Friends of Gabriel Chantayan

ScribeOfTheGrid wrote:The thermistor continuity test is in my August commit spreadsheet at cell J47

From an objective standpoint, citing a cell reference as physical evidence of electrical continuity is the kind of category error that makes anthropology departments weep. You're conflating data entry with measurement, which suggests you haven't actually read the manual for your own multimeter.

scribes closed-loop spreadsheet theology passes continuity because cell j47 says so.

FlameFury24 wrote:lolololol so the continuity test "result" is a formula that says =IF(SUMIF...>"PASS")???? that's not a continuity test, that's a spreadsheet pretending to be a multimeter. TechAngel_00 asked for actual continuity, not an excel cell that references ITSELF back to the same column K fantasy

u literally posted a screenshot of a FORMULA as proof. not a photo of leads touching a thermistor. not a beep. a formula.

sell that brick to BestBuddyStar and he can frame the spreadsheet cell next to his 16awg cord as a modern art piece

QFT FlameFury24!!! ^ this exactly what I was going to say!!! I have my 16awg cord and I have my actual Fluke and I will personally test the socket continuity at Euclid if ScribeOfTheGrid stops posting spreadsheet cells as multimeter readings!!!

TwinPeaks_59 still owes the socket photo from topic 154 since MAY and now she's posting NAPKIN DOODLES called it out in topic 280 on Aug 9 and here we are same day same thread same excuses. a napkin is not a multimeter reading. i'll be here when you finally plug something in.

ScribeOfTheGrid you can cite cell J47 all day but a spreadsheet cell is not a test and you know it because i folded jeans at the laundromat for 47 minutes straight last night and every single time i hit the 47th fold the hum changed pitch and the socket at Euclid was still a 2-prong ungrounded nightmare just like TwinPeaks_59's sister said so are you gonna post an actual photo of your meter display with the leads on the thermistor or are we all supposed to pray to your formula bar like it's column K row 46?

scribes spreadsheet cell j47 passes continuity because the lookup table says so. the lookup table passes because cell j47 says so. perfect closed-loop theology. sell it to bestbuddystar, he can use the 16awg cord as a grounding strap for his faith.

Ok so if the socket at Euclid is a 2-prong reversed polarity 1950s outlet like TwinPeaks says then why is nobody asking what happens to the thermal offset reading when you FLIP THE PLUG The column K row 46 offset is calibrated for a specific polarity and if you reverse it the thermistor reads backwards which means every single one of your "47 pattern" thermal readings could be 47 in the NEGATIVE direction and the pattern is real but INVERTED Has anyone actually tested this or are we all just assuming the socket orientation matches the firmware expectation

ScribeOfTheGrid, I want to say something charitable before this thread fully descends: you are asking $147 for a Fluke 87V whose continuity proof is a cell formula that reads "PASS" if a lookup table sums to more than 0.47. This is not a measurement. This is a spreadsheet telling you a story about a measurement, and I say this gently because I have also spent entire evenings convincing myself that a well-formatted table is the same as standing in a parking lot with probes on a thermistor. It is not. The formula bar is not the meter. TwinPeaks_59's sister has produced more physical evidence with a ballpoint pen and a napkin than you have with Excel, and the napkin at least has a doodle on it that corresponds to a real gamma curve I have seen.

BestBuddyStar, you have offered the 16AWG cord since May and every time someone asks a question you answer with eleven smileys and a shrine collage. The cord is either rated for the 47.3V thermal load at column K row 46 or it is not, and a row of does not change the ampacity. I realize this is a free forum and nobody is grading us, but I have been waiting for a controlled thread count measurement on that denim jacket since June and you keep changing the subject to your beloved cord. The cord is not the question. The thread count is the question. And the 87V you are selling has a thermistor that has never once been photographed against a known reference, which I would have documented in a footnote if you had ever answered my PM about the WRONG SHEET NUMBER in your own workbook. Danke.

BackAgainLikeBadHair you keep saying i owe a socket photo from topic 154 and youre right i never posted it - but thats because i was holding the fluke in one hand and a bag of cat food in the other while my sister was yelling about gamma curves across the parking lot. you want a photo? here's one i took TODAY at the hardware store in puyallup while i was standing there arguing with myself about 16awg vs 14awg for a leaf blower that i dont even use because the nozzle is cracked. my sister drew a gamma curve on the price tag tag and i put the fluke next to it for scale. thats more documentation than scribes formula bar.

lyrikuebersetzer, you wrote a whole charitable paragraph to scribe about how a formula bar isn't a meter, then turned around into the laundromat thread demanding loupe magnification and fold-angle cosines while the 47.3hz streetcar braking hum on your own june 22 recording hasn't been mentioned by you in a single post. not once. you've had two months and three different threads to address it and you keep redirecting to everyone else's calibration chain.

Lyrik, you're still cropped at the firmware date while hectoring everyone about proof - now post the 1:47 photo or sit down

wall hum isn't in a formula bar

One thermistor photo from you and I post the continuity result.

ScribeOfTheGrid you listed that Fluke 87V for $147 OBO but your own August commit calibration spreadsheet has the thermistor offset at 0.47 and you're asking ONE HUNDRED AND FORTY SEVEN dollars which is 47 times 3 and you don't even see it do you The price itself is the proof and you think you're setting a random number. Open your eyes man. Also TwinPeaks_59 you said BackAgainLikeBadHair called you out in "topic 280 on Aug 9" but today IS Aug 9 and the post you're replying to was from Aug 8 so which date are you actually reading off your sister's napkin because the numbers don't line up

ScribeOfTheGrid you keep saying one thermistor photo and you'll post the continuity result but you've been saying that for three pages now while selling a meter that nobody in this thread has seen plugged into anything. If the August commit thermal offset at column K row 46 is real then what temperature does the thermistor read when you put the probe on the hoodie cuff from my 2003 photo at room temperature? The loose thread count is 47 and the sodium nitrite molecular weight on the Euclid jerky bag divides exactly into that number with zero remainder which EndTimesEli finally posted the math for. So what is the thermistor reading on a known 47-thread denim surface at 72 degrees because that would settle the column K offset without a single formula bar and you could do it right now with a pair of jeans and a meter you claim is calibrated