claimant to provide their proof, not up to others to
disprove them.
But most importantly, research time and research
dollars are valuable. The foremost rule of legit
research is to not waste time or dollars on anything
that has a negligible probability of success.
There ALWAYS has to be some basis for optimism
or some ability to rip off federal funds for any valid
research to proceed.
Obviously the same bad beginner's mistakes that
everyone else makes by an obvious con artist fraud
attempt are rarely enough justification for serious
commitment of new research dollars.
Two cases in point: The Meyer Water Powered
Car fiasco: In reality, the "experiment" is rerun
millions of times daily. There are commercially
successful devices including EDM machining
and Qprox products that simply would not work
if Meyer was correct. Not to mention that there
is a whole EIS field ( short for Electrochemical
Impedance Spectroscopy that routinely has
never shown even the tiniest shred of evidence
of any Meyer validity.
And those old Bearden Claims have newly been
trashed in the latest issue of Skeptical Inquirer.
For Bearden to be correct, an utterly incredible
number of people would have to have been dead
wrong for a ridiculous time in countless different
ways.
As we have seen before, finding an unlimited
source of free energy would be one of the most
heinous crimes imaginable against humanity.
One that would make Hitler look like Mother
Teresa. And one that would rapidly convert
the planet into a cinder.
More on pseudoscience bashing here.
December 9, 2006
Continuing yesterday's discussion of technological
developments we can expect to happen soon...
INCREMENTAL BATTERY IMPROVEMENTS -
Electric vehicles and truly useful hybrids certainly
could use better battery technology. As could laptops
and PDA's for longer battery life. A major technology
breakthrough is unlikely, but small ongoing advances
seem the norm. And we already have NiMH cells
whose AA size capacity today exceeds yesterday's
sub-C's. NiCad technology recently discovered how
to use three outer electrons rather than just two for
a potential 50% increase. Use matched versions and
better manufacturing are routinely appearing on
product shelves. And a major upgrade in lithium
energy density is in the works.
MAJOR WEB CRASH-- Yesterday, I got 2,350
spam emails ( well filtered by our ISP ), 50 readable
messages of which twelve were remotely useful.
And the signal to noise ratio continues to deteriorate
at a dramatic rate. If this is typical of others in the
web, it is reasonable to predict that the web is near
certain to totally choke on its own vomit within a
very few weeks. The fundamental problem is that
email arrives postage due. This feature must be
eliminated if the web is to survive.
CHEAP SANTA CLAUS MACHINES - "Printers"
that print objects instead of messages are the crux
of the upcoming Santa Claus Machine revolution.
One intriguing low end approach is the RepRap
system that is eminently hackable. Here's a typical
service house, an example of architectural uses,
a good Gateway Link site, a good summary, and
another Resource Location.
CARBON NEUTRAL FUELS - We have already
seen below why the Hydrogen Economy flat out
ain't gonna happen. By far the best means of
storing hydrogen is to bond it to carbon in a
convenient room temperature liquid. Iso-octane
and Heptane have proven themselves to be
especially adept at this. Advantages of carbon
neutral approaches to alternate energy (as
opposed to carbon free ) are that (1) A significant
portion of the stored energy is provided by
the carbon component; (2) carbon appears to
be essential for the creation of room temperature
liquids of acceptable energy density and safety,
and (3) energy losses from reformation can be
eliminated, and (4) delivery infrastructure is
entirely or at least largely in place.
CLASS "D" AUDIO AMPS - I first ran a
tutorial on these in the February 1966 issue
of Electronics World and had a somewhat
more recent summary appear here. While
these have been "somewhat slow" out of the
starting gate, they are now coming on like
Gangbusters. Offering you high power, low
distortion, extreme efficiencies, no crossover
issues, and -- recently -- minimal output filtering.
Leading suppliers today include Analog Devices,
Maxim, National and Texas Instruments.
December 8, 2006
Here's some predictions of some technological developments
we can expect to happen soon...
BIG LED'S - White light emitting diodes are now
available in one and five watt levels approaching a
dollar each at ever increasing efficiencies that can
completely blow away fluorescents, let alone older
incandescents. Expect a major move from specialty
to routine lighting shortly. LED Journal is one good
info source.
EBOOK READERS - There is not the slightest
doubt that the utter demise of dead tree books is
imminent. An eBook reader or its replacement
can be expected "real soon now" that offers
better legibility, better convenience, and better
currency that traditional publications. Aided and
driven by a student revolt against backpacks. And
accepting standard .PDF and other files with DRM
a minor sideshow at best.
TOOTH DECAY GONE - A cheap once-a-week
mouthwash that completely eliminates dental
cavities sounds too good to be true. But it does
seem to be completely legit research proceeding
at a faster than expected pace Per this original
research, this activity today, and these links for
more info.
NET ENERGY SOLAR CELLS - As we have seen
in our Energy Fundamentals tutorial, not one net
watthour of conventional silicon pv electricity has
ever been produced. Nor is any ever likely. Today
the price of a synchronous inverter alone often will
consume more than the value of the electricity run
through it in its amortization. And that is before the
recent price runup and unavailability of silicon. But
new developments in SIGS solar and Quantum dots
may make all of conventional silicon ancient history.
$500 TRUE HDTV -- Flat panel displays have
finally turned the corner. Besides routine and
cheap 24 inch computer monitors, we can expect
a less than $500 and 32 inch HDTV with a full
1050 interlaced scan. Only it would be ludicrous
to still call it a television set, because almost
all viewed material will be computer, DVD, cable,
or direct web download. Expect CRT's, plasma, and
rear projection to die. And LCD's to dominate the
smaller screens, while DLP mirror technology will
handle the high end. Meanwhile, expect theaters
to continue their death wish by refusing to upgrade
to all digital screens.
December 7, 2006
Added some new links and corrected some older ones on
our Arizona Auction Links directory.
December 6, 2006
A photo and imaging tip left over from way on back
in my Popular Electronics days: There's this cheap
spray-on glop called Krylon Dulling Spray. Which
can dramatically improve anything bright on an
object that threatens to white burn. But the stuff is
somewhat difficult to remove and should not be used
on very high value or high tech items.
Additional photo and other tips here and here.
December 5, 2006
We have been having some email problems over the
last few days. Be sure to recontact us if anything
important slipped through the cracks.
Our email service does have an outstanding spam
filter. BUT -- yesterday we have 1240 spam messages,
54 real messages and 12 useful ones. If this is typical
of others in the web, it is reasonable to predict that
the web will totally choke on its own vomit within a
very few weeks.
Here is my proposed solution: The crux of the issue
is that email comes postage due. Eliminate this
feature. Make every email cost ten cents to send.
A recipient will have three options (A) accept the
source verified email at no cost to the sender, (B.)
accept the email and pocket nine cents, or else
(C.) return the email to the sender with another ten
cents due.
The average user would gladly pay a few dollars
a year to completely get rid of spam. And just
might get filthy rich if spam continues. And
the penny differential should pay for the service.
December 4, 2006
New ideas are just like pancakes or children.
You should always throw the first one away.
December 3, 2006
Magic Sinewaves are a newly discovered approach
to energy efficiency and power quality
Latest GuruGram #72 is on Faster Magic Sinewave
Zero Solutions.
Gonzo sourcecode for GG72 is available here..
December 2, 2006
Latest GuruGram #71 is on Enhancing your
eBay Tactical Skills V.
Gonzo sourcecode for GG71 is available here.
Earlier tutorials in the series can be found
here, here, here, and here.
December 1, 2006
Too good to be true department? I might have
found a way to make Magic Sinewave solutions
more deterministic very near their zeros.
If so, this should dramatically speed up analysis
time for very high zero harmonic solutions.
Here is the reasoning and some very preliminary
math. The full set of equations to be solved appears
here on page four. One seven pulse harmonic equation
to be zeroed might be something like...
cos (5*p1s) - cos (5*p1e) +.... +
cos(5*p7s) - cos(5*p7e) = 0
At present, when we are very near a zero, we use
Newton's Method or "shake the box" to improve
our answers. We make a small change in the p1s
edge and see if things get better. We keep making
small changes till a minimum is found. The "small
change" is then reduced and the process repeated
first for p1s and then for other pulse edges till an
acceptable number of decimal place gives a desired
accuracy.
At present, dozens to hundreds of complex iterations
are used. The method works very well, but it is slow
if more than a few dozen harmonics are to be zeroed.
Instead, if we are only changing p1s, everything else
is a constant ( this has already been used to speed up
the existing code ). We will also assume that the
new p1s cosine can be linearly approximated because
it is so close to the old one.
Now, if we are only dealing with the fifth harmonic,
we have a constant, an error, and a p1s edge angle.
We can exactly take out all of the error by finding
a new p1s offset of -b/m. This follows from the plain
old y = mx + b equation of a straight line. b is our
error and m is our slope. Our slope is known and
will be the negative harmonic sine of angle p1s.
Sadly, this will be likely to make the other harmonics
worse, so only a portion of the offset will be useful.
The problem instead is to take a pile of y = mx + b
equations and simultaneously try to reduce their rms
error. Reducing the square of the errors is simpler
and works as well. We thus seek a minimum of...
z = (m3x + b3)^2 + (m5x + b5)^2 + ...
A minimum (or maximum) results by finding the
slope and setting it to zero. Which seems to tell us
after expanding, differentiating, and regrouping
that...
angle correction =
-(m3b3 + m5b5 + ...)/( m3^2 + m5^2 + ... )/
Which implies that the best angle correction can
be directly calculated once rather than finding it
through a many step iterative process.
Much more on this as it develops.
Your comments welcome.
November 30, 2006
Apparently Dr. HTML has gone dark. This
was a superb free web site testing service.
Please let me know if you find any other useful
similar sites.
November 29, 2006
Latest GuruGram #70 is on Enhancing your
eBay Tactical Skills IV.
Gonzo sourcecode for GG70 is available here.
Earlier tutorials in the series can be found
here, here, and here.
November 28, 2006
We are discontinuing sales of our slot machine
displays. Despite careful packaging, too many
are having shipping problems. Refurb also takes
me longer than the value they are returning. But
basically, I am tired of pissing around with them.
These remain perfect student PIC projects. And
( lacking any and all provision for coin or token
mechanisms ) they are completely legal in all
jurisdictions.
The remaining 45 or so are now available at $2.99
each. Strictly FOB Thatcher AZ. We will not
assist you in shipping in any manner beyond
free loading.
All are individually boxed. Some extra bulbs and
other parts are also available.
November 27, 2006
The Government Liquidation saga continues.
At one time, U.S. military surplus was sold
directly through their own DRMS service.
Where high risk and gross inconvenience got
combined with negligible competition and
unbelievably outstanding bargains. And for
which we did extremely well with everything
from nuclear holocaust fashion accessories to
tinfoil hat liners to water soluble swimsuits.
Sadly, someone discovered that it was costing the
feds $1.65 in admin costs for each dollar in sales,
and that simply dumping the stuff outside the
main gate with a "FREE" sign on it would be far
cheaper. Instead, the feds elected to privatize
mil surplus sales.
The main beneficiary of which was Government
Liquidation, a for-profit firm in Scottsdale, AZ.
Things started out really great. But over the years,
the Government Liquidation closing bid prices of
test equipment went up so high we could no longer
afford to bid on them. Minimum bids were raised
to $50 on all items, some of which would have
been risky at $2.50.
At least some of their site managers became
legendary in their customer rudeness, inflexibility,
and intentional hassle creation. Maddingly
infuriating bid extensions meant that your
optimum bid window was a few milliseconds wide
precisely 42.7765 minutes into their closing hour.
Many military bases dramatically tightened
security and entry hassles. At least one base
would not make a phone call for you over a
200 foot distance.
As a result, we have personally been forced to
scale way back in our mil surplus involvement.
Substituting industrial distress auctions that
seem infinitely superior on most counts.
And, just as the mil surplus scene could not
possibly get any worse --- it did.
It seems another someone discovered that the
DRMS is still grossly inefficient. Similar to the
British Sailing Ship Bureaucracy whose size and
costs peaked many decades after the last sailing
ship was removed from service. Per this bizarre
document. Or this one.
Apparently many surplus warehousing centers are
being closed or downgraded. One consequence
appears to be that certain Government Liquidation
sites now list only a few worthless scrap items
instead of hundreds of potentially useful ones.
As in down to useless dregs. Arizona and New
Mexico seem particularly impacted.
As near as I can tell, DM Tucson surplus material
will be transferred to Northern Utah to save on
shipping costs. A mere 954 miles. Per this map.
Southern New Mexico stuff, of course, goes to
Central Colorado.
Obviously, there is definitely a major glitch today
in mil surplus availability. Whether it is temporary
or permanent remains to be seen. As will what role,
if any, that Government Liquidation will play in
future surplus opportunities.
Or your own role, depending on where you live.
The places to be appear to be Eglin FL and
Mechanicsburg PA..
November 26, 2006
Some more notes on wind power: Turns out the
Aermotor farm windmill folks are still in business
and still grinding out classic inefficient windmills.
Pricing varies with tower height and diameter,
but around $12,000.00 is ballpark for the mill
and the tower combined. Naturally that is for
pumping only. A generator and such costs a lot
extra. As does shipping and installation labor.
Their recommendation is to have the blade bottom
an absolute minimum of fifteen feet above any
building or terrain, with an unobstructed distance
of 400 feet in any direction.
Normal recommended minimum spacing for more
modern wind farms is four blade diameters center
to center and at least twelve blade diameters back
to back.
The efficiency peak for most windmill technologies
has a rather narrow tip speed to wind velocity
ratio range. Thus fancy electronic regulation would
be a must if efficiency is to be optimized
Yes, there are vertical axis windmills that offer
interesting engineering tradeoffs. Some of which
might behave better near a building roof. These
the Darrius and Savonius Rotors. Both are low
efficiency and do not appear to be of much current
interest in "real" wind farms.
I get the impression that these "gee whiz" approaches
had their chance and blew it. Besides low efficiency,
the Darrius Rotor will not self-start and the Savonius
Rotor speed range and efficiency is much lower.
Few people are aware how severe a restriction the cube
of wind speed is for efficient operation. You normally
would not want to live or work in any building where
the average wind speed was high enough to make for
practical energy production.
Even if you put windmills on the roof of such a building,
planting trees or earth berming to shield the wind would
save bunches more on heating and cooling costs than
any windmill scheme could ever hope to compete with.
Besides being ridiculously cheaper.
November 25, 2006
Decided to double check some fundamentals of
wind energy over yesterday's post. Mukund Patel's
newly revised Wind and Solar Power Systems
would seem a pricey but good place to start.
Where we find that recoverable wind energy is
nominally proportional to the square of the blade
diameter and the cube of the wind speed. We also
see that the maximum theoretically recoverable
wind energy is 59 percent and corresponds to an
exit wind velocity of one third the input speed.
Real world recoverable efficiencies include fast
two blade modern systems at 45% and the old
farm Aeromotors at 30%. But peaks are only
over a very narrow range of blade tip speed vs
wind speed.
Sure enough, working anywhere remotely near
the ground or a building roof is studiously
avoided. Towers at least four to five blade
heights are recommended for smaller diameter
systems.
Which makes this "what were they thinking?
building having many small windmills directly
on the front edge of its roof be what those French
Veterinarians would call a "four paw".
The number of physical, electrical, economic,
and psychological fundamental errors here totally
boggles the mind. I'd give the blades three weeks
flat before the differential speed across them totally
wipes them out Naturally, their employees will
be long since gone because of the psyc stress.
When properly full burden accounted, there is no
way in hell that this absurdity can ever become a net
energy source. And thus will forever remain a gasoline
destroying net energy sink.
Surely they did not do this on purpose. If they did,
I've got some ski condo timeshares in Arizona's
Whitlock mountains I'd like to sell them.
November 24, 2006
There's a lively discussion going on over in the
sci.electronics.design newsgroup over an individual
who thinks that wind microarrays could form a major
alternate energy solution.
To me, this looks like the usual case of someone
who does not have the faintest clue what they are
getting into, have not done their homework, and,
for that matter, don't even know what homework is.
Naturally, they started off running to a patent attorney
over a concept that ( if workable ) would be totally
obvious to a practitioner in the field. Besides having
centuries of prior art. And thus patently worthless.
Ideas succeed only when they reach the working model
beta test stage. Once long ago and far away, unproven
ideas used to sell for as much as a dime a dozen. But
these days, ten cents a bale in ten bale lots is wildly
beyond unrealistically optimistic.
Fundamentals of why patents and patenting can be
ludicrously absurd for most individuals and small scale
startups appear here, while some guidelines of when
patents actually may be marginally useful appear here.
The bottom line is that many practitioners in the field
clearly agree that wind energy does not scale downward
worth a damn.
Several obvious things would appear to go against
very small windmill microarrays. The first is that
rule #001-A of wind engineering is to have a laminar
flow that is free of turbulence or areal gradients. This
is one of the major reasons why useful windmills are
placed on high towers.
Smaller windmills placed on building roofs have an
obvious and grievous flaw: The wind velocity at the
bottom blade tips is near zero, owing to the boundary
conditions of the air layer in contact with the flat roof.
Giving us a second reason why useful windmills are
placed on high towers. The third, of course, is that
wind is much stronger at significant unrestricted
altitudes above ground level.
There also can be very serious unresolved infrasonic
problems that cause extreme psychological stress
in people living in buildings with windmills attached.
But the main problem is that the economics suck.
Let's look at one possible set of numbers: Four meters
per second average wind speed is way high for my area
and many parts of the country. Which has an energy
capability of 39 watts per square meter.
Best possible theoretical recovery would be 59 percent,
and a smaller wind device more likely 20 percent. So,
about eight watts per square meter effective recovery
for a wind device of one square meter area, or about
a 44 inch or so diameter.
Total production in 24 hours would be 192 watthours
per day. Or around two cents of electricity per day at
ten cents per kilowatt hour avoided cost.
From http://www.hsh.com/calc-amort.html we see that
$45.23 invested at ten years at ten percent amortizes
out to two cents per day.
Thus there would be NO NET GAIN whatsoever if the
wind generator cost more than $45.23. Assuming zero
labor and installation and maint costs.
To be a reasonably worthwhile endeavor, the 44 inch
windmill thus must sell for a lot less than ten dollars.
Including both its regulator and synchronous inverter.
Smaller wind machines, of course, would have even more
absurd economics. There is also a tendency for wind
machines to not do well in their hub area. Smaller machines
might have a larger hub to useful blade ratio, further
diminishing their meager capabilities.
Now, yes, these figures are conservative. But the point
remains that no calculations whatsoever were apparently
done. And it seems unlikely to me that any could be done
for most areas of the country that would be in any manner
better than conventional solutions.
November 23, 2006
At least one eBay seller is completely honest when
they stated " Buyer is responsible for all fright
arrangements".
Which should become a classic right up there with
the long ago offered swash stickers.
November 22, 2006
Photo postprocessing can get downright obsessive
at times. Ferinstance, what can you do when an
otherwise useful image has some bad burns in it?
Such as these "before" and "after" images that
you can click expand upon...
The first thing is to decide whether reshooting or
extensive rework is worth the time and effort.
Next try some "around the edges" easy stuff to
see if somewhat reducing the hot spots makes
enough of a difference.
Then try crowding. In which you make the near
problem areas more contrasty, sharper, and
more uniform. Being very careful not to get too
contrasty or too obvious.
Followed by attempting direct repairs from the
outside working in. Then focus on the worst of
the "beyond salvage" areas.
From the good parts of the photo, extract some
pasteable objects. In this case, grab two or three
capacitors to a work area. White outline them and
correct any overlapping wires or defects. Then make
-90, +90, and +180 degree rotated copies of these to
form a catalog of useful shapes.
Paste the most obvious shape into the worst spot.
Being careful to de emphasize it by having part of
it under the label or having wires cross it in an
appropriate manner. Extend or modify the existing
wires so they center on the capacitor ends.
Continue working on smaller and smaller details,
again raising contrast somewhat, darkening, and
making things match and lineup. Be sure to avoid
any gaffes at this point, such as wires that do not
go anywhere or capacitors that are not connected.
Very small problem areas can simply be made
muddy enough or obscure enough that the viewer's
attention is drawn elsewhere.
Consulting and postproc services available. More
photo techniques on our Auction Help library page.
November 21, 2006
Order mixups are a bad scene all the way around.
It pays to set up all sorts of double checking by
at least two people to avoid problems. Your 30:1
Buy/Sell Ratio does give you a first order of
defense against an occasional mixup.
Writing the full customer name on the box where
the label will eventually go is a good idea. We
just had a mixup involving two orders whose first
name both were "Carl".
Placing a copy of the sender and intended
address inside the box on pricier items is also
a very good idea.
Trying to get items back or exchanging them is
usually bad news. IF one of the two recipients
has not yet received their half of the mixup, you
sometimes can ask them to refuse their delivery.
If you send something to the wrong person, they
are in every manner entitled to treat the item as
a gift. And are under no obligation whatsoever to
do anything that in any manner would correct the
problem. Especially on their own cost or initiative.
If the items are fairly inexpensive and you have
lots in stock, comping a new shipment makes by
far the most sense. If you are out of stock, a
prompt refund of all costs is a very good idea.
Chances are the customer will be back when
they get to keep some unordered free stuff.
Telling both customers the email address only
of the other might get they to exchange parcels
after your total refund. But be sure you are out
of the loop. Because neither is under any obligation
whatsoever to take any action or trust the other.
Even on a costly item, issuing an immediate
refund to the real buyer and prepaying return
shipping to the wrong one is a very good idea.
With, of course, the fastest possible emails that
explain what is coming down.
Should you actually get the item back, and should
it pass a very careful inspection, you can always
try re offering it to the original buyer. Whoever
sent the thing back to you deserves something
extra, such as a ten dollar gift certificate.
But only on receipt, of course.
Above all, find out why the mistake was made and
take steps to correct similar future problems.
More on similar topics in our Auction Help page.
November 20, 2006
How to spot an extroverted engineer: They
stare at your shoes, rather than their own.
November 19, 2006