"Martin Baxter" wrote in message ...
| Paladin wrote:
|
| Go to a dictionary and look up the definition of boil.
| You will note that it mentions application of heat.
|
| OK:
|
| From my Funk and Wagnalls:
|
| boil v.i. 1. To be agitated by escaping gaseous bubbles, usually from
| the effect of heat: said of liquids.

Looks to me as it this definition also speaks to the application of heat.

|
| Clearly the application of heat is not necessary.

Not according to the definition above -- note the word 'usually.'
This means there might be a rare case or two where 'to boil' does
not result from application of heat such as blood boiling when
one is mad but that case is only a euphemism.

When one is talking in the realm of physics, as is the case
of a cavitating propeller, boil has a definite meaning - that
of adding heat. But, since a prop subtracts pressure to a
much greater extent that it adds heat, vaporization occurs
because of low pressure vaporization and not high temperature
boiling.

| I'm sure you have heard of people involved in high altitude research
| talking of the possibility of having ones blood boil if exposed to near
| vacuum. You appear to be engaging in an act of sophistry.

And, they are incorrectly using the verb boil. If exposed to a
vacuum the human body will freeze and not boil or explode as
shown in some silly movies . And, if it should happen to out gas,
it would be due to a very temporary pressure differential and
will have little to do with temps.

There's nothing deceptive about a reasoned use of language.

Paladin

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com