quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

aspiration is a process, and like tommy boy you chose the wrong one, thought you were catching on in a previous post, but I guess not after all.

everything is a process. it is a process to obtain intellect, unfortunately you were not given the choice, being born a profound retard, you have never and will never catch on, and it is obvious. You cannot explain why it is not 1) natural, 2) aspired, 3) flame, you can only spout drivel.

naturally (without special help or intervention)

aspirated (inhaled, drawn in, sniff, snort, gulp, insufflate)

fire( combustion or burning, in which substances combine chemically with oxygen from the air and typically give out bright light, heat, and smoke.)

good, then you wont have any difficulty what so ever providing a citation for a 'naturally aspirated *flame*'

you wont have any problem whatsoever for providing a citation to an actual credible source that says, "there exists in this universe no naturally aspirated flame, or fire".

And go. I wont bother checking back because.....................there wont be one.

geebus snotty, talk about a 180, ok so you agree with me now. I said there will be no citation for aspirated 'flame' because a flame is not aspirated! LOL

You and gomer pyle are the ones who think a flame is aspirated and there are shitloads of citations for aspirated engines, furnaces, burners etc, but none for the flame. Oh well makes no difference glad you agree with me. that musta hurt eh?

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

aspiration is a process, and like tommy boy you chose the wrong one, thought you were catching on in a previous post, but I guess not after all.

everything is a process. it is a process to obtain intellect, unfortunately you were not given the choice, being born a profound retard, you have never and will never catch on, and it is obvious. You cannot explain why it is not 1) natural, 2) aspired, 3) flame, you can only spout drivel.

naturally (without special help or intervention)

aspirated (inhaled, drawn in, sniff, snort, gulp, insufflate)

fire( combustion or burning, in which substances combine chemically with oxygen from the air and typically give out bright light, heat, and smoke.)

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

Still waiting for you to explain how your "open flame" can melt steel.
Jesus you are phoquing stupid.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

aspiration is a process, and like tommy boy you chose the wrong one, thought you were catching on in a previous post, but I guess not after all.

everything is a process. it is a process to obtain intellect, unfortunately you were not given the choice, being born a profound retard, you have never and will never catch on, and it is obvious. You cannot explain why it is not 1) natural, 2) aspired, 3) flame, you can only spout drivel.

naturally (without special help or intervention)

aspirated (inhaled, drawn in, sniff, snort, gulp, insufflate)

fire( combustion or burning, in which substances combine chemically with oxygen from the air and typically give out bright light, heat, and smoke.)

good, then you wont have any difficulty what so ever providing a citation for a 'naturally aspirated *flame*'

you wont have any problem whatsoever for providing a citation to an actual credible source that says, "there exists in this universe no naturally aspirated flame, or fire".

And go. I wont bother checking back because.....................there wont be one.

geebus snotty, talk about a 180, ok so you agree with me now. I said there will be no citation for aspirated 'flame' because a flame is not aspirated! LOL

You and gomer pyle are the ones who think a flame is aspirated and there are shitloads of citations for aspirated engines, furnaces, burners etc, but none for the flame. Oh well makes no difference glad you agree with me. that musta hurt eh?

quote:

ORIGINAL: InfoMan

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

aspiration is a process, and like tommy boy you chose the wrong one, thought you were catching on in a previous post, but I guess not after all.

everything is a process. it is a process to obtain intellect, unfortunately you were not given the choice, being born a profound retard, you have never and will never catch on, and it is obvious. You cannot explain why it is not 1) natural, 2) aspired, 3) flame, you can only spout drivel.

naturally (without special help or intervention)

aspirated (inhaled, drawn in, sniff, snort, gulp, insufflate)

fire( combustion or burning, in which substances combine chemically with oxygen from the air and typically give out bright light, heat, and smoke.)

This has been explained...

Convection requires gravity to function. (needs outside help/intervention)
The thermal exchange actually increases pressure, not decreases it (no suction produced)

thus - the very functions of fire in and of itself contradicts the statement 'naturally aspirated'.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

quote:

ORIGINAL: InfoMan

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

aspiration is a process, and like tommy boy you chose the wrong one, thought you were catching on in a previous post, but I guess not after all.

everything is a process. it is a process to obtain intellect, unfortunately you were not given the choice, being born a profound retard, you have never and will never catch on, and it is obvious. You cannot explain why it is not 1) natural, 2) aspired, 3) flame, you can only spout drivel.

naturally (without special help or intervention)

aspirated (inhaled, drawn in, sniff, snort, gulp, insufflate)

fire( combustion or burning, in which substances combine chemically with oxygen from the air and typically give out bright light, heat, and smoke.)

This has been explained...

Convection requires gravity to function. (needs outside help/intervention)
The thermal exchange actually increases pressure, not decreases it (no suction produced)

thus - the very functions of fire in and of itself contradicts the statement 'naturally aspirated'.

we need gravity to live. plants need gravity, the earth needs gravity, we are all just a fart bubble in a camels ass. (yes the thermal pressure is different from top of flame to bottom. I am ok calling it suction (boyles law and all that, to attempt equilibrium, naturo horror vacui........yeah, close enough for the girls we go with)

Fire needs oxygen to function. convection not fire needs conditions

The universe needs PI, Plancks constant, e, and many other things to function
therefore nothing in our experience is natural
except me getting a blowjob.

Class dismissed.
Schlau, aber nicht wahr.

I suggest another course of study.

quote:

ORIGINAL: InfoMan

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

quote:

ORIGINAL: InfoMan

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

aspiration is a process, and like tommy boy you chose the wrong one, thought you were catching on in a previous post, but I guess not after all.

everything is a process. it is a process to obtain intellect, unfortunately you were not given the choice, being born a profound retard, you have never and will never catch on, and it is obvious. You cannot explain why it is not 1) natural, 2) aspired, 3) flame, you can only spout drivel.

naturally (without special help or intervention)

aspirated (inhaled, drawn in, sniff, snort, gulp, insufflate)

fire( combustion or burning, in which substances combine chemically with oxygen from the air and typically give out bright light, heat, and smoke.)

This has been explained...

Convection requires gravity to function. (needs outside help/intervention)
The thermal exchange actually increases pressure, not decreases it (no suction produced)

thus - the very functions of fire in and of itself contradicts the statement 'naturally aspirated'.

we need gravity to live. plants need gravity, the earth needs gravity, we are all just a fart bubble in a camels ass. (yes the thermal pressure is different from top of flame to bottom. I am ok calling it suction (boyles law and all that, to attempt equilibrium, naturo horror vacui........yeah, close enough for the girls we go with)

Fire needs oxygen to function. convection not fire needs conditions

The universe needs PI, Plancks constant, e, and many other things to function
therefore nothing in our experience is natural
except me getting a blowjob.

Class dismissed.
Schlau, aber nicht wahr.

I suggest another course of study.

What you are willing to call it does not factor in...
It has been explained - it is not natural, it is not aspirated.

You cannot use the word-to-word definition then subjectively interpenetrate each of the words to best suit how you want to define it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx


ORIGINAL: InfoMan
ORIGINAL: thompsonx

Still waiting for you to explain how your "open flame" can melt steel.
Jesus you are phoquing stupid.



by making it large enough that it produces Adiabatic Conditions at it's core.


Adiabatic conditions defined:

"Adiabatic conditions refer to conditions under which overall heat transfer across the boundary between the
thermodynamic system and the surroundings is absent. Examples of processes proceeding under adiabatic
conditions and applied in engineering are expansion and compression of gas in a piston-type machine, the
flow of a fluid medium in heat-insulated pipes, channels and nozzles, throttling and setting of turbomachines
and distribution of acoustic and shock waves. The flow of a viscous liquid or gas through a heat-insulated
channel is often referred to as adiabatic. "

http://thermopedia.com/content/290/


How about you walk us through this missinfoman.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

Do you live in phoquing outer space? That is where you would have to live in order to claim that gravity is
outside help/intervention.

quote:

According to the cites provided you are wrong

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

Your opinion seems to be in conflict with the cite provided. This would tend to confirm that your opinion is full
of shit.

quote:

Perhaps you could point out just where that distorted I beam is partially melted

quote:

Here is a pic of a building that was less than 200 yards from the epicenter of the a bomb at hiroshima. Note the steel
beams of the dome in tact and not melted. My understanding is that a nuke blast is pretty warm. .

https://www.google.com/search?q=hiroshima+dome&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&sqi=2&ved=0ahUKEwiu57z3kdrTAhVEslQKHZu7CC4Q_AUIBigB&biw=853&bih=413#imgrc=G5NiX-ysHZGJ8M:&spf=198