Remember me
▼ Content

Hot Water Unit



Page 3 of 4<1234>
10-07-2021 03:52
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(9568)


James___ wrote:Heat "is" but it cannot be defined by "temperature".

Heat is a flow of thermal energy from one body of matter to another. Heat via conduction (and thus convection) is calculated using the temperature difference between the two bodies of matter in question. Heat via radiance (black body radiation) is simply a function of the absolute temperature to the fourth power.

Ergo, heat is formally and unambiguously defined in terms of temperature, area, thickness and heat transfer constant(s) of the material(s) in question.

James___ wrote: And "temperature" cannot be defined by "heat".

Correct. Temperature is defined by thermal energy and mass. Only matter can have temperature.

10-07-2021 04:06
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(9568)


James___ wrote:His freezer works by removing "heat".

Nope. His freezer creates heat. You can verify this by the fact that his ice does not melt. Thermal energy is effectively transferred out of the freezer. That flow of thermal energy out of the freezer is heat created by the freezer and it "heats" the outside of the freezer.

James___ wrote: It's a flow of "heat" from cold to warm.

False. The compression of the refrigerant outside the freezer increases the refrigerant's temperature to well above the temperature outside the freezer, and thus thermal energy flows from the very hot refrigerant to the much cooler air outside the freezer, i.e. from hot to cold. Once the compressed gas/liquid cools outside the freezer, it is ushered back into the freezer whereby it is allowed to expand and its temperature drops to below that of the inside of the freezer. As a result, thermal energy inside the freezer flows into the much cooler refrigerant, i.e. from hot to cold, cooling the inside the freezer and warming the refrigerant. The refrigerant is ushered out of the freezer and compressed ... and the cycle repeats.

Of course, in all of this the compressor itself converts electrical energy to thermal energy and does some heating of its own ... and it is outside the freezer.

10-07-2021 04:24
James___
★★★★★
(4736)
IBdaMann wrote:
[
James___ wrote:Heat "is" but it cannot be defined by "temperature".

Heat is a flow of thermal energy from one body of matter to another.



You're on the ropes. Body blows are coming. Keep your head up, I might not use the upper cut to knock you out.
Thermal energy does not have to be absorbed to be "heat". When it is absorbed then it's heat content is understood. The solar wind is one example of this. It has "heat" because of its "flow" even if it is not absorbed. When it is absorbed, then the "heat content" in its flow is understood.
And next you'll want to cut down a sycamore tree saying it's not a tree. That's how your kind is and we don't need your kind.

Edited on 10-07-2021 04:25
10-07-2021 05:11
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(9568)


James___ wrote: Thermal energy does not have to be absorbed to be "heat".

No, thermal energy only has to flow from one body of matter to another to be heat. I think I might have mentioned this.

James___ wrote: When it is absorbed then it's heat content is understood.

There is no such thing as "heat content" in physics.

From THE MANUAL.

Heat: noun
In the Global Warming theology, "heat" means whatever it needs to mean at any given moment. The term is employed by Global Warming believers to shift semantic goalposts as necessary. It's meaning can shift fluidly between "temperature," "increase in temperature," "thermal energy," "flow of thermal energy," "convection," "absorption of electromagnetic radiation," "energy," "friction," "conduction," "infrared," "plasma," "work," "radiance," "power," "radioactivity," "electrical energy" and others as convenient.

Heat Content: noun
In the Global Warming theology, "heat content" is a powerful obfuscation of the term "heat." Whereas "heat" can shift between meaning "temperature," "increase in temperature," "thermal energy," "flow of thermal energy," "convection," "absorption of electromagnetic radiation," "energy," "conduction," "infrared," "plasma," "work," "power," "radioactivity," "electrical energy" and others as convenient, the term "heat content" can refer to multiple terms at the same time, greatly minimizing the warmizombie's need to backpedal when questioned about his argument's semantics.

Heat Budget or Thermal Budget: noun
In the Global Warming theology, the arsenal of "heat" that Global Warming has at His disposal. Global Warming uses Greenhouse Effect to steadily increase His heat budget.

Waste Heat: noun
In the Global Warming theology, heat that is carelessly released into the atmosphere, usually by deniers, for Global Warming to use against Climate.

James___ wrote: The solar wind is one example of this.

Nope. The solar wind is a blast of charged particles.

James___ wrote: It has "heat" because of its "flow" even if it is not absorbed.

For it to be heat, there needs to be more to it than just being a "flow." It has to be specifically a flow of thermal energy from one body of matter to another.

When thermal energy flows from a hot charged particle (from the solar wind) to some other body of matter, then you have heat. It's pretty straightforward.

James___ wrote: When it is absorbed, then the "heat content" in its flow is understood.

Not only is it not understood, I don't think you understand what you are saying.

10-07-2021 05:13
James___
★★★★★
(4736)
This is one application of thermal energy.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Forces/isq.html
That is for reference purposes. It's not right but then I'm not saying it is, right?
It's a basic consideration of how something like the solar wind has its "heat" decrease as it is radiated by the Sun which is really a brown dwarf star and not a "Sun".
Since you and your friends call it a "Sun" IBDM, I will call it a "Sun" as well. It's actually a young star with little mass. If it were a "bigger" star then it wouldn't be emitting the solar radiation that it does. The frequency of its emissions would be much more energetic.
As stars goes, our brown dwarf is a young one like you. They say our solar system is about 5 Billion years old while the universe is over 15 Billion years old.
And sycamores like oak trees are actually pretty cool don't you think? They're so much different than the different species of pine trees on the west coast. Just kind of shows what an awesome planet we live on, right?
10-07-2021 05:37
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(9568)


James___ wrote:This is one application of thermal energy.

Nope. The inverse square law applies to emanating waves.

James___ wrote:And sycamores like oak trees are actually pretty cool don't you think?

The problem with Sycamores is that you cannot use their wood to build a Bessler wheel.

10-07-2021 05:48
James___
★★★★★
(4736)
IBdaMann wrote:


James___ wrote:This is one application of thermal energy.

Nope. The inverse square law applies to emanating waves.

James___ wrote:And sycamores like oak trees are actually pretty cool don't you think?

The problem with Sycamores is that you cannot use their wood to build a Bessler wheel.



That is so weak. How the inverse square law is applied is wrong. I can easily prove this. With Bessler, it is quite possible that he realized how to convert one form of energy into another. One example of this is a solar panel. It performs no work yet creates energy.
Just a basic understanding of science. Energy cannot be created (like our universe) yet it can be converted from one form to another. You are so right not yet a brown dwarf. Maybe one day?

p.s., the reference to sycamores is because of the movie "Flipped". It's a kids movie and yet a sycamore tree was the focal point of the movie. Watch the movie and you might understand why.
Edited on 10-07-2021 06:03
10-07-2021 06:11
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(9568)


James___ wrote:How the inverse square law is applied is wrong.

All that matters is whether the inverse square law is computed wrong ... or not.

It's math. It's for wave propagation over a given distance.

James___ wrote: With Bessler, it is quite possible that he realized how to convert one form of energy into another.

... by eating food and then going for a walk, perhaps?

I have my suspicions that the inventor of the steam engine discovered a way to convert one form of energy into another as well.

James___ wrote: One example of this is a solar panel. It performs no work yet creates energy.

Solar panels create no energy. Refer to the 1st law of thermodynamics.

Solar panels convert electromagnetic energy to electrical energy.

10-07-2021 06:22
James___
★★★★★
(4736)
IBdaMann wrote:


James___ wrote:How the inverse square law is applied is wrong.

All that matters is whether the inverse square law is computed wrong ... or not.

It's math. It's for wave propagation over a given distance.




As I said, I can prove it is wrong. It will help to show I am literate and know how to read. I can read in Engleske. Smart people know how to do that. Can you?
And we're back to this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMS_n1l3Wxc

We know energy cannot be created. Thus no universe exists.
10-07-2021 06:26
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(9568)


James___ wrote:We know energy cannot be created. Thus no universe exists.

We know that life cannot spring out of non-life. Thus no life exists.


... well, no intelligent life at least.

10-07-2021 06:37
James___
★★★★★
(4736)
IBdaMann wrote:


James___ wrote:We know energy cannot be created. Thus no universe exists.

We know that life cannot spring out of non-life. Thus no life exists.


... well, no intelligent life at least.



Self nullifying statements. We exist. Are we real? Maybe we just believe we exist like when we dream? The reality that we have to deal with is what we accept about our reality.
It's true, we might be our own imagination. But we feel what we believe we are.
How to reconcile myth with our perception of our existence?
10-07-2021 19:00
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15813)
James___ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:

James___ wrote:And yet heat is once again E = hv

Nope. It is not.

That is the formula for computing energy, not for computing any flow of energy.





Just can't accept it when you're wrong, can you? A "flow" of energy will have a wavelength.

Heat has no frequency.



This is where philosophy has failed you. When a flow of energy occurs, it emanates from a source. And you are familiar with black body radiation, that allows for many different frequencies of "heat" to be radiated.

Light is not heat.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
10-07-2021 19:01
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15813)
James___ wrote:
With feces, if treated, it can be used as fertilizer. An example is that on a diary farm, the methane can be collected and used to power an engine. I think some farms are doing this. Then the source of the methane can be spread as fertilizer on that farm as is it slows soil erosion. The fecal material came from the grass grown on that farm, right?
Why is light and heat the same thing? They both have a source that emits them. While there is visible light which is heat has a frequency between ~4 * 10^14 to 8 * 10^14 hz. Above and below those frequencies are all other functions of "wave" energy found.
The specific heat capacity of a material is the energy required to raise one kilogram (kg) of the material by one degree Celsius (°C). The specific heat capacity of water is 4,200 joules per kilogram per degree Celsius (J/kg°C).


1 Hertz = 6.62606957030801E-34 Joule

Heat is not light. There is no frequency in heat. Heat is not heat capacity.


I think that 1 hz = 6.626^34 joules demonstrates that light is heat just as heat is light.
And now we have defined "is" as in "what "is" a flow of energy". It is light at a specific frequency. It is also called electromagnetic radiation. Its frequency or hz determines how it affects matter that absorbs it such as in black body radiation or if it's refracted as with snow which is highly reflective.



The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
10-07-2021 19:02
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15813)
James___ wrote:
IBDM, you need to quit getting caught up in definitions. That doesn't allow for you to consider application. Heat and light are both electromagnetic radiation.

Heat is not light.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
10-07-2021 19:03
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15813)
James___ wrote:
gfm7175 wrote:
James___ wrote:
IBDM, you need to quit getting caught up in definitions. That doesn't allow for you to consider application. Heat and light are both electromagnetic radiation.

YEAH IBD!!!!! Just forget about definitions!!! Screw 'em!!! Just start speaking Liberal instead...

Jeeze... why do you even care about definitions anyway, IBD?? They're sooooooooo yesterday...... Get with the times, man!



He said that watts is a measure of power. In our atmosphere, the amount of energy in it is measured as "watts per square meter" or w/m^2. That is not power but is energy.
What he gave was one definition.

p.s., autocorrect, have to watch out for it.


No. that's power, not energy.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
10-07-2021 19:04
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15813)
James___ wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:

James___ wrote: ....the amount of energy in it is measured as "watts per square meter" or w/m^2.

That is called "Radiance" which is Power/Area



This is one of the reasons why I think you and gfm go to the same church. It's not power/radiance for the simple reason it's not controlled. Power like with the curling irons that girls like you and gfm use have a power/area relationship because of the wattage of your curling irons and the surface area of the iron itself. You ladies need to get out more often and breath the fresh, invigorating air of science.
It's actually pretty interesting. I mean our atmosphere is probably cooler than what scientists have made it out to be.


p.s., @All, the reason energy in our atmosphere is measured as w/m^2 is because it is ambient energy.
ambient; relating to the immediate surroundings of something. And with me, might be able to show how this is applicable to atmospheric temperatures.

Power doesn't have to be controlled to be power.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
10-07-2021 19:06
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15813)
Spongy Iris wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
gfm7175 wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
As IBDM knows, clouds don't trap heat, they block cold


Must be why, every time clouds roll in, we get a higher low.

It is not possible to trap heat.

Clouds can't do it either.


You can slow it down. For example...

You cannot slow or trap heat.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Say the high for the day outside is 90 degrees F. I will keep all the windows open, but won't use AC, unless it's over 95.

Fine.
Spongy Iris wrote:
The high inside my house will probably barely reach 85. So heat was slowed down by the roof over my head.

Nope. You cannot slow or trap heat.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Then on the flip side, say the low for that night is 55, after the day's high of 90. I will still keep all the windows open to cool it off from 85, but the temp inside might just drop to 70. So the roof over my head slowed down some cold.

Nope. You can't slow or trap heat. Heat is not cold. Heat is not hot. 'Cold' and 'Hot' are nothing more than subjective descriptions. Heat is the flow of thermal energy. Heat has no temperature.


Then why doesn't the ice in my freezer melt ?

Because your freezer keeps the water cold enough so that it remains solid.


And the heat outside my freezer, hasn't my freezer blocked it? No?

You cannot store or trap heat. You cannot block heat.
Heat is not inside or outside your freezer. Heat has no temperature.


Ok fine keep talking gibberish dude.

I'm not. You are. Inversion fallacy.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
10-07-2021 19:08
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15813)
James___ wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Heat has no temperature.


Ok fine keep talking gibberish dude.



Talk about a paradox. Heat "is" but it cannot be defined by "temperature". And "temperature" cannot be defined by "heat".

No paradox. Fallacy fallacy.
James___ wrote:
"Is" is basically nothing if it cannot be defined. This then suggests that life does does exist because what "is" cannot be defined. Kind of wish I did drugs as a kid so I could understand how nothing is something because nothing allows for something. Thermodynamics explains this quite well.

It is YOU ignoring the laws of thermodynamics. Inversion fallacy.
James___ wrote:
p.s., this is when you guys are "fun" to deal with.


@Spongy, he can't accept that life is a paradox and we're still here. He needs to know why we're here and no one really knows that. We just have to deal with one simple fact. We are here.

Fallacy fallacy. Life is not a paradox. It simply is.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
10-07-2021 19:24
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15813)
James___ wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:

I explained this to you above. Heat is a flow of thermal energy from one body of matter to another. Your freezer works by creating heat, i.e. a flow of



His freezer works by removing "heat". It's a flow of "heat" from cold to warm.
I think now I know why scientists get things wrong. They don't understand the work that is performed.


You cannot heat something warmer using something colder. You cannot make heat flow 'uphill'. You cannot reduce entropy. Ever. You are ignoring the 2nd law of thermodynamics.

Refrigeration systems work by using the ideal gas law.

Energy from what you put inside one heats the refrigerant. That refrigerant conveys that energy to a pump, where it is squashed. That is not heat. That is a conveyance of a material and it's energy.

Squashing any gas (compressing it) increases its temperature. That is not heat. That is the ideal gas law in action. Temperature is the average thermal energy in a given region, not the total thermal energy.

Squashing more atoms into the same region means more average energy (in this case thermal energy) in a given volume. This process requires energy to do it. Refrigerators don't work unless you plug them in.

Entropy is still increasing. You must consider the power plant that is producing the electricity for your refrigerator. You cannot discard from the system as any convenient time. The system chosen MUST remain consistent.

The hot gas is now hotter than the surrounding room. You put that into an coil of tubing and use that to heat the room. This helps to reduce the temperature of the refrigerant to room temperature again.

The compressed gas is then release. The ideal gas law now operates in reverse. You are not creating energy or destroying it. You are just spreading it over a larger volume. The temperature therefore drops. It drops so well that whatever you put in the refrigerator, even though it's colder, can still heat the refrigerant.

Round and round it goes.

If you just consider the refrigerator alone, you cannot consider the power plant. In other words, you cannot use the energy from plugging it in. THAT system is also consistent, and the result is that the inside and outside of the refrigerator will reach the same temperature.

Insulation does not slow or trap heat. It reduces it. Heat is not energy. It is the FLOW of energy....specifically thermal energy, and ONLY thermal energy.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
11-07-2021 03:29
duncan61
★★★★☆
(1235)
Diesel engine Kerosene fridge
Edited on 11-07-2021 03:30
11-07-2021 06:16
James___
★★★★★
(4736)
duncan61 wrote:
Diesel engine Kerosene fridge



Glow plugs? Evaporation?
11-07-2021 22:37
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15813)
duncan61 wrote:
Diesel engine Kerosene fridge


So you are powering your refrigerator with kerosene? Well...that's certainly one way to turn a compressor shaft!


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
11-07-2021 22:58
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15813)
Another way of doing refrigeration is the use of an absorber system. This is typically powered by propane and is commonly found in RVs and other remote applications. It's quite a clever way of using chemical reactions to refrigerate something instead of the usual compressor.

It's downside is that it's rather sensitive to being tilted in any way. You must carefully level these things to get 'em to work. It's why folks with trailers spend time leveling the thing when they park.

The system consists of a heat source (typically a propane burner), ammonia, hydrogen, and water.

An ammonia solution in water is heated by the propane. This causes ammonia to expand and rise into the condenser coils. Ammonia boils before water does, so this separates the ammonia and water.

In the condenser coils, the ammonia cools again, turning into a liquid.

The ammonia continues on to the evaporator, where it is mixed with hydrogen. This reaction causes the ammonia to evaporate again, but this time, it gets very cold. This part of the refrigerator is used to cool whatever's inside.

The warmer ammonia is not mixed with water again (the same water it was separated from by the burner flame). This causes the ammonia to release the hydrogen gas. This is light, so it is easily collected for reuse later in the cycle as well.

Now the ammonia-water solution flows back to the burner, and round and round it goes.

The thing has no mechanical pumps (the boiling ammonia pumps the whole thing...all you need is a burner flame).

A very clever use of ammonia, water, and hydrogen gas. All of it just cycles around the plumbing over and over.

Kerosene can also be used for the burner flame, though typically propane is used.
Edited on 11-07-2021 23:00
12-07-2021 01:00
duncan61
★★★★☆
(1235)
In Australia, Edward Hallstrom (later Sir Edward) produced his first kerosene-powered refrigerator in his Sydney backyard. He travelled to outback stations to sell the machines.
A kerosene fridge has a sealed network of tubes and chambers holding water, ammonia and hydrogen gas. A flame heats a chamber holding a solution of water and ammonia until the liquid boils. The ammonia gas rises to another chamber, the condenser, where it cools back into a liquid.
I have seen old kero fridges and there is a small flame at the back burning slowly.They were not that great but better than the wet hessian sacking box they replaced in outback areas
12-07-2021 01:29
James___
★★★★★
(4736)
duncan61 wrote:
In Australia, Edward Hallstrom (later Sir Edward) produced his first kerosene-powered refrigerator in his Sydney backyard. He travelled to outback stations to sell the machines.
A kerosene fridge has a sealed network of tubes and chambers holding water, ammonia and hydrogen gas. A flame heats a chamber holding a solution of water and ammonia until the liquid boils. The ammonia gas rises to another chamber, the condenser, where it cools back into a liquid.
I have seen old kero fridges and there is a small flame at the back burning slowly.They were not that great but better than the wet hessian sacking box they replaced in outback areas



We've discussed this in here and now we know who came up with it. This goes along with CO2 as a refrigerant. Matter/gas changing states. As a gas, they give up their heat but when compressed into a liquid, they absorb it.
This can get into a complicated discussion about conservation of energy and the different states of matter. Most people would think that a gas when compressed would not absorb heat but would emit it.
I think that someone at some time did testing to find out what seems "right" isn't. Something like this is considered as being counter intuitive. It simply goes against logic. And this does play into atmospheric chemistry and physics. And as you guys know, it is something that I have no interest in. Trust me, okay?
12-07-2021 05:41
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(9568)


James___ wrote:We've discussed this in here and ...

... you should have paid attention.

James___ wrote:As a gas, they give up their heat but when compressed into a liquid, they absorb it.

First, you have it backwards. Second, it has nothing to do with the state of the matter. Thermal energy always flows from higher temperature to lower temperature.


James___ wrote: This can get into a complicated discussion about conservation of energy and the different states of matter.

Nope. This discussion can only remain within the context of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics.

James___ wrote: Most people would think that a gas when compressed would not absorb heat but would emit it.

When compressed, the gas increases in temperature and thermal energy flows into the cooler surroundings.

12-07-2021 14:03
duncan61
★★★★☆
(1235)
I have a permit to fit autogas to mobile applications.A few things I remember well
.Autogas is 85%propane and 15%butane
.The butane helps the ignition process
.The octane rating of Autogas is 120,It is more powerful than petrol but retro fitting it to a combustion engine designed for petrol is not ideal,Autogas burns best at a ratio of 14:1 and a compression ratio of 13:1
.LPG boils at -21
.Autogas compresses to liquid at 270psi
.Butane is a yellow flame like cigarette lighters
.Domestic and camping cookers use a 50/50 mix of butane propane
Regards this comment
First, you have it backwards. Second, it has nothing to do with the state of the matter. Thermal energy always flows from higher temperature to lower temperature.
If I place warm beer in a ice slurry it is the ice that has the energy transferring to the warm beer at ambient.Heat always flows from higher temperature to lower temperature.

.
12-07-2021 15:51
James___
★★★★★
(4736)
duncan61 wrote:
I have a permit to fit autogas to mobile applications.A few things I remember well
.Autogas is 85%propane and 15%butane
.The butane helps the ignition process
.The octane rating of Autogas is 120,It is more powerful than petrol but retro fitting it to a combustion engine designed for petrol is not ideal,Autogas burns best at a ratio of 14:1 and a compression ratio of 13:1
.LPG boils at -21
.Autogas compresses to liquid at 270psi
.Butane is a yellow flame like cigarette lighters
.Domestic and camping cookers use a 50/50 mix of butane propane
Regards this comment
First, you have it backwards. Second, it has nothing to do with the state of the matter. Thermal energy always flows from higher temperature to lower temperature.
If I place warm beer in a ice slurry it is the ice that has the energy transferring to the warm beer at ambient.Heat always flows from higher temperature to lower temperature.

.



The composition of the "coolant" is separated. The water remains a liquid. The ammonia is "emitted" from the coolant. Changing "states" of matter.
[url]Thermal energy always flows from higher temperature to lower temperature.[/url]
And yet heat flows from your freezer into a warmer area. With a kerosene refrigerator, the coolant is heated so it will absorb cold and move it to warmer.
It's a process.
12-07-2021 18:47
James___
★★★★★
(4736)
With an ammonia refrigerator, I wonder if hydronium because hydrogen as well as water is used with ammonia.
http://sure-amm.blogspot.com/2009/02/ammonia-ammonia-is-compound-of-nitrogen.html

And with this, is ammonia going from NH3 to NH4? With hydrogen in the process it seems like how it changes how heat can be released in the condenser. And then in the heat exchanger it can absorb it because the heat exchanger is cold. This is where it might go from NH3 to NH4. NH3 + H would seem to be a less dense mixture than NH4. With NH3 + H, the hydrogen is a gas. When it ionizes the NH3 it becomes a part of a liquid.
The evaporator is supplied with hydrogen. The hydrogen passes across the surface of the ammonia. It lowers the ammonia vapor pressure enough to allow the liquid ammonia to evaporate. http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~mnr/fridge.html

Edited on 12-07-2021 18:48
13-07-2021 22:12
James___
★★★★★
(4736)
Just an FYI everyone. The reason water is used in a refrigeration system that uses ammonia is to establish a directional flow in the cooling system. Think of your coffee maker. It percolates water by heating the gasses in the water. This creates a flow.
With refrigeration, when water percolates upwards, it can flow back to where the cooler ammonia will be flowing towards the heat source in the system. The boiling point of NH4 ammonia (ammonium) is 113.5 °C /236.3 °F°. Since NH3 ammonia has a boiling point of -33.3° C/ -94.4° F is what could allow for NH4 > NH3 + H.
Basically ammonia (NH3) can become a gas at a much lower temperature than ammonium does. The same can be said for hydrogen. This might be an example of thermodynamics that has been overlooked. Otherwise ammonium would not be able to be used to percolate water to create a flow. Thank you Joe DiMaggio and your Mr. Coffee coffee maker.

This might have just given me an idea on how desalination might be improved. While there is organic chemistry (organic material contains at least 1 carbon atom) this is just plain chemistry.
In a sense it would be modifying the kerosene refrigerator that Duncan posted about. This is something that could help to show how innovation happens. What does "In Australia, Edward Hallstrom (later Sir Edward)" have to do with desalination? Maybe something and maybe nothing. We'll just have to find out mates.

Edited on 13-07-2021 22:21
14-07-2021 05:03
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15813)
duncan61 wrote:
In Australia, Edward Hallstrom (later Sir Edward) produced his first kerosene-powered refrigerator in his Sydney backyard. He travelled to outback stations to sell the machines.
A kerosene fridge has a sealed network of tubes and chambers holding water, ammonia and hydrogen gas. A flame heats a chamber holding a solution of water and ammonia until the liquid boils. The ammonia gas rises to another chamber, the condenser, where it cools back into a liquid.
I have seen old kero fridges and there is a small flame at the back burning slowly.They were not that great but better than the wet hessian sacking box they replaced in outback areas


They work reasonably well for small refrigerators. Like I said, they are sensitive to being properly leveled.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
14-07-2021 05:08
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15813)
James___ wrote:
duncan61 wrote:
In Australia, Edward Hallstrom (later Sir Edward) produced his first kerosene-powered refrigerator in his Sydney backyard. He travelled to outback stations to sell the machines.
A kerosene fridge has a sealed network of tubes and chambers holding water, ammonia and hydrogen gas. A flame heats a chamber holding a solution of water and ammonia until the liquid boils. The ammonia gas rises to another chamber, the condenser, where it cools back into a liquid.
I have seen old kero fridges and there is a small flame at the back burning slowly.They were not that great but better than the wet hessian sacking box they replaced in outback areas



We've discussed this in here and now we know who came up with it. This goes along with CO2 as a refrigerant. Matter/gas changing states. As a gas, they give up their heat but when compressed into a liquid, they absorb it.

Nope. Compressing a gas into a liquid does not absorb heat.
James___ wrote:
This can get into a complicated discussion about conservation of energy and the different states of matter.

Most of which you deny.
James___ wrote:
Most people would think that a gas when compressed would not absorb heat but would emit it.

Heat flows from hot to cold. Never from cold to hot.
James___ wrote:
I think that someone at some time did testing to find out what seems "right" isn't. Something like this is considered as being counter intuitive. It simply goes against logic.

Yes it does. Void argument fallacy. You might try English. It works better.
James___ wrote:
And this does play into atmospheric chemistry and physics.

What does? Void argument fallacy.
James___ wrote:
And as you guys know, it is something that I have no interest in. Trust me, okay?


You have no context either.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
14-07-2021 05:18
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15813)
duncan61 wrote:
I have a permit to fit autogas to mobile applications.A few things I remember well
.Autogas is 85%propane and 15%butane
.The butane helps the ignition process
.The octane rating of Autogas is 120,

The octane rating of Autogas, as you describe it, is ZERO.
duncan61 wrote:
It is more powerful than petrol but retro fitting it to a combustion engine designed for petrol is not ideal,Autogas burns best at a ratio of 14:1 and a compression ratio of 13:1
.LPG boils at -21

There is approx 91k BTU in a gallon of propane. There is 120.3k BTU in a gallon of gasoline. There is 137.4k BTU in a gallon of diesel oil.
duncan61 wrote:
.Autogas compresses to liquid at 270psi
.Butane is a yellow flame like cigarette lighters
.Domestic and camping cookers use a 50/50 mix of butane propane

Maybe where you are, the ones we use in the States run on just propane.
duncan61 wrote:
Regards this comment
First, you have it backwards. Second, it has nothing to do with the state of the matter. Thermal energy always flows from higher temperature to lower temperature.
If I place warm beer in a ice slurry it is the ice that has the energy transferring to the warm beer at ambient.Heat always flows from higher temperature to lower temperature.


Ice has less energy than warm beer. Warm beer heats the ice. Ice doesn't heat warm beer. See the 2nd law of thermodynamics.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
14-07-2021 05:19
James___
★★★★★
(4736)
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
duncan61 wrote:
In Australia, Edward Hallstrom (later Sir Edward) produced his first kerosene-powered refrigerator in his Sydney backyard. He travelled to outback stations to sell the machines.
A kerosene fridge has a sealed network of tubes and chambers holding water, ammonia and hydrogen gas. A flame heats a chamber holding a solution of water and ammonia until the liquid boils. The ammonia gas rises to another chamber, the condenser, where it cools back into a liquid.
I have seen old kero fridges and there is a small flame at the back burning slowly.They were not that great but better than the wet hessian sacking box they replaced in outback areas



We've discussed this in here and now we know who came up with it. This goes along with CO2 as a refrigerant. Matter/gas changing states. As a gas, they give up their heat but when compressed into a liquid, they absorb it.

Nope. Compressing a gas into a liquid does not absorb heat.
James___ wrote:
This can get into a complicated discussion about conservation of energy and the different states of matter.

Most of which you deny.
James___ wrote:
Most people would think that a gas when compressed would not absorb heat but would emit it.

Heat flows from hot to cold. Never from cold to hot.
James___ wrote:
I think that someone at some time did testing to find out what seems "right" isn't. Something like this is considered as being counter intuitive. It simply goes against logic.

Yes it does. Void argument fallacy. You might try English. It works better.
James___ wrote:
And this does play into atmospheric chemistry and physics.

What does? Void argument fallacy.
James___ wrote:
And as you guys know, it is something that I have no interest in. Trust me, okay?


You have no context either.


Nope. Compressing a gas into a liquid does not absorb heat.


Chemistry is void. I read your post and you were sober. Did you become what and I missed it? Still, a Christian would not seem sober.
To consider your post;
James___ wrote:
This can get into a complicated discussion about conservation of energy and the different states of matter.

Most of which you deny.
James___ wrote:

Life happens. I'll talk to your mother about it, okay?

Most people would think that a gas when compressed would not absorb heat but would emit it.

Heat flows from hot to cold. Never from cold to hot.
[quote]James___ wrote:

Mechanical means alters thermodynamics.

Enjoy
14-07-2021 05:19
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15813)
James___ wrote:
duncan61 wrote:
I have a permit to fit autogas to mobile applications.A few things I remember well
.Autogas is 85%propane and 15%butane
.The butane helps the ignition process
.The octane rating of Autogas is 120,It is more powerful than petrol but retro fitting it to a combustion engine designed for petrol is not ideal,Autogas burns best at a ratio of 14:1 and a compression ratio of 13:1
.LPG boils at -21
.Autogas compresses to liquid at 270psi
.Butane is a yellow flame like cigarette lighters
.Domestic and camping cookers use a 50/50 mix of butane propane
Regards this comment
First, you have it backwards. Second, it has nothing to do with the state of the matter. Thermal energy always flows from higher temperature to lower temperature.
If I place warm beer in a ice slurry it is the ice that has the energy transferring to the warm beer at ambient.Heat always flows from higher temperature to lower temperature.

.



The composition of the "coolant" is separated. The water remains a liquid. The ammonia is "emitted" from the coolant. Changing "states" of matter.
[url]Thermal energy always flows from higher temperature to lower temperature.[/url]
And yet heat flows from your freezer into a warmer area. With a kerosene refrigerator, the coolant is heated so it will absorb cold and move it to warmer.
It's a process.

It is not possible to absorb cold. See the 2nd law of thermodynamics.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
14-07-2021 05:20
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15813)
James___ wrote:
With an ammonia refrigerator, I wonder if hydronium because hydrogen as well as water is used with ammonia.
http://sure-amm.blogspot.com/2009/02/ammonia-ammonia-is-compound-of-nitrogen.html

And with this, is ammonia going from NH3 to NH4? With hydrogen in the process it seems like how it changes how heat can be released in the condenser. And then in the heat exchanger it can absorb it because the heat exchanger is cold. This is where it might go from NH3 to NH4. NH3 + H would seem to be a less dense mixture than NH4. With NH3 + H, the hydrogen is a gas. When it ionizes the NH3 it becomes a part of a liquid.
The evaporator is supplied with hydrogen. The hydrogen passes across the surface of the ammonia. It lowers the ammonia vapor pressure enough to allow the liquid ammonia to evaporate. http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~mnr/fridge.html

Nope. Go read my post about propane powered refrigerators.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
14-07-2021 05:22
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15813)
James___ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
[quote]duncan61 wrote:
In Australia, Edward Hallstrom (later Sir Edward) produced his first kerosene-powered refrigerator in his Sydney backyard. He travelled to outback stations to sell the machines.
A kerosene fridge has a sealed network of tubes and chambers holding water, ammonia and hydrogen gas. A flame heats a chamber holding a solution of water and ammonia until the liquid boils. The ammonia gas rises to another chamber, the condenser, where it cools back into a liquid.
I have seen old kero fridges and there is a small flame at the back burning slowly.They were not that great but better than the wet hessian sacking box they replaced in outback areas



We've discussed this in here and now we know who came up with it. This goes along with CO2 as a refrigerant. Matter/gas changing states. As a gas, they give up their heat but when compressed into a liquid, they absorb it.

Nope. Compressing a gas into a liquid does not absorb heat.
James___ wrote:
This can get into a complicated discussion about conservation of energy and the different states of matter.

Most of which you deny.
James___ wrote:
Most people would think that a gas when compressed would not absorb heat but would emit it.

Heat flows from hot to cold. Never from cold to hot.
James___ wrote:
I think that someone at some time did testing to find out what seems "right" isn't. Something like this is considered as being counter intuitive. It simply goes against logic.

Yes it does. Void argument fallacy. You might try English. It works better.
James___ wrote:
And this does play into atmospheric chemistry and physics.

What does? Void argument fallacy.
James___ wrote:
And as you guys know, it is something that I have no interest in. Trust me, okay?


You have no context either.


Nope. Compressing a gas into a liquid does not absorb heat.


Chemistry is void. I read your post and you were sober. Did you become what and I missed it? Still, a Christian would not seem sober.
To consider your post;
James___ wrote:
This can get into a complicated discussion about conservation of energy and the different states of matter.

Most of which you deny.
James___ wrote:

Life happens. I'll talk to your mother about it, okay?

Most people would think that a gas when compressed would not absorb heat but would emit it.

Heat flows from hot to cold. Never from cold to hot.
James___ wrote:

Mechanical means alters thermodynamics.

Enjoy

Never does. You can't ignore the laws of thermodynamics or suspend any of them for even a moment.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
14-07-2021 05:52
James___
★★★★★
(4736)
Into the Night wrote:

Heat flows from hot to cold. Never from cold to hot.
James___ wrote:

Mechanical means alters thermodynamics.

Enjoy

Never does. You can't ignore the laws of thermodynamics or suspend any of them for even a moment.



And yet you can't define what "heat" is. If heat cannot flow from "cold" to "hot" then what are air conditioners for? And because I am me, ozone in the stratosphere cools the troposphere.
14-07-2021 06:31
James___
★★★★★
(4736)
Aww, c'mon guys, heat doesn't flow from your freezer. Work with me here, okay?
We don't live in Alaska. Right? So it is colder outside. See? We can support thermodynamics.
In Alaska, it is colder than your freezer. See? We are making progress.
14-07-2021 10:23
duncan61
★★★★☆
(1235)
Into the Night wrote:
duncan61 wrote:
I have a permit to fit autogas to mobile applications.A few things I remember well
.Autogas is 85%propane and 15%butane
.The butane helps the ignition process
.The octane rating of Autogas is 120,

The octane rating of Autogas, as you describe it, is ZERO.
duncan61 wrote:
It is more powerful than petrol but retro fitting it to a combustion engine designed for petrol is not ideal,Autogas burns best at a ratio of 14:1 and a compression ratio of 13:1
.LPG boils at -21

There is approx 91k BTU in a gallon of propane. There is 120.3k BTU in a gallon of gasoline. There is 137.4k BTU in a gallon of diesel oil.
duncan61 wrote:
.Autogas compresses to liquid at 270psi
.Butane is a yellow flame like cigarette lighters
.Domestic and camping cookers use a 50/50 mix of butane propane

Maybe where you are, the ones we use in the States run on just propane.
duncan61 wrote:
Regards this comment
First, you have it backwards. Second, it has nothing to do with the state of the matter. Thermal energy always flows from higher temperature to lower temperature.
If I place warm beer in a ice slurry it is the ice that has the energy transferring to the warm beer at ambient.Heat always flows from higher temperature to lower temperature.


Ice has less energy than warm beer. Warm beer heats the ice. Ice doesn't heat warm beer. See the 2nd law of thermodynamics.


100 octane
The fuel type LPG cost less than petrol and generally has a higher octane rating, at over 100 octane.29 Apr 2021
In the class I took I recall auto gas was rated at 120 octane.The workshop where I did my fitting to cars was run by my mate and they built a 302 windsor ford engine to 13.1 compression and ponced with the injection system and did a 10 second quarter mile in a Capri even though everyone said it could not be done.We blend butane in West Australia as there is an excess of it and it needs to be got rid of.It softens the flame.Perhaps in the states you use pure propane.Why not.Petrol will ignite at rich and lean mixes with autogas it only has a narrow dilution it will ignite at and on old cars you have to advance the ignition as it burns slower than petrol.Modern cars run so well with VVTI and management systems they are not worth converting however cars from the 80s to 2000 go well as the computer management adjust the running to suit the fuel.The lads were looking in to connecting the LPG directly into the fuel rail on injected cars and managed cars.I am not sure how this went.When I did my 96 cherokee I fitted a diffuser above the throttle body and a jumbo convertor and used an emulator on the management system.


duncan61
Page 3 of 4<1234>





Join the debate Hot Water Unit:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Septic tanks and water pollution42322-07-2021 02:42
US Water Shortaages2628-04-2021 23:02
water supply1521-01-2021 11:33
Desalination and evaporation of sea water at both poles1019-11-2020 23:57
It's HOT101-11-2020 12:59
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2020 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact