Honda VTR coolant boiling ?
in [Aussie Motorcycles]
|
Prev: P plate training ...not
Next: Australian Standard 1698
From: Moike on 16 Feb 2007 22:09 Hammo wrote: > <bigiain(a)mightymedia.com.au> wrote: >> Hammo <hbaj2006(a)aapt.net.au> wrote: >>> <bigiain(a)mightymedia.com.au> wrote: >>>> Hammo <hbaj2006(a)aapt.net.au> wrote: >>>>> <bigiain(a)mightymedia.com.au> wrote: >>>>>> "Knobdoodle" <knobdoodle(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> "Peter Cremasco" <FirstName.LastName(a)bigpond.com> wrote in message >>>>>>> news:jk38t29gcr43dcheiaq60ver5gb1ad73am(a)4ax.com... >>>>>>>> On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 13:18:38 GMT, "Knobdoodle" <knobdoodle(a)hotmail.com> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> It also expands when cooled below zero! >>>>>>>>> [cue Twilight-Zone music] >>>>>>>> Below 4 degrees C, I think. >>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>> You're right; but I think it's negative 4. >>>>>> Nope, plus 4, thats why ice floats... >>>>> Eh? Flotation is based on temperature? >>>>> >>>>> That makes no sense. >>>> You are, of course, completely right Hammo, as usual. The expansion of >>>> water as it drops below 4 degrees has absolutely nothing to do with why >>>> ice floats, I must have forgotten to factor in the efficiency of the >>>> cooling system, or the torque on the refrigerator compressor or some >>>> other completely irrelevant detail. >>>> >>>> Lets see: >>>> >>>> http://www.google.com/search?q=why+ice+floats >>>> >>>> Not a single one of the returns there says anything about temperature >>>> having anything to do with why ice floats, does it? >>> So your post and I quote.. >>> >>> BigIain: " Nope, plus 4, thats why ice floats..." >>> >>> Tell me what that was supposed to mean. >>> >>> Hammo : I'm, pretty sure that what I posted was "Eh? Flotation is based on >>> temperature? "That makes no sense". >>> >>> I'm looking forward how you managed to interpret that to mean that it is, >>> especially after you pointed out that a temp of "plus 4" was why ice floats. >>> >> I know you're a very busy guy Hamish, but it's all in the context, all >> of which you've quoted up there. Try and follow along: >> >> Clem said "It also expands when cooled below zero!", >> then Peter said "Below 4 degrees C, I think.", >> then Clem said "You're right; but I think it's negative 4.", >> then I said "Nope, plus 4, thats why ice floats..." - pointing out that >> if you had to cool water down below -4 degrees until it started >> expanding, ice _wouldn't_ float. > > I don't recall seeing this last bit of your explanation. Has it always been > there? > > I disagree with you. The density of ice does change the colder it gets, and > so even if the change started there, ice would "float". As you know how to > google, look it up, or consult wikipedia for a way to calculate it. No, you are wrong. If ice(water) did not begin to reduce its density until -4 C (the assertion Big was rebutting) ice would not float until it was cooled below -4 C. Ice at (say) -2 C would sink. The oceans would freeze from the bottom up and life (as we know it) would not exist on this planet. What Big said was perfectly intelligible to anyone who had been listening in year 9 science and who chose to read it in the context of the thread. It's sad that someone who lays claim to a scientific background protests about his need to have someone else join the obvious dots for him. Moike
From: dogleg on 16 Feb 2007 22:18 anyhoo......why is his VTR coolant boiling? Do cold VTRs float or sink? ....so many questions.....so few answers.
From: Hammo on 16 Feb 2007 23:01 On 17/2/07 9:33 AM, in article er5bgd$lb5$1(a)otis.netspace.net.au, "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. 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. An interesting point, you also need to consider laminar vs turbulent flow. This IS important when considering "levels" of air. Hammo
From: Johno on 16 Feb 2007 23:22 On Sat, 17 Feb 2007 14:18:40 +1100, "dogleg" <leg(a)dog.com> wrote: >anyhoo......why is his VTR coolant boiling? Do cold VTRs float or sink? > >...so many questions.....so few answers. > They float at +4 degrees apparently Johno Beer mate?
From: Hammo on 16 Feb 2007 23:42
"Moike" <bmwmoike(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hammo wrote: >> <bigiain(a)mightymedia.com.au> wrote: >>> Hammo <hbaj2006(a)aapt.net.au> wrote: >>>> <bigiain(a)mightymedia.com.au> wrote: >>>>> Hammo <hbaj2006(a)aapt.net.au> wrote: >>>>>> <bigiain(a)mightymedia.com.au> wrote: >>>>>>> "Knobdoodle" <knobdoodle(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> "Peter Cremasco" <FirstName.LastName(a)bigpond.com> wrote in message >>>>>>>>> <knobdoodle(a)hotmail.com> >>>>>>>>>> It also expands when cooled below zero! >>>>>>>>>> [cue Twilight-Zone music] >>>>>>>>> Below 4 degrees C, I think. >>>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>> You're right; but I think it's negative 4. >>>>>>> Nope, plus 4, thats why ice floats... >>>>>> Eh? Flotation is based on temperature? >>>>>> >>>>>> That makes no sense. >>>>> You are, of course, completely right Hammo, as usual. The expansion of >>>>> water as it drops below 4 degrees has absolutely nothing to do with why >>>>> ice floats, I must have forgotten to factor in the efficiency of the >>>>> cooling system, or the torque on the refrigerator compressor or some >>>>> other completely irrelevant detail. >>>>> >>>>> Lets see: >>>>> >>>>> http://www.google.com/search?q=why+ice+floats >>>>> >>>>> Not a single one of the returns there says anything about temperature >>>>> having anything to do with why ice floats, does it? >>>> So your post and I quote.. >>>> >>>> BigIain: " Nope, plus 4, thats why ice floats..." >>>> >>>> Tell me what that was supposed to mean. >>>> >>>> Hammo : I'm, pretty sure that what I posted was "Eh? Flotation is based on >>>> temperature? "That makes no sense". >>>> >>>> I'm looking forward how you managed to interpret that to mean that it is, >>>> especially after you pointed out that a temp of "plus 4" was why ice >>>> floats. >>>> >>> I know you're a very busy guy Hamish, but it's all in the context, all >>> of which you've quoted up there. Try and follow along: >>> >>> Clem said "It also expands when cooled below zero!", >>> then Peter said "Below 4 degrees C, I think.", >>> then Clem said "You're right; but I think it's negative 4.", >>> then I said "Nope, plus 4, thats why ice floats..." - pointing out that >>> if you had to cool water down below -4 degrees until it started >>> expanding, ice _wouldn't_ float. >> >> I don't recall seeing this last bit of your explanation. Has it always been >> there? >> >> I disagree with you. The density of ice does change the colder it gets, and >> so even if the change started there, ice would "float". As you know how to >> google, look it up, or consult wikipedia for a way to calculate it. > No, you are wrong. If ice(water) did not begin to reduce its density > until -4 C (the assertion Big was rebutting) ice would not float until > it was cooled below -4 C. Ice at (say) -2 C would sink. Hmm, I didn't think that what Big was claiming. It took what he said to mean that water increased in density at plus 4 degrees and this is why ice "floated". Meaning that it was necessary to have a more dense solution to enable ice to float. To use the analogy of rocks in water (and leaving myself wide open) rocks have greater density and so don't float, water less dense cf rocks are above them. As per .. http://www.lsbu.ac.uk/water/phase.html > The oceans > would freeze from the bottom up and life (as we know it) would not exist > on this planet. No they wouldn't. That is just silly. The pressure at the bottom of the ocean is that same at the surface? You don't mention Debuye-Huckle (re salinity). As a result, the density will increase as the depth of the ocean increases. See also glacial theory. Not to mention convection which would be a what, first year high school if not primary school concept? See your own comment below. > > What Big said was perfectly intelligible to anyone who had been > listening in year 9 science and who chose to read it in the context of > the thread. Yeah, it is that simple, eh. See your comment above. > > It's sad that someone who lays claim to a scientific background protests > about his need to have someone else join the obvious dots for him. It is Usenet. Who cares? Hammo |