Todd Fatheree wrote:
"George E. Cawthon" wrote in message
...

Mortimer Schnerd, RN wrote:


But it can certainly be pressurized to hold much more gas than .5 cubic

feet.

Otherwise there's no way in hell it can hold more than it holds at one
atmosphere.


No it can't. How can you get more than .5 cubic
feet of air inside a cylinder that only has .5
cubic feet of volume? Please explain how you can
get more volume inside a cylinder than the volume
of the cylinder. Inquiring minds want to know?

And why are you fixated on assumptions about the
cylinder? It is just a cylinder. You don't know
the purpose or anything else about the cylinder.


There's no need to be intentionally obtuse just to try to prove a point.
The subject contains the phrase "gas cylinder". Now, maybe in your world,
that's any old cylindrical object that contains matter in a gaseous form,
but most humans interpret that to mean a (mostly) cylindrical object
designed to contain a gas at pressure. It's obvious from the freakin'
question that the gas is pressurized...otherwise the question would have
never come up.

todd



If you don't like the message, don't shoot the
messenger.

In article , "George E. Cawthon" wrote:
Doug Miller wrote:
In article ,
"George E. Cawthon" wrote:

wrote:


I said water goes gas to solid and solid to gas (sublimation)
with no liquid phase at very low presssure, which is true.

Not true, doesn't have to be very low pressure.


Certainly it *is* true. Or do you claim that water does *not* pass directly
between the solid and gaseous phases at very low pressures?

He stated that this occurs at very low pressures. That is true.

He did *not* state that it does *not* occur at normal pressures. You seem to
be under the impression that he did.


It happens all the time at atmospheric pressure.


Yes, thank you, we know that already. Who claimed that it didn't?


Like to argue for the sake of it, Doug?

Ummm, no, that would be *you* in this thread, I think...

Inclusion of the stipulation of "very low
pressure" in his statement implies that very low
pressures are needed. Otherwise why throw it in?

Dunno. Why ask me? Ask him. I'm just pointing out that he didn't make the
claim you're imputing to him.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

George E. Cawthon wrote:
No it can't. How can you get more than .5 cubic
feet of air inside a cylinder that only has .5
cubic feet of volume? Please explain how you can
get more volume inside a cylinder than the volume
of the cylinder. Inquiring minds want to know?


By hooking it up to a compressor. That is the usual way. You pump that .5cf
cylinder up to 3000 psi and later when you open the valve, you'll get 80 cf out
of it. Amazing.


And why are you fixated on assumptions about the
cylinder? It is just a cylinder. You don't know
the purpose or anything else about the cylinder.


I know it's not solid. I also know it's not supposed to hold a liquid, as the
OP already alluded to it holding 80 cf. You can compress the hell out of a
liquid but you won't appreciably decrease its volume so that the cylinder could
hold more. So we're talking about a gas. How am I wrong?



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN

VE

George E. Cawthon wrote:
Doug Miller wrote:
Do you really have a hard time understanding this concept? Or are you just
being pedantic? Inquiring minds want to know....


Possibly being pedantic, but more like trying to
indicate that sloppiness in writing results from
faulty thought processes or lack of information.
The point I was trying to make was a basic
understanding of states of matter would negate
that kind of question. The point was, and is,
that a gas occupies whatever space it is allowed
to occupy. And the volume it occupies, of itself,
tells nothing about the mass.


Ah, a purist. Also a horse's ass. And please don't shoot the messenger.




--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN

VE

I posted a link to the phase diagram a day or two ago. See
http://www.science.uwaterloo.ca/~cch...phasesdgm.html. At
about -80 C, solid CO2 is in equilibrium with the gas. You need a
temperature of -31 C to get a liquid, but then the equilibrium pressure is
5.1 atm. Above that temperature, liquid CO2 can exist at high pressure,
until conditions reach the critical point at 31.1 C and 78 atm. For higher
T, no surface will form regardless of the density; it is called a superfluid
state. Class over.

Steve

"Mortimer Schnerd, RN" wrote in message
om...
George E. Cawthon wrote:
No it can't. How can you get more than .5 cubic
feet of air inside a cylinder that only has .5
cubic feet of volume? Please explain how you can
get more volume inside a cylinder than the volume
of the cylinder. Inquiring minds want to know?


By hooking it up to a compressor. That is the usual way. You pump that
.5cf cylinder up to 3000 psi and later when you open the valve, you'll get
80 cf out of it. Amazing.


And why are you fixated on assumptions about the
cylinder? It is just a cylinder. You don't know
the purpose or anything else about the cylinder.


I know it's not solid. I also know it's not supposed to hold a liquid, as
the OP already alluded to it holding 80 cf. You can compress the hell out
of a liquid but you won't appreciably decrease its volume so that the
cylinder could hold more. So we're talking about a gas. How am I wrong?



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN

VE

George E. Cawthon wrote:
Doug Miller wrote:
In article , "George E. Cawthon" wrote:

wrote:


I said water goes gas to solid and solid to gas (sublimation)
with no liquid phase at very low presssure, which is true.

Not true, doesn't have to be very low pressure.


Certainly it *is* true. Or do you claim that water does *not* pass directly
between the solid and gaseous phases at very low pressures?

He stated that this occurs at very low pressures. That is true.

He did *not* state that it does *not* occur at normal pressures. You seem to
be under the impression that he did.


It happens all the time at atmospheric pressure.


Yes, thank you, we know that already. Who claimed that it didn't?


Like to argue for the sake of it, Doug?

Inclusion of the stipulation of "very low
pressure" in his statement implies that very low
pressures are needed. Otherwise why throw it in?

Note also the 'stipulation' of "without a liquid phase".

Sort of like CO2 at atmospheric pressure, eh? At very low
pressure water behaves somewhat like the way CO2 does at
atmospheric pressure. Of course that was always clear
from the context.

--

FF

Check this program out . . . . it is the finest conversion & problem solving
program ever . . . .

PROKON


http://members.sockets.net/~schwartz/

"Steve DeMars" wrote in message
news:ei9Qe.7699$Sj1.6180@okepread04...
Check this program out . . . . it is the finest conversion & problem
solving
program ever . . . .

PROKON


http://members.sockets.net/~schwartz/


Not quite as sophisticated, but free, is Convert

http://www.joshmadison.com/software/