[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 60 KB, 800x535, etnaboom_fulle_big.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2963349 No.2963349 [Reply] [Original]

For a moment, let's think of a scale between 1-10, with liquid magma being 1, and nuclear fission being 10. I suppose an inferno would be around 8, and boiling water would be like a 3. What would you describe as number 5? a corrosive acid? and extremely hot gas? This is all hypothetical.

>> No.2963364

I guess this would be a scale of molecular density.. not necessarily heat.

>> No.2963363

why is magma a 1 while boiling water a 3?

>> No.2963369

I would imagine boiling water to be less dense than molten rock

>> No.2963409

>>2963349
Is this a scale of entropy?

>> No.2963416

this is a fucktarded scale

>> No.2963423

>>2963349
I think you're smelling your numbers again, or hearing your colors

>> No.2963433
File: 4 KB, 100x100, LARGE.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2963433

>>2963369
>gas denser than rocks

>> No.2963439

A scale of what exactly? Define your parameters, please.

>> No.2963446

>fire
>corrosive acid
wat

>> No.2963469

The only scale I can conceive for OP is that it's a measure of how improbable something is going to occur on planet earth. Natural reactors (nuclear fission) is a hell of a lot more rare than say, liquid magma...

>> No.2963494

It's for a fun project. I suppose it could be a scale of density, but with elements of heat.

A radioactive explosion is at the top because it's merely a few atoms causing heat, while molten rock on the bottom because its molten rocks, and besides the super-heated rocks underneath the earths crust, it's the most dense form of heat energy I can think of.

>> No.2963523

If you guys don't want to help then that's fine. There's no need to ridicule though. Your answer doesn't have to be perfectly logical. I just figured I'd ask some random folks so I can broaden my options a bit before diving in. Sorry if you dont understand.

>> No.2963537

>>2963523
I'm not really seeing the point behind this "scale." Yes, the sun is hotter than a campfire, and this is determined through a temperature scale.

>> No.2963548

solid-->liquid--->gas
hot rocks--->magma--->flame

>> No.2963594

>>2963548
But "flame" isn't a substance. It is essentially heated gas and solid particles that are the product of the chemical reaction known as combustion.

>> No.2963617

Thanks but that's not helping. At least now we all know "flame" is connotative with heated gas.

>> No.2963619

>>2963594
plasma, dawg

>> No.2963640
File: 30 KB, 535x353, quarterlife.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2963640

the fuck

>> No.2963648

hmmm Plasma.. I hadn't thought of that

>> No.2963653
File: 27 KB, 184x184, 1261714888751.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2963653

>>2963640

>> No.2963663

>>2963349
this is worse that the cryptologist that wanted to encrypt numbers for no purpose

>> No.2963666

Haha the trolls are starving tonight. This is why I didn't go to /b/.

Perhaps I should have just made a, "list as many heat-creating reactions you can think of" but I think it would have gotten less attention

>> No.2963698

Please, someone tell me, what is this threads general purpose?

>> No.2963708

A project that has little to do with proper science or logic, yet people around here have to respond like its exams anyways

I think an element of plasma will fit, thanks.