They take into account different driving conditions. Diesels are good for hiway cruising, but are terrible in stop-and-go traffic. Hybrids are basically the opposite, and traditional petrol is somewhere in between.
I disagree with this. My old man had a Mitsubishi turbo diesel pickup back in the 80's. It would get close to 40mpg during normal driving, and had enough power that you could spin the rear tires on dry pavement when shifting to 2nd gear under heavy acceleration. It drove just like a gas-powered vehicle, other than having more torque. I also have a buddy that drives a 3/4 ton 4 wheel drive Chevy with the Duramax diesel. It also drives like a gas-powered vehicle.
There is very little difference between driving a diesel or gas rig in traffic any more. Yeah, the diesel is going to be a little noisier due to its much higher compression ratio, but that's it. The newer diesels aren't your grandfather's diesels that had the red line set on the tach at about 2000 rpm, and that's what made them a little harder to drive in traffic as you had to run through the gears very quickly to keep from over-revving the engine when you accelerated.
It couldn't possibly be that there are people who honestly disagree with you could it?
It could be. In fact, it's likely. However, do not doubt the propaganda efforts of the government. The DoD and many other organizations absolutely employ astroturf bloggers. Their posts are often as sincere as yours, but rarely as condescending.
I know the US government does monitor, and does infiltrate and investigate both criminal and terrorist orgs online. They need to do that. It's an integral part of law enforcement today, as it should be.
However, this idea that the government is the one doing most of astroturfing is ridiculous. Socialist groups do a ton of astroturfing and spreading their propaganda online. The conservatives don't do nearly as much as leftists in this regard.
Look at this site. Almost any defense of conservative values and viewpoints is modded as trolling or flamebait. Take your own post for instance. The post I replied to was far more aggressive, one-sided, and demeaning than mine(which is why I replied to it the way I did), but you chose to criticize me and let the truly negative poster slide because his post was left-leaning and anti-government.
I should point out that Bear, my pup, only shakes and then runs around like a maniac after I've toweled him to a point of being mostly dry, and that he loves getting wrapped up in a towel to keep him warm and get the majority of the water out of his fur.
He does very similar things when he's playing with my wife and I too when he's really hyper. He'll run in circles around me, the living room, through the kitchen and back, just as hard as he can go, with his tail wagging like crazy and a look of pure bliss on his face.
He really hated getting a bath at first, but he's much less bothered by it now. He's getting to the point he stands still for it and doesn't whine anymore. He's even stopped fighting when we brush the knots out of his coat after his bath.
No. That's not correct. Facebook is an unethical business. It lies. It deceives its users. Deceit is not required to be in business. There are ethical and unethical businesses and which type of business they are depends on the morals of the people who run them. Dishonest people run unethical businesses. Honest people run ethical businesses. Do not lump the honest people in with the dishonest ones. They are nowhere near being alike. They are at opposite ends of the spectrum.
My dog, at three months old, has adopted that same method, only he looks at me and says, deal with it, I'm a 3 pound bastard so you just try and stop me. He then runs all around the house like a maniac another couple of times rubbing against everything made of fabric.... I think it's probably his favorite thing to do. He looks and acts like he's having more fun than a barrel of monkeys. I don't think I could stop him with anything less than a.45.
What possible application could this research be for? In what way does this benefit mankind, expand out understanding of the universe, or improve the Human Condition. And perhaps the most important question, what moron paid for this? Please tell me it wasn't taxpayer money, because then technically I am one of the morons, and I don't very much appreciate it!
The application of the study? To prove how easy it is to waste government money. It's another form of welfare.
In what way does this study benefit mankind? It shows how well socialism works in that it takes money belonging to you and I and gives it to someone who has done nothing to earn it without our permission.
What moron paid for this? You and I did, just like everything else that socialism says it gives away for free.
Ah, yes, the "MS can't change because/. readers bash it for its history of, shall we say, less than ethical behavior" argument. [sarcasm]Yeah,/. readers have real influence. They have so much power over MS that MS can't become an ethical organization because of what/. readers have to say about its past..... [/sarcasm]
I can't believe anyone made that ridiculous argument. Just who would have made such an argument? Why, another MS shill of course. I doubt anyone else could have been that desperate.
It couldn't possibly be that there are people who honestly disagree with you could it? You know, citizens of the US that actually understand its history, its founding principles, and hate where people with your ideology desire to take it? Couldn't possibly be that some of those people see you as a traitor with your distorted, warped anger towards that which you cannot understand for you do not even understand the consequences of that which you espouse.
You're assertions are out of line. Assange put many people at risk of death, including citizens of Afghanistan, by publishing documents without even removing information that personally identifies civilians that terrorists would love to get their hands on. That ought to outrage everyone, including his supporters, as he has no sense of the worth of a human life.
He's an asshat. He proved he's only out for self-glorification, and doesn't give a damn how many people are hurt by his actions. I sure won't shed any tears of the demise of Wikileaks as long as he's at the head of it. Even many of those working with him on Wikileaks resigned rather put up with him.
I would do the same thing the US government did to shut him down. He's a egomaniac that puts innocents in harms way just so he can attack his perceived enemies faster. He could have delayed publishing the documents but he wouldn't as he runs off of hatred, not principle. He's no one to follow or support in any way.
Dude, I doubt that you are able to figure out that nearly all of the debt belongs to your people (republicants).
LOL. You're a funny guy. Your ignorance astounds me. In 19 months Obama has increased our national debt by $2.560 trillion. That's $335 billion more than the combined debt of the first 34 Presidents. Add to that the fact that Obama's budget calls for running $1 billion per year deficits for the next decade with his Obama care mess, and Obama is going to more than triple the debt of all previous Presidents combined.
You're the idiot. Every high starting torque application in which electric motors are used they have gear reduction boxes, you know, transmissions. Electric cars, planes, trains, motorcycles, etc... all do the same thing. None of them omit a gearbox of one type or another. If they could, they would, for it would save the manufacturers a ton of money and increase their profit margins.
I've worked with, repaired, and understand electric motors. That was an integral part of my working life for more than two decades. I know what works, and what doesn't. And on top of my real world experience I have formal training in electrical theory. I understand exactly what's going on in theory and in reality with electric motors.
I know electric motors have more torque, but you don't start them against extremely high levels of resistance. Plus, the highest starting torque electric motors are 3 phase AC motors, which you aren't going to have on a semi. Other types of electric motors have significantly less starting torque.
I've worked as a maintenance mechanic in industrial environments and I know what kind of torque an electric motor will start and run under without burning itself up. I have real world experience, how much do you have? Plus, I have a couple of years formal schooling in electrical theory.
If you would actually think about what you're trying to do you would see the difficulty involved. In a worst case electric-powered semi scenario you're going to try to move something like 30 - 40 tons from a dead stop up an 8% grade. Now, electric cranes do that easily, but they use a lot of gear reduction, you know, single speed transmissions, to increase the starting torque available from the electric motor. That's also how they can slowly lift and lower heavy loads. Direct drive electric motors just aren't used in high starting torque applications. .
We now have modern electric cars with far, far lower required torque loads to move the car than are required to move a heavily loaded semi. Take the Tesla for example as most people have heard of it. Guess what. It has a transmission. It's a single speed gearbox designed to increase torque from a standing start. There you have it, the electric motor doesn't have enough torque to effectively get the car rolling from a dead stop. It needs the torque multiplication available from a transmission to help it along.
The same thing done in electric cars, electric cranes, and high starting torque industrial motor applications is done with electric motorcycles too. They have single speed gear boxes to increase motor torque for taking off and for higher loads. This ought to show you that your idea is a pipe dream because if what you're proposing could be done, it would be done because it's cheaper than including a gear box. Your idea just isn't practical in the real world.
Likewise, for a semi, the bulk of the time, the semi is cruising. As such, a simple engine/generator/motor can provide the power to move it.
You must be a member of the flat earth society. In the real world most state, and all interstate, highways have hills, valleys, and mountain ranges that they must cross. No transmission-less electric motor will have the power or torque to deal with that terrain. And, transmissions in high gear, which is used for cruising, are 1:1 gearing, iow's direct drive. The reason for transmissions is to supply the necessary torque to the wheels for driving conditions that require high torque, such as starting under heavy load, climbing, and descending steep hills so engine compression can be used to slow the heavily loaded vehicle as using brakes only will burn the brakes up long before the bottom of the hill is reached.
Sometimes I wonder how some of you "green people" get along in the real world with your naively idealistic ideas. Ideals are good, but they have to be tempered with reality. Would I like a world without pollution? Yup. Would I like to drink out of the river near my home like I used to be able to do from the mountain streams where I grew up? Yup. On top of that I'd like to see corruption destroyed in both business and politics. I'd like a world in which I could go away for a week and not have to lock the doors on my house because I could trust people. I"d like a world in which we didn't need laws and police to control behavior because people would choose to control themselves and love their neighbor.
I would like all of the above, but I also realize that human nature being what it is that my ideals are not going to be met unless human nature itself changes. In the meantime, all I can control is my own behavior. I, nor anyone else, can force human nature to be anything other than it is. And, unless the basic physics of electric motors change a transmission-less electric motor isn't going to power heavily loaded semi's from a dead stop, or up one side of a mountain pass and act as a brake down the other. If you had ever worked in an environment in which several hundred horsepower electric motors are used you would know that too. Get some real world experience and allow it to temper your idealism with reality. Don't allow your idealism to be destroyed, but understand how your ideals can be implemented in real world ways that don't destroy other people's jobs and lives, and your nation's economy.
Montana speed limits are a fairly recent thing. Back in the 70's my old man got pulled over in eastern Montana for impeding traffic. He was doing 85 at the time, and getting passed by everyone. The state trooper told him to pick it up or he would write him a ticket.
That's been gone for a while now by order of the federal government under the guise of safety. However, accidents on those roads have gone up since then from drivers going to sleep at the wheel as the roads go for many miles without a corner or change of scenery and people just nod off from boredom. As far as I'm concerned this was just another instance in a long line of the feds bullying the states over the last half dozen or so decades just to get people used to seeing the feds interfere with everything.
And in fact my empirical studies, purely academic of course, have shown that the temperature of the liquid does not rise significantly over 83 C until all the alcohol has been evaporated.
Yeah, there's a technical term for that. It's called latent heat. As long as the alcohol is absorbing latent heat, in this case the amount of heat (btu's) needed for the alcohol to change state to a gas, the measured temperature of any of the liquid will not change. As for the latent heat required to evaporate methyl, propyl, and ethanol alcohols is 335 - 473 btu's. The boiling point is ~172 degrees Fahrenheit. All of these specs are well below those of water.
I see. An opportunity now equals a right. I've been wondering how the progressives reach many of their conclusions. Now I understand where they are coming from. They make up their own word definitions as they go.;)
Especially in an oven, where is the alcohol gonna go?
For those people, like you, who have never used an oven, air circulation is designed into all ovens. There is no door seal around the bottom of the oven door, and there is a vent built into the roof of the oven that exits, in the vast majority of cases, under the right rear burner. If there were no air circulation in an oven nothing would brown on top, such as cookies, cakes, turkey, chicken, etc... and nothing would cook evenly.
Turn on your oven and let it warm up. Then put your hand over the right rear burner and you will feel the warm air rising. For those of you with glass top ranges the oven will vent elsewhere, usually out the back.
So where does the alcohol go? It evaporates into the air in the oven and exits the oven through the vent, as the wiki article only mentions cases where the alcohol is NOT stirred into the mixture or the dish is removed from the heat as soon as the alcohol is added, and if you had ever made a pie crust from scratch you'd know that the water used is part and parcel of the dough of the pie crust itself. That alone removes it from the wiki list of examples. Furthermore, a baked pie crust is very dry without the filling, meaning the liquid used to make the dough has been evaporated during the baking process, and alcohol evaporates faster than water so it is the first liquid to evaporate. And, yes, you bake the crust before you add the filling.
Well, it's obvious that you have a hard time with the English language so how much you understood of what you readed(sic) and heard is up for debate....
The past tense of the verb read is read. Same word, same spelling, just pronounced differently. The past tense is pronounced the the same as the color red. Learn to use a dictionary.
Further evidence of your lack of English skills is your user name. Once again your understanding of grammar is very poor. You need to understand subject/verb agreement. The two turtles move. The single turtle moves.
Even more evidence of your lack of English skills is your misunderstanding of how and when to use your and you're.
Your shows ownership. It's possessive. It's your lack of grammar skills that call into question your ability to comprehend what you read. Your grammar skills belong to you.
You're is the contraction for you are. It shows action as it's a noun and verb together. It says you are doing something. You're not parsing the English language correctly so you're quite likely to draw mistaken conclusions from your reading.
So many mistakes in three sentences. I figured you needed the help as you obviously didn't learn these things in school, and any intelligent person wouldn't want to go on repeating such basic mistakes over and over again as they make you look ignorant and like you have less than a 6th grade education.
You need to go back and ask for a refund at all previous schools you have attended as problems like this are systemic to the educational system itself. The system passed you along whether you learned what you needed to know at that level or not. That's a huge disservice to the students in that system. That educational system failed you on a very basic level. They didn't teach you, and that's about as basic, and as serious, as educational failures can get.
You are correct, but just a mere few hundred years ago the fastest we could move was a dozen or so miles in a day. I am optimistic that if we don't manage to destroy ourselves we'll find means of providing energy and types of propulsion that would seem like magic to us today (kudos to A.C. Clarke for the reference).
Untrue, and provably so. Viking ships averaged 10 or 11 knots per hour. That's 12 to 13.2 mph, or approximately 144-160 miles in a 12 hour sailing day.
The better mustangs ridden in the Old West here in the US could do 100 miles in a day, but couldn't keep that up for more than a day or so. They could do 40-50 miles a day and keep that up for a week or two. The Apache warriors were known for their endurance. There are documented runs by Apache warriors of 13 hours at 9 miles an hour. That's more than 120 miles a day.
Well, you're someone else here on/. that doesn't understand the English language.
solve verb \sälv, solv\ solvedsolving Definition of SOLVE transitive verb 1 : to find a solution, explanation, or answer for
The past tense of solve is solved. That means the final solution, the final answer, to the mystery has been found and the mystery that once was is now in the past. To solve a problem/mystery does not mean to just better understand it. In logical terms "better understanding" is necessary, but not sufficient for a solution.
None of the researchers involved even begin to say that they know all the answers to solving this mystery. They say they have found two medical issues that are found in 100% of the affected bee populations, but they do not say they have 100% of the answers. They do not say the case has been solved and the mystery is in the past. They do not say this virus/fungus combination is the only cause, only that in combination they are fatal. There are other factors involved and they say that very clearly.
So, the headline is: Mystery of the Dying Bees Solved.
The first sentence in the first paragraph says: jamie points out news of a study attempting to explain the decline of honeybee populations across the US.
I guess "attempting to explain" now means "solved". The English language sure is changing rapidly here on/..
Slashdot Mirror
They take into account different driving conditions. Diesels are good for hiway cruising, but are terrible in stop-and-go traffic. Hybrids are basically the opposite, and traditional petrol is somewhere in between.
I disagree with this. My old man had a Mitsubishi turbo diesel pickup back in the 80's. It would get close to 40mpg during normal driving, and had enough power that you could spin the rear tires on dry pavement when shifting to 2nd gear under heavy acceleration. It drove just like a gas-powered vehicle, other than having more torque. I also have a buddy that drives a 3/4 ton 4 wheel drive Chevy with the Duramax diesel. It also drives like a gas-powered vehicle.
There is very little difference between driving a diesel or gas rig in traffic any more. Yeah, the diesel is going to be a little noisier due to its much higher compression ratio, but that's it. The newer diesels aren't your grandfather's diesels that had the red line set on the tach at about 2000 rpm, and that's what made them a little harder to drive in traffic as you had to run through the gears very quickly to keep from over-revving the engine when you accelerated.
It could be. In fact, it's likely. However, do not doubt the propaganda efforts of the government. The DoD and many other organizations absolutely employ astroturf bloggers. Their posts are often as sincere as yours, but rarely as condescending.
I know the US government does monitor, and does infiltrate and investigate both criminal and terrorist orgs online. They need to do that. It's an integral part of law enforcement today, as it should be.
However, this idea that the government is the one doing most of astroturfing is ridiculous. Socialist groups do a ton of astroturfing and spreading their propaganda online. The conservatives don't do nearly as much as leftists in this regard.
Look at this site. Almost any defense of conservative values and viewpoints is modded as trolling or flamebait. Take your own post for instance. The post I replied to was far more aggressive, one-sided, and demeaning than mine(which is why I replied to it the way I did), but you chose to criticize me and let the truly negative poster slide because his post was left-leaning and anti-government.
I should point out that Bear, my pup, only shakes and then runs around like a maniac after I've toweled him to a point of being mostly dry, and that he loves getting wrapped up in a towel to keep him warm and get the majority of the water out of his fur.
He does very similar things when he's playing with my wife and I too when he's really hyper. He'll run in circles around me, the living room, through the kitchen and back, just as hard as he can go, with his tail wagging like crazy and a look of pure bliss on his face.
He really hated getting a bath at first, but he's much less bothered by it now. He's getting to the point he stands still for it and doesn't whine anymore. He's even stopped fighting when we brush the knots out of his coat after his bath.
There's only 1 way to test your hypothesis....
LOL. That assumes I want to stop him.
He's having so much fun running around like a maniac that his joy is contagious. He makes me smile. His happiness at being alive makes me happy.
No. That's not correct. Facebook is an unethical business. It lies. It deceives its users. Deceit is not required to be in business. There are ethical and unethical businesses and which type of business they are depends on the morals of the people who run them. Dishonest people run unethical businesses. Honest people run ethical businesses. Do not lump the honest people in with the dishonest ones. They are nowhere near being alike. They are at opposite ends of the spectrum.
My dog, at three months old, has adopted that same method, only he looks at me and says, deal with it, I'm a 3 pound bastard so you just try and stop me. He then runs all around the house like a maniac another couple of times rubbing against everything made of fabric.... I think it's probably his favorite thing to do. He looks and acts like he's having more fun than a barrel of monkeys. I don't think I could stop him with anything less than a .45.
What possible application could this research be for? In what way does this benefit mankind, expand out understanding of the universe, or improve the Human Condition. And perhaps the most important question, what moron paid for this? Please tell me it wasn't taxpayer money, because then technically I am one of the morons, and I don't very much appreciate it!
The application of the study? To prove how easy it is to waste government money. It's another form of welfare.
In what way does this study benefit mankind? It shows how well socialism works in that it takes money belonging to you and I and gives it to someone who has done nothing to earn it without our permission.
What moron paid for this? You and I did, just like everything else that socialism says it gives away for free.
Ah, yes, the "MS can't change because /. readers bash it for its history of, shall we say, less than ethical behavior" argument. [sarcasm]Yeah, /. readers have real influence. They have so much power over MS that MS can't become an ethical organization because of what /. readers have to say about its past..... [/sarcasm]
I can't believe anyone made that ridiculous argument. Just who would have made such an argument? Why, another MS shill of course. I doubt anyone else could have been that desperate.
Wow. Paranoid more than just a little?
It couldn't possibly be that there are people who honestly disagree with you could it? You know, citizens of the US that actually understand its history, its founding principles, and hate where people with your ideology desire to take it? Couldn't possibly be that some of those people see you as a traitor with your distorted, warped anger towards that which you cannot understand for you do not even understand the consequences of that which you espouse.
You're assertions are out of line. Assange put many people at risk of death, including citizens of Afghanistan, by publishing documents without even removing information that personally identifies civilians that terrorists would love to get their hands on. That ought to outrage everyone, including his supporters, as he has no sense of the worth of a human life.
He's an asshat. He proved he's only out for self-glorification, and doesn't give a damn how many people are hurt by his actions. I sure won't shed any tears of the demise of Wikileaks as long as he's at the head of it. Even many of those working with him on Wikileaks resigned rather put up with him.
I would do the same thing the US government did to shut him down. He's a egomaniac that puts innocents in harms way just so he can attack his perceived enemies faster. He could have delayed publishing the documents but he wouldn't as he runs off of hatred, not principle. He's no one to follow or support in any way.
That should be: ...Obama's budget calls for $1 trillion deficits for the next decade....
LOL. You're a funny guy. Your ignorance astounds me. In 19 months Obama has increased our national debt by $2.560 trillion. That's $335 billion more than the combined debt of the first 34 Presidents. Add to that the fact that Obama's budget calls for running $1 billion per year deficits for the next decade with his Obama care mess, and Obama is going to more than triple the debt of all previous Presidents combined.
You're the idiot. Every high starting torque application in which electric motors are used they have gear reduction boxes, you know, transmissions. Electric cars, planes, trains, motorcycles, etc... all do the same thing. None of them omit a gearbox of one type or another. If they could, they would, for it would save the manufacturers a ton of money and increase their profit margins.
I've worked with, repaired, and understand electric motors. That was an integral part of my working life for more than two decades. I know what works, and what doesn't. And on top of my real world experience I have formal training in electrical theory. I understand exactly what's going on in theory and in reality with electric motors.
I know electric motors have more torque, but you don't start them against extremely high levels of resistance. Plus, the highest starting torque electric motors are 3 phase AC motors, which you aren't going to have on a semi. Other types of electric motors have significantly less starting torque.
I've worked as a maintenance mechanic in industrial environments and I know what kind of torque an electric motor will start and run under without burning itself up. I have real world experience, how much do you have? Plus, I have a couple of years formal schooling in electrical theory.
If you would actually think about what you're trying to do you would see the difficulty involved. In a worst case electric-powered semi scenario you're going to try to move something like 30 - 40 tons from a dead stop up an 8% grade. Now, electric cranes do that easily, but they use a lot of gear reduction, you know, single speed transmissions, to increase the starting torque available from the electric motor. That's also how they can slowly lift and lower heavy loads. Direct drive electric motors just aren't used in high starting torque applications. .
We now have modern electric cars with far, far lower required torque loads to move the car than are required to move a heavily loaded semi. Take the Tesla for example as most people have heard of it. Guess what. It has a transmission. It's a single speed gearbox designed to increase torque from a standing start. There you have it, the electric motor doesn't have enough torque to effectively get the car rolling from a dead stop. It needs the torque multiplication available from a transmission to help it along.
The same thing done in electric cars, electric cranes, and high starting torque industrial motor applications is done with electric motorcycles too. They have single speed gear boxes to increase motor torque for taking off and for higher loads. This ought to show you that your idea is a pipe dream because if what you're proposing could be done, it would be done because it's cheaper than including a gear box. Your idea just isn't practical in the real world.
You must be a member of the flat earth society. In the real world most state, and all interstate, highways have hills, valleys, and mountain ranges that they must cross. No transmission-less electric motor will have the power or torque to deal with that terrain. And, transmissions in high gear, which is used for cruising, are 1:1 gearing, iow's direct drive. The reason for transmissions is to supply the necessary torque to the wheels for driving conditions that require high torque, such as starting under heavy load, climbing, and descending steep hills so engine compression can be used to slow the heavily loaded vehicle as using brakes only will burn the brakes up long before the bottom of the hill is reached.
Sometimes I wonder how some of you "green people" get along in the real world with your naively idealistic ideas. Ideals are good, but they have to be tempered with reality. Would I like a world without pollution? Yup. Would I like to drink out of the river near my home like I used to be able to do from the mountain streams where I grew up? Yup. On top of that I'd like to see corruption destroyed in both business and politics. I'd like a world in which I could go away for a week and not have to lock the doors on my house because I could trust people. I"d like a world in which we didn't need laws and police to control behavior because people would choose to control themselves and love their neighbor.
I would like all of the above, but I also realize that human nature being what it is that my ideals are not going to be met unless human nature itself changes. In the meantime, all I can control is my own behavior. I, nor anyone else, can force human nature to be anything other than it is. And, unless the basic physics of electric motors change a transmission-less electric motor isn't going to power heavily loaded semi's from a dead stop, or up one side of a mountain pass and act as a brake down the other. If you had ever worked in an environment in which several hundred horsepower electric motors are used you would know that too. Get some real world experience and allow it to temper your idealism with reality. Don't allow your idealism to be destroyed, but understand how your ideals can be implemented in real world ways that don't destroy other people's jobs and lives, and your nation's economy.
Montana speed limits are a fairly recent thing. Back in the 70's my old man got pulled over in eastern Montana for impeding traffic. He was doing 85 at the time, and getting passed by everyone. The state trooper told him to pick it up or he would write him a ticket.
That's been gone for a while now by order of the federal government under the guise of safety. However, accidents on those roads have gone up since then from drivers going to sleep at the wheel as the roads go for many miles without a corner or change of scenery and people just nod off from boredom. As far as I'm concerned this was just another instance in a long line of the feds bullying the states over the last half dozen or so decades just to get people used to seeing the feds interfere with everything.
Must be why I'm not a politician....
Yeah, there's a technical term for that. It's called latent heat. As long as the alcohol is absorbing latent heat, in this case the amount of heat (btu's) needed for the alcohol to change state to a gas, the measured temperature of any of the liquid will not change. As for the latent heat required to evaporate methyl, propyl, and ethanol alcohols is 335 - 473 btu's. The boiling point is ~172 degrees Fahrenheit. All of these specs are well below those of water.
I see. An opportunity now equals a right. I've been wondering how the progressives reach many of their conclusions. Now I understand where they are coming from. They make up their own word definitions as they go. ;)
Why is that? With your attitude you have nothing but bad karma anyway.
For those people, like you, who have never used an oven, air circulation is designed into all ovens. There is no door seal around the bottom of the oven door, and there is a vent built into the roof of the oven that exits, in the vast majority of cases, under the right rear burner. If there were no air circulation in an oven nothing would brown on top, such as cookies, cakes, turkey, chicken, etc... and nothing would cook evenly.
Turn on your oven and let it warm up. Then put your hand over the right rear burner and you will feel the warm air rising. For those of you with glass top ranges the oven will vent elsewhere, usually out the back.
So where does the alcohol go? It evaporates into the air in the oven and exits the oven through the vent, as the wiki article only mentions cases where the alcohol is NOT stirred into the mixture or the dish is removed from the heat as soon as the alcohol is added, and if you had ever made a pie crust from scratch you'd know that the water used is part and parcel of the dough of the pie crust itself. That alone removes it from the wiki list of examples. Furthermore, a baked pie crust is very dry without the filling, meaning the liquid used to make the dough has been evaporated during the baking process, and alcohol evaporates faster than water so it is the first liquid to evaporate. And, yes, you bake the crust before you add the filling.
Well, it's obvious that you have a hard time with the English language so how much you understood of what you readed(sic) and heard is up for debate....
The past tense of the verb read is read. Same word, same spelling, just pronounced differently. The past tense is pronounced the the same as the color red. Learn to use a dictionary.
Further evidence of your lack of English skills is your user name. Once again your understanding of grammar is very poor. You need to understand subject/verb agreement. The two turtles move. The single turtle moves.
Even more evidence of your lack of English skills is your misunderstanding of how and when to use your and you're.
Your shows ownership. It's possessive. It's your lack of grammar skills that call into question your ability to comprehend what you read. Your grammar skills belong to you.
You're is the contraction for you are. It shows action as it's a noun and verb together. It says you are doing something. You're not parsing the English language correctly so you're quite likely to draw mistaken conclusions from your reading.
So many mistakes in three sentences. I figured you needed the help as you obviously didn't learn these things in school, and any intelligent person wouldn't want to go on repeating such basic mistakes over and over again as they make you look ignorant and like you have less than a 6th grade education.
You need to go back and ask for a refund at all previous schools you have attended as problems like this are systemic to the educational system itself. The system passed you along whether you learned what you needed to know at that level or not. That's a huge disservice to the students in that system. That educational system failed you on a very basic level. They didn't teach you, and that's about as basic, and as serious, as educational failures can get.
You are correct, but just a mere few hundred years ago the fastest we could move was a dozen or so miles in a day. I am optimistic that if we don't manage to destroy ourselves we'll find means of providing energy and types of propulsion that would seem like magic to us today (kudos to A.C. Clarke for the reference).
Untrue, and provably so. Viking ships averaged 10 or 11 knots per hour. That's 12 to 13.2 mph, or approximately 144-160 miles in a 12 hour sailing day.
The better mustangs ridden in the Old West here in the US could do 100 miles in a day, but couldn't keep that up for more than a day or so. They could do 40-50 miles a day and keep that up for a week or two. The Apache warriors were known for their endurance. There are documented runs by Apache warriors of 13 hours at 9 miles an hour. That's more than 120 miles a day.
Well, you're someone else here on /. that doesn't understand the English language.
The past tense of solve is solved. That means the final solution, the final answer, to the mystery has been found and the mystery that once was is now in the past. To solve a problem/mystery does not mean to just better understand it. In logical terms "better understanding" is necessary, but not sufficient for a solution.
None of the researchers involved even begin to say that they know all the answers to solving this mystery. They say they have found two medical issues that are found in 100% of the affected bee populations, but they do not say they have 100% of the answers. They do not say the case has been solved and the mystery is in the past. They do not say this virus/fungus combination is the only cause, only that in combination they are fatal. There are other factors involved and they say that very clearly.
Learn to read and comprehend.
So, the headline is: Mystery of the Dying Bees Solved.
The first sentence in the first paragraph says: jamie points out news of a study attempting to explain the decline of honeybee populations across the US.
I guess "attempting to explain" now means "solved". The English language sure is changing rapidly here on /..