Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #546306 > unrolled thread
| Started by | James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-01-18 12:45 -0800 |
| Last post | 2016-01-26 10:44 -0600 |
| Articles | 10 on this page of 130 — 17 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-18 12:45 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-01-18 16:38 -0600
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Poutnik <Poutnik4NNTP@gmail.com> - 2016-01-19 10:31 +0100
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-01-18 23:01 +0000
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2016-01-21 19:48 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-21 23:01 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 07:08 -0600
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 05:42 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-01-22 08:23 -0600
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 08:18 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 10:23 -0600
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 08:30 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 10:37 -0600
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 08:53 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 11:07 -0600
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 10:05 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 12:29 -0600
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 10:41 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-23 12:02 -0600
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> - 2016-01-23 10:36 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-01-23 13:42 -0600
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 09:11 -0600
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" claudiusdenk@gmail.com - 2016-01-25 11:50 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 16:37 -0600
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 15:16 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 06:24 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 08:36 -0600
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 14:20 -0500
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-23 13:35 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 09:51 -0600
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" claudiusdenk@gmail.com - 2016-01-25 11:55 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 16:39 -0600
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 15:18 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-01-26 10:40 -0600
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 08:46 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 11:05 -0600
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 10:03 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 12:04 -0600
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 10:15 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-01-24 17:31 +0100
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 08:52 -0600
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 11:33 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 13:39 -0600
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" claudiusdenk@gmail.com - 2016-01-25 12:04 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 16:43 -0600
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 15:31 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-01-26 10:42 -0600
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 13:28 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 16:46 -0600
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 15:33 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-01-24 20:00 +1100
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-24 01:08 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-01-24 17:22 +0100
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-24 11:14 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-01-25 10:45 -0600
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-01-26 11:40 +1100
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 17:34 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-01-26 13:03 +1100
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 18:18 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-01-26 14:28 +1100
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 07:28 -0600
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 09:32 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 12:07 -0600
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 10:18 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 12:55 -0600
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 11:29 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-01 07:01 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> - 2016-01-28 10:02 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-01-24 17:05 +0100
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-24 11:16 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-01-25 10:48 -0600
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 10:39 -0600
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" claudiusdenk@gmail.com - 2016-01-25 12:00 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 16:40 -0600
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 15:22 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 07:10 -0600
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 09:31 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 12:00 -0600
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 10:10 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 12:11 -0600
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 10:24 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 16:22 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-01-26 13:05 +1100
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 18:20 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-01-26 10:42 -0600
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 07:26 -0600
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 13:31 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-01-22 12:42 -0600
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 10:52 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Lawrence Senreich <lawest@galaxyredeems.org> - 2016-01-22 18:59 +0000
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 11:08 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-01-22 14:35 -0600
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 20:54 +0100
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Lawrence Senreich <lawest@galaxyredeems.org> - 2016-01-23 13:28 +0000
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-01-24 08:33 +0100
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-24 00:18 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-01-24 08:48 +0100
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-24 00:27 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-01-25 10:49 -0600
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Rebecca Ochsenknecht <rebeoch@stritzelhassel.net> - 2016-01-24 12:27 +0000
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-01-24 16:29 +0100
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Rebecca Ochsenknecht <rebeoch@stritzelhassel.net> - 2016-01-24 15:54 +0000
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-01-25 20:12 +0100
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-01-22 13:03 -0600
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 11:09 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-01-22 14:33 -0600
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 12:54 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 18:29 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 13:42 -0500
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 08:11 -0600
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 09:13 +0100
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 00:35 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-01-22 07:38 -0600
Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-01-19 04:18 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-19 18:09 -0500
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-01-19 16:44 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> - 2016-01-21 19:26 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-01-22 07:41 -0600
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-01-23 13:41 +1100
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 19:34 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-01-23 16:33 +1100
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 21:36 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-01-23 04:12 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-23 10:25 -0500
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-01-26 14:31 +1100
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" R Kym Horsell <kym@kymhorsell.com> - 2016-01-26 04:46 +0000
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 21:53 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 07:31 -0600
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 21:05 -0800
Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-01-26 10:44 -0600
Page 7 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7]
| From | Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-23 16:33 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <dgghkdFebdqU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #547391 |
On 23/01/2016 2:34 PM, James McGinn wrote: > On Friday, January 22, 2016 at 6:41:46 PM UTC-8, Sylvia Else wrote: > >> It's all about a dynamic equilibrium between liquid water and its >> vapour. > > Uh, . . . er . . . uh . . . dynamic . . . uh . . . equi . . . > > I suspect it was you who managed to post to the moderated group >> sci.physics.research, and had this explained to you. > > Yer like, one of dem smart peeples that noes dem big words. Dang golly I wiss I wuz more smarter lyke yiew. > It's hard to see how you could have come up with an understanding of the behaviour of water without having come across those words. If you really don't know what they mean, then it's time to learn some stuff rather than just spouting nonsense. Sylvia.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-22 21:36 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <0d3e67cd-52d4-4e6b-800e-a3abe54ec904@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #547404 |
On Friday, January 22, 2016 at 9:33:06 PM UTC-8, Sylvia Else wrote: > On 23/01/2016 2:34 PM, James McGinn wrote: > > On Friday, January 22, 2016 at 6:41:46 PM UTC-8, Sylvia Else wrote: > > > >> It's all about a dynamic equilibrium between liquid water and its > >> vapour. > > > > Uh, . . . er . . . uh . . . dynamic . . . uh . . . equi . . . > > > > I suspect it was you who managed to post to the moderated group > >> sci.physics.research, and had this explained to you. > > > > Yer like, one of dem smart peeples that noes dem big words. Dang golly I wiss I wuz more smarter lyke yiew. > > > > It's hard to see how you could have come up with an understanding of the > behaviour of water without having come across those words. If you really > don't know what they mean, then it's time to learn some stuff rather > than just spouting nonsense. > > Sylvia. There are a lot of stupid responses on this NG and a lot of inane responses, but rarely do we see them combined.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-23 04:12 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <5131bbcd-2b12-4655-be96-a3e25de1cf1c@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #547408 |
Fun fact: Because the high-energy particles evaporate out of the liquid, the average kinetic energy of the liquid never reaches that of its surroundings. The liquid is always slightly colder.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <none@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-23 10:25 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <IXMoy.203731$qC2.132725@fx05.iad> |
| In reply to | #547450 |
On 01/23/2016 07:12 AM, HVAC wrote:
> Fun fact: Because the high-energy particles evaporate out of the liquid, the average kinetic energy of the liquid never reaches that of its surroundings. The liquid is always slightly colder.
>
Just put the lid back on the pot, H&V.
Problem solved.
--
___ ___ ___ ___
/\ \ /\ \ /\__\ /\ \
/::\ \ /::\ \ /::| | \:\ \
/:/\:\ \ /:/\:\ \ /:|:| | ___ /::\__\
/::\~\:\__\ /::\~\:\ \ /:/|:| |__ /\ /:/\/__/
/:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/ /
\:\~\:\/:/ / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/ / \::/ /
\:\ \::/ / \:\ \:\__\ |:/:/ / \/__/
\:\/:/ / \:\ \/__/ |::/ /
\::/__/ \:\__\ /:/ /
~~ \/__/ \/__/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-26 14:31 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <dgo7k4Fdeu2U2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #546306 |
Ultimately, I'm not sure whether this guy is just outright trolling, or is exhibiting the symptoms of a delusion whereby he'll avoid pursuing any path that would threaten that delusion. Either way, there's really no point in discussing it with him. Sylvia.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | R Kym Horsell <kym@kymhorsell.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-26 04:46 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <n86tnj$khr$1@odin.sdf-eu.org> |
| In reply to | #548196 |
Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote: > Ultimately, I'm not sure whether this guy is just outright trolling, or > is exhibiting the symptoms of a delusion whereby he'll avoid pursuing > any path that would threaten that delusion. Welcome to psychiatry. :) > Either way, there's really no point in discussing it with him. > Sylvia. -- STP conditions imply a temperature of 0 ?C, at which the ability of water to become vapor is very restricted. Its concentration in air is very low at 0 ?C. The red line on the chart to the right is the maximum concentration of water vapor expected for a given temperature. The water vapor concentration increases significantly as the temperature rises, approaching 100% (steam, pure water vapor) at 100 ?C. However the difference in densities between air and water vapor would still exist. <http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/91/Dewpoint.jpg> [0C .8%; 10C 1%; 20C 1.9%; 20C 2.8%]. -- Wikipedia/Water_vapor
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-25 21:53 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <d4a43768-272b-410b-b5be-0b513227d7a0@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #548203 |
On Monday, January 25, 2016 at 8:53:44 PM UTC-8, Kym Horsell wrote: > However the difference in densities between air and water > vapor would still exist. Really? Gee golly. What differences, per se? Can you provide details? Or are these details in one of Bodkins lost textbooks?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-26 07:31 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <n87sfe$q9i$4@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #548210 |
On 1/25/2016 11:53 PM, James McGinn wrote: > On Monday, January 25, 2016 at 8:53:44 PM UTC-8, Kym Horsell wrote: > >> However the difference in densities between air and water >> vapor would still exist. > > Really? Gee golly. What differences, per se? Can you provide details? > Or are these details in one of Bodkins lost textbooks? > How is the textbook on Human Physiology, 7th edition, by Silverthorn, (with chapter references provided twice to you) lost? Do you routinely lose things that were told to you just a while ago? Is this the source of your problem? -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-25 21:05 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <35055b40-6cab-4fd6-9f49-113894235e97@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #548196 |
On Monday, January 25, 2016 at 7:31:21 PM UTC-8, Sylvia Else wrote: > Ultimately, I'm not sure whether this guy is just outright trolling, or > is exhibiting the symptoms of a delusion whereby he'll avoid pursuing > any path that would threaten that delusion. > > Either way, there's really no point in discussing it with him. If I don't dispute steam table and you don't dispute steam table then, it would seem, there is nothing to discuss.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-26 10:44 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <n887p9$1hpv$5@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #548205 |
On 1/25/2016 11:05 PM, James McGinn wrote: > On Monday, January 25, 2016 at 7:31:21 PM UTC-8, Sylvia Else wrote: >> Ultimately, I'm not sure whether this guy is just outright trolling, or >> is exhibiting the symptoms of a delusion whereby he'll avoid pursuing >> any path that would threaten that delusion. >> >> Either way, there's really no point in discussing it with him. > > If I don't dispute steam table and you don't dispute steam table then, it would seem, there is nothing to discuss. > you don't know what a steam table is. if you think you do, produce it. now. we are waiting.......
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 7 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7]
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web