insane_alien

depends on where you are. different countries use different voltages therefore you would require different currents to provide similar amounts of power. you really need to tell us what system you use (115 VAC, 230 VAC, etc.)

spunnery, if the moon was not rotating then a day on its surface would last roughly one year(it vary due to the orbit around the earth.) since it does not last one year, we can deduce that it is rotating while it revolves round a common axis with the earth.

Dak, that was me who said that, not tree. i use linux anyway so i don't have outlook. i was just curious.

and you joined this forum just to tell us that? yeah right.

why is it you've not to use outlook(i use gmail on the web anyway)? i've not heard anything bad about outlook. whats wrong with it?

even more so, the heat of collision could be enough to partially melt the steel causeing them to form a weld and actually become one single steel ball. its much easier to do with lead though, steel is hard enough to be able to shatter on impact. although that needs some higher velocities.

research, weather monitoring, surveying(maps, google earth etc.) recreation(i have an RC plane for example) and probably a bunch of other stuff.

0 should be a different catagory as the fact that NO lynchings whatsover took place in those places would seem to be important. i would use a separate catagory for that one.

yeah no problem, reverse osmosis is probably the better way of desalinating stuff, just pump it trough a membrane. the analysis i done was for optimal conditions, they aren't going to happen. i would probably say that an average over the whole day would be 4-5 thousand m^2 per kg s^-1

its revolving around an axis that goes through the earth. its rotating around its own axis. a quick dictionary check should point out the differences between those words. its been the cause of a few physics class showdowns.

why would turbulence be a problem? also the finely focused light would be inefficient as you would dump a lot of the energy into the vast cloud of mist that would suddenly spring up. you'd maybe be better with a more dispersed beam working on a reasonably big area and getting a good boil going on. since the whole place would be hot there would be less condensation in the air and less heat would be lost to water in the air. i'll write up an equation to work out how much water you'd get out of it. give me a while on it. <update>Okay, so i took valuable webcomic reading time and worked it out. power required = Q*(Cp*dT + dHv) where Q = mass flowrate of water to be vapourised Cp= heat capacity of water (4186 J/kgK) dT= temperature change (75 K) dHv= latent heat of vapourisation (2260000 J/kg) power in = A*I where A = area of mirror(assuming 100% effectiveness) I=solar irradiance (W/m^2) so A=Q(Cp*dT +dHv)/I plug the numbers in and out pops A=2524*Q (roughly) call it 2600 for all the losses. (this is called a fudge factor among engineers) so, for 1 kg/s you would need an area of 2600 m^2 this is pretty big. and thats at peak irradiance so its going to be greater even than that.

okay, reflection would look very very different to refraction and would produce poor quality images seeing as gasses aren't going to stay in the necessary shape for ver long or have it be good enough to act as a lens. also, the density would have to be at least a few trillion times greater and be composed entirely of metallic components. smooth and shiny metallic components at that. all in all, general relativity predicted it quite nicely before it was observed. also, if it was a gas (reflected or refracted) we would see a lot of absorbtion lines in different quantities than we would expect for normal star emissions.

so a solar furnace. it would work but you need to remove the large concentration of salt that would build up in the system, this can be done simply by flushing the system with normal sea water (at night probably since it wouldn't be operating anyway). you would also have to thermally isolate the chamber to get any sort of efficiency and remember its going to take a lot to heat it all up after you've flushed the system or even just starting up in the morning. it would also have to be massive to provide enough water for a town. it could work, but it would really only be viable for small towns and only the onesnear the coast at that.

well, seeing as there is no appreciable density change over the distances involved apart from very very close the the centre. then this can be discounted. if you are thinking of the earths atmosphere then remember that we can see them from space(outside our own atmosphere) we can conclude from the last fact alone that it is not from an atmospheric effect. another thing that discounts an atmospheric effect is that there is no spectral diffraction observed (where white light splits into its respective colours) this would be seen if it was a normal lens effect like an atmosphere would produce. gravity on the other hand would not cause this because it bends all wavelegnths equally

i was meaning free energy as in energy from nowhere. i was assuming jaques was meaning this because of his mention of magnet motros free energy or whatever.

okay, first of all, you can't control gravity, you would be controlling buoyancy. if you do manage to get a system to produce a constant rotation your going to have to put in more energy than you could get out of it. it would be more efficient to tie a weight to a rope wind the rope round the axle of a generator and drop the weight(but not the generator) from a height.

there is no such thing as free energy. and the thing with the magnifying glass is complete rubbish. if the magnifying glass is big enough to make anything happen at all it'll be boiling water not hydrogen. solar power isn't free energy. neither is wind, tidal, hydro or nuclear. wind and hydro are indirect solar power tidal power comes from the changing gravitaional fields caused by the rotation of the earth and the sun and moon. nuclear energy comes from the potential energy stored in the nuclei of atoms. the free energy magnet motor thingies never work.

yeah be he's asking how to make an egg sink faster in the water. freezing it would suspend the egg in the solid ice.

yeah but it won't be liquid, buoyancy doesn't work so well in solids

heating it up or adding alcohol would decrease the density

if the car wasn't spinning on its access then you would see all sides of the car rather than the one side and you would need some fancy suspension/axle/drivetrain to make it possible as well.

right, the pressure(voltage) isn't caused by the current. its the other way round. The voltage causes the electrons to drift in one direction because it creates an electric feild and the electrons are charged. but the voltage doesn't move. your interpretation of current is good.

If you drink some of my home brews you'll probably be in a few more

i think i would fare quite well. chemical engineering could be a valuable skill in a post-apocalyptic world (water purification, waste treatment, explosives, alcohol, etc.) its bound to be worth lots to the various warring factions that would spring up

scotland, just cos i'm scottish. i don't actually bother with football though.