Sentences with phrase «per ideal gas»

It's as imaginary as their gases, but within this imaginary container their ideal gases are «well - mixed» as per ideal gas, and can not be unmixed, so they can not separate out.

He said it would very quickly diffuse into the air of the room as per ideal gas [under its own molecular momentum] and so become thoroughly mixed where it couldn't become unmixed without an extreme amount of work being done [as for example it would take to separate back out ink that had been poured into water].

They called carbon dioxide, and oxygen and nitrogen, «ideal gases», and said they behave as per basic ideal gas description (pre Van der Waals), in other words, they have taken all the properties and process of real gases out of their «gases» and reduced them to hard dots with no mass, (no volume, weight or attraction and therefore nothing to be subject to gravity), and they say these travel at great speeds through empty space as per ideal gas, bouncing off each other in elastic collisions and so «thoroughly mixing» that they can't be unmixed (without an immense amount of work being done, so for all practical purposes can not be unmixed).

Strange that none of those folks consider the «forcing» caused simply by atmospheric pressure per the ideal gas law.

Not exact matches

AGWSF's Greenhouse Effect doesn't have convection because it doesn't have real gases, it has substituted the imaginary ideal gas without properties and processes, but our real Earth's atmosphere does have convection — the heavy ocean of real fluid gas oxygen and nitrogen weighing a ton on our shoulders, a stone per square inch, acts like a blanket around the Earth stopping the heat escaping, compare with the Moon which has extreme swings of temperature.

If the energy per cubic meter is higher, and the ideal gas law informs us the temperature is proportional to the energy, than the temperature is higher.

I'm also waiting to hear you acknowledge that a static lapse rate in an ideal gas at thermal equilibrium violates the second law of thermodynamics as per the example given above.

where g is the gravitational acceleration (presumed approximately constant throughout the spherical shell) and cp is the heat capacity per kilogram of the particular «ideal» gas at constant pressure.

If you want to prove that there is a non-GHG GE involving the dynamic motion of gases, play right on through, but realize that Jelbring's paper isn't about that and is incorrect because it ascribes the same effect to a completely static, completely dry ideal gas that has been left in place, isolated, for a billion years (or as long as equilibrium takes, which won't be anywhere near a billion years at a joule of conductive transport per meter of atmosphere per degree kelvin of temperature difference per 40 seconds).

The AGWGE molecules are as per descriptions of basic ideal gas, travelling at great speeds under their own molecular momentum spontaneously diffusing through empty space miles apart bouncing off each other in elastic collisions.

Our full atmosphere of real greenhouse gases, which are not ideal gases but have volume, weight, attraction and subject to gravity, act as a blanket weighing down a ton per square foot around the Earth keeping the heat from the Sun's warming of the Earth from escaping too quickly before the Sun again heats the surface.