Science lesson for today.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
11-10-2013, 09:59 PM
RE: Science lesson for today.
(11-10-2013 09:36 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  No dumbass. Energy is released from hydrocarbons as chemical energy. The sun has nothing to do with it. Repeating your nonsense just make you looks more like the idiot you are. Hydrocarbons are formed ...oh what's the use. http://www.wou.edu/las/physci/GS361/Ener..._Fuels.htm

You really should change your name to "Scarecrow" because obviously you haven't got a brain. Before the energy of hydrocarbons was in chemical form, it was in the form of sunlight. Plants use photosynthesis to convert sunlight into chemical energy. This is grade school level stuff for God's sake. Were you homeschooled by a lazy mom?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-10-2013, 10:05 PM
RE: Science lesson for today.
(11-10-2013 09:57 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(11-10-2013 09:36 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  No dumbass. Energy is released from hydrocarbons as chemical energy. The sun has nothing to do with it. Repeating your nonsense just make you looks more like the idiot you are. Hydrocarbons are formed ...oh what's the use. http://www.wou.edu/las/physci/GS361/Ener..._Fuels.htm

You really should change your name to "Scarecrow" because obviously you haven't got a brain. Before the energy of hydrocarbons was in chemical form, it was in the form of sunlight. Plants use photosynthesis to convert sunlight into chemical energy. This is grade school level stuff for God's sake. Were you homeschooled by a lazy mom?

Nice try Jebus-insult-bot-minus-eight-weasel.
YOU SAID "Oil (hydrocarbons) are a source of energy that continues as long as the sun burns."

That is a false statement.
Hydrocarbons burn (release energy), without any reference to a "burning" sun. Your statement is idiotic.
Many scientists are concerned about when humans will no longer be able to burn hydrocarbons. They NEVER reference the sun, in those discussions.
You have gone full retard, (or fuller retard, if that were even possible).

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-10-2013, 10:10 PM
RE: Science lesson for today.
(11-10-2013 09:40 PM)sandman Wrote:  Oil comes from animals which are fed by plants which are fed by the sun. A circuitous but real relation.

Petro-oil comes primarily from plants. Its a myth that it comes from dinosaurs.

Pretty much all energy ultimately comes from the sun. Nuclear power is an exception.

You can use solar power to make gasoline if you want.

Making gasoline out of thin air
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-10-2013, 10:17 PM (This post was last modified: 11-10-2013 10:26 PM by Heywood Jahblome.)
RE: Science lesson for today.
(11-10-2013 10:05 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Nice try Jebus-insult-bot-minus-eight-weasel.
YOU SAID "Oil (hydrocarbons) are a source of energy that continues as long as the sun burns."

"Continues" as in Continues to be produced.

I should have been more clear. I forget self created mongoloid jackasses like yourself read these threads.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-10-2013, 10:30 PM
RE: Science lesson for today.
... Mainly from plants! Who knew? Thanks
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-10-2013, 10:32 PM
RE: Science lesson for today.
MY BRAIN HURTS!! MAKE IT STOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOP!!!
。・°°・(>_<)・°°・。

When you are courting a nice girl an hour seems like a second. When you sit on a red-hot cinder a second seems like an hour. That's relativity.

You cannot successfully determine beforehand which side of the bread to butter.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-10-2013, 03:32 PM
RE: Science lesson for today.
(11-10-2013 09:52 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(11-10-2013 09:22 PM)sandman Wrote:  I'm just saying turbines wouldn't necessarily cool the air.

Well observation seems to validate your position.

If we took away the transfer of heat from one local to another aspect of the problem, I suspect you are still correct. I believe where BryanS makes an error in his thinking is by claiming that the wind turbine is a heat engine and must therefore lose heat or violate the laws of thermodynamics. The wind turbine isn't a heat engine. It is being moved by a heat engine which itself loses heat to make kinetic energy. That heat engine could be the wind or it could be a steam engine. Doesn't really matter. The energy captured by turbines is kinetic....and as you rightly point out some of that kinetic energy will be converted back into heat.

In short the temperature of the air decreases by going into motion in the first place and not by moving across a turbine.


You just don't understand the laws of thermodynamics, Heywood. This is pretty settled stuff, since the 1800s.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_law_o...modynamics
Quote:The first explicit statement of the first law of thermodynamics, by Rudolf Clausius in 1850, referred to cyclic thermodynamic processes.

In all cases in which work is produced by the agency of heat, a quantity of heat is consumed which is proportional to the work done; and conversely, by the expenditure of an equal quantity of work an equal quantity of heat is produced.[6]

The first law of thermodynamics is simply a statement of the conservation of energy. An engine driven by mechanical processes (like air turning a turbine) does work through extraction of heat. It has to. That is the first law of thermodynamics. And yes, a wind Turbine is an engine, with the fuel being supplied by the wind.

All engines work this way. The internal combustion engine operates when, after the explosion of the fuel, the gas does mechanical work on the piston. The expelled gasses expel less heat than the heat generated by the burning of the fuel.

A steam engine is almost exactly the same thing as a wind turbine. The steam is heated so it can obtain a high pressure and do work by driving a turbine. The expelled steam from the turbine is at a lower temperature than what was fed into it.


If the air that moves the wind turbine actually got hotter, you would be breaking the first law of thermodynamics by creating more energy than was put into the system. Imagine it--feed air into a turbine, do work, and take the hotter air and use that energy to ... do more work, which will create even hotter air which will do even more work.... Wow, Heywood, you discovered an infinite source of energy!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes BryanS's post
12-10-2013, 04:34 PM
RE: Science lesson for today.
Bucky and Haywood should just get a room.

(oh wow...Gunna go hide now)


God is a concept by which we measure our pain -- John Lennon

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-10-2013, 01:16 AM
RE: Science lesson for today.
(12-10-2013 03:32 PM)BryanS Wrote:  If the air that moves the wind turbine actually got hotter, you would be breaking the first law of thermodynamics by creating more energy than was put into the system. Imagine it--feed air into a turbine, do work, and take the hotter air and use that energy to ... do more work, which will create even hotter air which will do even more work.... Wow, Heywood, you discovered an infinite source of energy!

A heat engine uses heat to do work. A wind turbine uses kinetic energy of the wind to create electricity. A wind turbine is not a heat engine because it uses kinetic energy instead of heat . The reason a turbine can output heat is because it converts some of the kinetic energy into heat. The kinetic energy of the wind is finite and therefore only so much electricity, heat, and sound can be produced. There is no infinite energy source as you suggest.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-10-2013, 04:05 AM
RE: Science lesson for today.
(11-10-2013 10:05 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Nice try Jebus-insult-bot-minus-eight-weasel.
YOU SAID "Oil (hydrocarbons) are a source of energy that continues as long as the sun burns."

That is a false statement.
Hydrocarbons burn (release energy), without any reference to a "burning" sun. Your statement is idiotic.
Many scientists are concerned about when humans will no longer be able to burn hydrocarbons. They NEVER reference the sun, in those discussions.
You have gone full retard, (or fuller retard, if that were even possible).

You have no concept of interpretive charity because you rely on its obverse to create these opportunities to score cheap points. You seek the cheap point presumably because you are incapable of making a substantive point.

I knew what HJ meant and likely so did you. Fossil fuels are ultimately derived from the Sun. There was no suggestion in anything that HJ posted that suggests he believes that the combustion of fossil fuels depends on the Sun. You are the idiot making these idiotic statements. If you've ever complained that you are surrounded by idiocy or that idiocy follows you then you need only take a good look at yourself to determine why that is the case. You manufacture the idiocy so you can then rail against it and thereby reassure yourself that you are clever. You are a buffoon.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chippy's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: