another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.

[Bubba1]

I agree with you Bubba.  Always have.  Joules certainly IS NOT POWER.  It is the measure of power dissipated. 
Rosemary

Watts is a measure of power.
Joules is a measure of energy.
Power and energy are related the same way speed and distance are related, and you keep getting power and energy mixed up.

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Watts is a measure of power.
Joules is a measure of energy.
Power and energy are related the same way speed and distance are related, and you keep getting power and energy mixed up.

Bubba why are you plugging this?  I took the trouble to look up the definition in wiki.  Here it is
In physics, power is the rate at which energy is transferred, used, or transformed. For example, the rate at which a light bulb transforms electrical energy into heat and light is measured in wattsâ€"the more wattage, the more power, or equivalently the more electrical energy is used per unit time

NOTE - it uses the word EQUIVALENTLY.  And I've used both words in precisely these contexts.  But I'll check with someone who  really does know and will get back to you.  Maybe by Monday.

Kindest regards,
Rosemary

[poynt99]

Dear three readers of this thread,

Watt (W) is the UNIT of power (P).
Joule (J) is the UNIT of Energy (E).

Rosemary in her ignorance is rallying to have "P" thrown out entirely, and have "W" put in it's place for power equations.  How absurd!

Here is the nonsense I'm referring to:

He proposes the terms POUT (POWER OUT) AND PIN (POWER IN) and proceeds to represent that number as WATTAGE.  Which is a horribly flawed and a rather abused misuse of the term power.  POWER IS NOT WATTAGE.  So WHY does he use the term POUT or PIN or anything like this - AT ALL -  when WOUT - OR WIN - if anything - would be more appropriate?  And even that is debatable.  But I'll get there.  For now, just know that these terms have little - if any relevance to their use as determined by ALL standard or conventional terminologies.  His use of them - his invention of these terms POUT AND PIN are only a reflection of his own rather eccentric misunderstandings of the term power.  It has absolutely no support, whatsoever. in any conventional analysis.  Power is ALWAYS REPRESENTED AS JOULES which is vi dt.  Else it's NOT POWER.  It's WATTAGE - or vi.

Rosemary will next be rallying to have "I" for current changed to "A" for Amperes, since Amperes is the unit of current.    Imagine this, instead of I=V/R, she would have it as A=V/R. 

The terms Pin and Pout are most certainly not my invention. But then most folks here already know this, even the amateur experimentalists. Complaining about using shortened versions of "input power" and "output power" when it is quite clear what they mean, is you playing "silly-bugger". When calculating the efficiency of an electrical device, one common method of determining "n" (efficiency) is to divide the output power in Watts by the input power in Watts, i.e. n=Pout/Pin. So if you have a problem with this commonly-used and accepted terminology, then it is your problem alone. Get over it.

"Power is always represented as Joules" according to Rosemary. Incorrect!

Power is given in Watts, and Energy is given in Joules. Watts and Joules are UNITS for power and energy respectively.

Rosemary, you are hopelessly confused about power and energy measurements. Please stop spreading your nonsense. Oh, and don't always count on Wiki as being a reliable source for correct information.
.99

[poynt99]

Here are a few examples where the terms "Pin" and "Pout" are used:

http://sound.westhost.com/efficiency.htm

http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/electrical-motor-efficiency-d_655.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_conversion_efficiency  (yes even your wiki)

.99

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Hello again Poynty Point

Always a pleasure to hear from you.

Unless Harti's 'view' rates - as recorded - are GROSS misrepresentations of this, then I think we both know that there's upwards of 600 hits here a day.  In fact, by tomorrow this time I'll be able to give you an EXACT count.  I have a friend who keeps record.  Which leaves us with a problem.  Which of those three readers of that > 600 or thereby who are reading here, are you addressing?  Personally I get the distinct impression that you're rather relying on the fact that there ARE only 3 readers.  But we all of us realise that you're not inclined to allow mere facts - or raw data -  shape your opinion.  So.  I have a small problem?  What to do?  Find out who you're appealing to and ask them to answer you?  Or simply answer you myself?  Since I doubt that there are any telepaths reading this that they can inform us all, and in view of the URGENCY of the matter - frankly, it's probably better that I deal with this.  Else everyone reading here will assume that there's ever any merit at all in applying those grossly erroneous conventions of PIN AND POUT. 

In any event I've split the following posts into one each for each reference.  Else the page just looks confusing.

R