At just flattened at!

Ah I see, I didn't know such a tower exsisted (even though they've been around since 1900 odd) I'd never thought of gravity pulling on gas either and thats why there was higher pressure at lower levels, learnt something there. I wonder then could an old mine shaft, because of the heat generated down there and the depth, replace the need for the solar panels and be used to power the wind turbine? Ah I see, I didn't know such a tower exsisted (even though they've been around since 1900 odd) I'd never thought of gravity pulling on gas either and thats why there was higher pressure at lower levels, learnt something there. I wonder then could an old mine shaft, because of the heat generated down there and the depth, replace the need for the solar panels and be used to power the wind turbine?

As I understand it when low pressure is at one end of a tunnel and high pressure at the other, air is blown down it. Is that right? If it is, then why isen't there wind turbines that operate in a tunnel, say starting at sea level and running up the side of a hill or mountain to create the pressure difference at either end? Surely then there would be a constant breeze to blow them and they would be more productive, unlike the ones I always see doing naff all.

Like whatZapatos said, an auto will change up and down when it feels its right to, undernormal road driving conditions that’s fine, on a track the driver/rider willwant to shift down even when revs are high and back the rear wheel/s round thecorner. I reckon an auto would want to shift back up when you're thenaccelerating mid corner and moving in a controlled rear slide even if didn’twant it to. Does an automatic work solely off what revs you are at in aparticular gear? Or does it take into account what’s happening with traction controland the like?

Think like a Christian, I think you would like it. It ties up lots of things.

Because if your religion says God made all existence and you believe that and accept that as truth like a Christian does, how do you believe there was another cause for all existence coming into being? You can't as you already have your answer that you believe to be fact.

No of-course you can be religious and believe what we know about the universe so far. Just the part about how it all came to be, as in the case of Christianity, Christians believe god made everything. You can't believe that and be open to other theory's can you.

There is equally as little proof that everything was created via any other method, and what speculation there is about existence coming into being is a belief in itself, scientists believe is happened like so in some cases, and people with religion believe it happened like so in others. Neither parties are crazy nor wrong, just no-one has any hard proof yet, just beliefs , but have faith and we may find out one day.

I can't decide if it's detrimental to the species overall (whether our current route is the right one for our survival or a more animal-istic society would see us on this planet longer), your points have certainly got me thinking Justin. One thing is for certain though I think we need more natural selection in our current society, half the people I meet should be left outside in the cold or eaten by a bear. I just saw that Phi I was miles away for a second then

It's not that I think that physical strength is more desirable, I should have stated that by weak I meant less able in any sense. But a smart guy could outwit a brute and the brute would die, hang on a minute didn't this happen. As for the wings argument it's the same reason we don't have eyes as good as a hawk or smell like a dog or hair like a chimp, we didn't need it, or it was better not to have it. (I would like to point out that I believe murder and genocide are wrong (because I was taught so) and that I'm not a raging nut job)

But doesn't killing leave the strong and get rid of the weak? Like a sped up natural selection it would in-fact drive evolution and as a species we would grow stronger? What we have at the minute are societies that protect the weak and stunt the growth of the strong, if all who were considered weak were killed, as a species would we not grow stronger?

Take a dangerous place in the world, where people think nothing of abducting and murdering someone for the change in their pocket. It may be just one person but it can be many people. Like a bad neighborhood but much worse. The acts of the people in such a place would be considered by our standards to wrong, but to them it's the norm. They have no mental problems it's just how they have grown up to be. Take a young child out of that place and put them with another family, a family that would be considered "good and normal" and the child won't grow up like it's parents in the bad neighborhood. The child wont learn that lifestyle and that sense of right and wrong. Can you give me a reason why abortion or any crime for that matter is wrong? And I mean without taking a perspective at all. Edit: And without any feeling involved.

That is if the carbon dioxide capturing device/coating had to be located in the flue, if it was taking CO2 out of the air at another location then it would do the same job overall. If we can make artificial skin I'm sure in time we could make a membrane that does the job of a plant. I'll leaf you to it I don't want to hijack the thread either.

I believe that our human sense of what is "right" and "wrong" is nothing more than a human creation, totally derived from our feelings and largely influenced by the feelings of the majority. Do you agree? So all that repulses us and would be considered "wrong", for example murder, is only wrong because we feel it should be not because it truly is "wrong". Likewise for feelings of what is "right."

If plant-life does exactly what we need, can we not copy what the plants do? Build a organic machine of sorts.

Thank you for your words of wisdom, they are appreciated I had not planned to weld nor build any part myself for the very reasons you outlined. The description of the boiler and details was for me at this stage not a concern as all the engineering aspects would be handled by a qualified person. The object of the posts was to ascertain if a boiler of such a size (even a very inefficient one) could produce what I needed. Unfortunately even if the boiler had produced enough steam I was stuck at another hurdle and that one I couldn't overcome. Thankyou all for your help and if you arn't aware of it: Google, 3D printing, its a clever thing. All the best.

I see, ok so say the vessel is cylindrical with parabolic ends, I'll draw up a quick sketch so maybe we could calculate some outputs.

Pm sent chap.

This video shows a small boiler putting out a decent jet of steam, what I would like to know is how to calculate the volume of steam I could output and the constant pressure at which it was ejected. Ignoring everything above and: Taking the boiler as 1L in volume and a constant heat of 400C surely it is possible to calculate the maximum amount of steam produced per minute isen't it? In CFM. www.youtube.com/watch?v=sz_Kgkzfaxk

It needs to be a constant flow. So not throttle-able if thats what you mean. Desired mass flow is: 60-85 CFM Im a little unsure of what you mean by how much energy am I putting into the system. Do you mean the energy created by the heat? Thankyou for the reply.

Hello all, I humbly ask for some assistance from someone who's more capable when it comes to science, I'm a work with my hands type of chap and the science behind things takes a bit of grasping for me to understand sometimes. So here is what I'm trying to do and where I would very much appreciate some help: I am building a steam boiler: It will be made of stainless steel and contain two heated tubes to boil water. These are the dimensions: W 25cm H 25cm D 10cm So a cuboid with two pipes running the 25cm length. The heated pipes are 800F or 427C, without the water/steam touching them. It will have a display to show the internal pressure, a blowoff valve to relieve pressure should it build too high and an outlet for the pressurised steam to be released. I would like to know what pressure the outlet could output constantly, or would the boiler have to build pressure and then release it? . And how to calculate the output pressure? What would happen if the output hole was reduced in size? If anyone could work out something to show pressures that would be great, and even better if you could show me how you came to the end result. I have difficulty with equations but could understand it if all aspects were explained. Thankyou in advance. Alex