Subject:
|
Re: castle vs. space (was: Re: AFOLs - The comic!)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.castle, lugnet.space
|
Date:
|
Sun, 29 Feb 2004 21:56:59 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
116 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.castle, Ley Ward wrote:
> Um, technically (and, correct me if I'm wrong, but I haven't worked with such
> people as Carl Sagan or Issac Asimov ;-) space doesn't actually suck; it's
> the air (pressurised) that, um, blows.
By the scientific definition, that's technically true, just like pushing a
stalled car along level ground isn't technically "work". If you've ever pushed
a car, you've probably been impressed by how much effort it takes to not do any
work. In other words, it's a matter of semantics. When you drink your
double-thick milk shake through a straw, and the atmosphere "technically" pushes
it up for you, it still requires a considerable effort on your behalf. By the
same logic, nothing can actually "blow" either, since all that's really
happening is a basic equalization of pressure. My stance on it is that whatever
is actively initiating the movement determines whether something is being sucked
or blown. When you're drinking or using a vacuum cleaner, that's sucking. When
you're blowing bubbles in your drink or using a leaf-blower, that's clearly
blowing. Popping open an airlock is a bit trickier, since neither side is
actively causing air to move, so I'd say it depends on whether the artificially
induced pressure is higher or lower than the natural local pressure. Therefore,
a lunar base would blow while an underwater base would suck. And that means
that Space can't possibly suck.
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
10 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
