Water changes & Temperature Fluctuations

[James Roberge]

Hey everyone

So now that my tank is cycled, i have another question before i add fish
regarding water temperature when changing water.

When i changed my water i filled my 20L jug with tap water (very cold)
I poured 2L of that into a kettle and boiled it and poured it back in to
raise the temp to closer to my tank temperature (but it was still a
little colder). I didn't get too worried with it being that i have no
fish, so needless to say, even with boiling some water the water in the
tank did drop in temperature by 4 degrees.

My question is, i need some formulas to figure out things like

"if i have 'a' litres of water @ 'x' degrees, and I add 'b' litres of
water @ 'y' degrees, then a+b = c litres at 'z' degrees."

OR

"if i have 'a' litres of water @ 'x' degress, how much water (b) at 'y'
degrees do i have to add to make a+b = z degrees."

I am sure i took some of this stuff in school some time, but damned if i
can remember any of it. Just one formula is good, i can re-work it to
find what i need (i remember that much! lol). Even a google search
term would be great.

Thanks

James

[atomweaver]

James Roberge > wrote in
:


> My question is, i need some formulas to figure out things like
>
> "if i have 'a' litres of water @ 'x' degrees, and I add 'b' litres of
> water @ 'y' degrees, then a+b = c litres at 'z' degrees."
>
> OR
>
> "if i have 'a' litres of water @ 'x' degress, how much water (b) at 'y'
> degrees do i have to add to make a+b = z degrees."
>

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.aquaria.freshwater.misc/msg/fd62721edb0a
3097?dmode=source

Regards
DaveZ
Atom Weaver

[James Roberge]

atomweaver wrote:
> James Roberge > wrote in
> :
>
>
>> My question is, i need some formulas to figure out things like
>>
>> "if i have 'a' litres of water @ 'x' degrees, and I add 'b' litres of
>> water @ 'y' degrees, then a+b = c litres at 'z' degrees."
>>
>> OR
>>
>> "if i have 'a' litres of water @ 'x' degress, how much water (b) at 'y'
>> degrees do i have to add to make a+b = z degrees."
>>
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/rec.aquaria.freshwater.misc/msg/fd62721edb0a
> 3097?dmode=source
>
> Regards
> DaveZ
> Atom Weaver
This link brought up nothing, but I did see Larry Blanchard's post from
less than a week ago! LOL, sorry I should have caught that before
posting. I canceled my post because there no responses yet, but after I
did that a response popped up... I am kinda new with newsgroups, so
perhaps I should not have done that.

James

[atomweaver]

James Roberge > wrote in
:

> atomweaver wrote:
>> James Roberge > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>
>>> My question is, i need some formulas to figure out things like
>>>
>>> "if i have 'a' litres of water @ 'x' degrees, and I add 'b' litres
>>> of water @ 'y' degrees, then a+b = c litres at 'z' degrees."
>>>
>>> OR
>>>
>>> "if i have 'a' litres of water @ 'x' degress, how much water (b) at
>>> 'y' degrees do i have to add to make a+b = z degrees."
>>>
>>
>>
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.aquaria.freshwater.misc/msg/fd62721
>> edb0a 3097?dmode=source
>>
>> Regards
>> DaveZ
>> Atom Weaver
> This link brought up nothing,

Depending upon your browser, and my competence in posting, the second
line of that link may not have been included when you clicked. if you
get something like that in the future , a cut-and-paste of the full link
into your browser URL line will fix it.

> but I did see Larry Blanchard's post
> from less than a week ago!

The very post I was trying to link to :-)

> LOL, sorry I should have caught that
> before posting. I canceled my post because there no responses yet,
> but after I did that a response popped up... I am kinda new with
> newsgroups, so perhaps I should not have done that.

NP. FYI, there is no "cancellling" a post in Usenet.

Regards
DaveZ
Atom Weaver

[nut]

atomweaver wrote:
> NP. FYI, there is no "cancellling" a post in Usenet.

Yes there is.



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

[Jolly Fisherman]

On Tue, 5 Dec 2006 20:41:01 -0000, "nut"
> wrote:

>atomweaver wrote:
>> NP. FYI, there is no "cancellling" a post in Usenet.
>
>Yes there is.


There are a few caveats to his advice. Read the rest of the thread
also.

[nut]

Jolly Fisherman wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Dec 2006 20:41:01 -0000, "nut"
> > wrote:
>
>> atomweaver wrote:
>>> NP. FYI, there is no "cancellling" a post in Usenet.
>>
>> Yes there is.
>
>
> There are a few caveats to his advice.

Shouldn't that be "in" his advice? I'm not sure whether you're slagging him
off or defending him.

What he said was wrong, so i corrected him... usenet posts can be cancelled.

Although often ineffective, a message sent in error *should* be cancelled...
to say that it cannot be is to teach bad manners. We already have enough
goons on usenet - let's not train the puppies to **** on the carpet eh?

> Read the rest of the thread also.

I did, before i replied, but that's of no consequence... a thousand lines of
wisdom may camoflauge a line of nonsense, but it doesn't stop it being
nonsense.




--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

[Köi-Lö]

"nut" > wrote in message
.. .
> Jolly Fisherman wrote:
>> On Tue, 5 Dec 2006 20:41:01 -0000, "nut"
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> atomweaver wrote:
>>>> NP. FYI, there is no "cancellling" a post in Usenet.
>>>
>>> Yes there is.
>>
>>
>> There are a few caveats to his advice.
>
> Shouldn't that be "in" his advice? I'm not sure whether you're slagging
> him
> off or defending him.
>
> What he said was wrong, so i corrected him... usenet posts can be
> cancelled.
=======================
Then why not explain to us HOW to cancel them should we chose to do so?
--
KL....
Frugal ponding since 1995.
My Pond & Aquarium Pages:
http://tinyurl.com/9do58
~~~~ }<((((*> ~~~ }<{{{{(ö> ~~~~ }<((((({*>

[atomweaver]

"nut" > wrote in
:

> Jolly Fisherman wrote:
>> On Tue, 5 Dec 2006 20:41:01 -0000, "nut"
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> atomweaver wrote:
>>>> NP. FYI, there is no "cancellling" a post in Usenet.
>>>
>>> Yes there is.
>>
>>
>> There are a few caveats to his advice.
>
> Shouldn't that be "in" his advice? I'm not sure whether you're
> slagging him off or defending him.
>
> What he said was wrong, so i corrected him... usenet posts can be
> cancelled.
>
> Although often ineffective, a message sent in error *should* be
> cancelled... to say that it cannot be is to teach bad manners. We
> already have enough goons on usenet - let's not train the puppies to
> **** on the carpet eh?
>
>> Read the rest of the thread also.
>
> I did, before i replied, but that's of no consequence... a thousand
> lines of wisdom may camoflauge a line of nonsense, but it doesn't stop
> it being nonsense.
>

Meh. You're right in that newsreaders have a "cancel message" command,
which will propagate across the newssevers. I've used it, but if the
message hits the Google Groups archive, or another web interface, before
the cancel command propagates, I don't see those sites pulling them from
their archive without further prompting (in the form of a direct
request/command sent to each web interface). So a sent message is as
good as "out there", due to Usenet's decentralized nature, and the
various web interfaces glomming off of it for web content at various
servers (which may or may not recognize your cancel command). You're
absolutely correct, though. A more correct reply might have been "good
luck canceling a Usenet post before someone replies".

DZ
AW

[nut]

Köi-Lö wrote:
> "nut" > wrote in message
> .. .
>> Jolly Fisherman wrote:
>>> On Tue, 5 Dec 2006 20:41:01 -0000, "nut"
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> atomweaver wrote:
>>>>> NP. FYI, there is no "cancellling" a post in Usenet.
>>>>
>>>> Yes there is.
>>>
>>>
>>> There are a few caveats to his advice.
>>
>> Shouldn't that be "in" his advice? I'm not sure whether you're
>> slagging him
>> off or defending him.
>>
>> What he said was wrong, so i corrected him... usenet posts can be
>> cancelled.
> =======================
> Then why not explain to us HOW to cancel them should we chose to do
> so?

From the menubar in Outlook Express: Message -> Cancel message.

Most people set their newsreaders to poll every 5 minutes so, even if you're
quick, the chances are *someone* will have read it and maybe replied.

Some news servers don't accept cancel requests... but if you cancel a
message it'll stop most people from downloading the message if they haven't
already done so.

Cancelling a message the next day won't help much as everyone who's
subscribed to the group will have already received it, but it's still
courteous to do so if it was posted in error.

Hope that helps.



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

[nut]

atomweaver wrote:
> "nut" > wrote in
> :
>
>> Jolly Fisherman wrote:
>>> On Tue, 5 Dec 2006 20:41:01 -0000, "nut"
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> atomweaver wrote:
>>>>> NP. FYI, there is no "cancellling" a post in Usenet.
>>>>
>>>> Yes there is.
>>>
>>>
>>> There are a few caveats to his advice.
>>
>> Shouldn't that be "in" his advice? I'm not sure whether you're
>> slagging him off or defending him.
>>
>> What he said was wrong, so i corrected him... usenet posts can be
>> cancelled.
>>
>> Although often ineffective, a message sent in error *should* be
>> cancelled... to say that it cannot be is to teach bad manners. We
>> already have enough goons on usenet - let's not train the puppies to
>> **** on the carpet eh?
>>
>>> Read the rest of the thread also.
>>
>> I did, before i replied, but that's of no consequence... a thousand
>> lines of wisdom may camoflauge a line of nonsense, but it doesn't
>> stop it being nonsense.
>>
>
> Meh. You're right in that newsreaders have a "cancel message"
> command, which will propagate across the newssevers. I've used it,
> but if the message hits the Google Groups archive, or another web
> interface, before the cancel command propagates, I don't see those
> sites pulling them from their archive without further prompting (in
> the form of a direct request/command sent to each web interface). So
> a sent message is as good as "out there", due to Usenet's
> decentralized nature, and the various web interfaces glomming off of
> it for web content at various servers (which may or may not recognize
> your cancel command). You're absolutely correct, though. A more
> correct reply might have been "good luck canceling a Usenet post
> before someone replies".

If i'm absolutely correct, how can i be more correct? ;)

Sorry if i appeared obtuse - your explanation is 100%, and we are now in
agreement.



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

[atomweaver]

"nut" > wrote in news:457711ef$0$15470
:

> atomweaver wrote:
>> "nut" > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>> Jolly Fisherman wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 5 Dec 2006 20:41:01 -0000, "nut"
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> atomweaver wrote:
>>>>>> NP. FYI, there is no "cancellling" a post in Usenet.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes there is.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> There are a few caveats to his advice.
>>>
>>> Shouldn't that be "in" his advice? I'm not sure whether you're
>>> slagging him off or defending him.
>>>
>>> What he said was wrong, so i corrected him... usenet posts can be
>>> cancelled.
>>>
>>> Although often ineffective, a message sent in error *should* be
>>> cancelled... to say that it cannot be is to teach bad manners. We
>>> already have enough goons on usenet - let's not train the puppies to
>>> **** on the carpet eh?
>>>
>>>> Read the rest of the thread also.
>>>
>>> I did, before i replied, but that's of no consequence... a thousand
>>> lines of wisdom may camoflauge a line of nonsense, but it doesn't
>>> stop it being nonsense.
>>>
>>
>> Meh. You're right in that newsreaders have a "cancel message"
>> command, which will propagate across the newssevers. I've used it,
>> but if the message hits the Google Groups archive, or another web
>> interface, before the cancel command propagates, I don't see those
>> sites pulling them from their archive without further prompting (in
>> the form of a direct request/command sent to each web interface). So
>> a sent message is as good as "out there", due to Usenet's
>> decentralized nature, and the various web interfaces glomming off of
>> it for web content at various servers (which may or may not recognize
>> your cancel command). You're absolutely correct, though. A more
>> correct reply might have been "good luck canceling a Usenet post
>> before someone replies".
>
> If i'm absolutely correct, how can i be more correct? ;)
>
I meant a more correct initial reply _from me_...

DZ
AW

[nut]

atomweaver wrote:

>> If i'm absolutely correct, how can i be more correct? ;)
>>
> I meant a more correct initial reply _from me_...

ahhhhhhhhhhhh i get it now :)

....so we're both right and no harms done... phew!





--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

[Köi-Lö]

"nut" > wrote in message
.. .
> Köi-Lö wrote:
>> "nut" > wrote in message
>> .. .
>>> Jolly Fisherman wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 5 Dec 2006 20:41:01 -0000, "nut"
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> atomweaver wrote:
>>>>>> NP. FYI, there is no "cancellling" a post in Usenet.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes there is.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> There are a few caveats to his advice.
>>>
>>> Shouldn't that be "in" his advice? I'm not sure whether you're
>>> slagging him
>>> off or defending him.
>>>
>>> What he said was wrong, so i corrected him... usenet posts can be
>>> cancelled.
>> =======================
>> Then why not explain to us HOW to cancel them should we chose to do
>> so?
>
> From the menubar in Outlook Express: Message -> Cancel message.
>
> Most people set their newsreaders to poll every 5 minutes so, even if
> you're quick, the chances are *someone* will have read it and maybe
> replied.
>
> Some news servers don't accept cancel requests... but if you cancel a
> message it'll stop most people from downloading the message if they
> haven't already done so.
>
> Cancelling a message the next day won't help much as everyone who's
> subscribed to the group will have already received it, but it's still
> courteous to do so if it was posted in error.
>
> Hope that helps.
===============
Yes. Thank you. I just never gave canceling messages a thought. :-)

--
KL....
Frugal ponding since 1995.
rec.ponder since late 1996.
My Pond & Aquarium Pages:
http://tinyurl.com/9do58
~~~~ }<((((*> ~~~ }<{{{{(ö> ~~~~ }<((((({*>

[Jolly Fisherman]

On Wed, 06 Dec 2006 04:36:43 GMT, Jolly Fisherman >
wrote:

>On Tue, 5 Dec 2006 20:41:01 -0000, "nut"
> wrote:
>
>>atomweaver wrote:
>>> NP. FYI, there is no "cancellling" a post in Usenet.
>>
>>Yes there is.
>
>
>There are a few caveats to his advice. Read the rest of the thread
>also.

Sorry I was unclear. I really was talking about Larry Blanchard's
advice.

Permit me to be pedantic but you cannot cancel a Usenet post once it
has been submitted to an ISP's news server and propagated to the
Internet. Unless you have access & control of that nntp server you
can only cancel a Usenet post _before_ it is submitted by your client
to the server (i.e. in your outbox). When someone else replies is
irrelevant. Your ability to cancel or not cancel a post is the same
if no one ever replies. Also it is possible to have outlook
(express), for example, configured to not automatically send/receive.
In that case you could cancel a message any time before that manual
send. But remember only because it has not been sent to or received
by your nntp server.

[Jolly Fisherman]

On Thu, 07 Dec 2006 06:36:10 GMT, Jolly Fisherman >
wrote:

>On Wed, 06 Dec 2006 04:36:43 GMT, Jolly Fisherman >
>wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 5 Dec 2006 20:41:01 -0000, "nut"
> wrote:
>>
>>>atomweaver wrote:
>>>> NP. FYI, there is no "cancellling" a post in Usenet.
>>>
>>>Yes there is.
>>
>>
>>There are a few caveats to his advice. Read the rest of the thread
>>also.
>
>Sorry I was unclear. I really was talking about Larry Blanchard's
>advice.
>
>Permit me to be pedantic but you cannot cancel a Usenet post once it
>has been submitted to an ISP's news server and propagated to the
>Internet. Unless you have access & control of that nntp server you
>can only cancel a Usenet post _before_ it is submitted by your client
>to the server (i.e. in your outbox). When someone else replies is
>irrelevant. Your ability to cancel or not cancel a post is the same
>if no one ever replies. Also it is possible to have outlook
>(express), for example, configured to not automatically send/receive.
>In that case you could cancel a message any time before that manual
>send. But remember only because it has not been sent to or received
>by your nntp server.

See here's an example. I responded to the wrong post and didn't
notice it until after it was submitted to my nntp server. It is un-
cancelable and my mistake will be around as long as google or someone
else maintains an archive of these groups. :(

[nut]

Jolly Fisherman wrote:

> See here's an example. I responded to the wrong post and didn't
> notice it until after it was submitted to my nntp server. It is un-
> cancelable and my mistake will be around as long as google or someone
> else maintains an archive of these groups. :(

I just forwarded an email to a newsgroup on a private server... on realising
that i'd lost all the HTML formatting i cancelled the post and resubmitted
it as HTML. I then reset the group and, low and behold, there was my HTML
post with the former nowhere to be found.

A perfect example of correct cancelling, so i thought i'd share it with you.



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

[nut]

Jolly Fisherman wrote:

> Is that another problem? Once it is retreived by other readers'
> newsreaders it will remain there, despite your cancellation, if they
> don't reset or synchronize their local cache of the group?

Theoretically the cancellation should propagate... if a server picks up the
original post, it'll get the cancel message too.

> I think I understand my old professor's comments about usenet posting
> now. While he implied that a message cannot be cancelled, in reality
> one should *not expect* to *always* be able to cleanly remove a
> submitted post. For that reason he wrote off the concept wholesale.

Agreed.



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com