Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #556347

Re: A Simpler Alternative to Penino's Suggested Experiment

Show all headers | View raw

James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> On Tuesday, February 23, 2016 at 12:16:05 PM UTC-8, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> 
>> Take a fixed volume of air (that means you put ambient air into a container
>> and close it) and monitor the pressure (that means put a pressure guage
>> on the container) while you slowly increase the temperature (that means
>> make the container hotter very slowly so the air inside has time to heat
>> up).
>> 
>> If the H2O in the air in the container is gaseous, the pressure will
>> smoothly increase as the temperature in increased.
> 
> I get your point.  You are saying there should be a sharp discontinuance

Learn to format lines to a fixed length of no more than 68 characters.

> 
>> If the H2O in the air in the container is liquid, the pressure will
>> smoothly increase as the temperature in increased until the temperature
>> reaches the boiling point, at which point there will be a discontinuance
>> (that means sharp and sudden) increase in pressure, after which the pressure
>> will continue to increase smoothly.
>> 
>> Guess which happens.
> 
> I don't need to guess.  I know what will happen.  
> 
>> Is this an anecdote?
> 
> No.  
> 
>> No, it is an experiment.
>> 
>> Is this reproducible?
> 
> Yes.
> 
>> Yes, you will get the same result no matter how many times you do it
>> or who does it.
> 
> I agree.  
> 
> You have the right idea.  But water is tricky.  The discontinuance will

Learn to format lines to a fixed length of no more than 68 characters.

<remainder snipped as difficult to read and not amenable to responding>

-- 
Jim Pennino

Back to sci.physics | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

A Simpler Alternative to Penino's Suggested Experiment James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-24 12:42 -0800
  Re: A Simpler Alternative to Penino's Suggested Experiment Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-02-24 15:40 -0600
  Re: A Simpler Alternative to Penino's Suggested Experiment jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-02-24 23:08 +0000
    Re: A Simpler Alternative to Penino's Suggested Experiment James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-24 18:49 -0800
      Re: A Simpler Alternative to Penino's Suggested Experiment pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-02-24 19:13 -0800
        Re: A Simpler Alternative to Penino's Suggested Experiment pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-02-24 19:18 -0800
      Re: A Simpler Alternative to Penino's Suggested Experiment jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-02-25 03:54 +0000
        Re: A Simpler Alternative to Penino's Suggested Experiment James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-24 22:56 -0800
          Re: A Simpler Alternative to Penino's Suggested Experiment Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-02-25 08:49 -0600
      Re: A Simpler Alternative to Penino's Suggested Experiment moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-02-25 17:57 +0000

csiph-web