Is Fire Conductive?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Is Fire Conductive?

No, I will give you one more and see if someone can find the last.

Bose-Einstein Condensate: Very similar to gas like plasma, but at a super cold temperature. This stuff comes from the boson group of particles. To give you an example of what I mean by super cold state, our sun is at 600K, ice forms at 273K, this matter forms at 1/billionth of a K or around -459 F. :eek:

The only reason I bring it up is because the last state of matter may one day be developed into the "superconductor" we have all been waiting for.
 
Re: Is Fire Conductive?

Fermionic condensate.

It's similar to Bose-Einstein condensate but that deals with bosons while fermionic condensate deals with fermions. Bosons are called force mediators because they are how two things made out of fermions (more regular matter) inrteract.

Basically these condensate states are created by reducing matter to it's lowest quantum energy state. Atoms stop boucing off of each other so much and act less like kabillions of really fast moving super duper balls and more like better behaved BB's.

Edit: Error A

[ June 07, 2005, 11:34 PM: Message edited by: physis ]
 
Re: Is Fire Conductive?

Cool stuff!

At some point it may be possible to pair the electrons in fermionic condensate to form a room temperature superconductor that bascially would have no heat loss due to the fact there would be no resistance.

I still feel "super-insulation" is more likely than "super-conducting", but that is left to be seen.
 
Re: Is Fire Conductive?

Steve, Bryan's right, plasma is a state. But you were right too when you said it might be just be ionized gas. It's both. a gas becomes plasma when it's ionized. Some or all of the electrons get taken away from the outer electron orbits of the atoms or molecules. Those outer shell electrons are what was responsible for the gases normal state behaviour, and they're gone now. So the gas is no longer inert or capable of bonding. The atom's and molecules have charge now, like charges too, they repel each other instead of sticking together. These once inert goody two shoes molecules and atoms that never got into any kind of trouble are now all hyped out on kinetic energy and are looking to get involved in all the different kind of irresponsible interactions that they've been missing out on.

If I have some of this stuff a little off it's ok, I never have really gotten around to learning about plasma.
 
Re: Is Fire Conductive?

I work mainly with power utilities and this is a very interesting topic and quickly rang a bell with me.

Anyone remember the August 14, 2003 blackout?...it might help shed some light on this. Here is a part of the final report prepared by NERC(North American Electric Reliability Council). Events #1, #2, & #3 (yes...where it all began) are trips of generators involving 1757 MW's between 12:05 and 1:31pm.....WOW...a lot of power lost!

Event #4 is the interesting one and might shed some light to bphgravity:

"2:02 PM - line disconnects in southwestern Ohio

4. Stuart - Atlanta 345 KV
This line is part of the transmission pathway from Southwestern Ohio into northern Ohio. It disconnected from the system due to brush fire under a portion of the line. Hot gases from a fire can ionize the air above a transmission line, causing air to conduct electricity and short-circuit the conductors"

If anyone is interested in reading the report
http://www.nerc.com/~filez/blackout.html

EDIT: quote from page #4 of the report

[ June 09, 2005, 09:12 PM: Message edited by: molotov27 ]
 
Re: Is Fire Conductive?

Nonsense.

Anybody can learn anything.

The only thing you really need is to be interested.

Time helps a lot too.

Edit: BTW, hardworkingstiff, one of the GC's I deal with, (one that I like more than most), and I use phrases pretty much like what you said, "I'm just a dumb contractor" when people would prefer to believe that they'er being ripped off or that they know how we should be doing something as opposed to the way that we are doing something.

It's, actually pretty fun.

[ June 10, 2005, 02:32 AM: Message edited by: physis ]
 
Re: Is Fire Conductive?

Physis,

I agree, we can always learn. Back in my early 20's I really thought I could learn/do anything without failure if I wanted to. Now in my 50's, it is getting harder and harder to learn new things. I have to read them twice and think about it before I grasp it. The more I learn, the more I realize I don't know.

BTW, the "dumb contractor" comment was a little tongue in cheek.
 
Re: Is Fire Conductive?

BTW, the "dumb contractor" comment was a little tongue in cheek.
Click to expand...
I know it was, I just don't want to see anyone believe it. :p

I have to agree, being a whole 41 I can't educate myself as fast as I could when I was younger. But at the same time a lot of things are easier to see clearly too. :cool:

Edit: Didn't put all the words in that were supposed to be there.

[ June 10, 2005, 07:25 AM: Message edited by: physis ]
 
Re: Is Fire Conductive?

A very interesting topic. I will try to apply some simple physics to the question. The Jacob's ladder applies a high voltage (difference of potential) between the electrodes. This causes the air between the electrodes to ionize, once ionization occurs, an arc occurs and higher current flows. Placing a combustible material in the path of the arc ignites the material which produces gases and vapors. It is not the flame that is conductive, but rather the gases and vapors within the flame. The gases and vapors are made up of atoms which become ionized and come under the influence of the magnetic field produced by the arc. Thus the flame (burning vapors) follow the magnetic field of the arc.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top