Scorpion Hunting / Bottled Water Sterility Maintenance

Sugar- free low sodium - decaffinated chocolate, Snicker Snicker bar. My what 50 added .years does to a person. The only time I choke up and can't decide is on the 2nd floor of Coppels Department Store when the kids seat me in a chair then do their version of a light show parading a hundred different blouses and pants. "Do You Like It?" takes on a whole new meaning.

The battery board is finished. Tomorrow, repeat for ignition A circuit. Then the K car will be officially "snubbed". 17 volt max on A/C clutch transients. Starter motor and solenoid transients. Quicksilver has few DC electronics and lots of avalanche rectifiers. The field collapse on the starter has fried several MR2535s. Time for a 50-amp version. See how a larger P/N junction fares.

Even now I do better than 20 mins to decide but sometimes need help. Usually it's a Snickers

Back in the sixties I saw my quota of Love Children standing in front of a vanding machine for twenty minutes tring to decide between a Snickers Bar or Milky Way.
A truly brutal shock as to the effects of a Chemical Lifestyle. They're all dead now whatcan ironic coincidence. I suffered tripping-out in Bezerkely UCB and Stanford Libraries. Short term memory loss and phasor algebra don't get along too hot.
Meanwhile back at the ranch, I have LED projects lined up. One is Ardino voice control light dimming. "Computer! Half lighting"

Some people dream. I'm foolish enough to go for it. I am building the first in a series of automobile/RV transient voltage protection circuits. Pianotuna's 120vac suppressor is finished. Quicksilver's circuit is no challenge. Four Motorola MR2535 avalanche 28-32 volt discretetes and a single 300 ohm 450 volt electrolytic and maybe a .47 and .01

Then there's the special truply wye toad stator Lund & Flynn is hand winding for me. Say goodbye to 22 amps at idle in gear. Say hello to 70+ amps. No more toad issues. But wait! There's the group 31 Lifeline upgrade. Idle hands, and all that.

SCVJeff wrote:

Naio wrote:
Mex, you have such unusual hobbies :B.

Also, I hope the prolific posts mean that you are feeling energetic?!

Doesnt he tho?
Wonder if there's a Hendrix poster soaking up a little of that?

Shhhh! We don't want Mex to day trip, or trip, period. Did you load up some Voodoo Child Slight Return for him on an SD card to remind him of his San Francisco days? Voodoo child slight return

I'll stick with germ scorpions

GordonThree wrote:
Actual UV: Sanitize yes, disinfect yes, deodorize yes, sterilize no. Sterilize means to kill everything, down to some very tiny margin of error. Sanitize or disinfect means to kill a lot of cooties, like Lysol claiming to disinfect 99.99 pct. So out of a trillion bacteria per square meter, it will leave only few million still standing.

Sterilize is a regulated term, you need a certification from the government to claim your "whatever" sterilizes anything, along with regular testing and recertifications. At an electron-beam or gamma-ray sterilization facility, they use ultra high energy particles to kill EVERYTHING, not just most things. Certain types of gas are certified to kill everything, as is high pressure steam (if I recall correctly.)

You are 99.9% correct, only with the steam you are wrong. It is superheated steam, with normal steam pressure.

SCVJeff wrote:
And a side question: what about these super intense UV strobes being used in hospital rooms to "sterilize" the room once the patient is gone?

They don't sterilize, they clean, or when really well done, disinfect the room.

fj12ryder wrote:
I guess you need to elaborate on this statement. Since UV light can kill bacteria and viruses, why would this not qualify as "sterilization"? Perhaps a better term would be "disinfection" rather than "sterilization".

Yes, disinfection, and in some cases high level disinfection would be the right term.
If you have an open container or system, the way it is common with water to be used, sterility cannot be achieved because of continuous contamination of air borne or environmental microbial loads.

To kill the entire microbial load of water (to achieve sterility), one would need a very strong UV source, because every molecule of the water has to be reached by the UV light at the same time, otherwise cross contamination would take place.

Wuwee oxymoron time

Pathogen Free / Mexico

R/O water saturated with ozone then maintained closed bottle STERILE with UV periodic irradiation is good enough for me. Didn't intend to infer the chip would render a mud puddle safe to sip. If one desires a lab experiment remove a plate of leftovers from a gas refrigerator in 100F weather and slip a slide under a 300X microscope. It's Mardi Gras time.

fj12ryder wrote:
So it pretty much boils(Har) down to semantics. :)

Perhaps from an advertising standpoint. It's a matter of effectiveness. Sterile has to be darned effective; that every microbe is destroyed within a given area/container. Anything less is more or less "good enough" for food service, or regular hygiene needs.