Discussion:
A simple experiment to validate - in part - the H2O ideas of James McGinn
(too old to reply)
Arindam Banerjee
2018-03-11 04:58:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
James McGinn says that water vapour cannot exist as a gas under 100 deg C, going by steam tables.

He gets much ridicule for taking this viewpoint from all in this newsgroup, and this arouses my interest for unfortunately I too face a similar situation, although for other subjects - such as holding that e=mcc=hv is nonsense, Lorenz force has no opposite reaction, unlimited acceleration is thus possible, etc etc.

James is correct up to a point, going by the experiment my science teacher performed right before the whole class when I was in Std 4, in the year 1965.

Those were the great days of science. e=mcc=hv mumbo-jumbo had not reduced physics to the status of the most ridiculous, worthless and cantankerous liberal arts subject imaginable, as is the situation now.

So it was, that right on the teachers' table was mounted a gas burner, and after lighting it, was placed upon it a metal oil can of rectangular cross section, and filled up to a third or so with water.

Soon the water heated up, and started boiling. The teacher allowed a good few minutes for the water to boil, and the steam to come out from the narrow round opening in the can. Then, very carefully so as not to get scalded, he secured the can shut by tightly screwing in the oil can cap.

After that, it was pure fun for us 8-9 year olds. As the can cooled, the most weird noises were heard as the rectangular metal walls of the can caved in. The shape it finally took was peculiar. What enjoyment, well remmebered after 53 years!

As a few here may have guessed, our teacher was showing us through an experiment, the existence of atmospheric pressure.

According to him, the steam in the can, rising up, forced the air molecules out of the can, so there were not so many air molecules left in the can after a while - the can was full of hot steam and its pressure matched the air pressure outside, so the walls of the can did not cave in so long as the water was boiling.

But after the burner was shut off, the temperature fell, the steam in the can cooled down and became water. (This is the interesting part for McGinn - when there are no air molecules to stop the interaction of water molecules joining each other to form water, then yes, water vapour does become water below 100degC as this experiment shows.)

Now as the hot steam became water, with not too many air molecules left in the can, there was less pressure from air within the can. There was more pressure outside the can. This greater air pressure pushed the metal walls in, making all the enjoyable sounds.

This experiment certainly proves the existence of air pressure, or rather, what happens when there are air pressure differentials - forces come into play! It also proves that given a closed space, with not too many air molecules to obstruct, water vapour gas below 100degC unites to form water.

In the open region, another story. The steam that escaped, was monomolecular and diffusing upwards. Some of it while cooling would interact with each other to form water. The rest would rise up to form clouds. If the surroundings were too muggy, they would add to it by combining with the extra water vapour around, thus causing more fog, etc.

Cheers,
Arindam Banerjee
James McGinn
2018-03-11 05:49:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Arindam Banerjee
James McGinn says that water vapour cannot exist as a gas under
100 deg C, going by steam tables.
Yes. It's something that is believed by stupid people.
Post by Arindam Banerjee
He gets much ridicule
Actually, being ridiculed by idiots is a compliment.
Post by Arindam Banerjee
James is correct up to a point,
No, I'm just correct.
Post by Arindam Banerjee
According to him, the steam in the can, rising up,
Actually it probably wasn't 100% steam. It is almost impossible to get pure steam in any kind of open container. But there was a lot of vapor nanodroplets to force air out of the container. And is a pretty good representation of what would happen with pure steam.
Post by Arindam Banerjee
In the open region, another story. The steam that escaped, was
monomolecular and diffusing upwards.
Not possible. This is your delusion, Arindam. Steam cannot persist at temperatures below its boiling temperature/pressure.

Hey, so did you notice Ed Prochak's incredibly poor math skills. And this guy claims to be an engineer.
Arindam Banerjee
2018-03-11 06:00:37 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James McGinn
Post by Arindam Banerjee
James McGinn says that water vapour cannot exist as a gas under
100 deg C, going by steam tables.
Yes. It's something that is believed by stupid people.
Post by Arindam Banerjee
He gets much ridicule
Actually, being ridiculed by idiots is a compliment.
Post by Arindam Banerjee
James is correct up to a point,
No, I'm just correct.
Post by Arindam Banerjee
According to him, the steam in the can, rising up,
Actually it probably wasn't 100% steam. It is almost impossible to get pure steam in any kind of open container. But there was a lot of vapor nanodroplets to force air out of the container. And is a pretty good representation of what would happen with pure steam.
Post by Arindam Banerjee
In the open region, another story. The steam that escaped, was
monomolecular and diffusing upwards.
Not possible. This is your delusion, Arindam. Steam cannot persist at temperatures below its boiling temperature/pressure.
It won't be steam. It will be single monomolecular water travelling slowly as compared to monomolecular water at above 100degC. Being slow, it can be caught by other monomolecular water to form droplets, as in mist, fog, at low altitudes. But till it is caught, a monomolecule of water acts as a gas, for it cannot be called a liquid - a solid, well, maybe.
Post by James McGinn
Hey, so did you notice Ed Prochak's incredibly poor math skills. And this guy claims to be an engineer.
James McGinn
2018-03-11 06:12:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Arindam Banerjee
Post by James McGinn
Post by Arindam Banerjee
In the open region, another story. The steam that escaped, was
monomolecular and diffusing upwards.
Not possible. This is your delusion, Arindam. Steam cannot persist at temperatures below its boiling temperature/pressure.
It won't be steam. It will be single monomolecular water
Semantics. Gaseous H2O is steam. It can't persist. It will instantly combine with other water molecules.


travelling slowly as compared to monomolecular water at above 100degC. Being slow, it can be caught by other monomolecular water to form droplets, as in mist, fog, at low altitudes. But till it is caught,

It's like saying that if the winds are just right pigs can fly.
Arindam Banerjee
2018-03-11 06:17:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James McGinn
Post by Arindam Banerjee
Post by James McGinn
Post by Arindam Banerjee
In the open region, another story. The steam that escaped, was
monomolecular and diffusing upwards.
Not possible. This is your delusion, Arindam. Steam cannot persist at temperatures below its boiling temperature/pressure.
It won't be steam. It will be single monomolecular water
Semantics. Gaseous H2O is steam. It can't persist. It will instantly combine with other water molecules.
If they can find each other, yes. If they are diffused as a result of initial pressure giving them greater individual kinetic velocity/energy, then another story.

Main point is, that steam is monomolecular at 100degC plus, so when the ambient is less it will condense to water IF AND ONLY IF it can find some other monomolecule or multimolecule to which it can adhere.

If it cannot find another monomolecule, then no matter what the ambient, it will remain molecular, for the simple reason that there was no other monomolecule around.
Post by James McGinn
travelling slowly as compared to monomolecular water at above 100degC. Being slow, it can be caught by other monomolecular water to form droplets, as in mist, fog, at low altitudes. But till it is caught,
It's like saying that if the winds are just right pigs can fly.
James McGinn
2018-03-11 06:27:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Arindam Banerjee
Main point is, that steam is monomolecular at 100degC plus, so when the ambient is less it will condense to water IF AND ONLY IF it can find some other monomolecule or multimolecule to which it can adhere.
Meaningless. This assertion is equally inane as stating that if you flip a coin over and over again there is a chance it will be heads a thousand times in a row.
Arindam Banerjee
2018-03-11 06:34:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James McGinn
Post by Arindam Banerjee
Main point is, that steam is monomolecular at 100degC plus, so when the ambient is less it will condense to water IF AND ONLY IF it can find some other monomolecule or multimolecule to which it can adhere.
Meaningless. This assertion is equally inane as stating that if you flip a coin over and over again there is a chance it will be heads a thousand times in a row.
It is not an assertion. It is simple logic.

Just as a person remains single till he finds a partner, a monomolecule of water remains a monomolecule irrespective of the ambient temperature till it finds another mono or multimolecule of water.

All excepting mindless einsteinian dolts and suchlike learned cretins should be able to follow such simple logic.

Cheers,
Arindam Banerjee
James McGinn
2018-03-11 07:13:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Arindam Banerjee
Post by James McGinn
Post by Arindam Banerjee
Main point is, that steam is monomolecular at 100degC plus, so when the ambient is less it will condense to water IF AND ONLY IF it can find some other monomolecule or multimolecule to which it can adhere.
Meaningless. This assertion is equally inane as stating that if you flip a coin over and over again there is a chance it will be heads a thousand times in a row.
It is not an assertion. It is simple logic.
It's also logical to suggest you could flip a coin and hit heads one thousand times in a row.
Post by Arindam Banerjee
Just as a person remains single till he finds a partner, a monomolecule of water remains a monomolecule irrespective of the ambient temperature till it finds another mono or multimolecule of water.
If your goal is to irritate people you will be very successful with this kind of argument.
Arindam Banerjee
2018-03-12 02:32:15 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James McGinn
Post by Arindam Banerjee
Post by James McGinn
Post by Arindam Banerjee
Main point is, that steam is monomolecular at 100degC plus, so when the ambient is less it will condense to water IF AND ONLY IF it can find some other monomolecule or multimolecule to which it can adhere.
Meaningless. This assertion is equally inane as stating that if you flip a coin over and over again there is a chance it will be heads a thousand times in a row.
It is not an assertion. It is simple logic.
It's also logical to suggest you could flip a coin and hit heads one thousand times in a row.
Yes, and the chances for that can be estimated.
Similarly the chances of every monomolecule to unite with other monomolecules or multimolecules can be estimated, when all factors (containment, temperature, pressure, conc of non water molecules, etc.) are taken into account.
This way, we can predict if there can be fog or not.
Like, the chances of fog go up when there is a lot of water on the ground, reasonably high temperatures, and a lot of water vapour not too far from the Earth making the ascent of water vapour beyond them less easy, for the presence of water vapour in the air makes it light and so makes it difficult for evaporating water to rise up to cloud level.
On the other hand, when there is coolness and dryness, then the water will rise up from evaporation high up and thus from clouds.

All quite simple really isn't it.

Hardly the stuff of internal force engines, terrific rail guns, Sanskrit, metaphysics, etc. which I am interested about these days, after spending a lifetime on antenna development, telecom, IT, etc.
Post by James McGinn
Post by Arindam Banerjee
Just as a person remains single till he finds a partner, a monomolecule of water remains a monomolecule irrespective of the ambient temperature till it finds another mono or multimolecule of water.
If your goal is to irritate people you will be very successful with this kind of argument.
Alas, what to do, McGinn! No matter what you do some people will get irritated. If you do nothing they will irritably call you a dole bludger. This world is hell ain't it. Nothing pleasant here, until we make it so.

Cheers, and keep well.
Arindam Banerjee
James McGinn
2018-03-12 04:47:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sunday, March 11, 2018 at 7:32:19 PM UTC-7, Arindam Banerjee wrote:

Don't waste your time with silly notions like H2O that magically turns gaseous at ambient temperatures. Fools believe what they are told to believe.

Meteorology is not an empirical science, its a conversational science.

Millions of Tons of Water Suspended Kilometres Above
http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=16597
p***@gmail.com
2018-03-12 04:56:08 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Don't waste your time with silly notions like H2O that magically turns gaseous at ambient temperatures...
It's not magic, Jim, it's physics. You, of course, don't know this because you know no physics...
James McGinn
2018-03-12 06:13:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by p***@gmail.com
Don't waste your time with silly notions like H2O that magically turns gaseous at ambient temperatures...
It's not magic, Jim, it's physics. You, of course, don't know this because you know no physics...
Your imagination doesn't count, jackass.
Sergio
2018-03-12 16:17:26 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by p***@gmail.com
Don't waste your time with silly notions like H2O that magically turns gaseous at ambient temperatures...
It's not magic, Jim, it's physics. You, of course, don't know this because you know no physics...
.......and McGinn is a liar.
Arindam Banerjee
2018-03-12 23:36:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James McGinn
Don't waste your time with silly notions like H2O that magically turns gaseous at ambient temperatures. Fools believe what they are told to believe.
That is not my point. My point is that at 100 deg C and plus, water becomes mono-molecular, definitely. In an ambient of 100 deg C plus it will remain that way. When released in the open air, it will remain monomolecular if it cannot find another monomolecule or multimolecule IRRESPECTIVE OF THE AMBIENT TEMPERATURE.

This fundamental fact explains a lot - like clouds, mist, rain, etc.

Evaporation at the ambient is essentially a monomolecular process to begin with. A random molecule gets ejected by some air molecule, so clothes dry better with wind around. Well, if that monomolecule cannot escape and remain single that way, it will unite with others in a closed space so this is why certain places appear so damp - too many multimolecules of H2O. Whether to consider these as solids floating in air, or liquids floating in air, is another story. I suppose when they are visible to the naked eye they may b4 considered liquid, but when not, as solid objects bouncing around.

Yes, water is a strange and wonderful substance.

The fact that tons of water remain above as clouds, without falling, can be explained in terms of relative density, surface tensions, and aerodynamics.

Relative density - clouds are microdroplets mixed with air and unassociated monomolecules, not yet assimilated. The less the association, higher and lighter the cloud, for it is less dense than the heavy clouds where most of the H2O monomolecules have been assimilated into the microdroplets. So in a given volume, the water, the vapour and the air nearly match the density of the not-cloud heavier air below, so the cloud with water can rest upon same.

Surface tension - this has to do with the cohesive attraction between the water particles - this sort of forms an electric skin which repulses the air molecules below the cloud. One notes that even children draw a cloud with a flat base and a fluffy top. That is becasue the bottoms of thick cloud are quite flat, from the repulsion with the heavier air below, while the tops are not that flat. This is most clearly seen at sunsets - cloud bases are usually horizontal.

Aerodynamics - There is more wind on top of the cloud than below, so there is net pressure upward, upon the cloud. This helps to keep the cloud up

Cheers,
Arindam Banerjee
Post by James McGinn
Meteorology is not an empirical science, its a conversational science.
Millions of Tons of Water Suspended Kilometres Above
http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=16597
James McGinn
2018-03-13 00:26:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Arindam Banerjee
Post by James McGinn
Don't waste your time with silly notions like H2O that magically
turns gaseous at ambient temperatures. Fools believe what they
are told to believe.
That is not my point.
That is my answer. You were told to believe evaporation involves singular molecules of H2O and now you can't stop believing it.
Post by Arindam Banerjee
My point is that at 100 deg C and plus, water
becomes mono-molecular, definitely. In an ambient of 100 deg C plus
it will remain that way.
Right. Which doesn't exist on this planet.
Post by Arindam Banerjee
When released in the open air, it will remain monomolecular if it cannot
find another monomolecule or multimolecule IRRESPECTIVE OF THE
AMBIENT TEMPERATURE.
OMG. Yes, if we were in outer space or on some other planet that had very little moisture in the atmosphere this would be true. But we are on earth. Let's stick to scenarios that are relevant to the planet we all live on. Okay?

On earth singular H2O molecules are combined with others instantly.
Post by Arindam Banerjee
This fundamental fact
OMG. Your fundamental fact is neither fundamental or factual. It's just the fucking unrestrained imagination of somebody that refuse to accept reality.
Post by Arindam Banerjee
explains a lot - like clouds, mist, rain, etc.
It explains nothing because it doesn't happen on this planet.
Post by Arindam Banerjee
Evaporation at the ambient is essentially a monomolecular process to
begin with.
OMG. This is surreal. I'm surrounded by retards. That is impossible. You aren't paying attention.
Post by Arindam Banerjee
A random molecule gets ejected by some air molecule, so clothes
dry better with wind around. Well, if that mono-molecule cannot
escape and remain single
Random molecules don't get ejected, dumb-ass. Hasn't this already been firmly established. How was this obvious fact not apparent to you? Can you explain? No, you can't explain because you are just a dingbat who doesn't know what he thinks/believes from one second to the next.

It can't escape as a singular molecule. Now if you are a retard like Sergio your only conclusion will be that, therefore, evaporation can't happen. But for non-retards there is a very obvious alternative solution: evaporation involves nano-droplets not singular molecules. (Why did I have to explain this to you? How was this alternative not plainly obvious. Can you explain?)

<snip pure nonsense>

James McGinn / Solving Tornadoes
http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=16462
http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/search.php?search_id=egosearch
Arindam Banerjee
2018-03-13 00:42:15 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James McGinn
Post by Arindam Banerjee
Post by James McGinn
Don't waste your time with silly notions like H2O that magically
turns gaseous at ambient temperatures. Fools believe what they
are told to believe.
That is not my point.
That is my answer. You were told to believe evaporation involves singular molecules of H2O and now you can't stop believing it.
True, and I see no reason to disbelieve it.

- snip -
James McGinn
2018-03-13 01:20:35 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Arindam Banerjee
Post by James McGinn
Post by Arindam Banerjee
Post by James McGinn
Don't waste your time with silly notions like H2O that magically
turns gaseous at ambient temperatures. Fools believe what they
are told to believe.
That is not my point.
That is my answer. You were told to believe evaporation involves singular molecules of H2O and now you can't stop believing it.
True, and I see no reason to disbelieve it.
Excellent.

You are the first person to admit that the reason you maintain this belief is because you were told to believe it. The same is true for many others. But they will never admit it. They will continue to believe it until the day they die.

The next step is to ask yourself if you have reasons to believe it. Delineate what those reasons are--literally write them down.

Then the next step after that is to see if you cna find alternative explanation for the reasons to believe.

For example you might come up with the following two reasons to believe moist air contains monomolecular H2O: 1) Moist air is clear 2) moist air seems to gradually elevate in the atmosphere and 3) moist air does not fall as a result of gravity and making all air dry?

Now, assuming this list is comprehensive, see if you can come up with alternative explanations.

Then, once you have alternative explanation see if you can test them.

Being honest about the genuine basis of belief is the first step, but it is not the last step.

James McGinn / Solving Tornadoes
Sergio
2018-03-13 02:16:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Arindam Banerjee
Post by James McGinn
Don't waste your time with silly notions like H2O that magically turns gaseous at ambient temperatures. Fools believe what they are told to believe.
That is not my point. My point is that at 100 deg C and plus, water becomes mono-molecular, definitely. In an ambient of 100 deg C plus it will remain that way. When released in the open air, it will remain monomolecular if it cannot find another monomolecule or multimolecule IRRESPECTIVE OF THE AMBIENT TEMPERATURE.
This fundamental fact explains a lot - like clouds, mist, rain, etc.
Evaporation at the ambient is essentially a monomolecular process to begin with. A random molecule gets ejected by some air molecule, so clothes dry better with wind around. Well, if that monomolecule cannot escape and remain single that way, it will unite with others in a closed space so this is why certain places appear so damp - too many multimolecules of H2O. Whether to consider these as solids floating in air, or liquids floating in air, is another story. I suppose when they are visible to the naked eye they may b4 considered liquid, but when not, as solid objects bouncing around.
Yes, water is a strange and wonderful substance.
The fact that tons of water remain above as clouds, without falling, can be explained in terms of relative density, surface tensions, and aerodynamics.
Relative density - clouds are microdroplets mixed with air and unassociated monomolecules, not yet assimilated. The less the association, higher and lighter the cloud, for it is less dense than the heavy clouds where most of the H2O monomolecules have been assimilated into the microdroplets. So in a given volume, the water, the vapour and the air nearly match the density of the not-cloud heavier air below, so the cloud with water can rest upon same.
Surface tension - this has to do with the cohesive attraction between the water particles - this sort of forms an electric skin which repulses the air molecules below the cloud. One notes that even children draw a cloud with a flat base and a fluffy top. That is becasue the bottoms of thick cloud are quite flat, from the repulsion with the heavier air below, while the tops are not that flat. This is most clearly seen at sunsets - cloud bases are usually horizontal.
Aerodynamics - There is more wind on top of the cloud than below, so there is net pressure upward, upon the cloud. This helps to keep the cloud up
Cheers,
Arindam Banerjee
Post by James McGinn
Meteorology is not an empirical science, its a conversational science.
Millions of Tons of Water Suspended Kilometres Above
http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=16597
excellent post,

I did some experimentation with using evaporative cooling my whole
house, but we did not have that many low humidity days to have it work
great. One has to keep the humidity in the house lower than say 60% or
mold grows. And if you start with outside humidity level of 40% then you
don't get much cooling. on outside dry days, 15% humidity it worked
like a champ.

But if you live in dry Australia or desert areas, water evaporative
cooling is an excellent choice. but you sill have to watch out for dust
being pulled into the house.
James McGinn
2018-03-13 02:57:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sergio
I did some experimentation with using evaporative cooling my whole
house,
You got an air conditioner and you call that an experiment?
Post by Sergio
but we did not have that many low humidity days to have it work
great. One has to keep the humidity in the house lower than say 60% or
mold grows. And if you start with outside humidity level of 40% then you
don't get much cooling. on outside dry days, 15% humidity it worked
like a champ.
Nothing you are stating here is remotely relevant to what is being discussed.
Post by Sergio
But if you live in dry Australia or desert areas, water evaporative
cooling is an excellent choice. but you sill have to watch out for dust
being pulled into the house.
You are a low band-width retard who barely understands any of the issues being discussed.

You haven't the sllghtest idea what the 40 percent and 60 percent is referring to.
Arindam Banerjee
2018-03-13 23:59:35 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sergio
Post by Arindam Banerjee
Post by James McGinn
Don't waste your time with silly notions like H2O that magically turns gaseous at ambient temperatures. Fools believe what they are told to believe.
That is not my point. My point is that at 100 deg C and plus, water becomes mono-molecular, definitely. In an ambient of 100 deg C plus it will remain that way. When released in the open air, it will remain monomolecular if it cannot find another monomolecule or multimolecule IRRESPECTIVE OF THE AMBIENT TEMPERATURE.
This fundamental fact explains a lot - like clouds, mist, rain, etc.
Evaporation at the ambient is essentially a monomolecular process to begin with. A random molecule gets ejected by some air molecule, so clothes dry better with wind around. Well, if that monomolecule cannot escape and remain single that way, it will unite with others in a closed space so this is why certain places appear so damp - too many multimolecules of H2O. Whether to consider these as solids floating in air, or liquids floating in air, is another story. I suppose when they are visible to the naked eye they may b4 considered liquid, but when not, as solid objects bouncing around.
Yes, water is a strange and wonderful substance.
The fact that tons of water remain above as clouds, without falling, can be explained in terms of relative density, surface tensions, and aerodynamics.
Relative density - clouds are microdroplets mixed with air and unassociated monomolecules, not yet assimilated. The less the association, higher and lighter the cloud, for it is less dense than the heavy clouds where most of the H2O monomolecules have been assimilated into the microdroplets. So in a given volume, the water, the vapour and the air nearly match the density of the not-cloud heavier air below, so the cloud with water can rest upon same.
Surface tension - this has to do with the cohesive attraction between the water particles - this sort of forms an electric skin which repulses the air molecules below the cloud. One notes that even children draw a cloud with a flat base and a fluffy top. That is becasue the bottoms of thick cloud are quite flat, from the repulsion with the heavier air below, while the tops are not that flat. This is most clearly seen at sunsets - cloud bases are usually horizontal.
Aerodynamics - There is more wind on top of the cloud than below, so there is net pressure upward, upon the cloud. This helps to keep the cloud up
Cheers,
Arindam Banerjee
Post by James McGinn
Meteorology is not an empirical science, its a conversational science.
Millions of Tons of Water Suspended Kilometres Above
http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=16597
excellent post,
I did some experimentation with using evaporative cooling my whole
house, but we did not have that many low humidity days to have it work
great. One has to keep the humidity in the house lower than say 60% or
mold grows. And if you start with outside humidity level of 40% then you
don't get much cooling. on outside dry days, 15% humidity it worked
like a champ.
But if you live in dry Australia or desert areas, water evaporative
cooling is an excellent choice. but you sill have to watch out for dust
being pulled into the house.
Thanks, Sergio. We do have evaporative cooling installed and that works well in dry conditions, but not when it is muggy. Otherwise we use AC, which maintains the humidity.

Australia is a dry country, but mostly they use AC in the motels for reasons of convenience no doubt.

Evaporative cooling drives the air out of the house with a large fan pouring in cool humid air down the ducts. Actually it is good for driving out smells and smoke - once the fire was lit with the vent down, and there was smoke! Putting the evaporated cooling on for a while - even in the cold - worked well to drive out the smoke.
Sergio
2018-03-11 07:19:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Arindam Banerjee
Post by James McGinn
Post by Arindam Banerjee
Post by James McGinn
Post by Arindam Banerjee
In the open region, another story. The steam that escaped, was
monomolecular and diffusing upwards.
Not possible. This is your delusion, Arindam. Steam cannot persist at temperatures below its boiling temperature/pressure.
It won't be steam. It will be single monomolecular water
Semantics. Gaseous H2O is steam.
McGinn is Wrong as usual, steam is visable.
Post by Arindam Banerjee
Post by James McGinn
It can't persist. It will instantly combine with other water molecules.
wrong, as usual, water vapor is a gas, molecules do not combine with
others when the heat is high and pressure is low
Post by Arindam Banerjee
If they can find each other, yes. If they are diffused as a result of initial pressure giving them greater individual kinetic velocity/energy, then another story.
Main point is, that steam is monomolecular at 100degC plus, so when the ambient is less it will condense to water IF AND ONLY IF it can find some other monomolecule or multimolecule to which it can adhere.
If it cannot find another monomolecule, then no matter what the ambient, it will remain molecular, for the simple reason that there was no other monomolecule around.
<snip McGinn crap>

McGinn has always been wrong on this, and most everything else in
science, he is uneducated, a 2nd class person.
J***@.
1970-01-01 00:00:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
<PRE Style='Font-Family: OCR A, monospace !important;'>
&lt;snip McGinn crap> McGinn has always been wrong on this,
and most everything else in science;
he's an uneducated, 2nd class person.
James McGinn has a Narcissistic Personality Disorder.

WikiPedia says:

Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD) is characterized by:

1. exaggerated feelings of self-importance [ I am God ],
2. an excessive need for admiration [ Worship me ],
and 3. a lack of understanding of others' feelings [ Or die ].

The condition needs to be differentiated
from mania and substance abuse disorders
[ coffee, cocaine, meth, adderall ].

Therapy is often difficult as people with the disorder
frequently do not consider themselves to have a problem.
James McGinn
2018-03-11 13:16:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by J***@.
<snip McGinn crap> McGinn has always been wrong on this,
and most everything else in science;
he's an uneducated, 2nd class person.
James McGinn has a Narcissistic Personality Disorder.
1. exaggerated feelings of self-importance [ I am God ],
2. an excessive need for admiration [ Worship me ],
and 3. a lack of understanding of others' feelings [ Or die ].
The condition needs to be differentiated
from mania and substance abuse disorders
[ coffee, cocaine, meth, adderall ].
Therapy is often difficult as people with the disorder
frequently do not consider themselves to have a problem.
Wow Jeff. You know how to use a dictionary. I can see you left the laws of thermodynamics out of this. Why is that. LOL.
J***@.
1970-01-01 00:00:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
<snip McGinn crap> McGinn has always been wrong on this,
and most everything else in science;
he's an uneducated, 2nd class person.
James McGinn has a Narcissistic Personality Disorder.

WikiPedia says:

Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD) is characterized by:

1. exaggerated feelings of self-importance [ I am God ],
2. an excessive need for admiration [ Worship me ],
and 3. a lack of understanding of others' feelings [ Or die ].

The condition needs to be differentiated
from mania and substance abuse disorders
[ coffee, cocaine, meth, adderall ].

Therapy is often difficult as people with the disorder
frequently do not consider themselves to have a problem.
nuny@bid.nes
2018-03-11 10:29:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sergio
Post by Arindam Banerjee
Post by James McGinn
Post by Arindam Banerjee
Post by James McGinn
Post by Arindam Banerjee
In the open region, another story. The steam that escaped, was
monomolecular and diffusing upwards.
Not possible. This is your delusion, Arindam. Steam cannot persist
at temperatures below its boiling temperature/pressure.
It won't be steam. It will be single monomolecular water
Semantics. Gaseous H2O is steam.
McGinn is Wrong as usual, steam is visable.
Post by Arindam Banerjee
Post by James McGinn
It can't persist. It will instantly combine with other water molecules.
wrong, as usual, water vapor is a gas, molecules do not combine with
others when the heat is high and pressure is low
Post by Arindam Banerjee
If they can find each other, yes. If they are diffused as a result of
initial pressure giving them greater individual kinetic velocity/energy,
then another story.
Main point is, that steam is monomolecular at 100degC plus, so when the
ambient is less it will condense to water IF AND ONLY IF it can find
some other monomolecule or multimolecule to which it can adhere.
If it cannot find another monomolecule, then no matter what the ambient,
it will remain molecular, for the simple reason that there was no other
monomolecule around.
<snip McGinn crap>
McGinn has always been wrong on this, and most everything else in
science, he is uneducated, a 2nd class person.
I was rather enjoying watching Water Boy give Banjo shit for defending him.


Mark L. Fergerson
James McGinn
2018-03-11 13:17:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by ***@bid.nes
Post by Sergio
Post by Arindam Banerjee
Post by James McGinn
Post by Arindam Banerjee
Post by James McGinn
Post by Arindam Banerjee
In the open region, another story. The steam that escaped, was
monomolecular and diffusing upwards.
Not possible. This is your delusion, Arindam. Steam cannot persist
at temperatures below its boiling temperature/pressure.
It won't be steam. It will be single monomolecular water
Semantics. Gaseous H2O is steam.
McGinn is Wrong as usual, steam is visable.
Post by Arindam Banerjee
Post by James McGinn
It can't persist. It will instantly combine with other water molecules.
wrong, as usual, water vapor is a gas, molecules do not combine with
others when the heat is high and pressure is low
Post by Arindam Banerjee
If they can find each other, yes. If they are diffused as a result of
initial pressure giving them greater individual kinetic velocity/energy,
then another story.
Main point is, that steam is monomolecular at 100degC plus, so when the
ambient is less it will condense to water IF AND ONLY IF it can find
some other monomolecule or multimolecule to which it can adhere.
If it cannot find another monomolecule, then no matter what the ambient,
it will remain molecular, for the simple reason that there was no other
monomolecule around.
<snip McGinn crap>
McGinn has always been wrong on this, and most everything else in
science, he is uneducated, a 2nd class person.
I was rather enjoying watching Water Boy give Banjo shit for defending him.
Mark L. Fergerson
Coward.
nuny@bid.nes
2018-03-12 03:35:02 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James McGinn
Post by ***@bid.nes
Post by Sergio
Post by Arindam Banerjee
Post by James McGinn
Post by Arindam Banerjee
Post by James McGinn
Post by Arindam Banerjee
In the open region, another story. The steam that escaped, was
monomolecular and diffusing upwards.
Not possible. This is your delusion, Arindam. Steam cannot persist
at temperatures below its boiling temperature/pressure.
It won't be steam. It will be single monomolecular water
Semantics. Gaseous H2O is steam.
McGinn is Wrong as usual, steam is visable.
Post by Arindam Banerjee
Post by James McGinn
It can't persist. It will instantly combine with other water molecules.
wrong, as usual, water vapor is a gas, molecules do not combine with
others when the heat is high and pressure is low
Post by Arindam Banerjee
If they can find each other, yes. If they are diffused as a result of
initial pressure giving them greater individual kinetic velocity/energy,
then another story.
Main point is, that steam is monomolecular at 100degC plus, so when the
ambient is less it will condense to water IF AND ONLY IF it can find
some other monomolecule or multimolecule to which it can adhere.
If it cannot find another monomolecule, then no matter what the ambient,
it will remain molecular, for the simple reason that there was no other
monomolecule around.
<snip McGinn crap>
McGinn has always been wrong on this, and most everything else in
science, he is uneducated, a 2nd class person.
I was rather enjoying watching Water Boy give Banjo shit for defending him.
Mark L. Fergerson
Coward.
"Coward"? For walking away from a raving monomaniac who denies simple physics and chemistry, yet styles himself the greatest genius of this (or was it any?) century?

Get your meds adjusted boy. Go back to spanking Banjo for daring to agree with you.


Mark L. Fergerson
James McGinn
2018-03-12 04:53:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sunday, March 11, 2018 at 8:35:07 PM UTC-7, ***@bid.nes wrote:

"Coward"? For walking away from a raving monomaniac

For being a petty twit.

Address substantive issues or kindly go away.

James McGinn / Solving Tornadoes
The 'Missing Link' of Meteorology's Theory of Storms
http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=16329
p***@gmail.com
2018-03-12 04:57:49 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James McGinn
Address substantive issues or kindly go away.
You've been asked to do the same thing for a long time, and you're still here!
James McGinn
2018-03-12 06:14:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by p***@gmail.com
Post by James McGinn
Address substantive issues or kindly go away.
You've been asked to do the same thing for a long time, and you're still here!
Nothing!!!
James McGinn
2018-03-12 19:04:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by p***@gmail.com
Post by James McGinn
Address substantive issues or kindly go away.
You've been asked to do the same thing for a long time, and you're still here!
Here it comes . . .

Wait for it . . .

Wait for it . . .

I can't even imagine how frustrating it must be to be so sure your are right and so completely unable to say how or why.

It must be like a nightmare. It just keeps getting worse!!!

James McGinn / Solving Tornadoes
Explaining The Behavior of Non-Newtonian Fluids
http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=16885
Arindam Banerjee
2018-03-12 08:35:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by ***@bid.nes
Post by James McGinn
Post by ***@bid.nes
Post by Sergio
Post by Arindam Banerjee
Post by James McGinn
Post by Arindam Banerjee
Post by James McGinn
Post by Arindam Banerjee
In the open region, another story. The steam that escaped, was
monomolecular and diffusing upwards.
Not possible. This is your delusion, Arindam. Steam cannot persist
at temperatures below its boiling temperature/pressure.
It won't be steam. It will be single monomolecular water
Semantics. Gaseous H2O is steam.
McGinn is Wrong as usual, steam is visable.
Post by Arindam Banerjee
Post by James McGinn
It can't persist. It will instantly combine with other water molecules.
wrong, as usual, water vapor is a gas, molecules do not combine with
others when the heat is high and pressure is low
Post by Arindam Banerjee
If they can find each other, yes. If they are diffused as a result of
initial pressure giving them greater individual kinetic velocity/energy,
then another story.
Main point is, that steam is monomolecular at 100degC plus, so when the
ambient is less it will condense to water IF AND ONLY IF it can find
some other monomolecule or multimolecule to which it can adhere.
If it cannot find another monomolecule, then no matter what the ambient,
it will remain molecular, for the simple reason that there was no other
monomolecule around.
<snip McGinn crap>
McGinn has always been wrong on this, and most everything else in
science, he is uneducated, a 2nd class person.
I was rather enjoying watching Water Boy give Banjo shit for defending him.
Mark L. Fergerson
Coward.
"Coward"? For walking away from a raving monomaniac who denies simple physics and chemistry, yet styles himself the greatest genius of this (or was it any?) century?
Get your meds adjusted boy. Go back to spanking Banjo for daring to agree with you.
Mark L. Fergerson
Coward.
john
2018-03-12 14:41:02 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
I dunno, guys.
Is H2O polar?
Wouldn't gaseous H2O be like little magnets floating around minding their own business?
Odd Bodkin
2018-03-12 14:53:30 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by john
I dunno, guys.
Is H2O polar?
Yes, very.
Post by john
Wouldn't gaseous H2O be like little magnets floating around minding their own business?
--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
Sergio
2018-03-12 16:16:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Odd Bodkin
Post by john
I dunno, guys.
Is H2O polar?
Yes, very.
Post by john
Wouldn't gaseous H2O be like little magnets floating around minding their own business?
oil and water do not mix, cause one is polar the other is not.
john
2018-03-12 16:19:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
There could be an undiscovered STRUCTURE taken on by H2O when surrounded by air.
Something like a spherical meniscus, but smaller
Sergio
2018-03-12 17:10:21 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by john
There could be an undiscovered STRUCTURE taken on by H2O when surrounded by air.
Something like a spherical meniscus, but smaller
checkout water droplets, it does get spherical when smaller, when
gravity has small effect. it goes from teardrop shape (large) to sphere
(smaller)

but this is all well known, it was well studied in the 1800's


some links to get you started on reading about it;

https://hypertextbook.com/facts/2007/EvanKaplan.shtml

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drop_(liquid)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reynolds_number
James McGinn
2018-03-12 18:56:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by john
There could be an undiscovered STRUCTURE taken on by H2O when surrounded by air.
Something like a spherical meniscus, but smaller
It's surface tension. The smaller (and more miss-shaped) a microdroplet becomes the larger is the percentage of its structure that is polar. This is just surface tension. It is not undiscovered, but it is unexplained. But the video I am about to release will explain it explicitly.

In the meantime read this:
Lookout For Bill or by it's alternate name:
A very Long Confessional Statement Attached To My Application for V-Phasian Membership
http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=16582
James McGinn
2018-03-12 18:47:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Odd Bodkin
Post by john
I dunno, guys.
Is H2O polar?
Yes, very.
It's not that simple.
James McGinn
2018-03-12 18:34:15 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by john
I dunno, guys.
Is H2O polar?
Wouldn't gaseous H2O be like little magnets floating around minding their own business?
See my response here:
H2O Polarity is Collectively Variable (by James McGinn of Solving Tornadoes)
https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!topic/sci.physics/cdt76TEM0CM
James McGinn
2018-03-11 13:14:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sergio
Post by Arindam Banerjee
Post by James McGinn
Post by Arindam Banerjee
Post by James McGinn
Post by Arindam Banerjee
In the open region, another story. The steam that escaped, was
monomolecular and diffusing upwards.
Not possible. This is your delusion, Arindam. Steam cannot persist at temperatures below its boiling temperature/pressure.
It won't be steam. It will be single monomolecular water
Semantics. Gaseous H2O is steam.
McGinn is Wrong as usual, steam is visable.
Post by Arindam Banerjee
Post by James McGinn
It can't persist. It will instantly combine with other water molecules.
wrong, as usual, water vapor is a gas, molecules do not combine with
others when the heat is high and pressure is low
Post by Arindam Banerjee
If they can find each other, yes. If they are diffused as a result of initial pressure giving them greater individual kinetic velocity/energy, then another story.
Main point is, that steam is monomolecular at 100degC plus, so when the ambient is less it will condense to water IF AND ONLY IF it can find some other monomolecule or multimolecule to which it can adhere.
If it cannot find another monomolecule, then no matter what the ambient, it will remain molecular, for the simple reason that there was no other monomolecule around.
<snip McGinn crap>
McGinn has always been wrong on this, and most everything else in
science, he is uneducated, a 2nd class person.
All the worthless trolls with nothing significant to say. You cowards need to go find another hobby.
Loading...