Rod McInnis wrote:
"basskisser" wrote in message
om...


That has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that that nitrogen
doesn't expand at the same rate as oxygen for any given temperature
change. Do you deny this?


Yes. I deny this.

Mr. Boyle denies this. Mr. Charles denies this. Mr. Gay and Mr. Lussac
deny this. They wrote laws of physics about it. Every chemistry, physics and
thermodynamics class uses these laws. Here, don't take my word for it, let's
take a look at some of the information available from the net.

As an example:

Department of Chemistry
California State University, Sacramento
http://kekule.chem.csus.edu/gaslaws

You might as well give up now. No matter how much proof you provide,
basskisser will not believe it and will find some way to weasel out,
probably by saying he answered you in some other post without being able to
show where.

The thing I find amazing is that he claims to be a structural engineer, or
something like that. A professional engineer even. He is a sad testament
to whatever college he graduated from. This is basic high school physics
that is also reempasized in first year college engineering physics. For
him to be so blatently wrong in something that is so provable that he's
wrong and still not be able to admit it is just plain sad.

Steve

On 30 Oct 2003 04:21:49 -0800, (basskisser) wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message ...
On 29 Oct 2003 04:27:31 -0800, (basskisser) wrote:

Please refute my statements, or shut up. Quit stalking me.

lol. Stalking you? I didn't even respond to you. You're so stupid you
can't even follow a thread.

Idiot. If you aren't stalking me, why did you bother to refer to me in
a response that had NOTHING to do with the topic?

You're inability to follow a thread and know what's on topic vs. off
topic is only surpassed by your inability to understand the most basic
of engineering concepts.

Steve

"Del Cecchi" wrote in message
...

"Mark Browne" wrote in message
news:qv8ob.62616$Tr4.167581@attbi_s03...

snip

That has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that that nitrogen
doesn't expand at the same rate as oxygen for any given temperature
change. Do you deny this?

snip
Now you have my curiosity!

I understand all gases to expand about 1/270 per degree C at room
temperature.

Please explain how now nitrogen and oxygen differ?

Mark Browne

Nitrogen has an atomic weight of 14 and oxygen is 16? I can live on pure
oxygen, but pure nitrogen will kill me?

By the way, is is more like 1/300 at room temperature unless you live in a
very cold room.... :-)

PV=nRT or PV=NkT

del cecchi

Thanks.

Mark Browne

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message ...
On 30 Oct 2003 04:21:49 -0800, (basskisser) wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message ...
On 29 Oct 2003 04:27:31 -0800, (basskisser) wrote:

Please refute my statements, or shut up. Quit stalking me.

lol. Stalking you? I didn't even respond to you. You're so stupid you
can't even follow a thread.

Idiot. If you aren't stalking me, why did you bother to refer to me in
a response that had NOTHING to do with the topic?

You're inability to follow a thread and know what's on topic vs. off
topic is only surpassed by your inability to understand the most basic
of engineering concepts.

Steve

Again, do you have something of substance to interject into the
thread, or just stalking? This thread is about trailer tires
overheating. Now, what have you posted in this thread, relating to the
subject? Hell, I'll answer for you. NOTHING.

Steven Shelikoff wrote in message ...
Rod McInnis wrote:
"basskisser" wrote in message
om...


That has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that that nitrogen
doesn't expand at the same rate as oxygen for any given temperature
change. Do you deny this?


Yes. I deny this.

Mr. Boyle denies this. Mr. Charles denies this. Mr. Gay and Mr. Lussac
deny this. They wrote laws of physics about it. Every chemistry, physics and
thermodynamics class uses these laws. Here, don't take my word for it, let's
take a look at some of the information available from the net.

As an example:

Department of Chemistry
California State University, Sacramento
http://kekule.chem.csus.edu/gaslaws

You might as well give up now. No matter how much proof you provide,
basskisser will not believe it and will find some way to weasel out,
probably by saying he answered you in some other post without being able to
show where.

The thing I find amazing is that he claims to be a structural engineer, or
something like that. A professional engineer even. He is a sad testament
to whatever college he graduated from. This is basic high school physics
that is also reempasized in first year college engineering physics. For
him to be so blatently wrong in something that is so provable that he's
wrong and still not be able to admit it is just plain sad.

Steve


Boyles' law states that for a GIVEN GAS, the rate of expansion versus
temperature is inversely proportional. FOR A GIVEN GAS. It does not
state, however, that one gas expands as temp. increases, at the same
rate as another gas.

Rick wrote in message link.net...
Mark Browne wrote:


Now you have my curiosity!

I understand all gases to expand about 1/270 per degree C at room
temperature.

Please explain how now nitrogen and oxygen differ?

This should be a good one ... but don't hold your breath waiting for a
response. I am just amazed that he doesn't just look up the gas laws and
see for himself. Bizarre.

Bass posted this and I haven't heard from him since I answered him, so
if you attempt to explain it to him maybe he will finally just go away.

You apparently don't know squat about the Laws of Gases.
Now, Im again telling you that the ONLY reason is that
the pressure to temperature ratio is more linear.
Do you refute that? If so, do tell why. Now, I suspect that
you don't UNDERSTAND my answer, and that is the reason that
you don't think it's correct. So, allow me to explain.
The nitrogen doesn't expand as much as air, for a given
temperature change.

The level of scientific illiteracy in this country is frightening when
you see it defended so hotly by those with the smallest armory.

Rick

Yes, I agree, the level of scientific illiteracy is frightening. Here
you go, and Shelikoff, can you read this and comment??

There are several properties of gasses that can easily be demonstrated
using liquid nitrogen. These properties include phase changes (gas to
liquid, liquid to gas, and visa versa), and the temperature dependence
of volume. If you have a volunteer blow up a clear balloon, you can
show how a gas (oxygen) can go from gas to liquid. Oxygen has a
boiling point of -180o C, so when the balloon containing oxygen from
someone's breath is submerged in the liquid nitrogen the oxygen is
cooled to below its boiling point and it begins to condense. There is
usually some water vapor present in this balloon also- under good
conditions, the water vapor will condense to liquid and then freeze,
thus going through two phase changes. You can also discuss the
kinetics involved in the balloons expanding when they are removed from
the liquid nitrogen and begin to return to room temperature. Notice
how the lighter gasses do not constrict as much since the boiling
points of hydrogen and helium are both lower than that of nitrogen.
You may also notice though that they will also expand a bit faster
than the heavier gasses. The differences in the expansion rate becomes
even more obvious if argon is available. Argon has a very small
difference between the freezing point and boiling point (4o C) thus an
argon filled balloon will expand very rapidly. Compare this to a
breath filled balloon or a balloon filled with a gas such as ethane
(95o C difference between freezing and boiling points).

"basskisser" wrote in message
om...
Rick wrote in message
link.net...
Mark Browne wrote:


Now you have my curiosity!

I understand all gases to expand about 1/270 per degree C at room
temperature.

Please explain how now nitrogen and oxygen differ?

This should be a good one ... but don't hold your breath waiting for a
response. I am just amazed that he doesn't just look up the gas laws and
see for himself. Bizarre.

Bass posted this and I haven't heard from him since I answered him, so
if you attempt to explain it to him maybe he will finally just go away.

You apparently don't know squat about the Laws of Gases.
Now, Im again telling you that the ONLY reason is that
the pressure to temperature ratio is more linear.
Do you refute that? If so, do tell why. Now, I suspect that
you don't UNDERSTAND my answer, and that is the reason that
you don't think it's correct. So, allow me to explain.
The nitrogen doesn't expand as much as air, for a given
temperature change.

The level of scientific illiteracy in this country is frightening when
you see it defended so hotly by those with the smallest armory.

Rick

Yes, I agree, the level of scientific illiteracy is frightening. Here
you go, and Shelikoff, can you read this and comment??

There are several properties of gasses that can easily be demonstrated
using liquid nitrogen. These properties include phase changes (gas to
liquid, liquid to gas, and visa versa), and the temperature dependence
of volume. If you have a volunteer blow up a clear balloon, you can
show how a gas (oxygen) can go from gas to liquid. Oxygen has a
boiling point of -180o C, so when the balloon containing oxygen from
someone's breath is submerged in the liquid nitrogen the oxygen is
cooled to below its boiling point and it begins to condense. There is
usually some water vapor present in this balloon also- under good
conditions, the water vapor will condense to liquid and then freeze,
thus going through two phase changes. You can also discuss the
kinetics involved in the balloons expanding when they are removed from
the liquid nitrogen and begin to return to room temperature. Notice
how the lighter gasses do not constrict as much since the boiling
points of hydrogen and helium are both lower than that of nitrogen.
You may also notice though that they will also expand a bit faster
than the heavier gasses. The differences in the expansion rate becomes
even more obvious if argon is available. Argon has a very small
difference between the freezing point and boiling point (4o C) thus an
argon filled balloon will expand very rapidly. Compare this to a
breath filled balloon or a balloon filled with a gas such as ethane
(95o C difference between freezing and boiling points).

Rick and I just worked this out for water. In a race car tire that reaches
225 F to 250 F during normal operation, there *is* a phase change in water,
from liquid to vapor. The newly introduced water vapor can add a significant
component to the partial pressure composition of the tire. The only thing
left here is to determine how much liquid water might be found inside a tire
in different settings.

Now in the temperature range of interest, operating tire temperatures, are
any of the materials you mention (Nitrogen, Argon, Oxygen) undergoing any
phase changes?
If not, do they show any appreciable deviation from the ideal gas properties
in the temperature range of interest?

If not, suck it up and move on.

Mark Browne
P. S. You would not be doing a Jax here, would you? That is, trying to
define the problem in such a narrow way as to give yourself a little wiggle
room. This is not necessarily a bad thing - some us miss toying with Jax!

"basskisser" wrote in message
om...
Steven Shelikoff wrote in message
...
Rod McInnis wrote:
"basskisser" wrote in message
om...


That has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that that nitrogen
doesn't expand at the same rate as oxygen for any given temperature
change. Do you deny this?


Yes. I deny this.

Mr. Boyle denies this. Mr. Charles denies this. Mr. Gay and Mr.
Lussac
deny this. They wrote laws of physics about it. Every chemistry,
physics and
thermodynamics class uses these laws. Here, don't take my word for it,
let's
take a look at some of the information available from the net.

As an example:

Department of Chemistry
California State University, Sacramento
http://kekule.chem.csus.edu/gaslaws

You might as well give up now. No matter how much proof you provide,
basskisser will not believe it and will find some way to weasel out,
probably by saying he answered you in some other post without being able
to
show where.

The thing I find amazing is that he claims to be a structural engineer,
or
something like that. A professional engineer even. He is a sad
testament
to whatever college he graduated from. This is basic high school
physics
that is also reempasized in first year college engineering physics. For
him to be so blatently wrong in something that is so provable that he's
wrong and still not be able to admit it is just plain sad.

Steve


Boyles' law states that for a GIVEN GAS, the rate of expansion versus
temperature is inversely proportional. FOR A GIVEN GAS. It does not
state, however, that one gas expands as temp. increases, at the same
rate as another gas.

Ok, since you are running your class here, which law *does* state that "one
gas expands as temperature increases, at the same rate as another gas."

Mark Browne

On 31 Oct 2003 04:46:29 -0800, (basskisser) wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message ...
On 30 Oct 2003 04:21:49 -0800, (basskisser) wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message ...
On 29 Oct 2003 04:27:31 -0800, (basskisser) wrote:

Please refute my statements, or shut up. Quit stalking me.

lol. Stalking you? I didn't even respond to you. You're so stupid you
can't even follow a thread.

Idiot. If you aren't stalking me, why did you bother to refer to me in
a response that had NOTHING to do with the topic?

You're inability to follow a thread and know what's on topic vs. off
topic is only surpassed by your inability to understand the most basic
of engineering concepts.

Again, do you have something of substance to interject into the
thread, or just stalking? This thread is about trailer tires
overheating. Now, what have you posted in this thread, relating to the
subject? Hell, I'll answer for you. NOTHING.

As usual, you're wrong again. I've contributed by pointing out that
you're full of crap when you say that nitrogen and oxygen don't expand
at the same rate for a given temperature change. And you're completely
full of crap when you say that the temperature vs. pressure curve for
air is somehow less linear than for nitrogen.

I know that these are such simple basic concepts (any high school
physics student would laugh at you if they read it) that I should not
have to correct you on such stupid statements. But you're just ****ed
that once again, you're displaying your intellectual ineptitude. And
this time there are several people witnessing it and having a good
chuckle at your expense.

So now what? Are you going to threaten me again for pointing out what a
moron you are?

Steve

On 31 Oct 2003 04:52:56 -0800, (basskisser) wrote:

Rick wrote in message link.net...
Mark Browne wrote:


Now you have my curiosity!

I understand all gases to expand about 1/270 per degree C at room
temperature.

Please explain how now nitrogen and oxygen differ?

This should be a good one ... but don't hold your breath waiting for a
response. I am just amazed that he doesn't just look up the gas laws and
see for himself. Bizarre.

Bass posted this and I haven't heard from him since I answered him, so
if you attempt to explain it to him maybe he will finally just go away.

You apparently don't know squat about the Laws of Gases.
Now, Im again telling you that the ONLY reason is that
the pressure to temperature ratio is more linear.
Do you refute that? If so, do tell why. Now, I suspect that
you don't UNDERSTAND my answer, and that is the reason that
you don't think it's correct. So, allow me to explain.
The nitrogen doesn't expand as much as air, for a given
temperature change.

The level of scientific illiteracy in this country is frightening when
you see it defended so hotly by those with the smallest armory.

Rick

Yes, I agree, the level of scientific illiteracy is frightening. Here
you go, and Shelikoff, can you read this and comment??

Sure.

There are several properties of gasses that can easily be demonstrated
using liquid nitrogen. These properties include phase changes (gas to

First problem is that you're using *liquid* nitrogen to demonstrate a
property of nitrogen gas. It's properties as a liquid and during the
phase change to gas is absolutely and completely irrevelant to it's
pressure/temperature/volume relationship in it's gasous state.

And since we're talking about air vs. nitrogen in a tire, they are both
gasses and not liquids. Even the water *vapor* in the air is a gas and
has the same pressure/temperature/volume relationship as nitrogen, as
long as the vapor doesn't condense. And if you are at all careful about
limiting the amount of water in your compressed air, it shouldn't
condense.

liquid, liquid to gas, and visa versa), and the temperature dependence
of volume. If you have a volunteer blow up a clear balloon, you can
show how a gas (oxygen) can go from gas to liquid. Oxygen has a
boiling point of -180o C, so when the balloon containing oxygen from
someone's breath is submerged in the liquid nitrogen the oxygen is
cooled to below its boiling point and it begins to condense. There is
usually some water vapor present in this balloon also- under good
conditions, the water vapor will condense to liquid and then freeze,
thus going through two phase changes. You can also discuss the
kinetics involved in the balloons expanding when they are removed from
the liquid nitrogen and begin to return to room temperature. Notice
how the lighter gasses do not constrict as much since the boiling
points of hydrogen and helium are both lower than that of nitrogen.
You may also notice though that they will also expand a bit faster
than the heavier gasses. The differences in the expansion rate becomes

No, you won't notice that hydrongen and helium will expand a bit faster
than the heavier gasses. Because they don't.

even more obvious if argon is available. Argon has a very small
difference between the freezing point and boiling point (4o C) thus an
argon filled balloon will expand very rapidly. Compare this to a

Neither will Argon. As long as you keep the temperature above it's
boiling point, it will expand just as fast as any other gas as you raise
the temperature further.

breath filled balloon or a balloon filled with a gas such as ethane
(95o C difference between freezing and boiling points).

You're understanding of physics is abysmal if you think that because
different substances have different PVT relationships during a phase
change means they will not follow the gas laws, which say they will have
the same PVT relationship as a gas.

The fact that you're trying to demonstrate that gasses do not follow the
gas laws (which is a necessity if you want to claim that a racing tire
filled with nitrogen has a more linear temperature pressure curve than
one filled with air) by using a phase change argument is specious at
best.

Steve