"Gilligan" wrote in message . ..
|
| "Paladin" noneofyourbusiness.www wrote in message
| ...
|
|
| 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.
|
|
| Your grasp of things scientific is outstanding. Blood will not boil in space
| because the blood vessels keep it under pressure.
|
| http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/as...rs/970603.html
|
| Are you a NASA scientist?
|
|

I'm with JPL. NASA is for second-rate minds.

Paladin



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

Can't Help It Paladin,

If you're so Damn Smart, why are you rambling on about language and
boiling under the heading of: "USELESS PROPELLER!" That's stupid!




http://community.webtv.net/tassail/ThomPage

"Thom Stewart" wrote in message ...
| Can't Help It Paladin,
|
| If you're so Damn Smart, why are you rambling on about language and
| boiling under the heading of: "USELESS PROPELLER!" That's stupid!


You and most others here demonstrate shallowness of thinking. What's stupid
is to expect to even attempt to discuss the utility or uselessness of propellers
if folks are speaking different languages. And, mark my word, unless folks
can agree on word definitions they are speaking different languages.

1) The discussion media here is the written word.
2) Written words have specific and agreed upon meanings.
3) Unless those meanings are understood clearly by all concerned discussion is
confusing and meaningless.
4) I'm "rambling on about language and boiling" because the entire thread went the
wrong direction because of confusion about the meaning of words.
5) The only way to get things back on track is to agree on commonly accepted
definitions of the word "boil" in this case.
6) The only way to keep things on track in the future is by continually pointing
out that people must use words as defined and NOT as they, in their
imagination, think words are defined.
7) If a person as intelligent, well-versed, educated, and logical as Gilligan
is confused about the meaning of certain words just how lacking is the
understanding of the average subscriber here who lacks education beyond the
8th grade level.
8) Why should those of with Masters and Doctorates lower ourselves
the level of 8th graders. Isn't it more productive to attempt to raise
8th grader understanding to at least a high school graduate level?

If you'll recall Gilligan's original reply it stated something to the effect
that cavitation happens because the prop boils the water. I say any prop
that boils water is useless as a prop but handy as a water heater for
showers and such. Therefore such a prop is useless for moving a yacht
and, as such, discussing it under the heading of "Useless propeller" is
entirely correct.

Paladin

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

"Thom Stewart" wrote
| Can't Help It Paladin,
|
| If you're so Damn Smart, why are you rambling on about language and
| boiling under the heading of: "USELESS PROPELLER!" That's stupid!


Nail... Hammer...


Paladin wrote:
You and most others here demonstrate shallowness of thinking. What's stupid
is to expect to even attempt to discuss the utility or uselessness of propellers
if folks are speaking different languages. And, mark my word, unless folks
can agree on word definitions they are speaking different languages.

1) The discussion media here is the written word.
2) Written words have specific and agreed upon meanings.
3) Unless those meanings are understood clearly by all concerned discussion is
confusing and meaningless.
4) I'm "rambling on about language and boiling" because the entire thread went the
wrong direction because of confusion about the meaning of words.
5) The only way to get things back on track is to agree on commonly accepted
definitions of the word "boil" in this case.

Among some people, it is "commonly accepted" that the world
is flat. Does that make it so?

Your attempt to describe cavitation using a dictionary is
just plain dumb.

Here is a dictionary that defines "boil" perfectly, at least
with regard to you personally:
http://www.medterms.com/script/main/...rticlekey=2498



If you'll recall Gilligan's original reply it stated something to the effect
that cavitation happens because the prop boils the water.

"Something to the effect"??
This is the internet. Why not quote his post exactly, unless
you are either too stupid to figure out how, or have a
spurious agenda to conceal his actual statement.



... I say any prop
that boils water is useless as a prop

If that were all it did, then you'd be totally correct.
However, under the specific circumstances, any propellor
will boil water.

When people who live in the mountains make their tea and/or
coffee, do they boil their water or does the lower
atmospheric pressure mean that they are "vaporizing" it?

A stove is a device for transferring energy from an outside
source into the food. A propellor is a device for
transferring energy from the boat's engine into the water.
Two devices for transferring energy, surely they can both be
said to "boil" things.

Fresh Breezes- Doug King

"DSK" wrote in message .. .
| "Thom Stewart" wrote
| | Can't Help It Paladin,
| |
| | If you're so Damn Smart, why are you rambling on about language and
| | boiling under the heading of: "USELESS PROPELLER!" That's stupid!
|
|
| Nail... Hammer...
|
|
| Paladin wrote:
| You and most others here demonstrate shallowness of thinking. What's stupid
| is to expect to even attempt to discuss the utility or uselessness of propellers
| if folks are speaking different languages. And, mark my word, unless folks
| can agree on word definitions they are speaking different languages.
|
| 1) The discussion media here is the written word.
| 2) Written words have specific and agreed upon meanings.
| 3) Unless those meanings are understood clearly by all concerned discussion is
| confusing and meaningless.
| 4) I'm "rambling on about language and boiling" because the entire thread went the
| wrong direction because of confusion about the meaning of words.
| 5) The only way to get things back on track is to agree on commonly accepted
| definitions of the word "boil" in this case.
|
| Among some people, it is "commonly accepted" that the world
| is flat. Does that make it so?

Too stupid an analogy to merit comment...

|
| Your attempt to describe cavitation using a dictionary is
| just plain dumb.

Your thinking that's what I'm doing is just plain dumber...

One boils water by adding heat.

One doesn't boil water by reducing pressure. The verb
"to boil" simply does not apply to the vaporization of
water by reducing pressure. It follows that any process
that vaporizes water by heating it can correctly be said
to be boiling the water. Any process that vaporizes water
by lowering pressure cannot be said to be boiling water
by definition. It can only be said that lowering pressure
vaporizes water.

|
| Here is a dictionary that defines "boil" perfectly, at least
| with regard to you personally:
| http://www.medterms.com/script/main/...rticlekey=2498

Duh? Too dumb to differentiate between a noun and a verb?
You must be one of those 8th grade education individuals I
mentioned.

|
|
|
| If you'll recall Gilligan's original reply it stated something to the effect
| that cavitation happens because the prop boils the water.
|
| "Something to the effect"??
| This is the internet. Why not quote his post exactly, unless
| you are either too stupid to figure out how, or have a
| spurious agenda to conceal his actual statement.

Are you too stupid to follow the thread back and read it yourself?
Why should I do your research for you?

|
|
|
| ... I say any prop
| that boils water is useless as a prop
|
| If that were all it did, then you'd be totally correct.
| However, under the specific circumstances, any propellor
| will boil water.

The specific circumstances would have to be enough electricity
running through the prop to heat it up like the element in an
electric water heater.

|
| When people who live in the mountains make their tea and/or
| coffee, do they boil their water or does the lower
| atmospheric pressure mean that they are "vaporizing" it?

They are adding heat only so they are boiling it. The lower
atmospheric pressure only means they are able to boil water
usling fewer BTUs because the boiling point temp is lowered.

|
| A stove is a device for transferring energy from an outside
| source into the food. A propellor is a device for
| transferring energy from the boat's engine into the water.
| Two devices for transferring energy, surely they can both be
| said to "boil" things.


They cannot! The definition of the verb "to boil" precludes it.

Paladin

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

| ... I say any prop
| that boils water is useless as a prop
|
| If that were all it did, then you'd be totally correct.
| However, under the specific circumstances, any propellor
| will boil water.

Paladin wrote:
The specific circumstances would have to be enough electricity
running through the prop to heat it up like the element in an
electric water heater.


Is electricity the only thing in the universe which will
produce heat?


|
| When people who live in the mountains make their tea and/or
| coffee, do they boil their water or does the lower
| atmospheric pressure mean that they are "vaporizing" it?


Paladin wrote:
They are adding heat only so they are boiling it.

What about the energy expended in carrying it up the
mountainside?


.... The lower
atmospheric pressure only means they are able to boil water
usling fewer BTUs because the boiling point temp is lowered.


Hmm... and heat is energy... so therefor, if a propellor
adds energy to the water, and by doing so lowers the
pressure enough that the boiling point temp is lowered....

A DUCK!!






They cannot! The definition of the verb "to boil" precludes it.


Read it again! You're missing something, just like you
missed something in the two earlier examples I gave.

BTW I can think of a simple test to prove you are or are not
the Crapton®. Explain, in your own words, the term 'hull speed.'

DSK

"DSK" wrote in message .. .
| | ... I say any prop
| | that boils water is useless as a prop
| |
| | If that were all it did, then you'd be totally correct.
| | However, under the specific circumstances, any propellor
| | will boil water.
|
| Paladin wrote:
| The specific circumstances would have to be enough electricity
| running through the prop to heat it up like the element in an
| electric water heater.
|
|
| Is electricity the only thing in the universe which will
| produce heat?

No but it's the only thing on earth I know of that has the ability to cause a propeller attached
to a yacht to boil water.

|
| |
| | When people who live in the mountains make their tea and/or
| | coffee, do they boil their water or does the lower
| | atmospheric pressure mean that they are "vaporizing" it?
|
|
| Paladin wrote:
| They are adding heat only so they are boiling it.
|
| What about the energy expended in carrying it up the
| mountainside?

What if it came down the mountain stream? Your question
and mine are equally nonsensical as neither are part of
the equation.

|
|
| .... The lower
| atmospheric pressure only means they are able to boil water
| usling fewer BTUs because the boiling point temp is lowered.
|
|
| Hmm... and heat is energy... so therefor, if a propellor
| adds energy to the water, and by doing so lowers the
| pressure enough that the boiling point temp is lowered....

Boiling temp. There's that boil word again. You're still guilty
of using a word that means to add heat. You can combine it
with another word but that doesn't change the meaning of
the word boil. As I argued with Gilligan, and he finally concurred,
a propeller does not add enough heat to the water to boil it. It
only lowers pressure in some cases enough to vaporize water and
cause cavitation, so to say a propeller boils water is just plain wrong
according to the definition of the verb "to boil".

|
| They cannot! The definition of the verb "to boil" precludes it.
|
|
| Read it again! You're missing something, just like you
| missed something in the two earlier examples I gave.
|
| BTW I can think of a simple test to prove you are or are not
| the Crapton®. Explain, in your own words, the term 'hull speed.'

For a displacement boat, a heavy deep-keel boat, the maximum speed a given hull can attain from wind power is called "hull speed"
and is largely dependent on the waterline length of the boat. Hull speed is expressed as 1.34 X the square root of LWL, or length of
waterline. If a cruising sailboat has a waterline length of 36 feet, she should be able to sail 1.34 x 6, or approximately eight
knots.
http://www.sailnet.com/collections/a...leid=colgat006

Paladin


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