TECHNET Archives

February 2014

TechNet@IPC.ORG

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Patrick Goodyear <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
TechNet E-Mail Forum <[log in to unmask]>, [log in to unmask]
Date:
Thu, 6 Feb 2014 06:43:42 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (393 lines)
Put a dew in the freezer for 45 minutes, pour it into a glass then thump 
the glass with your finger, it will slush up.

pat
On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 2:25 PM, Phil Bavaro wrote:

> Is it possible to make it snow Diet Mountain Dew by warming it up and 
> then throwing a pan of it out into the freezing atmosphere?  Oh wait, 
> that might yield yellow snow....(zappa).
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of David D. Hillman
> Sent: Wednesday, February 05, 2014 2:23 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: [TN] NTC RE: [TN] NTC Friday Element Quiz Answer
>
> Hi Robert - sorry, I won't be much help. I am still trying to figure 
> out where Doug got  "slugs/fortnight" as a unit of measure. Probably a 
> Diet Mt Dew issue again.
>
> Dave
>
>
>
> From:   <[log in to unmask]>
> To:     <[log in to unmask]>, <[log in to unmask]>
> Date:   02/05/2014 04:16 PM
> Subject:        RE: [TN] NTC Friday Element Quiz Answer
>
>
>
> " rattle our brains"??
> I'm still trying to figure out how to convert the Imperial/Si units to 
> something I can understand.
> Is this "ton" thing short or long?  Based on American pounds or 
> British rocks?
> Love the FEQ
>
> Robert E. Welch
> Senior Process Engineer
> Moog Components Group
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of David D. Hillman
> Sent: Wednesday, February 05, 2014 8:16 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [TN] NTC Friday Element Quiz Answer
>
> Hi Dean - the FEQ was and is meant to be a way for Technet to have 
> some fun at the end of the work week, rattle our brains and get to 
> know each other a bit better. I think the jibs and jabs are great plus 
> it gives us a way to deal with the stress our jobs can cause. Everyone 
> keep having fun and I am sure that the FEQAB will figure out how to 
> deal with any protests that come their way!
>
> Dave
>
>
>
> From:   "Stadem, Richard D." <[log in to unmask]>
> To:     <[log in to unmask]>
> Date:   02/05/2014 06:08 AM
> Subject:        Re: [TN] NTC Friday Element Quiz Answer
> Sent by:        TechNet <[log in to unmask]>
>
>
>
> Absolutely. Dave, I think you know I mean no malice, not ever.
> dean
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bev Christian [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2014 7:24 PM
> To: 'TechNet E-Mail Forum'; Stadem, Richard D.
> Subject: RE: [TN] NTC Friday Element Quiz Answer
>
> Now, now, let's play nice.
>
> I haven't tried to answer ANY this time around.
> 1) Way tougher this time than last
> 2) With the questions not coming consistently at a time good for me, 
> the
> right answer is usually there before I even see the question.
>
> You know deep in your heart that Dave is doing his best.  I know most 
> of
> what you are saying is tongue in cheek, but....
>
>
> Bev
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Stadem, Richard D.
> Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2014 10:02 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [TN] NTC Friday Element Quiz Answer
>
> A bit of misdirection? A bit of misdirection? Loop-hole exercise? Are 
> you
> kidding me? Not even a talented chemist like Dr. Feyereisen can get it
> right. And I noticed that the esteemed Bev Christian did not even 
> attempt
> an answer this week after that gassy explanation offered up last week. 
> And
>
> the famed Dr. Ellis gave up all hope weeks ago.  And I am sure you 
> noticed
>
> the
> 117 wrong answers before someone got it "right"?  A bit of 
> misdirection,
> but never a false fact?  Are you kidding me? Playoffs?
>
> Playoffs....hey... not a bad idea, most winning answers in a series 
> get to
>
> go to next round.....hmm...
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of David D. Hillman
> Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2014 8:11 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [TN] NTC Friday Element Quiz Answer
>
> Hi Ron - no problem! I have several reference books I use for the quiz 
> and
>
> some of the information can be dated (i.e. like the cost per oz. for 
> some
> of the elements) so I try to be careful. And there is always a bit of
> misdirection in the clues (but never an intentional false fact)  to 
> make
> everyone work a bit on their responses. Ya never know how Doug (or
> Richard) are going to use a clue for a loop hole exercise. Clearly the
> prolonged cold weather here in the Midwest has started to impact their
> state of mind  - most likely some form of  Diet Mt Dew winter fever.
>
> Dave
>
>
>
> From:   Ron Feyereisen <[log in to unmask]>
> To:     "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>
> Cc:     "TechNet E-Mail Forum ([log in to unmask])" <[log in to unmask]>
> Date:   02/04/2014 07:50 AM
> Subject:        RE: [TN] NTC Friday Element Quiz Answer
>
>
>
> Hi Dave,
>
> Thanks for the explanation. The statement of 46 isotopes is what 
> really
> threw everyone off since it?s specific.
> I appreciate your work in coming up with these questions- it surely 
> takes
> our minds off of other stressful work!
>
> Thanks again,
>
> Ron
>
>
> From: [log in to unmask] 
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Monday, February 03, 2014 4:30 PM
> To: Ron Feyereisen
> Cc: TechNet E-Mail Forum
> Subject: RE: [TN] NTC Friday Element Quiz Answer
>
> Hi Ron - the number of isotopes is going to be somewhat dependent on 
> which
>
> reference source I am using when putting the element clues together. 
> That
> is one reason I try to give a set of clues that,  when considered as a
> whole, can only point to one element. Most of the time that 
> methodology
> has been successful but on occasion, our Technet community finds holes 
> in
> the clue logic set.  Hope that makes sense.
>
> Dave
>
>
>
> From:        Ron Feyereisen <[log in to unmask]>
> To:        TechNet E-Mail Forum <[log in to unmask]>, "
> [log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>
> Date:        02/03/2014 03:32 PM
> Subject:        RE: [TN] NTC Friday Element Quiz Answer
>
>
>
>
> Doesn't Thulium have 58 Isotopes (23 Isomers, 34 Radioactive Isotopes 
> plus
>
> the one stable)?
>
> Ron
>
> Ron Feyereisen
> Continuous Improvement Mgr., CIT
>
> www.sigmatronintl.com
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of David D. Hillman
> Sent: Monday, February 03, 2014 1:06 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: [TN] NTC Friday Element Quiz Answer
>
> Hi folks - Here is the Friday Element Quiz Answer (sorry for getting 
> this
> out late - blame it on Minnesota ice):
>
> The Question:
> This element has 46 isotopes but only one is stable. This element is 
> so
> scarce that 500 tons of ore must be processed to extract 4 kilograms 
> of
> the element. It has very few commercial uses - it has been used for
> portable x-ray sources and in laser applications. The dust of this 
> element
>
>
>
>
> is both toxic and explosive. What element is being described?
>
> The Answer:
> The element is Thulium (Tm)! Thulium derives its name from Thule, the
> Greek word for Scandinavia. Thulium is very rare in terms of being a 
> Rare
> Earth
> Element(REE)- it ranks 16th out of 17th. Monazite sand contains about 
> 50%
> REE content but of that 50% value, only 0.007% is thulium.
> Tm-169 is the only stable isotope of thulium.
>
>
> The winner of the weekly element quiz is Steve Gregory and he will get 
> the
>
> services of Clumpy and Kloumpios for the week. The boys should be 
> arriving
>
> at your facility anytime now.
>
>
> So far Clumpy and Kloumpios have done the following:
>
> Past Quiz winners/tasks:
> Week 1 Dick Krug,  Spartan Complex Systems Week 2 Laura Turbini, IRC 
> Week
> 3 James Head, Crowcon Detection Instruments Limited Week 3 Pat 
> Goodyear,
> PGE Week 4 Joe Russeau, Precision Analysts Laboratory Week 5 Tom 
> Carroll,
> Boeing Defense, Space and Security Week 6 Steve Gregory Week 7 Phil 
> Kinner
>
> Week 8 Brian Ellis Week 9 James Head, Crowcon Detection Instruments
> Limited Week 10 Leland Woodall, CSTech Inc.
> Week 11 Keith Calhoun, Sopark Corp
> Week 12 Matthias Mansfeld, Mansfeld-Elektronik Week 13 Leland Woodall,
> CSTech Inc.
> Week 14 Brian Ellis
> Week 15 Tom Carroll, Boeing Defense, Space and Security Week 16 Steve
> Gregory Week 17 Phil Kinner Week 18 Ian Braddock, MBDA Systems Week 19
> Leland Woodall, CSTech Inc.
> Week 20 Denny Fritz
> Week 21 Amol Kane
> Week 21 Dewey Whittaker, Honeywell
> Week 21 David Bealer, Watch Fire Signs
> Week 22 Phil Kinner
> Week 23 Guy Ramsey, RD Circuits
> Week 24 Mark Kostinovsky, Schlumberger
> Week 25 Keith Calhoun, Sopark Corp
> Week 26 Paul Reid, PWB Interconnect Solutions Inc Week 27 Greg Munie, 
> IPC
> Week 28 Steve Gregory Week 29 Gus Trakas, Viasystems Week 29 Steve
> Creswick Week 30 Robert Welch, Moog Component Group Week 31 Heidi 
> Havelka,
>
> Interplex Sunbelt Week 32 Raye Rivera, Canoga Perkins Week 33 Steve
> Creswick Week 34 Dewey Whittaker, Honeywell Week 35 Don Vischulis Week 
> 36
> Greg Munie, IPC Week 37 Larry Dzaugis Week 37 Bonus Question Steve 
> Mikell
> Week 38 Curt McNamara, Logic PD Week 38 Bonus Question Dewey 
> Whittaker,
> Honeywell
>
> Week 39 Leland Woodall, CSTech Inc.
> - Tell the guys I'm giving them a late Christmas present, and they can
> spend the week at home with their wives fulfilling their own set of
> chores.  Maybe they'll get a chance to get back to NC a little later 
> on in
>
> the year, and it will be warm enough to go fishing at the coast.
>
> Week 40 Leland Woodall, CSTech Inc.
> - assisted with ????
>
> Week 40 Ron Feyereisen, Sigmatron Int.
> - assisted with ????
>
> Week 41 Steve Gregory
> - assisted with ????
>
>
> Everyone have a safe week.
>
> Dave Hillman
> Rockwell Collins
> [log in to unmask]
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud 
> service.
> For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or 
> [log in to unmask]
> ______________________________________________________________________
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud 
> service.
> For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or 
> [log in to unmask]
> ______________________________________________________________________
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud 
> service.
> For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or 
> [log in to unmask]
> ______________________________________________________________________
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud 
> service.
> For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or 
> [log in to unmask]
> ______________________________________________________________________
>
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud 
> service.
> For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or 
> [log in to unmask]
> ______________________________________________________________________
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud 
> service.
> For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or 
> [log in to unmask]
> ______________________________________________________________________
> ________________________________
>  This message and any attachments are solely for the use of the 
> addressee and may contain L-3 proprietary information that may also be 
> defined as USG export controlled technical data. If you are not the 
> intended recipient, any disclosure, use or distribution of its content 
> is prohibited. Please notify the sender by reply e-mail and 
> immediately delete this message and any attachments.
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud 
> service.
> For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or 
> [log in to unmask] 
> ______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or [log in to unmask] 
______________________________________________________________________

ATOM RSS1 RSS2