|
Grex > Agora35 > #153: Computer references changing written language? |  |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 22 new of 151 responses total. |
other
|
|
response 130 of 151:
| 
Nov 28 04:04 UTC 2000 |
What is the plural form of 'each'?
Re: shall vs. may.
The content and apparent purpose of the sign provides sufficient context
from which to ascertain the intent of the statement beyond question, but
setting that aside, there is nothing inherent about the words 'may not'
to suggestion the lack of option rather than the option of lacking.
Marcus is ascribing a definitive meaning which those words usually convey
only by the addition of inflection -- an aspect unavailable to the
written form.
|
drew
|
|
response 131 of 151:
|
Nov 28 06:35 UTC 2000 |
Why would the Feds make a rule like that in #121?
|
gelinas
|
|
response 132 of 151:
|
Nov 28 06:42 UTC 2000 |
As I remember, the requirement is that the people near that exit be physically
able to open it.
|
remmers
|
|
response 133 of 151:
|
Nov 28 11:56 UTC 2000 |
Re #130: Right. I frequently use "may not" in the sense of
"might not" -- i.e. there's an option present.
|
other
|
|
response 134 of 151:
|
Nov 28 17:21 UTC 2000 |
re: 131
Two-fold, I'd suggest. One, as indicated in resp:132, and two, that
people in proximity to the emergency exit be assumed to be sufficiently
capable of understanding the consequences of their actions that they'd
not toy with the emergency exit release handle.
|
gull
|
|
response 135 of 151:
|
Nov 30 18:59 UTC 2000 |
Toying with the emergency release handle is unlikely to do any serious
damage, though I wouldn't suggest it. Emergency exits are "plug doors" that
open inward; when the airplane is in flight and pressurized, I doubt there's
anyone alive that could yank one open, since they'd be working against about
8 psi. If the exit door is 2 ft. by 5 ft., that's almost six tons of force
holding the door in place.
|
mary
|
|
response 136 of 151:
|
Nov 30 19:08 UTC 2000 |
But isn't that what happened just a couple of weeks ago, where
a plane had made an emergency landing, and an attendant opened
the emergency exit before the plane had be depressurized? He
or she was sucked out of the plane and died on the tarmac?
|
rcurl
|
|
response 137 of 151:
|
Nov 30 19:51 UTC 2000 |
I was surprised by that as the pressurization of an airplane cabin is
usually *less* than ground-level atmospheric pressure.
|
albaugh
|
|
response 138 of 151:
|
Nov 30 20:48 UTC 2000 |
How about "To each one's own"? Awkward sounding, to be sure, but if one wants
to express something without even a hint of gender, while still using proper,
accepted grammar, one ought to word one's prose with one and one's.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 139 of 151:
|
Nov 30 22:01 UTC 2000 |
each = one, so that would be, "To one one's own."
|
other
|
|
response 140 of 151:
|
Nov 30 22:30 UTC 2000 |
Yes, but "each one" is an accepted extension of "each."
To each's own?
|
mary
|
|
response 141 of 151:
|
Nov 30 22:50 UTC 2000 |
And I thought that the cabins of commercial jet passenger aircraft were
always pressurized to 7,000 feet. But I don't know where I got that bit
of info. We have a jet mechanic in the family and I'll ask him next time
we talk.
|
gull
|
|
response 142 of 151:
|
Dec 1 00:21 UTC 2000 |
There was discussion about this on one of the aviation newsgroups. The
consensus was that planes are commonly pressurized to about 0.5 psi on the
ground, just before takeoff, to minimize pressure changes that could be
uncomfortable for the passengers. However, most people thought it was more
likely that the attendant was thrown off balance by the door opening (the
attendant-opened ones often have power assists) or by an over-eager
passenger.
|
gelinas
|
|
response 143 of 151:
|
Dec 1 13:48 UTC 2000 |
The reports I saw of that accident were short on detail, but I got the
impression that the exit in question was one of the regular ones, not the
over-wing emergency exits. As noted, those are assisted, but they also
open differently.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 144 of 151:
|
Dec 1 18:43 UTC 2000 |
You would notice a pressure change of 0.5 psi, and I've never felt one
on the ground. However you feel the changes as the plane ascends or
descends, which I've always thought was a somewhat lower pressure (like,
7000 feet) as one ascended, and the reverse when descending. (The low
elevation pressure decrease with height is about 1 inch Hg per thousand
feet. 7000 feet would mean ca. 7 in Hg, or about 3.4 psi.)
|
gull
|
|
response 145 of 151:
|
Dec 2 18:46 UTC 2000 |
Re #143: Never trust the media to get anything right about an aviation
accident.
|
bdh3
|
|
response 146 of 151:
|
Dec 3 02:45 UTC 2000 |
Think about every airplane disaster flick you've ever seen, the cabin
gets a hole in it and passengers are sucked out. The cabin is at higher
pressure than the outside atmosphere. Now think about the news story
referenced above. On the ground the flight attendant is sucked out
because the air pressure on the ground is lower than that in the
aircraft? And as pointed out, was lower enough to suck the attendant
out, but the attendant was strong enough to open it against the pressure
differential holding the door shut?
|
ea
|
|
response 147 of 151:
|
Dec 3 04:36 UTC 2000 |
re #146 - I can think of one airplane disaster flick that doesn't have a
hole in the cabin - Airplane! didn't have anyone getting sucked out of
the plane. ;) (just a minor nit)
|
bdh3
|
|
response 148 of 151:
|
Dec 3 06:26 UTC 2000 |
(That was a comedy/parody not a disaster flick.) (just a minor pick at a
minor nit)
|
mary
|
|
response 149 of 151:
|
Dec 3 14:29 UTC 2000 |
I spoke with my jet mechanic brother-in-law last evening and he explained
it this way:
Aircraft, once off the ground, are pressurized to a differential that
changes depending on altitude. At 30,000 feet or above the cabin would be
pressurized to between 7 and 8 psi. On the tarmac, in preparation for
takeoff, the aircraft is at 1 to 2 psi.
What he suspects happened in the incident being discussed is the "ground
shift" didn't promptly occur. Ground shift is the term for the plane
realizing it is on the ground and pressurization returning to 0 psi.
All door have an emergency assist whereby a gas canister essentially blows
the locking mechanism and the door open. At altitude even this assist
wouldn't be enough to open a door. But he suspects this particular plane
for some reason didn't complete the ground shift, was still at 1 - 2 psi,
the attendant couldn't get the manual handle to open the door (it wouldn't
at that pressure), so he or she activated the assist, which did work. He
also suspects the attendant wouldn't have really been sucked from the plan
as much as bumped out by the resulting air concussion, onto the tarmac,
which is between a 10 and 25 foot drop depending on which door it was on
what jet.
|
br00t
|
|
response 150 of 151:
|
Dec 3 19:36 UTC 2000 |
Cyberpunk .... No i must be lost ?
|
raven
|
|
response 151 of 151:
|
Dec 3 22:27 UTC 2000 |
No cyberpunk covers broad issues of social change in cyberspace, not just
h8cking for 3llet2 d00ds. :-)
|