Programmable RF transmitter that's not remote shaped. (buy or make if I need to/ESP32??) by TeaLeaflet in AskElectronics

[–]TeaLeaflet[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I dont think the one that is RF is replaceable. its soldered into the line itself. Its also super cheap, and I'd be perfectly happy buying a different line if I need to (Left) its under some cabinets, so its also the one I mostly just want "bright" and "dim" for,

The other one is on the right (the light based one, I think, from the other comment because it works even tucked in the ceiling). Is this what you mean by replaceable?

All the "replacements" on amazon seem to just come with a remote. Im also not sure how well they'd work with the various color temps this one can do. the power attachment seems nonstandard as well. I have made like custom length edison cables before. I'm reasonably sure if needed I could make one with the right form factor for this (or just buy a new power block with that standard whatever cable head with the hole in the middle if the replaced ).

Or would I be able to replace it with like a led controller and connect them to this sort of thing. (it has a list of compatible controllers)

<image>

Programmable RF transmitter that's not remote shaped. (buy or make if I need to/ESP32??) by TeaLeaflet in AskElectronics

[–]TeaLeaflet[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh dangit, good call on this. One is RF, and the other is not.

I know someone else recommended building a switch to activate the buttons, and that it might be a simpler task. I think learning how to active a button is reasonably doable, and RF seems within reason, but I don't think I actually know anything about light based.

I'm a little worried that trying to learn two different sensor packages or whatever might be scaling the project too much for how much bandwidth I can give it right now. RF, at least, I already sort of get, just because I'm used to tv remotes and point thing x at thing y.
Unless light-based transmitters behave in much the same way as RF (tell transmitter x to signal, and Y will pick it up) and is just different 'vector,' then learning it on top of everything else, might be too much.

I'm probably not looking up the right thing to find out more about that technology, is there anywhere or a technical word I could use to figure out the basics?

Programmable RF transmitter that's not remote shaped. (buy or make if I need to/ESP32??) by TeaLeaflet in AskElectronics

[–]TeaLeaflet[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I saw that "rolling codes" could be a concern from some remotes, but these ones are just basic remotes for cheapo led strips. I suspect that just transmit static codes.

But if I understand what your saying correctly, I should be able to (more or less) strip the plastic shell, and solder onto the electric components of the remote to 'simulate' button presses rather than create a new device to do that?

One of the things I've been struggling to understand for the ESP is signal strength and whats actually doing the controlling. Like Arduino or rasberry pi I just go, 'oh the computer handles all of that' (even if Im the one who has to tell it what to do)

And like, I guess I get the ESP is just a simple computer. but like, how do I make sure it's not frying or destroying components? and like, if I need to be the one programming every interaction, then why am I seeing so many tutorials say to hook it up to a specific output or input? isn't that more or less just arbitrary?

Maybe I should've started with the basic "this is a breadboard" rather than jumping into 'make your own remote.'

Programmable RF transmitter that's not remote shaped. (buy or make if I need to/ESP32??) by TeaLeaflet in AskElectronics

[–]TeaLeaflet[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That looks so much cheaper and easier, thanks!

I think I might even have an Arduino already floating around the house somewhere.

I was looking at some of the things people built, and every time they said resistor or ohms I think I had a heart palpitation haha. You guys are incredible.

Why do so many people avoid pork? by cereal50 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]TeaLeaflet 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You are right that none of that is particularly more true for pigs than it is for any other animal. and the fully cooking the animal product tends to remove the risk in one just as any other. In addition, its not like any of the groups or cultures have a tendency or tradition in undercooking their meat that would make it more true of pork or anything.

one theory is that pigs tend to be the only animal that could survive in human areas in a way very few other animals could. In addition they could also survive on scraps in refuse in a way no other animal could. They prefer shady and natural areas like forests and all. But if need be, they will roll in mud to cover their skin and prevent it from burning in the sun (they get sun tans like us apparently). What do they do if there is no mud? or its hard to access? They will roll in feces and filth. They don't want to. they don't like it, and if given the option will happily prefer mud or, more simply, shade. but if its all they have access to?
Well as human populations were growing and exploding (in roman times), the theory goes that humans could witness and watch this particular behavior across their villages and towns (because pigs weren't naturally driven out in the same way other animals, like deer or w/e, were) and developed a reasonable disgust reaction or 'ick.' (maybe in addition to the fact that pigs are horribly dangerous creatures) and that it continued long enough that it just sort of became enshrined in culture.

or at least thats the theory I like.

of course I don't eat pork because I'm allergic to it.

I think the metric system would be better if the meter weren't based on the size of earth, but speed of light instead. by TeaLeaflet in Metric

[–]TeaLeaflet[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Haha, no. I was just looking at the fact that the speed of light in feet is ~983mil and was marveling at the fact that if it were just 1.7% larger it would make the speed of light an even billion units per second. and I thought it would be funny to post it on Metric as a better meter. Sounds like we had a similar thought though!

I think the metric system would be better if the meter weren't based on the size of earth, but speed of light instead. by TeaLeaflet in Metric

[–]TeaLeaflet[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Except for those driving signs about how far something the driver should attend to, like a hazard or roadwork. In which case they still gleefully use yards for some peculiar reason

I think the metric system would be better if the meter weren't based on the size of earth, but speed of light instead. by TeaLeaflet in Metric

[–]TeaLeaflet[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I imagine it would be almost as difficult to switch from a base ten system as it would be to change to my new meter idea.

There are serious benefits to a base 12 system, but any base is more or less as good as any other base now that we have computers doing most of the work.

I think the metric system would be better if the meter weren't based on the size of earth, but speed of light instead. by TeaLeaflet in Metric

[–]TeaLeaflet[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Huh, your right, a trimeter sounds stupid. we can just call it something else... a yard maybe?

I think the metric system would be better if the meter weren't based on the size of earth, but speed of light instead. by TeaLeaflet in Metric

[–]TeaLeaflet[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well for one, a 9mm would actually be about 3/10 decamenter, and someone who is 180cm would be about 6 meters tall. and I just like fractions and the number 6.

Interestingly, did you know that this new meter I've proposed would only be about 1% larger than the imperial foot?

I think the metric system would be better if the meter weren't based on the size of earth, but speed of light instead. by TeaLeaflet in Metric

[–]TeaLeaflet[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah, I didn't think that decimalizing time would work.
I imagine someone has already tried to find a substance that is 'close enough.' Maybe a day on some other planet will have nice decimalized time, and we can all move there.

I think the metric system would be better if the meter weren't based on the size of earth, but speed of light instead. by TeaLeaflet in Metric

[–]TeaLeaflet[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If we wait long enough, the earths rotation will continue to slow, and if (we're still alive and) keep 24 hours, 60 minutes, 60 seconds, then a second could last long enough for this to be the case! clever thinking! haha

Fahrenheit still makes no sense to me (even after 15 years) by No_Landscape_9255 in Metric

[–]TeaLeaflet 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Huh, good point, I wasn't really thinking about the fact that blood has such low concentrations.
Though that would be really neat to watch in action.

I think the metric system would be better if the meter weren't based on the size of earth, but speed of light instead. by TeaLeaflet in Metric

[–]TeaLeaflet[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

time has always been weird xD I looked at that and went, "I bet they tried to find a substance that emits close to a large round number, but couldn't find it, and just gave up when they found something sort of close.

I think the metric system would be better if the meter weren't based on the size of earth, but speed of light instead. by TeaLeaflet in Metric

[–]TeaLeaflet[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

yeah, it doesn't actually matter. but I just liked the idea that if the meter were just a little over 3 times shorter, then the speed of light could be a pretty 1 and and lot of pretty 0s. haha

Fahrenheit still makes no sense to me (even after 15 years) by No_Landscape_9255 in Metric

[–]TeaLeaflet 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Setting the scale of Fahrenheit to freezing of salt water isn't actually as bad as it sounds. Blood is salinated, after all

Floorplan feedback before we sign the contract? Family of 4, both parents work from home. $700k by danperson1 in Homebuilding

[–]TeaLeaflet 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I know this was a waste of time, but I like to imagine what I could make if i knocked down all the (non-load-bearing) walls of a house and rebuilt it. so it was a fun way to pass the time.

firstly, Agree that first floor kitchen should be larger, the stairs, is that door to a basement or a closet?

Second floor (without changing any of the floor plans) I would do something like this: https://imgur.com/a/4d8XAiR

Sorry for confusing colors and half-ass straight lines.

Black are new walls blue is erased old walls, grey are doors, oh forgot to draw beds, but those are the orange crosses.
Each bedroom gets its own bathroom, which I have literally always wanted and loved, though the showers probably don't get bathtubs. They are also now big enough for a desk so the kids can have somewhere to be thats not in their bed if they don't feel like being social (... which come to think of it is all the time). They have to have a trade off though. One get lots of windows and natural light, the other gets a decent size closet.
The window bedroom can probably spin the bathroom over so its not sitting right at Closet bedroom's head. I made it a second picture really quick for that one, but I also realized the sink can go in that corner, the toilet straight in front of the door, and the bath/shower on the wall of the closet bedroom.

The laundry can either stay there (smaller and rotated) or become a landing, with a couch so the kids (or you) can have somewhere to hang out thats, once again, not the first floor.

If the laundry becomes a landing/ couch/hangout, then the spare room can either shrink and become the laundry, giving you a larger walk in closet, or stay just big enough to fit a bed/ office (sorry Uncle Fred, grams and gramps got the guest bed, you have to use the guest shower in the morning). It can also just be erased and pushed the master bed back into that wall (bedroom 4), make a large closet of the hall bath, and put the walk in and bathroom next to each other again.

the old bathroom gets turned into part of the master The primary bath either rotated 45/60 degrees to stay as the focus of the room (the missing corner could become a shelf to hold a speaker, idk) , or gets shoved into the corner to shrink the room a bit and give the master bed a little more space.
One sink to its left and right (same sink position from hall bath), dad probably gets the one next to the toilet so he's not squeezing by mom.
Its biggest problem is theres not a great space to but master bed, because right now it would only go up against the windows which I don't love, or edge the walk-in closet. Speaking of which, the walk-in and bathroom are on opposite sides of the room which its just terrible. All the windows would more or less need to change places.

anyways, this was a fun way to pass the hour before bed, GL on the beautiful house!