| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"Donald G. Shead" |
| Date: |
21 Jun 2004 06:33:29 AM |
| Object: |
Converting material matter into energy |
For the time being, forget E = mc^2:
Almost anything will burn if you get it hot enough; but asside from
fission, fusion, and water power, most of the energy we use these days
comes from easily combustible matter such as wood, coal, or petroleum
products. Through the years we've learned to safely control and direct
this combustion with external combustion steam engines and internal
combution gas; diesel, jet and rocket engines.
Our dependence on petroleum products has increased over the years, and
our realization that the supply is limited has increased our efforts
to find similary safe and inexpensive materials from which to extract
energy.
If it's any help; the process of converting material matter into
energy goes something like this: First comes the conversion to the
molecular motion of heat, which creates expansion, and thrust; which
is used directly in jet and rocket engines or converted to molar
linear, or rotary motion through various levers and cranking
mechanisims.
The gathering and storing of solar energy must be approached carefully
and regulated so as not to upset our environment and nature's balance;
where the solar energy received each day is given off each night: But
maybe a safe compromise can be arranged.
.
|
|
| User: "Michael Varney" |
|
| Title: Re: Converting material matter into energy |
21 Jun 2004 02:52:57 PM |
|
|
"Donald G. Shead" <dcshead@charter.net> wrote in message
news:48402bae.0406210333.4b22afa7@posting.google.com...
For the time being, forget E = mc^2:
No way in hell! Hurry up and die SHead.
.
|
|
|
| User: "tj Frazir" |
|
| Title: Re: Converting material matter into energy |
21 Jun 2004 08:32:44 PM |
|
|
Sheed will live to be 106 varney ...
he has 30 years BUT Not varney ,,varney has 17 years left.
Vaney has a hart skip he ignores and eats junk too much . That thud
dump sound you hear is not gas varney ,,I saw the bag under the eye and
the pailness and the neal that protected your left side.
Have a good bloodhound confirm it .
varney is 27 . 17,,
44 if yer luckey but longer if yer smart
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sam Wormley" |
|
| Title: Re: Converting material matter into energy |
21 Jun 2004 07:34:46 AM |
|
|
"Donald G. Shead" wrote:
For the time being, forget E = mc^2:
Almost anything will burn if you get it hot enough....
E = mc^2 precisely accounts for the change in mass in chemical
combustion, Shead! You seem to think that physics is wrong, when
it's you that is wrong.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Donald G. Shead" |
|
| Title: Re: Converting material matter into energy |
23 Jun 2004 01:08:04 PM |
|
|
Sam Wormley <swormley1@mchsi.com> wrote in message news:<40D6D5E3.72F5449D@mchsi.com>...
"Donald G. Shead" wrote:
For the time being, forget E = mc^2:
Almost anything will burn if you get it hot enough....
E = mc^2 precisely accounts for the change in mass in chemical
combustion, Shead! You seem to think that physics is wrong, when
it's you that is wrong.
Horseradish: Combustion is is only partially complete in any case:
Like I say forget E = mc^2, That's only for theoretically complete
combustion, and is a crock anyway.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sam Wormley" |
|
| Title: Re: Converting material matter into energy |
23 Jun 2004 01:13:51 PM |
|
|
"Donald G. Shead" wrote:
Sam Wormley <swormley1@mchsi.com> wrote in message news:<40D6D5E3.72F5449D@mchsi.com>...
"Donald G. Shead" wrote:
For the time being, forget E = mc^2:
Almost anything will burn if you get it hot enough....
E = mc^2 precisely accounts for the change in mass in chemical
combustion, Shead! You seem to think that physics is wrong, when
it's you that is wrong.
Horseradish: Combustion is is only partially complete in any case:
Like I say forget E = mc^2, That's only for theoretically complete
combustion, and is a crock anyway.
The E = mc^2 precisely accounts for the change in mass in chemical
combustion, Shead! As you point out engines are far from complete
combustion. You seem to think that physics is wrong, when it's you
that is wrong.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Varney" |
|
| Title: Re: Converting material matter into energy |
23 Jun 2004 04:03:42 PM |
|
|
"Sam Wormley" <swormley1@mchsi.com> wrote in message
news:40D9C85E.6E428CFC@mchsi.com...
"Donald G. Shead" wrote:
Sam Wormley <swormley1@mchsi.com> wrote in message
news:<40D6D5E3.72F5449D@mchsi.com>...
"Donald G. Shead" wrote:
For the time being, forget E = mc^2:
Almost anything will burn if you get it hot enough....
E = mc^2 precisely accounts for the change in mass in chemical
combustion, Shead! You seem to think that physics is wrong, when
it's you that is wrong.
Horseradish: Combustion is is only partially complete in any case:
Like I say forget E = mc^2, That's only for theoretically complete
combustion, and is a crock anyway.
The E = mc^2 precisely accounts for the change in mass in chemical
combustion, Shead! As you point out engines are far from complete
combustion. You seem to think that physics is wrong, when it's you
that is wrong.
What is even more wrong is that his parents were allowed to breed.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "MorituriMax" |
|
| Title: Re: Converting material matter into energy |
23 Jun 2004 11:45:47 PM |
|
|
Donald G. Shead wrote:
Like I say forget E = mc^2, That's only for theoretically complete
combustion, and is a crock anyway.
I'm sure the people at Hiroshima and Nagasaki will be relieved that it's a
crock.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "MorituriMax" |
|
| Title: Re: Converting material matter into energy |
21 Jun 2004 08:38:13 AM |
|
|
Sam Wormley wrote:
"Donald G. Shead" wrote:
For the time being, forget E = mc^2:
Almost anything will burn if you get it hot enough....
E = mc^2 precisely accounts for the change in mass in chemical
combustion, Shead! You seem to think that physics is wrong, when
it's you that is wrong.
I'm still trying to figure out from his wording whether he thinks we are
currently able to use fusion power.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Donald G. Shead" |
|
| Title: Re: Converting material matter into energy |
21 Jun 2004 02:17:51 PM |
|
|
"MorituriMax" <newage@sendarico.net> wrote in message news:<9xBBc.16895$4g1.13894@fe2.texas.rr.com>...
Sam Wormley wrote:
"Donald G. Shead" wrote:
For the time being, forget E = mc^2:
Almost anything will burn if you get it hot enough....
E = mc^2 precisely accounts for the change in mass in chemical
combustion, Shead! You seem to think that physics is wrong, when
it's you that is wrong.
I'm still trying to figure out from his wording whether he thinks we are
currently able to use fusion power.
What does it matter what I think Maxie?
So far fusion energy's practical use remains pi inthe sky: There isn't
any good container for it; yet
At the present time energy from petroleum is mostly what turns the
wheels of progress; even generates "juice" to light up our bulbs and
our TVs.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "The Ghost In The Machine" |
|
| Title: Re: Converting material matter into energy |
23 Jun 2004 07:00:12 AM |
|
|
In sci.physics, MorituriMax
<newage@sendarico.net>
wrote
on Mon, 21 Jun 2004 13:38:13 GMT
<9xBBc.16895$4g1.13894@fe2.texas.rr.com>:
Sam Wormley wrote:
"Donald G. Shead" wrote:
For the time being, forget E = mc^2:
Almost anything will burn if you get it hot enough....
E = mc^2 precisely accounts for the change in mass in chemical
combustion, Shead! You seem to think that physics is wrong, when
it's you that is wrong.
I'm still trying to figure out from his wording whether he thinks we are
currently able to use fusion power.
Pedant Point:
Using fusion power isn't the problem. Now generating it, on
the other hand... :-)
--
#191,
It's still legal to go .sigless.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "tj Frazir" |
|
| Title: Re: Converting material matter into energy |
21 Jun 2004 08:20:22 PM |
|
|
true sam very true .
So a girl on a bike is converting energy into rotational energy .
She burns 700 cals an hour and there is 30,000 cals in a gallon of gas
BUT she cant use liquid oxygen .
She gets 1700 mpg ( im gessing the math )
and if she used liquid oxygen she would have 10 times the HP.
10 hp at 2000 mpg but she cant recycle her heat by using the steam
and injecting liqud oxygen into her waist But if she could would double
her mpg 10 hp at 4000 mpg.
liquid piston engines have much longer legs than the girl and CAN use
liquid oxygen AND recycle the heat waist.
138 hp at 516 mpg.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "The Ghost In The Machine" |
|
| Title: Re: Converting material matter into energy |
21 Jun 2004 11:00:08 AM |
|
|
In sci.physics, Donald G. Shead
<dcshead@charter.net>
wrote
on 21 Jun 2004 04:33:29 -0700
<48402bae.0406210333.4b22afa7@posting.google.com>:
For the time being, forget E = mc^2:
Forgetting such an important equation is unwise, although there
are more intricate forms of the same concept available such
as E^2 = m^2c^4 + p^2c^2, which may be more interesting and useful.
But I digress.
Almost anything will burn if you get it hot enough;
Chemical combustion.
but asside from
fission, fusion, and water power, most of the energy we use these days
comes from easily combustible matter such as wood, coal, or petroleum
products.
Which is, if one takes it to the logical source,
fusion power. A slightly weird way of looking at it,
but where does wood get its energy? From carbon bonds. [*]
What assembled those carbon bonds? Photosynthesis.
Where is the light coming from? A *very* large nuclear
reactor pouring forth 3.94 * 10^26W exactly 1 AU away.
Ergo, apart from some issues regarding geothermal,
tidal, and fission power, all power derives from the
Sun, ultimately. Even those can be derived from stellar
power -- the first two are because of gravitational issues
(which are there because the Sun had an accretion disk,
which formed into the planets), the last is from some
other sun that exploded long ago, forming uranium, among
many other heavy nuclei.
Through the years we've learned to safely control and direct
this combustion with external combustion steam engines and internal
combution gas; diesel, jet and rocket engines.
Our dependence on petroleum products has increased over the years, and
our realization that the supply is limited has increased our efforts
to find similary safe and inexpensive materials from which to extract
energy.
If it's any help; the process of converting material matter into
energy goes something like this: First comes the conversion to the
molecular motion of heat, which creates expansion, and thrust; which
is used directly in jet and rocket engines or converted to molar
linear, or rotary motion through various levers and cranking
mechanisims.
The gathering and storing of solar energy must be approached carefully
and regulated so as not to upset our environment and nature's balance;
where the solar energy received each day is given off each night: But
maybe a safe compromise can be arranged.
And of course what form is this "solar energy" going to take?
[*] this is a bit of an oversimplification, admittedly.
--
#191,
It's still legal to go .sigless.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Donald G. Shead" |
|
| Title: Re: Converting material matter into energy |
24 Jun 2004 06:43:48 AM |
|
|
The Ghost In The Machine <ewill@aurigae.athghost7038suus.net> wrote in message news:<v16jq1-0o1.ln1@lexi2.athghost7038suus.net>...
Cut<
Which is, if one takes it to the logical source,
fusion power. A slightly weird way of looking at it,
but where does wood get its energy? From carbon bonds. [*]
What assembled those carbon bonds? Photosynthesis.
Where is the light coming from? A *very* large nuclear
reactor pouring forth 3.94 * 10^26W exactly 1 AU away.
Ergo, apart from some issues regarding geothermal,
tidal, and fission power, all power derives from the
Sun, ultimately. Even those can be derived from stellar
power -- the first two are because of gravitational issues
(which are there because the Sun had an accretion disk,
The Sun's more than an accretion disk; it's a 3d mass. Gouls may not
be able to relate to three dimensions I suppose.
which formed into the planets), the last is from some
other sun that exploded long ago, forming uranium, among
many other heavy nuclei.
Cut<
And of course what form is this "solar energy" going to take?
Heat a'course; along with other electromagnetic radiation: By the way
did I tell you that electromagnet radiation is matter in it's rarest
form?
Essentially that's what George Lewis leSage's 'ultimate particles'
are; that cause gravitation.
[*] this is a bit of an oversimplification, admittedly.
Simple minds - especially of gouls - tend to oversimplify(;^)
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Ghost In The Machine" |
|
| Title: Re: Converting material matter into energy |
24 Jun 2004 11:00:07 AM |
|
|
In sci.math, Donald G. Shead
<dcshead@charter.net>
wrote
on 24 Jun 2004 04:43:48 -0700
<48402bae.0406240343.6d791b00@posting.google.com>:
The Ghost In The Machine <ewill@aurigae.athghost7038suus.net> wrote in message news:<v16jq1-0o1.ln1@lexi2.athghost7038suus.net>...
Cut<
Which is, if one takes it to the logical source,
fusion power. A slightly weird way of looking at it,
but where does wood get its energy? From carbon bonds. [*]
What assembled those carbon bonds? Photosynthesis.
Where is the light coming from? A *very* large nuclear
reactor pouring forth 3.94 * 10^26W exactly 1 AU away.
Ergo, apart from some issues regarding geothermal,
tidal, and fission power, all power derives from the
Sun, ultimately. Even those can be derived from stellar
power -- the first two are because of gravitational issues
(which are there because the Sun had an accretion disk,
The Sun's more than an accretion disk; it's a 3d mass. Gouls may not
be able to relate to three dimensions I suppose.
Ha ha ha.
I'd have to look but any spinning ellipsoidal gaseous/rocky cloud
will probably flatten out. Guess what formed the Earth.
which formed into the planets), the last is from some
other sun that exploded long ago, forming uranium, among
many other heavy nuclei.
Cut<
And of course what form is this "solar energy" going to take?
Heat a'course; along with other electromagnetic radiation: By the way
did I tell you that electromagnet radiation is matter in it's rarest
form?
And how does one store heat? I was thinking more along
the lines of pine woods and other such photosynthetic
material; it turns out coal is from ancient peat, and oil
is from algae.
Essentially that's what George Lewis leSage's 'ultimate particles'
are; that cause gravitation.
leSage's mechanisms have far too many problems to be taken seriously.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LeSage_(gravity)
[*] this is a bit of an oversimplification, admittedly.
Simple minds - especially of gouls - tend to oversimplify(;^)
--
#191,
It's still legal to go .sigless.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
