That is a good way to remember it, and the same principle applies to the Earth.
from Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jupiter
Ram Jet and Global Warming - is the physics similar?
- Thread starter Robittybob1
- Start date
from Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jupiter
Sorry Dave, we are skipping along with this discussion quite well, covering lots of points and then you spring this ultimatum on me by saying a ram jet must be enclosed, without even proving that is a fact.
We get all sorts of atmospheric effects because the air is contained in a band between the ground and space it is held together by gravity, so in some ways the atmosphere is contained. High pressure zones spread out sideways to get the pressure build up seems to imply a degree of containment. No physical walls but do you need them? This is what we are trying to discuss.
Are you and I both cross contamination too? As I said I believe there will be a chance we need to check the results experimentally. To me it sounded quite an exciting idea to run an experiment once we had discussed what we thought the outcome could be. Like there would be no need for the expenditure if someone could show me I was entirely wrong.
I bet you can't match me! I feel as if I am ahead of you on this one. I wouldn't argue "space or relativity" with you, but the reason for the winds and the physics of the ram jet engine, I think I can match you in the debate.
No doubt you will try and beat me into submission. I am sure you will be able to teach me something. :bawl:
There's not enough content here to justify presence in P&M. Thread moved to alt theories.
Well that does give me a little more freedom to explore this as a possible "new" theory.
Cheers Prometheus.
Sorry Dave, we are skipping along with this discussion quite well, covering lots of points and then you spring this ultimatum on me by saying a ram jet must be enclosed, without even proving that is a fact.
We get all sorts of atmospheric effects because the air is contained in a band between the ground and space it is held together by gravity, so in some ways the atmosphere is contained. High pressure zones spread out sideways to get the pressure build up seems to imply a degree of containment. No physical walls but do you need them? This is what we are trying to discuss.
In my theory you get a ramjet through the ozone hole down the sides of the magnetic outflow, but my theory is currently on hold.
Well to be honest I am glad to hear that. As we explore this alternative theory, I hope to crack the reason the gas covered planets have atmospheres that are roaring around them faster than the planet is spining in the first place. I believe the Ram Jet Effect (RJE) is the reason for this, and it is the duration of the RJE that makes the planets attain their rotational velocities.
Well to be honest I am glad to hear that. As we explore this alternative theory, I hope to crack the reason the gas covered planets have atmospheres that are roaring around them faster than the planet is spining in the first place. I believe the Ram Jet Effect (RJE) is the reason for this, and it is the duration of the RJE that makes the planets attain their rotational velocities.
Ramjet theory is one of the reasons that I keep posting about my theory. I thought it would be useful years ago, but never got enough people to take it to Ramjet theory. I've never got far into any thread to cover everything. I won't ruin your thread with the other things.
Last edited:
Dave, robitty does not let thaings like facts and physics get in the way of a good idea!
Dave, robitty does not let thaings like facts and physics get in the way of a good idea!
I am slightly encouraged that you say it is a good idea, but I do hope to show the RJE with facts and figures before we are finished.
It isn't a simple feat to come up with an idea and then set out to prove it.
Sorry, what I meant is "robitty thinks is a good idea". Frankly the idea is a turd - you're comparing apples and armadillos.
It isn't a simple feat to come up with an idea and then set out to prove it.
That is correct. What's more, is that it is next to impossible to come up with an idea when you do not have the background in the field. You might as well give a major league pitcher tips on his throwing motion, or tell a brain surgeon how to best remove a tumor while minimizing damage.
Well I do know you have an interest in these planetary topics as well, for you came on with ideas on the "Expanding Earth" threads. So if you feel inclined to disprove the things I say you are welcome for it is the curly bits that have to be ironed out as well.
I want to know what causes the extreme winds on Jupiter and Venus in particular, and the reason I chose the Ram Jet was the physics may have had a similarity. So it is the physics that are similar not the Ram Jet compared to the planet.
So if you compared "apples and armadillos" as you say, if you looked at them from the point of DNA and genes you might be surprised how much they had in common.
DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
Why would I be the only one around here who has to produce facts? :bugeye: :bugeye: :bugeye:
Jupiter's high winds are surely caused by pixie dust. That is my theory.
You are not the only one to provide facts, but every thing I claim as a fact I will endeavour to back it up with a reference.
And what can't be solved by a search of the available data I'll run an experiment to see if it works.
The design I have in mind is a straight 300 mm diameter pipe 2 meters long.
This has an electrical heating coil attached to it, (wound around it). It is then insulated so that the coil heats just the pipe.
An electrical current is passed through the cable and the tube can heat up.
A fan positioned at one end of the tube blows air through the pipe. A wind flow meter is at the other end measuring the outflow.
As the temperature of the tube heats up the wind flow meter will measure the changes in throughput. Hopefully heat is radiated or conducted to the air moving through the tube.
Do you think the wind flow meter will record an increase or a decrease in the wind flow speed proportional (or some relationship) to the temperature of the tube walls?
Or do you think the heating of the moving air will have no effect on the air flow speed.?
(It can't increase the volume unless the fan can blow warmed air quicker.)
Last edited:
Experiment.
The design I have in mind is a straight 300 mm diameter pipe 2 meters long.
This has an electrical heating coil attached to it, (wound around it). It is then insulated so that the coil heats just the pipe.
An electrical current is passed through the cable and the tube can heat up.
A fan positioned at one end of the tube blows air through the pipe. A wind flow meter is at the other end measuring the outflow.
As the temperature of the tube heats up the wind flow meter will measure the changes in throughput. Hopefully heat is radiated or conducted to the air moving through the tube.
Do you think the wind flow meter will record an increase or a decrease in the wind flow speed proportional (or some relationship) to the temperature of the tube walls?
Or do you think the heating of the moving air will have no effect on the air flow speed.?
(It can't increase the volume unless the fan can blow warmed air quicker.)
Now if the fan was not working and the tube was absolutely level, the air in the tube would just heat up and some of it would be displaced. Cold air would enter both ends and as it warmed would rise and flow out at the tops of both ends. These would be described as convection currents.
Now no one would disagree with this would they?
The design I have in mind is a straight 300 mm diameter pipe 2 meters long.
This has an electrical heating coil attached to it, (wound around it). It is then insulated so that the coil heats just the pipe.
An electrical current is passed through the cable and the tube can heat up.
A fan positioned at one end of the tube blows air through the pipe. A wind flow meter is at the other end measuring the outflow.
As the temperature of the tube heats up the wind flow meter will measure the changes in throughput. Hopefully heat is radiated or conducted to the air moving through the tube.
Do you think the wind flow meter will record an increase or a decrease in the wind flow speed proportional (or some relationship) to the temperature of the tube walls?
Or do you think the heating of the moving air will have no effect on the air flow speed.?
(It can't increase the volume unless the fan can blow warmed air quicker.)
Now if the fan was not working and the tube was absolutely level, the air in the tube would just heat up and some of it would be displaced. Cold air would enter both ends and as it warmed would rise and flow out at the tops of both ends. These would be described as convection currents.
Now no one would disagree with this would they?
Heating the air will most definitely increase the speed and pressure of the "wind" if not conventional gas turbines would not work. One might mention that adding fuel and burning it with the air is causing the thrust, but fundamentally its the increase temperature of the air not simply the addition of fuel molecules converted from liquid to gas that is the primary source of thrust. Look up "Project Pluto" for demonstration of this, it was a nuclear powered ramjet engine.
I will do that, but could you picture the heated tube experiment? I want to keep it technically simple so that people can see the similarity between a simple Ram Jet (as exampled by the heated tube) and what happens in the atmosphere of these gas covered planets.
Sometimes I don't describe things that clearly so I am asking you? Please can you understand the heated tube experiment?