Ram Jet and Global Warming - is the physics similar?

Has anyone looked at it yet?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I'm not sure if you have a ram jet there. You need a second tube inside the first tube... I think. The second tube should probably also be cold. Then you need to seal the fan to direct the flow into the tube, because I think that the sun is also using pressure.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I'm not trying to construct a ram jet that will power anything but just to see what the minimum is to create an increase in the air current moving out of one end of the tube due to the heating.
I would then say at the equatorial regions of these planets the atmosphere is gravitationally contained and heated by the Sun. And because of prior motion the energy absorbed makes the atmosphere move faster in the direction it is already moving.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Of course you are right that you need a complete simulation. I was just adapting you first experiment. If I was making it from scratch without adapting yours I would do this...


Ball for the Earth.
Tight Gauze with a large hole at the front, small hole at the back for ozone layer.
Large Chinese lantern type object for space (self constructed from sticks, and paper) With fan sized hole at one end, small hole at other end.
Fan with heater behind it for sun. Sealed with Chinese lantern.
Cold metal rod for magnetic outflow in the middle of ozone gauze hole.

Then you test to see how much hot air goes through the gauze, how much goes along the cold rod, and how much spreads around the Chinese lantern.

 

Is there any ozone on Jupiter? Is there an ozone hole? These atmospheric effects long precede any thinning of the ozone layer on Earth.

 

So what are you using as a Ramjet then? I thought this was about Ramjets? You need a hole for a Ramjet, and a central rod. Maybe your title is misleading? Anyway, without the ozone hole I see no other similar physics. The physics you are talking about is a greenhouse effect.

 

This is the simplistic design:
"The design I have in mind is a straight 300 mm diameter pipe 2 meters long.
This has an electrical heating coil attached to it, (wound around it). It is then insulated so that the coil heats just the pipe.
An electrical current is passed through the cable and the tube can heat up.

A fan positioned at one end of the tube blows air through the pipe. A wind flow meter is at the other end measuring the outflow.

As the temperature of the tube heats up the wind flow meter will measure the changes in throughput. Hopefully heat is radiated or conducted to the air moving through the tube."

And these are the questions I want you to answer:

Do you think the wind flow meter will record an increase or a decrease in the wind flow speed proportional (or some relationship) to the temperature of the tube walls?

Or do you think the heating of the moving air will have no effect on the air flow speed?

And it may not be qite the same as the Greenhouse Gas Effect as in the GHG situation the light strikes the land surface which then radiates infra red photons some of which are then picked up by certain molecules.

In my set up heat is produced and by contact the energy is transferred to moving gas molecules. Due to the requirement of conservation of energy and momentum, molecules going in the same direction as the forces will be speed up (wind). This intensifies the wind and doesn't tend to slow it down.

If the collisions decelerated the gas molecules you would be struggling to see how energy and momentum can be conserved.

 

Well in your version, the hot air should attempt to rise, and expand causing friction along the tube, a sort of rolling due to the friction, and slow the air down. If you keep raising the temperature, eventually the experiment should flip around, because the pressure will become so great that the hot air suddenly gets crushed into smaller particles.

 

:shrug:

 

Yes my theory has chameleon particles. Hence Gravity becomes Magnetism.

 

Hot air rises if it is displaced by colder air taking its place. Colder air is denser than warm air. But each molecule of air does immediately want to go up just because it is hot. The molecule itself is not lighter but faster. The kinetic energy it has gained makes it bump the other molecules out of the way so the gas expands and hence density drops and then is displaced by colder air.

Right, so along the length of the tube we expect to see some degree of stratification, but remember the air is being fanned along the tube and there will be so much turbulence the stratification maybe not be appreciable.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

This experiment is limited by the strength of the tube. I would make it from steel, and it would never be heated to over 1000 degrees centigrade. Atmospheric temperatures on the planets in question can be quite high but I doubt if it would go higher that what is required to melt steel.

We need to see what the temperature of Jupiter's atmosphere is on average.
The effects you speak of may only happen at much higher temperatures if at all.

 

Yes I don't know when they switch around. Gravity may be easier to work out to magnetism because of the new Data from the moon.

 

Great the insane leading the... insane!

Heating air causes it to expand, expansion is motion, thus heating air causes motion, heat differentials cause direction of motion, planets do this, ram jets do this, thread over... but no don't let me get in the way of talking more about the chameleon particles.

 

Well I did want to complete the physics without less vague interpretations. I wanted to add what was missing. So what happens in the tube then, because you say expansion, and motion without saying pressure? This is an open tube with a fan at the end. The tube is being heated, and air can flow all around it.

 

I know Pincho's ideas are a bit odd, but he keeps the thread moving.
But you are so sort of cut and dried and yet so wrong just to dismiss it like that.

What I want to know in the end is how a molecule of gas can speed up (get hotter without having to be in contact with a solid? What is the mechanism to the transfer of energy?
Heating air causes the molecules to speed up. Secondary effect is expansion.
Motion causes expansion in all directions. The pipe will have the same temperature all the way along the tube. So where are the heat differentials coming from?

Thread is not over for you have not explained your science.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Any gas that is colourless to light should not really heat up when visible light or infrared light is shone through it. Greenhouse gases (GHG) on the other hand absorb certain wavelengths of the spectrum. So is the only way to excite a free gas into having a higher temperature by having a mixture with GHG in it?
Usually to heat a gas you heat the container so the gas molecule must be kicked away faster than when it arrived (more kinetic energy). I understand conduction of heat but not so much radiant heat.

 

We don't seem to have a problem in thinking a solid material warms up when radiant energy shines on to it. Maybe we even accept a liquid will do the same. But when it comes to a gas we struggle to think that it warms up directly from the radiant energy.
Obviously this is partly from the fact that if a medium was 100% transparent or 100% reflective it would not heat up. So a gas being very transparent lets the radiation through and does not heat up (much??? or not at all???).

But what happens when the atmosphere becomes dirty or opaque will fine particles suspended in the atmosphere heat as if they were a solid or a liquid?

Interesting and well written article on "Air Pollution".
http://www.explainthatstuff.com/air-pollution-introduction.html

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Take a moment and look at this picture. "This image was selected as picture of the day on the English Wikipedia for July 11, 2009."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:790106-0203_Voyager_58M_to_31M_reduced.gif

 

Any thoughts on how after combustion the gases get hot and expand? What is the order of events in combustion?
Atoms collide ..... what next?