Honda VTR coolant boiling ?
in [Aussie Motorcycles]
|
Prev: P plate training ...not
Next: Australian Standard 1698
From: Knobdoodle on 16 Feb 2007 10:33 "Hammo" <hbaj2006(a)aapt.net.au> wrote in message news:C1FC1285.125C2%hbaj2006(a)aapt.net.au... > > > > On 16/2/07 7:26 PM, in article > bigiain-83E7BC.19260716022007(a)nasal.pacific.net.au, "Iain Chalmers" > <bigiain(a)mightymedia.com.au> wrote: > >> >> big (are you gonna stalk me round every aus.moto thread since I gave up >> on you in the "magic headlights running on no energy" thread? ;-) ) > > Actually I noticed you had no rebuttal on your calcs based in my back of > envelope one. Why was that? > Can I take a guess here? Was it 'cause Hammo's electrical calculation included mentions of stoichiometry, oxygenators and the efficiency of solvent-storage methods (as well as the all-too-important discourse about how if the watts were sacrificed for the betterment of mankind then they weren't REALLY wasted; were they!) And a complex-sounding final xenotropihanthe (just to throw anyone who's made it that far). -- Clem
From: Knobdoodle on 16 Feb 2007 10:43 "Knobdoodle" <knobdoodle(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >.....if the watts were sacrificed for the betterment of mankind then they >weren't REALLY wasted; were they!) > Dammit; that would've been funnier if I'd said "... died doing something they loved..." Why does that never occur until AFTER you hit send? (Or is THIS the secret that makes Pat's post so funny?) -- Clem
From: Dale Porter on 16 Feb 2007 17:33 "paulh" <paulh(a)fahncahn.com> wrote in message news:akbbt2dglrucsqm0kug0n0qljgqf3nc2c9(a)4ax.com... > On Fri, 16 Feb 2007 21:45:14 +1100, "Dale Porter" > <daleaporter(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >>"paulh" <paulh(a)fahncahn.com> wrote in message news:qi2bt2hq7nbhf2t7lhsl3o12l3fthigvmf(a)4ax.com... >>> On Fri, 16 Feb 2007 18:37:54 +1000, Toosmoky <toosmoky(a)hotmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>>Iain Chalmers wrote: >>>> >>>>> Perhaps only blimps and air-ships actually "float" in Nev-land since >>>>> they manage to keep 100% of their mass out of the water? :-) >>>> >>>>As ships displace water, so airships displace air... >>> >>> Air is compressible, Water isn't. So airships just might push the air >>> aside. >>> >>> >> >>But isn't pushing the air aside also displacing it? > > Not really... theoretically if you displace water then the water that > has been displaced must go somewhere else. That is, the water level in > the bath rises. But in air there would be no increase in 'air level', > but the air would just get denser instead. > > In a real life experiment (with an airship) it would possibly do a bit > of both as the enviroment is far more complex. > > The "level" of air would be irrelevant. To displace something, you are moving it from it's original location. If I came up to you and hip-and-shouldered you out of the way, I would have displaced you. Your level would not have changed (other than your level of annoyance). An airship displaces air by pushing it aside. The air is effectively replaced at that point by an airship. -- Dale Porter GPX250 -> CBR600 -> VTR1000 + VT250F-J
From: paulh on 16 Feb 2007 19:17 On Sat, 17 Feb 2007 09:33:44 +1100, "Dale Porter" <daleaporter(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> In a real life experiment (with an airship) it would possibly do a bit >> of both as the enviroment is far more complex. >> >> > >The "level" of air would be irrelevant. To displace something, you are moving it from it's original location. If I came up to you >and hip-and-shouldered you out of the way, I would have displaced you. Your level would not have changed (other than your level of >annoyance). An airship displaces air by pushing it aside. The air is effectively replaced at that point by an airship. Well, duh.... paulh
From: Johno on 16 Feb 2007 21:41
On Sat, 17 Feb 2007 09:33:44 +1100, "Dale Porter" <daleaporter(a)gmail.com> wrote: >"paulh" <paulh(a)fahncahn.com> wrote in message news:akbbt2dglrucsqm0kug0n0qljgqf3nc2c9(a)4ax.com... >> On Fri, 16 Feb 2007 21:45:14 +1100, "Dale Porter" >> <daleaporter(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>"paulh" <paulh(a)fahncahn.com> wrote in message news:qi2bt2hq7nbhf2t7lhsl3o12l3fthigvmf(a)4ax.com... >>>> On Fri, 16 Feb 2007 18:37:54 +1000, Toosmoky <toosmoky(a)hotmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>>Iain Chalmers wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Perhaps only blimps and air-ships actually "float" in Nev-land since >>>>>> they manage to keep 100% of their mass out of the water? :-) >>>>> >>>>>As ships displace water, so airships displace air... >>>> >>>> Air is compressible, Water isn't. So airships just might push the air >>>> aside. >>>> >>>> >>> >>>But isn't pushing the air aside also displacing it? >> >> Not really... theoretically if you displace water then the water that >> has been displaced must go somewhere else. That is, the water level in >> the bath rises. But in air there would be no increase in 'air level', >> but the air would just get denser instead. >> >> In a real life experiment (with an airship) it would possibly do a bit >> of both as the enviroment is far more complex. >> >> > >The "level" of air would be irrelevant. To displace something, you are moving it from it's original location. > If I came up to you and hip-and-shouldered you out of the way, I would have displaced you. Looks at Dale... Looks at Paulh.... YR! (tm) :P >Your level would not have changed (other than your level of >annoyance). An airship displaces air by pushing it aside. The air is effectively replaced at that point by an airship. Johno [1] getting out of the way rather quickly - just in case paulh does it to me! Beer mate? |