134a Refrigerant

Yes I've used a sexton and an atomic clock radio to find my
position, it was apart of my ARMY surveyors training:
http://www.billhughes.com/trigmarker.jpg It was my job to give an
azimuth, and distance to target coordinance longitude and latitude.
reminds me, as a bleeding heart liberal, you've never done anything in
the service to our country, have you?
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O


Stephen Cowell wrote:
>
> "L.W. (ßill) Hughes III" > wrote in message ...
> > Stevie, I can't believe you can asked the same stupid question over, and
> > over again! You must have bought your diploma from a school like
> > Berkeley we saw on television the other day. OK, once again the answer
> > is: everyone knows except apparently you the winds blow away from the
> > equator to the west, west, north in our northern hemisphere and just the
> > opposite on the other side of the equator, to the east, east, south.
> > This proves all bleeding heart liberals are liars, for overlooking that
> > fact, in their attempt to blame American's chlorofluorocarbons for the
> > ozone holes in the southern hemisphere. Physically impossible!
>
> So if I go stand on the Equator, then magically the air from
> the North side will only blow North, and the air from the
> South side will only blow South? What about the vacuum
> in between? And what keeps the air one foot north from
> mixing with the air one foot south? And what about mid-
> Spring or Fall, and the Sun is at vertex at one of the
> Tropics? Have you ever seen the Analemma, Bill?
> It means that the Sun is not always directly overhead
> at the Equator... it goes back and forth. This creates
> high and low pressure zones on different sides of the
> Equator... and we know what that means!
>
> What if I breathe air one foot north, then walk over
> and breathe it out one foot south? Will an Atmospheric
> Policeman stop me?
> __
> Steve
> .

Bill you are wrong on this one.

Bleeding hearts serve their country by NOT serving. What kind of shape
would our military be in if we waffled in the wind or kept repeating "That
is NOT a 155 the enemy is about to fire, that is NOT a 155 the enemy is
about to fire" or refused to fire their weapon while being over-run on the
grounds on the effect of cordite on the atmosphere.


"L.W. ("ßill") Hughes III" > wrote in message
...
> Yes I've used a sexton and an atomic clock radio to find my
> position, it was apart of my ARMY surveyors training:
> http://www.billhughes.com/trigmarker.jpg It was my job to give an
> azimuth, and distance to target coordinance longitude and latitude.
> reminds me, as a bleeding heart liberal, you've never done anything in
> the service to our country, have you?
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
>
>
> Stephen Cowell wrote:
>>
>> "L.W. (ßill) Hughes III" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > Stevie, I can't believe you can asked the same stupid question over,
>> > and
>> > over again! You must have bought your diploma from a school like
>> > Berkeley we saw on television the other day. OK, once again the answer
>> > is: everyone knows except apparently you the winds blow away from the
>> > equator to the west, west, north in our northern hemisphere and just
>> > the
>> > opposite on the other side of the equator, to the east, east, south.
>> > This proves all bleeding heart liberals are liars, for overlooking that
>> > fact, in their attempt to blame American's chlorofluorocarbons for the
>> > ozone holes in the southern hemisphere. Physically impossible!
>>
>> So if I go stand on the Equator, then magically the air from
>> the North side will only blow North, and the air from the
>> South side will only blow South? What about the vacuum
>> in between? And what keeps the air one foot north from
>> mixing with the air one foot south? And what about mid-
>> Spring or Fall, and the Sun is at vertex at one of the
>> Tropics? Have you ever seen the Analemma, Bill?
>> It means that the Sun is not always directly overhead
>> at the Equator... it goes back and forth. This creates
>> high and low pressure zones on different sides of the
>> Equator... and we know what that means!
>>
>> What if I breathe air one foot north, then walk over
>> and breathe it out one foot south? Will an Atmospheric
>> Policeman stop me?
>> __
>> Steve
>> .

"Stephen Cowell" > wrote in message
. ..
> Heavier than the components summed individually?

no, but as hard as you try to spin i just wont let you. the individual
weights dont matter until the compound is broken down. refrigerant is
heavier than cholorine which is heavier than air making it even harder for
refrigerant to reach the ozone than chlorine (although it would be dissolved
by the sunlight much in the same way you have to keep adding chlorine to a
pool).


> 2 is not heavier than 1+1... that's the point.

TRANSLATION --> "im wrong so ill spin a herring"


> the combined components are not heavier
> than the original components.

the combined components are heavier than the individual components
individually thus making it even harder for refrigerant to reach the ozone
layer. a layer of refrigerant would settle below layers of the individual
elements that make it up.

--
Nathan W. Collier
http://InlineDiesel.com
http://7SlotGrille.com
http://UtilityOffRoad.com

"Stephen Cowell" > wrote in message
. ..
>> TRANSLATION --> "youre right"

>No really... too funny!

TRANSLATION --> "youre still right"

:-)

--
Nathan W. Collier
http://InlineDiesel.com
http://7SlotGrille.com
http://UtilityOffRoad.com

"Stephen Cowell" > wrote in message
. ..
> > Refrigeration not part of HVAC?
>
> nope. thats what you get for asking your sisters husbands brother.

> How about Google?

i dont give a damn what google says. refrigeration is not part of hvac.
hvac = heating ventilation air condition. nothing in there about
refrigeration. hvac/r on the other hand.....


> Well, describe how I 'choked'

lol so you can continue to spin away and ask the same question over and over
ignoring my intial answer like a little kid not getting his way? :-)
initially you choked by stating it was hvac related. secondly you choked by
suggesting you could simply bypass it (thats what you get for asking someone
else who is as ignorant as you). finally youve yet to give me an
alternative solution to replacing a failed HMC in a pinch.

but your failure is no surprise......just add it to your long list. :-)


>TRANSLATION--> "I'd better back away from that one!"

wow......thanks for the sincere flattery. :-)


> Actually, I don't give a **** *what* you think you said
> about any HMC

TRANSLATION --> "im mad because i choked on it" :-)

> Freon's
> a compound, and you're stuck with it!

freon is a brand name, but i wouldnt expect you to say anything factual.

> I actually gave a pretty good explanation of how it
> could be used

lol.....only in your ignorant mind! :-) give your little explanation in a
room full of experienced refrigeration techs and watch how many choke. :-)


> I asked nobody... and you can't prove otherwise.

TRANSLATION --> "i asked another ignorant fool" :-)

--
Nathan W. Collier
http://InlineDiesel.com
http://7SlotGrille.com
http://UtilityOffRoad.com

"Stephen Cowell" > wrote in message
. ..


2 is not heavier than 1+1... that's the point.

Never claimed it to be, I asked my question using a "per unit volume" frame
of reference. The correct answer to my question is "not always."

Were you born this stupid, or did you have to take lessons at it later
in life???? Miscibility of water and alcohol has nothing to do with
"density" and likewise nothing to do with molecule size. BTW, three
component phase diagrams are pretty cool things with some nice saddles
and inflections where the miscibility gaps are. This miscibility gap is
why there is only a certain amount of water that can be absorbed by dry
gas, even though alcohol and gasoline are fully miscible, and water and
alcohol are fully miscible.

--
jeff



L.W.(ßill) Hughes III wrote:
> Geez, I guess you never had to add and additive (alcohol) to your
> gas tank to suck up water, to pass it though the system.
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> http://www.billhughes.com/
>
>
> jeff wrote:
>

LOL

"BillyRay" > wrote in message
...
> Bill you are wrong on this one.
>
> Bleeding hearts serve their country by NOT serving. What kind of shape
> would our military be in if we waffled in the wind or kept repeating
> "That is NOT a 155 the enemy is about to fire, that is NOT a 155 the enemy
> is about to fire" or refused to fire their weapon while being over-run on
> the grounds on the effect of cordite on the atmosphere.
>
>
> "L.W. ("ßill") Hughes III" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Yes I've used a sexton and an atomic clock radio to find my
>> position, it was apart of my ARMY surveyors training:
>> http://www.billhughes.com/trigmarker.jpg It was my job to give an
>> azimuth, and distance to target coordinance longitude and latitude.
>> reminds me, as a bleeding heart liberal, you've never done anything in
>> the service to our country, have you?
>> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
>>
>>
>> Stephen Cowell wrote:
>>>
>>> "L.W. (ßill) Hughes III" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>> > Stevie, I can't believe you can asked the same stupid question over,
>>> > and
>>> > over again! You must have bought your diploma from a school like
>>> > Berkeley we saw on television the other day. OK, once again the answer
>>> > is: everyone knows except apparently you the winds blow away from the
>>> > equator to the west, west, north in our northern hemisphere and just
>>> > the
>>> > opposite on the other side of the equator, to the east, east, south.
>>> > This proves all bleeding heart liberals are liars, for overlooking
>>> > that
>>> > fact, in their attempt to blame American's chlorofluorocarbons for the
>>> > ozone holes in the southern hemisphere. Physically impossible!
>>>
>>> So if I go stand on the Equator, then magically the air from
>>> the North side will only blow North, and the air from the
>>> South side will only blow South? What about the vacuum
>>> in between? And what keeps the air one foot north from
>>> mixing with the air one foot south? And what about mid-
>>> Spring or Fall, and the Sun is at vertex at one of the
>>> Tropics? Have you ever seen the Analemma, Bill?
>>> It means that the Sun is not always directly overhead
>>> at the Equator... it goes back and forth. This creates
>>> high and low pressure zones on different sides of the
>>> Equator... and we know what that means!
>>>
>>> What if I breathe air one foot north, then walk over
>>> and breathe it out one foot south? Will an Atmospheric
>>> Policeman stop me?
>>> __
>>> Steve
>>> .
>
>

Ok, so the "Mr. Science" answer for an eight year old satisfies you. In
the words of Harry Callahan, "A man's got to know his limitations".
Miscibility is the key to the closer inter-molecular packing, but since
you are happy, I won't go into polar solutions, ionic substances, London
Dispersion and induced dipole-dipole attraction.

--
jeff


BillyRay wrote:
> Jeff, This is America and you certainly have the right to disagree. You
> also have the right to be wrong which is good in this case as you are
> incorrect in your disagreement.
>
> I will refer you to this page from the Argonne National Labrotory where this
> question is answered by the Science, Math, and Computer Science Education
> Department for a 8 year old..
> http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasc.../chem03197.htm
>
>
>
>
>
> "jeff" > wrote in message
> news:1QVAe.17423$Zy6.1897@trnddc04...
>
>>BillyRay wrote:
>>
>>>Close but no. Miscibility only is a reference to the solutions ability
>>>to mix. The answer is the alcohol molecules are smaller than water
>>>molecules and some will "fit" in between the water molecules
>>>
>>>"jeff" > wrote in message
>>>news:%nOAe.7548$8N5.311@trnddc09...
>>>
>>>
>>>>BillyRay wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>How come when you mix a cup of alcohol and a cup of water you get LESS
>>>>>than 2 cups of the mixed materials?
>>>>
>>>>Miscibility.
>>
>>I disagree. Molecule size has nothing to do with it. Consider that there
>>is a large difference in molecule size between oil and water molecules so
>>they should fit comfortably between each other, but because they are
>>immiscible the mixed volume stays the same and no mater how hard you shake
>>it, there are still two separate phases. Read the following three
>>definitions. The key to complete miscibility is the ability to form a
>>single phase solution.
>>
>>1) immiscible. immiscibility.
>>Two liquids are considered "immiscible" or unmixable if shaking equal
>>volumes of the liquids together results in a meniscus visible between two
>>layers of liquid. If the liquids are completely immiscible, the volumes of
>>the liquid layers are the same as the volumes of liquids orginally added
>>to the mixture.
>>
>>2) miscible. miscibility; liquid miscibility.
>>Two liquids are considered "miscible" or mixable if shaking them together
>>results in a single liquid phase, with no meniscus visible between layers
>>of liquid.
>>
>>3) partial miscibility.
>>Two liquids are considered partially miscible if shaking equal volumes of
>>the liquids together results in a meniscus visible between two layers of
>>liquid, but the volumes of the layers are not identical to the volumes of
>>the liquids originally added.
>>
>>--
>>jeff
>
>
>

Okay, if you want a more technically correct answer continue reading. Let me
know if you want to go into the mathematics.

There are many examples of liquids that have a negative volume of mixing.
The reasons are not always evident, and are frequently restatements of "It
happens because it happens." rather than providing a fundamental explanation
that can be independently tested experimentally.

In the case of ethanol and water, the "reason" is that liquid water has a
rather "open" structure due to hydrogen bonding. The same is not so true of
ethanol. So when the two are mixed, the ethanol interferes with this "open"
structure of water and causes it to "collapse", and hence reduce the volume
relative to the sum of the volumes of the components.

A related property of water is the minimum in the molar volume at about 4C
(at sea level).

If a water soluble solid has an "open" structure that can be made more
compact by dissolving, one would expect a similar result.

It is difficult to predict if and when it will happen because it could also
depend upon the temperature and the pressure at which the components are
mixed. ...


"jeff" > wrote in message
news:7Z7Be.50980$ZN6.47321@trnddc02...
> Ok, so the "Mr. Science" answer for an eight year old satisfies you. In
> the words of Harry Callahan, "A man's got to know his limitations".
> Miscibility is the key to the closer inter-molecular packing, but since
> you are happy, I won't go into polar solutions, ionic substances, London
> Dispersion and induced dipole-dipole attraction.
>
> --
> jeff
>
>
> BillyRay wrote:
>> Jeff, This is America and you certainly have the right to disagree. You
>> also have the right to be wrong which is good in this case as you are
>> incorrect in your disagreement.
>>
>> I will refer you to this page from the Argonne National Labrotory where
>> this question is answered by the Science, Math, and Computer Science
>> Education Department for a 8 year old..
>> http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasc.../chem03197.htm
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> "jeff" > wrote in message
>> news:1QVAe.17423$Zy6.1897@trnddc04...
>>
>>>BillyRay wrote:
>>>
>>>>Close but no. Miscibility only is a reference to the solutions ability
>>>>to mix. The answer is the alcohol molecules are smaller than water
>>>>molecules and some will "fit" in between the water molecules
>>>>
>>>>"jeff" > wrote in message
>>>>news:%nOAe.7548$8N5.311@trnddc09...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>BillyRay wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>How come when you mix a cup of alcohol and a cup of water you get LESS
>>>>>>than 2 cups of the mixed materials?
>>>>>
>>>>>Miscibility.
>>>
>>>I disagree. Molecule size has nothing to do with it. Consider that there
>>>is a large difference in molecule size between oil and water molecules so
>>>they should fit comfortably between each other, but because they are
>>>immiscible the mixed volume stays the same and no mater how hard you
>>>shake it, there are still two separate phases. Read the following three
>>>definitions. The key to complete miscibility is the ability to form a
>>>single phase solution.
>>>
>>>1) immiscible. immiscibility.
>>>Two liquids are considered "immiscible" or unmixable if shaking equal
>>>volumes of the liquids together results in a meniscus visible between two
>>>layers of liquid. If the liquids are completely immiscible, the volumes
>>>of the liquid layers are the same as the volumes of liquids orginally
>>>added to the mixture.
>>>
>>>2) miscible. miscibility; liquid miscibility.
>>>Two liquids are considered "miscible" or mixable if shaking them together
>>>results in a single liquid phase, with no meniscus visible between layers
>>>of liquid.
>>>
>>>3) partial miscibility.
>>>Two liquids are considered partially miscible if shaking equal volumes of
>>>the liquids together results in a meniscus visible between two layers of
>>>liquid, but the volumes of the layers are not identical to the volumes of
>>>the liquids originally added.
>>>
>>>--
>>>jeff
>>
>>