Open Letter to Dave Thomas

[Grizzly Bear]

Temperature is a physical property, just like colour or dimension, but it does not cause weakening of steel, as ozeco suggested. Weakening of steel occurs at a particular temperature, which itself is a measurement of the intensity of the thermal energy in the steel. You change temperature by changing the level or intensity of heat, not the other way around.

You are confusing correlation with causation. Temperature is not some cosmic thermostat. The Stundies belong to you.

Do you enjoy posting contradictions back to back or something???

 

[Newtons Bit]

Do you enjoy posting contradictions back to back or something???

I'm sure he can come up with a way in which he doesn't have to admit he was wrong.

 

[ergo]

Do you enjoy posting contradictions back to back or something???

Do you have any clue what you're talking about??

Temperature is a physical property, just like colour or dimension, but it does not cause weakening of steel, as ozeco suggested. Weakening of steel occurs at a particular temperature, which itself is a measurement of the intensity of the thermal energy in the steel. You change temperature by changing the level or intensity of heat, not the other way around.

This is not a contradiction. It is pointing out the difference between causation vs. correlation.

Just drop it, guys. You already look stupid enough.

 

[ergo]

We know that the fires were very severe on the south side of the building. We have copious and consistent testimony from firefighters that the south side of the building was fully engaged in fire, and we have videos of the south side which show smoke issuing from the entire south face. The fires, as any reasonable person would conclude, were real, and enormous, and at the time of the videos were concealed by the smoke they produced. We also know that the fires reached the north side of the building, from photographs that show flames issuing from windows on the north side, and blackening around broken windows that indicate that fire had passed those windows.

Testimony that was not used by NIST. Testimony that is not backed up by any visual evidence.

Eighty gigs of video (or is it more?), of a crime scene, and not a single image of the south side inferno? Or of the south side at all. Why?

 

[Newtons Bit]

Do you have any clue what you're talking about??




This is not a contradiction. It is pointing out the difference between causation vs. correlation.

Just drop it, guys. You already look stupid enough.

So what was this about:

Originally Posted by BigAl
Temperature is a property of matter whether you measure it or not.

Wrong. You're obviously thinking of heat, aka thermal energy.

You told BigAl that he was wrong when he stated that temperature is a property of matter. You've just stated that temperature IS a physical property.

Which is it?

 

[ergo]

It doesn't change the fact that temperature does not cause heat, does it, NB?

 

[ergo]

Your confusion about this reaches back far before that post. Don't try to pick a new fight just to save face.

 

[Newtons Bit]

It doesn't change the fact that temperature does not cause heat, does it, NB?

As far as I am aware, you're the only person that has stated this. Perhaps you could quote the post saying otherwise?

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

It doesn't change the fact that temperature does not cause heat, does it, NB?

Is this really the hill you want to make your stand on?

 

[ergo]

This is being flogged far beyond its natural conclusion.

NB, you yourself showed a graph which shows the correlation between temperature and the strength of steel. Does this graph show that "temperature weakens steel", yes or no?

 

[Newtons Bit]

This is being flogged far beyond its natural conclusion.

NB, you yourself showed a graph which shows the correlation between temperature and the strength of steel. Does this graph show that "temperature weakens steel", yes or no?

Yes.

Temperature is a measurement of the kinetic energy of the individual molecules within, in this case, solid steel. As this kinetic energy increases the mechanical bonds that make steel rigid and strong weaken. This is solely a function of the kinetic energy of the molecules which temperature is a direct measurement of. At least until the temperature reaches a sufficient point that the chemical composition of steel begins to change.

 

[excaza]

Yes.

Temperature is a measurement of the kinetic energy of the individual molecules within, in this case, solid steel. As this kinetic energy increases the mechanical bonds that make steel rigid and strong weaken. This is solely a function of the kinetic energy of the molecules which temperature is a direct measurement of. At least until the temperature reaches a sufficient point that the chemical composition of steel begins to change.

[ergo]so it's not temperature that weakens steel, it's kinetic energy! stupid bedunkers[/ergo]

 

[ergo]

I rest my case. You really don't know what you're talking about. Actually, I suspect you do, but you're trying to cover for ozeco.

Your two answers contradict each other.

Yes... [...temperature weakens steel]

Temperature is a measurement of the kinetic energy of the individual molecules within, in this case, solid steel. As this kinetic energy increases the mechanical bonds that make steel rigid and strong weaken. This is solely a function of the kinetic energy of the molecules which temperature is a direct measurement of. At least until the temperature reaches a sufficient point that the chemical composition of steel begins to change.

 

[ergo]

Confusing correlation with causation. That's our bee dunkers!

 

[excaza]

Your two answers contradict each other.

No, they don't.

 

[ergo]

I suggest you guys take it to the Science, Mathematics forum and get it straightened out. 'Kay?

In the meantime, it would be really great to have a professor of fire science answer this question:

Smoke emanating from a building for hours with little sign of flames on its active side and next to no flames on any other side of the building indicates what kind of fire?

 

[ElMondoHummus]

[ergo]so it's not temperature that weakens steel, it's kinetic energy! stupid bedunkers[/ergo]

ROFL! OMG, you called it!

I rest my case. You really don't know what you're talking about. Actually, I suspect you do, but you're trying to cover for ozeco.

Yes... [...temperature weakens steel]

Temperature is a measurement of the kinetic energy of the individual molecules within, in this case, solid steel. As this kinetic energy increases the mechanical bonds that make steel rigid and strong weaken. This is solely a function of the kinetic energy of the molecules which temperature is a direct measurement of. At least until the temperature reaches a sufficient point that the chemical composition of steel begins to change.

Your two answers contradict each other.

 

[Newtons Bit]

I rest my case. You really don't know what you're talking about. Actually, I suspect you do, but you're trying to cover for ozeco.

Your two answers contradict each other.

No, they are in perfect agreement. What exactly do you think temperature is?

 

[excaza]

I suggest you guys take it to the Science, Mathematics forum and get it straightened out. 'Kay?

Why don't you? You're the one having issues.

In the meantime, it would be really great to have a professor of fire science answer this question:

Smoke emanating from a building for hours with little sign of flames on its active side and next to no flames on any other side of the building indicates what kind of fire?

Combustion.

 

[ergo]

NB, does the graph you posted show correlation or causation?