Robbery and burglary are different legal concepts. Rob is used for both dictionary meanings:
even though the legal definition is often only a(2).
It’s possible “short” meaning “open electrical circuit” will eventually make it’s way into the dictionary, but for now it’s not that common, and almost diametrically opposite to the technical definition.
Well how about that. A handful of experts on the subject say they’d never call an unknown problem a “short”. One, an engineer according to his user name says he might say “Possible short”, translation to the layman, “Short”. You all are so close to proving your point. All you need to do is have all of the millions of others who would qualify as an expert on the difference between and “open” and a “short” to post here and avow that they would never call an “open” or unknown problem a “short” and then you’ve proven your point. Or you could stop the misplaced pedantics about definitions of words and understand that an expert in this sense does not require an EE or certification as an electrician, not that it matters anyway, an expert would be anyone with the basic knowledge of electrical circuits who understands that current flows through conductors and what the words “short” and “open” means. And some large percentage of those experts frequently deals with laymen who don’t understand the difference and rather than try to explain it to them, or argue with them about it, will just acknowledge that some unknown problem, or even a known “open” is a “short”, because they don’t have the time I have already wasted on this subject to try to correct them or explain it to them.
So I’ll check this thread from time to time waiting for the millions of more experts to chime in and eventually prove me wrong.
ETA: I would hope that a ‘professional’, an engineer, a certified electrician, or many other types of technicians would not use the term “short” erroneously. That is hardly the matter in question though.
Thanks, I was wondering what it would take to convince you you were wrong.
Always happy to accomodate. I’ll even refrain from calling an ‘open’ a ‘short’ myself to settle the matter.
jeez, peeps. Whats up with the word battles?:rolleyes:
In place car battery cables, as others have mentioned, are usually failing at the terminal ends.
ps
Dont trust your jumper cables. They will fail over time, if old and used a lot. Cheap ones in particular. Strands will often break at the clamp ends (unseen) and cables will not carry full voltage, (although still having continuity) and the car which needs jumping will not start. (just learned this the hard way)
It’s the Dope. I think we’re required to do this according to the user agreement.
Not knowing how something works or doesn’t work then using “laymans” terminology doesn’t exactly qualify you as an expert. However, it doesn’t take a lot of dirt and grime to foul up an electrical connection then toss a bit of water into the mess and you get open circuits and yes,even shorts… Keep everything clean and tight and you should be able to avoid most of the problems inherent to battery cables.
As a licensed electrical engineer I would never refer to an unknown failure or an open circuit as a “short”. And while I don’t refute engineer_comp_geek’s definition of a “fault”, I have to admit that Ihaven’t heard that term used for a “failed open” situation. From my background as a utility company power engineer we used the term fault to describe a short circuit of the distribution or transmission system. Lotsa sparks at 345,000 volts.
As a guy who has had to discuss electrical problems with a layman I would assume that they might be declaring a “short” as “any kind of problem”
Glad to help muddy the water.
Wait, you yourself asked whether an electrical professional would use the word “short” when talking to a layman, if the problem was something that’s not an actual short. We answered your question: we would never do it and in our experience would be surprised if it did happen. If your standard for what satisfies you is nothing short of millions of replies, then why did you even ask it?
We know the word is used that way by laymen - my wife is one. But it’s not to the point where the usage has become an acceptable idiom. It’s an incorrect usage that’s not uncommon (but it’s still incorrect).
not sure what point you’re making but i think it’s more correct to say that not knowing how something works or doesn’t work and then using laymen’s terms to describe the problem doesn’t ever (you’d used “exactly”) qualify someone as an expert on something.
also, I’ve never seen a short in a battery cable caused by dirt & grime.
This is what I posted:
For some reason some Dopers feel the need to challenge the bolded part of that statement. If they want to disprove it they’ll have to show the evidence that not one single expert would ever refer to an unknown problem as a “short”. I can’t imagine why a statement that is not practically disprovable requires such discussion, but I’m happy to play along.
didn’t you make the claim that “even the expert may use the term when the problem is unknown”? in this case, isn’t it you that would need to provide proof it has happened?
for what it’s worth, I’m not saying it hasn’t occurred. how could anyone make that claim. i will say that anyone with a firm grasp of what it means & is in any field where it matters would almost have to be saying that to someone else as a joke, or to make light of the public usage. like “i guess it’s a “short” (wink), that’s what the lady the lady i spoke to said”.
in no situation, ever until the end of time would i personally ever call an unknown or known problem a short unless it was one. if someone described a problem that, in fact, did sound like a short had occurred, i can easily see myself describing that as a “possible short”. in that case it would be because i thought it was possible, not because it was a complete unknown.
I was talking about when you asked this:
The answer you got, from the professionals here, is that NONE of use would ever do that, and we’d be surprised if we ever heard anyone else do it. When you said “even the expert may use the term…” that implies that it’s somewhat common. It seems like you’re trying to move the goalposts to saying that statement just means that there could be one expert somewhere in the world who does it.
OK then, there may be one, or even a small number, of experts who would use “short” to indicate a generic electrical problem. They will be hard to find though.
You yourself provided the proof when you stated you might call it a “possible short”, and then again by pointing out how it may be sarcastic usage.
A layman asked about this usage, and I explained it to him in layman’s terms. I don’t need to explain what a short is to an expert. I didn’t say that experts use ‘short’ as a synonym for other electrical faults. This is a matter of how laymen use and understand the word, and even an expert communicating with a layman may have to use the layman’s terminology to communicate effectively. And by ‘effectively’ I don’t mean fighting their general ignorance on how electrical circuits work, I mean telling them that you found a problem or didn’t, which is all many laymen want to know, the OP having demonstrated that.
i think i was more than clear that i couldn’t quantify that it never had ever been used that way. no one could.
if you took what i said about my referring to something as a “possible short” to mean anything other than just that (‘a short seems likely, given what i know’ - not ‘i have no idea what’s happening, so I’ll call it a short’), then it only goes to prove you don’t have a grasp of the very, very specific thing that a short is and how blissfully stupid that would make someone look, that knows better, but chooses to instead just randomly throw it out there to describe either the unknown or some other problem that isn’t a short at all.
i think you’d be just as likely to hear a pro use the words peanut butter sandwich versus short as some all encompassing term. i couldn’t say that had never happened either, it’s just not very likely.
I didn’t mention anything about quantifying. I am not intending to criticize your or anyone else’s professionalism. I’m just stating a fact that you yourself has demonstrated. I am talking about layman’s language, which even an expert or professional may have to use on occasion. If you interpreted my statement to mean that an expert or professional will use the term “short” to refer to an unknown fault or even a known ‘non-short’ fault then you’re reading more into the statement than is there, and I certainly didn’t intend to cause you such distress by the wording.
ETA: I see you are new here. Welcome aboard. I appreciate your polite tone of argument. Be forewarned that you might get some flack for failure to capitalize words because of … something.
thank you for your kind welcome.
i certainly would rather fit in here than not. the collective pool of knowledge over the wide range of subjects is one that can’t be matched anywhere else on the internet that I’m aware of. hopefully what knowledge i have & how i share it contributes to this place in a way that’s well received by others as well.
regarding capitalization. there’s a lot that I’d like to enhance about my posts (words as links, bolding words, multiple quotes, my reply to posts done within the paragraphs of a post I’m replying to, … there’s surely more I’m missing in that list). the issue is I’m most often posting from my phone so some of those enhancements aren’t as easily achieved on the smaller screen without more effort than what seems reasonable. and as i don’t use capitals when i text, my phone settings roll over onto here.
If it was a car from last century, I’d suspect it was a fusible link. These were wires that were designed to (my words) burn-up and break the circuit. For a 2008 Jeep, sounds like it was just a cheaply made part (the wire).
ETA: This from wikiP; “Electrical fusible links are common in high-current automotive applications.”
Actually, I keep reading the thread title, “How often do car battery cables get shorts in them,” and picturing a scene where a mechanic rummages around under the hood of a car and then comes out holding up a pair of boxer shorts. “I think I found your problem, Mr. Smith!”
BTW, in this case, that’s (mostly) correct terminology. If the power cord has exposed copper, the wires can “short” to each other or to ground. I wouldn’t say that a power cord with exposed copper “had a short in it,” but it could certainly cause one, if it touched an earthed conductor.