How to temporary chill a car with non-working AC.

On Sat, 25 Sep 2004 20:55:26 GMT, Randolph > wrote:

>
>"James C. Reeves" wrote:
>>
>> "Threeducks" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> |
>> | A system does not contain "heat". Heat is simply a method of
>> | transfering energy between the system and it's surroundings.
>>
>> I thought that *any* material with a temperature above "absolute zero" contains
>> "heat".
>
>No, a material can not contain heat. Heat, as Threeducks said, applies
>only to thermal energy in transit. From Halliday / Resnick: Fundamentals
>of Physics, 3rd edition, Wiley 1988:
>
>Page 464: "Heat is energy that flows between a system and its
>environment by virtue of a temperature difference that exists between
>them"

That definition is bull****. It is wrong.

They should correct their book, if it contains such nonsense.

By that definition, if you heat a rock to 200 F, and then
place it in 200 F water, the rock no longer contains heat energy at
the moment you submerse it, because none will transfer to the water,
which is already at the same temperature. Once you take it out of the
water, now it suddenly contains heat energy again ???? Nonsense.

IE, their definition attempts to define heat energy as a
relative thing, dependant on flow to exist. It is not.

Don't believe everything you read in books :-)

>Page 465: "Both heat and work represents energy-in-transit between a
>system and its environment. Heat and work, unlike temperature, pressure
>and volume, are not intrinsic properties of a system. They have meaning
>only as they describe energy transfers into or out of a system, adding
>or subtracting from the system's store of internal energy.

That is bull****. That is a possible description ( although a
poor one ) of heat flow, not HEAT.

> (...) It is
>without meaning to say: "This system contains 450 J of heat" or "This
>system contains 385 J of work""

True. At least they got ONE part right.



Paul ( pjm @ pobox . com ) - remove spaces to email me
'Some days, it's just not worth chewing through the restraints.'

HVAC/R program for Palm PDA's
Free demo now available online http://pmilligan.net/palm/
Free Temperature / Pressure charts for 38 Ref's http://pmilligan.net/pmtherm/

wrote:
>
> On Sat, 25 Sep 2004 20:55:26 GMT, Randolph > wrote:
>
> >
> >"James C. Reeves" wrote:
> >>
> >> "Threeducks" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> |
> >> | A system does not contain "heat". Heat is simply a method of
> >> | transfering energy between the system and it's surroundings.
> >>
> >> I thought that *any* material with a temperature above "absolute zero" contains
> >> "heat".
> >
> >No, a material can not contain heat. Heat, as Threeducks said, applies
> >only to thermal energy in transit. From Halliday / Resnick: Fundamentals
> >of Physics, 3rd edition, Wiley 1988:
> >
> >Page 464: "Heat is energy that flows between a system and its
> >environment by virtue of a temperature difference that exists between
> >them"
>
> That definition is bull****. It is wrong.
>
> They should correct their book, if it contains such nonsense.

Perhaps you can cite authoritative sources for your definition.
Encyclopedia Britannica agrees with Halliday / Resnick, see
http://www.encyclopediabritannica.co...query=heat&ct=
as does Encarta,
http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761575286/Heat_(physics).html

>
> By that definition, if you heat a rock to 200 F, and then
> place it in 200 F water, the rock no longer contains heat energy at
> the moment you submerse it, because none will transfer to the water,
> which is already at the same temperature. Once you take it out of the
> water, now it suddenly contains heat energy again ???? Nonsense.

The rock never *contained* heat, in or out of the water. Heat is defined
as *flow* of thermal energy.
>
> IE, their definition attempts to define heat energy as a
> relative thing, dependant on flow to exist. It is not.

They are defining "heat" not "heat energy".

>
> Don't believe everything you read in books :-)

The book goes on to say (page 465) "In popular usage, "heat" is often
used where "temperature" is intended, as in the cookbook instruction:
"Put in na oven at 300 degrees of heat." We also say that when we add
heat to something it gets "hotter", by which we mean its temperature
increases. When we say: "It's a hot day." we are referring to
temperature and not heat. Do not confuse these totally different
quantities."


> >Page 465: "Both heat and work represents energy-in-transit between a
> >system and its environment. Heat and work, unlike temperature, pressure
> >and volume, are not intrinsic properties of a system. They have meaning
> >only as they describe energy transfers into or out of a system, adding
> >or subtracting from the system's store of internal energy.
>
> That is bull****. That is a possible description ( although a
> poor one ) of heat flow, not HEAT.
>
> > (...) It is
> >without meaning to say: "This system contains 450 J of heat" or "This
> >system contains 385 J of work""
>
> True. At least they got ONE part right.
>
> Paul ( pjm @ pobox . com ) - remove spaces to email me
> 'Some days, it's just not worth chewing through the restraints.'
>
> HVAC/R program for Palm PDA's
> Free demo now available online http://pmilligan.net/palm/
> Free Temperature / Pressure charts for 38 Ref's http://pmilligan.net/pmtherm/

On Sat, 25 Sep 2004 22:41:52 GMT, Randolph > wrote:

>
>
wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, 25 Sep 2004 20:55:26 GMT, Randolph > wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >"James C. Reeves" wrote:
>> >>
>> >> "Threeducks" > wrote in message
>> >> ...
>> >> |
>> >> | A system does not contain "heat". Heat is simply a method of
>> >> | transfering energy between the system and it's surroundings.
>> >>
>> >> I thought that *any* material with a temperature above "absolute zero" contains
>> >> "heat".
>> >
>> >No, a material can not contain heat. Heat, as Threeducks said, applies
>> >only to thermal energy in transit. From Halliday / Resnick: Fundamentals
>> >of Physics, 3rd edition, Wiley 1988:
>> >
>> >Page 464: "Heat is energy that flows between a system and its
>> >environment by virtue of a temperature difference that exists between
>> >them"
>>
>> That definition is bull****. It is wrong.
>>
>> They should correct their book, if it contains such nonsense.
>
>Perhaps you can cite authoritative sources for your definition.
>Encyclopedia Britannica agrees with Halliday / Resnick, see
>http://www.encyclopediabritannica.co...query=heat&ct=
>as does Encarta,
>http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761575286/Heat_(physics).html
>
>>
>> By that definition, if you heat a rock to 200 F, and then
>> place it in 200 F water, the rock no longer contains heat energy at
>> the moment you submerse it, because none will transfer to the water,
>> which is already at the same temperature. Once you take it out of the
>> water, now it suddenly contains heat energy again ???? Nonsense.
>
>The rock never *contained* heat, in or out of the water. Heat is defined
>as *flow* of thermal energy.

No, that is heat TRANSER or FLOW.

The rock contains energy imparted to it by a heat source (
there was transfer or flow at the time that happened ), and currently
reflected in the increased molecular movement. That increase in
motion did not slow down when you submerged it in water of the same
temperature. That added energy is still in the rock. That is what I
am referring to as 'heat energy contained in the rock'.

>>
>> IE, their definition attempts to define heat energy as a
>> relative thing, dependant on flow to exist. It is not.
>
>They are defining "heat" not "heat energy".
>
>>
>> Don't believe everything you read in books :-)
>
>The book goes on to say (page 465) "In popular usage, "heat" is often
>used where "temperature" is intended, as in the cookbook instruction:
>"Put in na oven at 300 degrees of heat." We also say that when we add
>heat to something it gets "hotter", by which we mean its temperature
>increases. When we say: "It's a hot day." we are referring to
>temperature and not heat. Do not confuse these totally different
>quantities."

This is true.

>
>
>> >Page 465: "Both heat and work represents energy-in-transit between a
>> >system and its environment. Heat and work, unlike temperature, pressure
>> >and volume, are not intrinsic properties of a system. They have meaning
>> >only as they describe energy transfers into or out of a system, adding
>> >or subtracting from the system's store of internal energy.
>>
>> That is bull****. That is a possible description ( although a
>> poor one ) of heat flow, not HEAT.
>>
>> > (...) It is
>> >without meaning to say: "This system contains 450 J of heat" or "This
>> >system contains 385 J of work""
>>
>> True. At least they got ONE part right.
>>
>> Paul ( pjm @ pobox . com ) - remove spaces to email me
>> 'Some days, it's just not worth chewing through the restraints.'
>>
>> HVAC/R program for Palm PDA's
>> Free demo now available online http://pmilligan.net/palm/
>> Free Temperature / Pressure charts for 38 Ref's http://pmilligan.net/pmtherm/


Paul ( pjm @ pobox . com ) - remove spaces to email me
'Some days, it's just not worth chewing through the restraints.'

HVAC/R program for Palm PDA's
Free demo now available online http://pmilligan.net/palm/
Free Temperature / Pressure charts for 38 Ref's http://pmilligan.net/pmtherm/

wrote:

<snip>

> >> By that definition, if you heat a rock to 200 F, and then
> >> place it in 200 F water, the rock no longer contains heat energy at
> >> the moment you submerse it, because none will transfer to the water,
> >> which is already at the same temperature. Once you take it out of the
> >> water, now it suddenly contains heat energy again ???? Nonsense.
> >
> >The rock never *contained* heat, in or out of the water. Heat is defined
> >as *flow* of thermal energy.
>
> No, that is heat TRANSER or FLOW.

No, heat is defined as transfer of thermal energy.

>
> The rock contains energy

Absolutely, it contains thermal energy, it does not contain heat.

> imparted to it by a heat source (
> there was transfer or flow at the time that happened )


> , and currently
> reflected in the increased molecular movement. That increase in
> motion did not slow down when you submerged it in water of the same
> temperature. That added energy is still in the rock.

Sure, it contains the same amount of thermal energy, it still does not
contain heat.

> That is what I
> am referring to as 'heat energy contained in the rock'.

On Sat, 25 Sep 2004 23:44:11 GMT, Randolph > wrote:

>
wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>> >> By that definition, if you heat a rock to 200 F, and then
>> >> place it in 200 F water, the rock no longer contains heat energy at
>> >> the moment you submerse it, because none will transfer to the water,
>> >> which is already at the same temperature. Once you take it out of the
>> >> water, now it suddenly contains heat energy again ???? Nonsense.
>> >
>> >The rock never *contained* heat, in or out of the water. Heat is defined
>> >as *flow* of thermal energy.
>>
>> No, that is heat TRANSER or FLOW.
>
>No, heat is defined as transfer of thermal energy.
>
>>
>> The rock contains energy
>
>Absolutely, it contains thermal energy, it does not contain heat.

OK, I don't draw a line between the two terms.

>> imparted to it by a heat source (
>> there was transfer or flow at the time that happened )
>
>
>> , and currently
>> reflected in the increased molecular movement. That increase in
>> motion did not slow down when you submerged it in water of the same
>> temperature. That added energy is still in the rock.
>
>Sure, it contains the same amount of thermal energy, it still does not
>contain heat.

Put your hand on it and tell me that :-) It contains LOTS of
heat, just WAITING to meet you :-)

The HEAT was there before you touched it, and some of it will
still be there after your screams of pain die down :-)

>> That is what I
>> am referring to as 'heat energy contained in the rock'.


Paul ( pjm @ pobox . com ) - remove spaces to email me
'Some days, it's just not worth chewing through the restraints.'

HVAC/R program for Palm PDA's
Free demo now available online http://pmilligan.net/palm/
Free Temperature / Pressure charts for 38 Ref's http://pmilligan.net/pmtherm/

James C. Reeves wrote:
> "Threeducks" > wrote in message
> ...
> |
> | A system does not contain "heat". Heat is simply a method of
> | transfering energy between the system and it's surroundings.
>
> I thought that *any* material with a temperature above "absolute zero" contains
> "heat".
>
Nope. Any undergraduate text in thermodynamics will explain it to you.

wrote:
> On Sat, 25 Sep 2004 20:55:26 GMT, Randolph > wrote:
>
>
>>"James C. Reeves" wrote:
>>
>>>"Threeducks" > wrote in message
...
>>>|
>>>| A system does not contain "heat". Heat is simply a method of
>>>| transfering energy between the system and it's surroundings.
>>>
>>>I thought that *any* material with a temperature above "absolute zero" contains
>>>"heat".
>>
>>No, a material can not contain heat. Heat, as Threeducks said, applies
>>only to thermal energy in transit. From Halliday / Resnick: Fundamentals
>>of Physics, 3rd edition, Wiley 1988:
>>
>>Page 464: "Heat is energy that flows between a system and its
>>environment by virtue of a temperature difference that exists between
>>them"
>
>
> That definition is bull****. It is wrong.
>
> They should correct their book, if it contains such nonsense.

Then they must need to correct every text book on thermodynamics ever
written.

>
> By that definition, if you heat a rock to 200 F, and then
> place it in 200 F water, the rock no longer contains heat energy at
> the moment you submerse it, because none will transfer to the water,
> which is already at the same temperature. Once you take it out of the
> water, now it suddenly contains heat energy again ???? Nonsense.

No, that is your misunderstanding of thermodynamics. Heat is one way
energy can be transfered from one object to another. For heat transfer
to exist, you need a finite temperature difference between objects.

The rock never contained "heat" energy. It had an internal energy,
which is based on temperature and its heat capacity.

>
> IE, their definition attempts to define heat energy as a
> relative thing, dependant on flow to exist. It is not.

Yes it is.
>
> Don't believe everything you read in books :-)
>
>
>>Page 465: "Both heat and work represents energy-in-transit between a
>>system and its environment. Heat and work, unlike temperature, pressure
>>and volume, are not intrinsic properties of a system. They have meaning
>>only as they describe energy transfers into or out of a system, adding
>>or subtracting from the system's store of internal energy.
>
>
> That is bull****. That is a possible description ( although a
> poor one ) of heat flow, not HEAT.
>

It is the correct definition and is the one that has been agreed upon by
the thermodynamics community for approximately 100 years.

>
>>(...) It is
>>without meaning to say: "This system contains 450 J of heat" or "This
>>system contains 385 J of work""
>
>
> True. At least they got ONE part right.
>
>
>
> Paul ( pjm @ pobox . com ) - remove spaces to email me
> 'Some days, it's just not worth chewing through the restraints.'
>
> HVAC/R program for Palm PDA's
> Free demo now available online http://pmilligan.net/palm/
> Free Temperature / Pressure charts for 38 Ref's http://pmilligan.net/pmtherm/

On Sat, 25 Sep 2004 22:51:49 -0400, Threeducks
> wrote:

wrote:
>> On Sat, 25 Sep 2004 20:55:26 GMT, Randolph > wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"James C. Reeves" wrote:
>>>
>>>>"Threeducks" > wrote in message
...
>>>>|
>>>>| A system does not contain "heat". Heat is simply a method of
>>>>| transfering energy between the system and it's surroundings.
>>>>
>>>>I thought that *any* material with a temperature above "absolute zero" contains
>>>>"heat".
>>>
>>>No, a material can not contain heat. Heat, as Threeducks said, applies
>>>only to thermal energy in transit. From Halliday / Resnick: Fundamentals
>>>of Physics, 3rd edition, Wiley 1988:
>>>
>>>Page 464: "Heat is energy that flows between a system and its
>>>environment by virtue of a temperature difference that exists between
>>>them"
>>
>>
>> That definition is bull****. It is wrong.
>>
>> They should correct their book, if it contains such nonsense.
>
>Then they must need to correct every text book on thermodynamics ever
>written.

Sounds like they have some work to do ;-)

>
>>
>> By that definition, if you heat a rock to 200 F, and then
>> place it in 200 F water, the rock no longer contains heat energy at
>> the moment you submerse it, because none will transfer to the water,
>> which is already at the same temperature. Once you take it out of the
>> water, now it suddenly contains heat energy again ???? Nonsense.
>
>No, that is your misunderstanding of thermodynamics. Heat is one way
>energy can be transfered from one object to another. For heat transfer
>to exist, you need a finite temperature difference between objects.
>
>The rock never contained "heat" energy. It had an internal energy,
>which is based on temperature and its heat capacity.

I'm too busy to play with the semantics. And that's all it
is.


>
>>
>> IE, their definition attempts to define heat energy as a
>> relative thing, dependant on flow to exist. It is not.
>
>Yes it is.
>>
>> Don't believe everything you read in books :-)
>>
>>
>>>Page 465: "Both heat and work represents energy-in-transit between a
>>>system and its environment. Heat and work, unlike temperature, pressure
>>>and volume, are not intrinsic properties of a system. They have meaning
>>>only as they describe energy transfers into or out of a system, adding
>>>or subtracting from the system's store of internal energy.
>>
>>
>> That is bull****. That is a possible description ( although a
>> poor one ) of heat flow, not HEAT.
>>
>
>It is the correct definition and is the one that has been agreed upon by
>the thermodynamics community for approximately 100 years.
>
>>
>>>(...) It is
>>>without meaning to say: "This system contains 450 J of heat" or "This
>>>system contains 385 J of work""
>>
>>
>> True. At least they got ONE part right.
>>
>>
>>
>> Paul ( pjm @ pobox . com ) - remove spaces to email me
>> 'Some days, it's just not worth chewing through the restraints.'
>>
>> HVAC/R program for Palm PDA's
>> Free demo now available online http://pmilligan.net/palm/
>> Free Temperature / Pressure charts for 38 Ref's http://pmilligan.net/pmtherm/


Paul ( pjm @ pobox . com ) - remove spaces to email me
'Some days, it's just not worth chewing through the restraints.'

HVAC/R program for Palm PDA's
Free demo now available online http://pmilligan.net/palm/
Free Temperature / Pressure charts for 38 Ref's http://pmilligan.net/pmtherm/

wrote:
> On Sat, 25 Sep 2004 23:44:11 GMT, Randolph > wrote:
>
>
wrote:
>>
>><snip>
>>
>>>>> By that definition, if you heat a rock to 200 F, and then
>>>>>place it in 200 F water, the rock no longer contains heat energy at
>>>>>the moment you submerse it, because none will transfer to the water,
>>>>>which is already at the same temperature. Once you take it out of the
>>>>>water, now it suddenly contains heat energy again ???? Nonsense.
>>>>
>>>>The rock never *contained* heat, in or out of the water. Heat is defined
>>>>as *flow* of thermal energy.
>>>
>>> No, that is heat TRANSER or FLOW.
>>
>>No, heat is defined as transfer of thermal energy.
>>
>>
>>> The rock contains energy
>>
>>Absolutely, it contains thermal energy, it does not contain heat.
>
>
> OK, I don't draw a line between the two terms.

And you are wrong. What you are saying is on the order of defining your
own color system and expecting everyone to go along with it.

>
>
>>>imparted to it by a heat source (
>>>there was transfer or flow at the time that happened )
>>
>>
>>>, and currently
>>>reflected in the increased molecular movement. That increase in
>>>motion did not slow down when you submerged it in water of the same
>>>temperature. That added energy is still in the rock.
>>
>>Sure, it contains the same amount of thermal energy, it still does not
>>contain heat.
>
>
> Put your hand on it and tell me that :-) It contains LOTS of
> heat, just WAITING to meet you :-)

The transfer of energy through a finite temperature difference is
"heat", but the rock doesn't "contain" heat. It contains a lot of
internal energy, which is related through the heat capacity dU=CvdT.

<snip>

On Sun, 26 Sep 2004 PJM > wrote:

>>>> No, a material can not contain heat. Heat, as Threeducks said,
>>>> applies only to thermal energy in transit. From Halliday / Resnick:
>>>> Fundamentals of Physics, 3rd edition, Wiley 1988: Page 464: "Heat is
>>>> energy that flows between a system and its environment by virtue of a
>>>> temperature difference that exists between them"

>>> That definition is bull****. It is wrong.

> >No, that is your misunderstanding of thermodynamics. Heat is one way
> >energy can be transfered from one object to another. For heat transfer
> >to exist, you need a finite temperature difference between objects.

> I'm too busy to play with the semantics. And that's all it is.

Spazzing on about "semantics" is the mark of an idiot caught with his
intellectual pants not only down, but torn and full of poo.

But sure, fine, whatever, I'll play: You're right and the entire rest of
the world is wrong. Here's a cookie. While I've got your omniscient
attention, perhaps you can share with us your correct definitions of
"green" and "wet" and "42"? I've been just slavishly adhering to the
explicitly defined definitions for those terms, just goin' along with the
rest of the world, but I'm sure you have more accurate definitions, so
please elucidate!

DS