agreeOriginally posted by Jezmeister:regardless of the state of fire the greatest (or 2nd greatest) physicist of them all taught us that energy and mass are interchangable. ie. E = MC2. but that's just the way you phrased it i suspect, if you meant rather it can't be both at the same time you'd be right.
my knowledge of plasma is limited but I've done some reading cos I'm a physics geeky kinda guy and this sounded interesting.... annnyway i think i can explain it (woo if i can someone will probably correct me if i'm wrong)
essentially... both stories are correct. during the reaction that happens producing the flame all of this as basic chemistry should tell every one of us a large amount of 'swapping' of electrons goes on between molecules and elements to form a different product, and to anyone who knows their physics they should know it's the movement of the electrons to and from different energy levels that gives off the light energy we see as a flame. I should be right so far cos i've been taught all this... now if I'm right a plasma can form on a flame (or in) when electrons escape from the reaction causing the released gases to become ionised... it would be wrong to say that the visible flame itself is a plasma though methinks. I also think it would require a whole lot more energy input than your average household candle can provide but hey.
Question 1. Did anyone said anything about visible flame? However there are indeed multiple reactions just in a fire, including creation of radicals which of course would cause ionization effects and thus of cause, creation of plasma.Originally posted by Jezmeister:regardless of the state of fire the greatest (or 2nd greatest) physicist of them all taught us that energy and mass are interchangable. ie. E = MC2. but that's just the way you phrased it i suspect, if you meant rather it can't be both at the same time you'd be right.
my knowledge of plasma is limited but I've done some reading cos I'm a physics geeky kinda guy and this sounded interesting.... annnyway i think i can explain it (woo if i can someone will probably correct me if i'm wrong)
essentially... both stories are correct. during the reaction that happens producing the flame all of this as basic chemistry should tell every one of us a large amount of 'swapping' of electrons goes on between molecules and elements to form a different product, and to anyone who knows their physics they should know it's the movement of the electrons to and from different energy levels that gives off the light energy we see as a flame. I should be right so far cos i've been taught all this... now if I'm right a plasma can form on a flame (or in) when electrons escape from the reaction causing the released gases to become ionised... it would be wrong to say that the visible flame itself is a plasma though methinks. I also think it would require a whole lot more energy input than your average household candle can provide but hey.
1. find your older post. you are the first one who mention about visible flameOriginally posted by Herzog_Zwei:Question 1. Did anyone said anything about visible flame? However there are indeed multiple reactions just in a fire, including creation of radicals which of course would cause ionization effects and thus of cause, creation of plasma.
It consists of reacting gases and solids emitting visible and infrared light, the frequency spectrum of which depends on the chemical composition of the burning elements and intermediate reaction products.
If you see flame...the topic will be closed by mods.Originally posted by Darkness_hacker99:If your see flame.. It's unburnt carbon glowing actually.
Originally posted by LatecomerX:If you see flame...the topic will be closed by mods.
Originally posted by LatecomerX:If you see flame...the topic will be closed by mods.

