TRuggiero_
Senior Member
well carbon dioxide is a gas and it can freeze, but carbon dioxide does jump from a solid to a gas, it just evaporates or sublimates into a gas, it will never drip.
A Scary Thought
- Thread starter Frank_Li
- Start date
- Replies 84
- Views 4K
We may earn a small commission from affiliate links and paid advertisements. Terms
lol i like that
basicly id say you cant do solid O2 cuz you cant get it cold enough it doesnt turn to a liquid untill -300* F
absolute zero is said to be -459* F at that temp everything would be a solid but it has not been reached yet and it most likely will not be able to be held for any useable length of time when it is reached
why are you so interested in solid O2 anyway??
TRuggiero_
Senior Member
Well I have an idea, this is a frigin genious revolutionary idea that is gonna make a billion dollars. me and my boy on this board are workin on, were gonna test some other ideas first, but when they don't work, I'll share it with you guys.
Partially correct. It never exists as a liquid at atmospheric pressure. Given enough pressure, you can force carbon dioxide to melt from a solid into a liquid, instead of subliming directly from a solid into a gas. Check out the phase diagram for CO2 (right side):
You can see the triple point marked on the P-T phase diagram. If you're above 5.1 atm, then you can hold a liquid phase state with carbon dioxide. The "dry ice" that we know has a surface temperature of -78.5 degrees Celcius (194.5 K), and we experience it at 1 atm. When the surface of the "ice" passes 194.5 K, it sublimes directly from solid to vapor. Get a really big fat bastard to sit on it, and you might get lucky and see liquid carbon dioxide.
Now on oxygen... the phase diagram is a little harder to read, since the triple point for unlinked oxygen sits at such a low pressure:
The triple point for oxygen sits right at 54.36 K and 0.00152 x10^5 Pa (0.00152 atm). My guess is that you can have solid oxygen survive at room temperature and pressure for a short peroid of time, but it would sublime much more quickly than carbon dioxide. I don't have a detailed enough chart to show where the lines cross at normal atmospheric conditions... but take into consideration that the CO2 phase diagram is drawn on a linear scale while the O2 phase diagram is on a logarithmic scale and you can somewhat get an idea of how things play out between the two compounds. Solid O2 would take much higher pressures to produce than solid CO2, and at lower temps as well. It's probably just not feasible to use as a cheap refrigerant like we do on ice cream cakes.
Theoretically, at zero Kelvin everything turns into a solid, because there is no more movement at the sub-atomic scale. So yes, you can have solid anything.
Sweet InStinct
Hot Member
aNy OTHER QUESTIONS??
i WANT some $$$ IF u guys do become billionares
REMEMBER MIKE, E SolSi and I r helping u out!!!
i WANT some $$$ IF u guys do become billionares
REMEMBER MIKE, E SolSi and I r helping u out!!!
TRuggiero_
Senior Member
Hmmm, I checked and my freezer guage doesn't go to kelvin, so, that idea was shot to shit.
Very imformative stuff though, thanks, I was always under the impression that there was no liquid co2. chemically own3d
Good stuff though, I gotta print this out and ponder.
Very imformative stuff though, thanks, I was always under the impression that there was no liquid co2. chemically own3d
Good stuff though, I gotta print this out and ponder.
Originally posted by Sweet InStinct@Mar 13 2003, 10:29 PM
aNy OTHER QUESTIONS??
i WANT some $$$ IF u guys do become billionares
REMEMBER MIKE E SolSi, and I r helping u out!!!
I'll keep you in mind.
I just had to make the explanation the right way... took some time to find all the phase diagrams, since I don't have a scanner and my Thermodynamics + Fluids books handy.
TRuggiero_
Senior Member
Don't worry bout it, props is delivered where props is due.
About hydrogen being so dangerous (did i SP that wrong?). Really it is not. The new tanks that they are developing for them, they can carry about 250 mile crussing range under extreme pressures but to achevie this, they are using new high tech materials so that they will not blow up during a car crash, or if someone shot it (even with out ignition, if a tank burst at the pressures they are running, the car would be blown to peices. About the fire safty thing, everyone connects hydrogen with the famos hindenburg that went down within like 10 seconds. To major reason why that was such a site, the paint/inslation that they used on the outside, one of the main substances used in it was something verysimilar to rocket fuel. (belive that was in the Forward drive book.) When hydrogen actually burns, the flames are invisible to the naked eye and the heat is almost non existant until you actaually have contact with the flame.
One thing that they are testing is Liquid hydrogen for cars. The major problem for this is that liquid hydrogen is so cold that phyical contact with it will cause major tissue damage. One thing that they would have to do to make this work would be to make robotic/automated filling stations to handle the stuff. With L H, crussing distances for these kinds of cars can be close to a 1000 miles. Also the other problem is what happens when it heats up? Things that they have considered have been having "vents" on these tanks to release the gas H.
About how making Hydrogen is bad for the environment, there are other ways of getting power to do electrolis (sp) (electrolis is the process of sending eletric current through water to split the bond between H and 0.) It could actually be good for the environment. Because these "robotic gas stations" would be nessacry with liquid H, The gas stations could also do electrolis by making the roofs into solar panels to produces the electricity for electrois. Also when you split H and O, what would you do with O? That would be relased into the atomosphere and these gas stations would like Micanical trees in a sence. Also when h is burned, the only by probuct is heat and water.
Technology like this is going to become more and more apart of the automotive industry as time progresses. Look at the civic Hybrid this month. With soring gas prices, the sales of it are through the roof. Honda produced the first Fuel Cell car (hydrogen) and this is just a begining. Gasoline is slowing going to start to become a thing of the past but the autocompanys want to stick with the old proven tech. as much as possible.
Read "forward drive" very good book about new tech (published by serria group or what ever that extremist group is)
(just FYI, my spelling seems even worse on this one so forgive me, I am just tired)
One thing that they are testing is Liquid hydrogen for cars. The major problem for this is that liquid hydrogen is so cold that phyical contact with it will cause major tissue damage. One thing that they would have to do to make this work would be to make robotic/automated filling stations to handle the stuff. With L H, crussing distances for these kinds of cars can be close to a 1000 miles. Also the other problem is what happens when it heats up? Things that they have considered have been having "vents" on these tanks to release the gas H.
About how making Hydrogen is bad for the environment, there are other ways of getting power to do electrolis (sp) (electrolis is the process of sending eletric current through water to split the bond between H and 0.) It could actually be good for the environment. Because these "robotic gas stations" would be nessacry with liquid H, The gas stations could also do electrolis by making the roofs into solar panels to produces the electricity for electrois. Also when you split H and O, what would you do with O? That would be relased into the atomosphere and these gas stations would like Micanical trees in a sence. Also when h is burned, the only by probuct is heat and water.
Technology like this is going to become more and more apart of the automotive industry as time progresses. Look at the civic Hybrid this month. With soring gas prices, the sales of it are through the roof. Honda produced the first Fuel Cell car (hydrogen) and this is just a begining. Gasoline is slowing going to start to become a thing of the past but the autocompanys want to stick with the old proven tech. as much as possible.
Read "forward drive" very good book about new tech (published by serria group or what ever that extremist group is)
(just FYI, my spelling seems even worse on this one so forgive me, I am just tired)
Originally posted by E_SolSi@Mar 13 2003, 11:37 PM
i think my head just exploded
ha ha. for once Mikes jiber jaber made sence to me. I guess that chem actually did get through to me after all.
I have read some really interesting experiments with liquid CO2. Crap, i can't remember what the other stuff they used in this experiment but With liquid CO2, they made this substance that is alot harder then glass but so light that a peice of it the size of a car, a normal man can lift it up with little difficult. Major problem is that when they produce it, extremly small air bubbles for uniformly in it making it impossible to see through. They are trying to figure out why theses are forming to try and stop them so that way they can find practial uses for this stuff. Production is relatively cheap. They could make huge aquiums (sp big time, the things that fish swim in) and use extremly thin amounts of this stuff.
Originally posted by TRuggiero_+?-->TRuggiero_ @ ?) said:Hmmm, I checked and my freezer guage doesn't go to kelvin, so, that idea was shot to shit.
Very imformative stuff though, thanks, I was always under the impression that there was no liquid co2. chemically own3d
Good stuff though, I gotta print this out and ponder.
Here's an easy conversion... Kelvin and degrees Celcius are measured on the same scale, but 0 degrees Celcius = 273 Kelvin (no degrees for Kelvin, it's an absolute measure), so 0 Kelvin = -273 degrees Celcius.
BOOM!
asmallsol@?
for once Mikes jiber jaber made sence to me. I guess that chem actually did get through to me after all.
Chemistry is fun. Crystal lattices for more advanced forms of carbon molecules (Buckyballs and stuff like that) is even more fun. Chemistry comes in handy with Mechanical Engineering too.
Spelling FYI:
You spelled "hydrogen" right
electrolis -> electrolysis
Micanical -> Mechanical
hindenburg -> Hindenburg
The Hindenburg went down mostly because it was carrying its hydrogen in one large tank. There were no partitions or anything else that prevented the hydrogen from mixing with oxygen to burn. Traditional combustion requires oxygen to run to completion... so when the Hindenburg got caught on something (I forget what), the hydrogen all of a sudden had an unlimited supply of oxygen to mix with, and it caught fire as soon as something ignited it. The paint composition might have had something to do with it (not sure), but it was basically a big flying balloon of fuel waiting for some oxygen to come along and make it combustible. Hydrogen will not burn on its own.
The concept behind a lot of the hydrogen fuel cell (or just hydrogen storage in general) technology for automobiles is finding a way to store a large enough mass of hydrogen to run a vehicle for a decent range, while still providing some amount of explosion protection. One of the most common designs I've seen uses a "sponge" made out of porous material which traps the hydrogen molecules, and can maintain its physical integrity in the event of a crash, which would prevent the hydrogen from leaking out and mixing with ambient air. No big bombs here.
I've got a few friends in fuel cell research- one just landed a job for $100k+ / year working in Hawaii, and one is working on his Master's / PhD in Florida, so I'm sure I'll hear a lot more about alternate fuel technology from them.
What's that material you're talking about? I'm curious... oh yeah, it's "aquariums" not "aquiums". Not trying to be an ass, just correcting things you have a (sp?) next to.
Oh yeah, since we're geeking out... today is Einstein's 124th birthday! Check out the Google graphic:
Zerosk8r455
Senior Member
Wow..this is great. I love watching how much these threads alter during their existence. It goes from gas to burning trees for hydrogen to freezing oxygen to einstein's b-day!!! We love it!
I was searching on Google last night and I could not find anything. I read about this stuff back a few years ago. It is pretty intresting and if they ever solve some of these problems, we are going to see this alot more in cars.
About the Hindenburg, yes the reason why it went down was because of the Hydrogen burning but the only reason why you could see flames is because of the Paint covering that they used.
About the spelling thing. No problem. I warned you.
Originally posted by asmallsol+?-->asmallsol @ ?) said:
Hmm. Cool. Let me know if you're ever able to find it.
Ah, that's what you were trying to say. Yeah, that makes sense. I figure that since there was more than just the hydrogen burning (covering, passenger compartment, surroundings) that you would have seen the flames no matter what.
Originally posted by asmallsol@?
About the spelling thing. No problem. I warned you.
That's cool. I'm just trying to help you out some since you commented (sp?) on so many things.
doofnoil@?
That would be a hella bad ass video if the Hindenburg did explode like an H-bomb. The reporter would be like what a sad dayy.....oh shit!
Nah. Only if the hydrogen was under extreme pressure... the Hindenburg disaster was all free-form hydrogen floating around, so it was more of a "watch the fuel burn" rather than a "watch it all go BOOM" kind of thing.
TRuggiero_
Senior Member
About 30 years ago Michael Jackson was black. Things are never what they seem my friend. There really is no way to know how long our fuels will last. I read an article that says there is still thousands if not millions of untapped oil resources. Hell there is still parts of the world man has yet to discover.
