Period Electrickery

[Flyfisher]

Yes, TARDIS technology would be great wouldn't it? Although I have a feeling that I'd still manage to somehow accumulate sufficient junk to just about exceed the space available, no matter how large. :wink:

 

[LadyArowana]

Yes, TARDIS technology would be great wouldn't it? Although I have a feeling that I'd still manage to somehow accumulate sufficient junk to just about exceed the space available, no matter how large. :wink:

No problem, you just fill the first tardis with some others....

 

[Penners]

Yes, TARDIS technology would be great wouldn't it? Although I have a feeling that I'd still manage to somehow accumulate sufficient junk to just about exceed the space available, no matter how large. :wink:

It's not your fault, FF, it's Parkinson's Law (Penners' Variant):

Stuff expands to exceed the available storage.

 

[Flyfisher]

No problem, you just fill the first tardis with some others....

:lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[piper]

Yes, TARDIS technology would be great wouldn't it? Although I have a feeling that I'd still manage to somehow accumulate sufficient junk to just about exceed the space available, no matter how large. :wink:

No problem, you just fill the first tardis with some others....

That wouldn't work, because surely two Tardises (Tardes?) would cancel each other out, so that the space inside a Tardis which was inside another Tardis would actually compress space in the same proportion, or at least a mathematically related proportion, to the expansion inside the first one. So in the fortunately theoretically impossible case that a Tardis could be made powerful enough to expand its inside space to infinity, the space inside the second Tardis would be compressed to a point of infinite density, with the danger that this could trigger a Big Bang and the creation of a new universe. If the Doctor is lurking on this Forum, perhaps he could log on and explain in more detail..?

 

[wobs]

Thank you Zebra nd FF. Just the sort of tips I was looking for.

Computers of old:
I do recall seeing a youtube of an old Tomorrow's World episode where they were using a computer in teh 1960s to create what looked like 3D models on the screen. Amazing stuff, when you consider what they had at the time.

 

[wobs]

Yes, TARDIS technology would be great wouldn't it? Although I have a feeling that I'd still manage to somehow accumulate sufficient junk to just about exceed the space available, no matter how large. :wink:

No problem, you just fill the first tardis with some others....

That wouldn't work, because surely two Tardises (Tardes?) would cancel each other out, so that the space inside a Tardis which was inside another Tardis would actually compress space in the same proportion, or at least a mathematically related proportion, to the expansion inside the first one. So in the fortunately theoretically impossible case that a Tardis could be made powerful enough to expand its inside space to infinity, the space inside the second Tardis would be compressed to a point of infinite density, with the danger that this could trigger a Big Bang and the creation of a new universe. If the Doctor is lurking on this Forum, perhaps he could log on and explain in more detail..?

I'm sure the Doctor explained in last Saturday's episode that the inside was infinite.

 

[Flyfisher]

That wouldn't work, because surely two Tardises (Tardes?) . . . . .

Tardii ? (though it messes up the acronym)

. . . . would cancel each other out, so that the space inside a Tardis which was inside another Tardis would actually compress space in the same proportion, or at least a mathematically related proportion, to the expansion inside the first one. So in the fortunately theoretically impossible case that a Tardis could be made powerful enough to expand its inside space to infinity, the space inside the second Tardis would be compressed to a point of infinite density, with the danger that this could trigger a Big Bang and the creation of a new universe. If the Doctor is lurking on this Forum, perhaps he could log on and explain in more detail..?

But surely the infinite space inside each TARDIS would occupy a different dimension so there would be no compression of space in the original dimension? An infinite number of dimensions, each containing an infinite space.

Though I'd bet that Penners' variation of Parkinson's Law would still apply.

 

[Penners]

surely the infinite space inside each TARDIS would occupy a different dimension so there would be no compression of space in the original dimension? An infinite number of dimensions, each containing an infinite space.

I'm agog at the level of scientific knowledge on this forum.

 

[piper]

But surely the infinite space inside each TARDIS would occupy a different dimension so there would be no compression of space in the original dimension? An infinite number of dimensions, each containing an infinite space.

An interesting idea, but potentially very dangerous.
There has to be a reason why the Doctor has never used multiple nested TARDIS (Plural is of course still TARDIS, because the acronym would be "...in Spaces" - I should have realised that instead of using Latin, in which it would of course be TardES, third declension).
Probably Antimatter is involved, and more than one being activated simultaneously would annihilate each other, with the release of potentially infinite amounts of energy, if the space involved is indeed infinite. Of course if it IS infinite, there would be no need for multiple TARDIS, even for Penners.

 

[Keith Bowman]

You all seem to have overlooked the fact that time and space are so interlinked that a TARDIS could simply connect through a wormhole into a parallel universe - or even an infinite number of parallel universes....

 

[philpjuk100]

It`s not real! it`s just a telly program!

 

[Flyfisher]

It`s not real! it`s just a telly program!

Aww . . . now you've ruined the discussion!

I dare you to repeat that on the Dr Who forum. :wink:

 

[wobs]

But surely the infinite space inside each TARDIS would occupy a different dimension so there would be no compression of space in the original dimension? An infinite number of dimensions, each containing an infinite space.

An interesting idea, but potentially very dangerous.
There has to be a reason why the Doctor has never used multiple nested TARDIS (Plural is of course still TARDIS, because the acronym would be "...in Spaces" - I should have realised that instead of using Latin, in which it would of course be TardES, third declension).
Probably Antimatter is involved, and more than one being activated simultaneously would annihilate each other, with the release of potentially infinite amounts of energy, if the space involved is indeed infinite. Of course if it IS infinite, there would be no need for multiple TARDIS, even for Penners.

Not a nested Tardis as such, but it did land inside itself in Space and Time:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_/_Time
Meaning that when they went to leave through the door, they ended up back in the control room.

 

[DJH]

That's an impressive newel post you have there Ivor. It took awhile to do that I reckon...

Doug

 

[88v8]

That's an impressive newel post you have there Ivor. It took awhile to do that I reckon...

Doug

Yes, and first I had to repair the bottom of it where it was damaged when we liberated it c1974 from a house in Wanstead Flats that was scheduled to be demolished. That was before we even had a house. It was installed there in 91 when our extension was built. Then, when we moved, we left it behind (boohoo as I've said before).

Btw, sorry OP, this is what happens sometimes with threads on here...

Ivor

PS too right Penners, about the storage

 

[Penners]

sorry OP, this is what happens sometimes with threads on here...

Sometimes??!

 

[wobs]

Leaving aside the question of taste/preference regarding style of sockets and switches, I think wobs was asking for "things to think of now which should be included in a quote for a rewire, rather than left out and possibly regretted later." If that was what you meant wobs, then you might not need all of these, but things to think about might include:
location and number of socket outlets, obviously
sockets for appliances eg dishwashers and washing machines
whether your appliances are integrated and would therefore need fused spurs above the worktop
what type of lights you want - this may affect number of light points required and their location
any two-way switching, for example switching the landing from downstairs and the hall from upstairs
any 5-amp sockets to be able to switch table lamps from the wall switch
outside lights, sensors if required
shed or garden lighting
loft light
loft sockets for TV aerial booster if required
wiring for boiler/central heating pump/immersion/shower
kitchen undercabinet lights
cooker hoods and extraction
cooker circuit - will be required if you are having electric hob or a large kW rated oven
cooker switch
bathroom extractor fan
bathroom shaver point or mirror lights
smoke alarms (a requirement if having a rewire)
main protective bonding will be required on water and gas pipework
doorbell perhaps
phone points (some electricians do phone wiring too)
TV aerial points (likewise)
Mmmmm, that's all I can think of for now.

I'm afraid I disagree with Flyfisher about the replacement of two-core cable not being necessary. You can keep old two-core wiring, but electricians are very much encouraged by the regulatory authorities to encourage householders to replace such wiring rather than simply put it on an RCD. You could keep it only if there are no metal switches or light fittings on the affected circuits, and the cables are tested to be in good condition, and then you must fix a notice to the consumer unit advising any future residents not to have metal switches or light fittings installed. But RCDs are intended for supplementary protection, not for basic protection against electric shock from unearthed metal fittings.

I'm afraid I must also comment on Flyfisher's statement that a new consumer unit will go a long way towards making an old installation as safe as a new one. It will of course be safer but there are faults (loose connections, undersized cabling for example) which a new consumer unit won't protect against any better than an old one, so you can't get away with simply upgrading your consumer unit and then assume that the house is safe. What needs to happen is that all circuits are tested, and any faults rectified at the same time. Domestic installations are supposed to be tested every 5-10 years anyway, although few are.

You could get away with a partial rewire though. Other existing circuits would just have to be tested and any faults rectified. Your electrician won't know until the testing is done, which circuits would be safe to keep, although a quick poke about with a screwdriver might give an idea.

I'm quoting this post, as it is an excellent reference.

Well, we have started the electrical work.
A new consumer unit is now in, and we are now earthed! Hurrah!

Interestingly, the electrician has only connected the earth to the main services (gas, electrics, and water) close to where they come into the house. No bonding was necessary in the bathroom or kitchen, which reflects the new regs. The new consumer apparently can deal without the earth bonding being required in those rooms, which saves ripping up floor boards in the bathroom.

We are planning to re-wire the lighting circuit next week, as he reminded us that we cannot buy many metal light fittings without 3-core cable. As we have been given a one for free this week, it tipped the balance (although I think we were going to do it anyway).

Suprises have included:
Flex going from a plug in a socket back into the socket unit, and going to an outside light.
Flex going from the back of said socket and going to the other double socket on the other side of the room. We had been using the PC etc. on this socket, which uses 6 plugs!
Utility room is a source of much wonder, with round bakerlite switches, a double socket hanging off the wall, un-armoured cables going to the garage (now disconnected), and a mess of junctions. He took the cover off one, and we all gasped at the state of it.
Telephone wire going under a carpet, and is now frayed. This will need replacing and re-routing. KC will have to come, and replace the main junction and fit a new socket, as its very old. But I'll have to wire in lots of new telephone cable. Oh the joy.

I should point out that an electrician used to live in this house at some point.

Lots to do.

One question they asked was whether we wanted the smoke detectors wiring in. It can see a draw back to this, as we would not be able to turn them off in the event of a fault. Opinions?

 

[Owain]

Interestingly, the electrician has only connected the earth to the main services (gas, electrics, and water) close to where they come into the house. No bonding was necessary in the bathroom or kitchen, which reflects the new regs. The new consumer apparently can deal without the earth bonding being required in those rooms, which saves ripping up floor boards in the bathroom.

Suprises have included:
Flex going from a plug in a socket back into the socket unit, and going to an outside light.
Flex going from the back of said socket and going to the other double socket on teh other side of the room. We had been using the PC etc. on this socket, which uses 6 plugs.
I should point out that an electrician used to live in this house at some point

One question they asked was whether we wanted the smoke detectors wiring in. It can see a draw back to this, as we would not be able to turn them off in the event of a fault. Opinions?

Supplementary bonding in bathrooms is not required under 17th Edition Regulations if all circuits serving a bathroom have RCD protection. Supplementary bonding was never required in kitchens.

Smoke detectors MUST be wired in and interlinked to comply with Building Regs. There is unlikely to be a fault with them, and if there is you want it sorted immediately, and not to run the risk of someone turning them off and forgetting. For this reason I also prefer them to be on a lighting circuit so it's quickly obvious if the circuit has tripped out.

You can get a remote test-and-hush switch if you want to be able to disable alarms temporarily
http://www.discount-electrical.co.uk/product.php/21297944/aico-remote-test---hush-switch-for-ei150--r--models

 

[Penners]

You can get a remote test-and-hush switch

Do those only work on smoke alarms, or can they be fitted to people?