Sunsets in paris...
Oct 22nd 2004, 4:46 am
#121
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Sunsets in paris...
On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 18:44:19 +0200, Mxsmanic
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Ellie C writes:
>> THen I must be having hallucinations when the hills disappear because of
>> little droplets of water. I wonder why people buy fog lights. I wonder
>> what that stuff is that makes it hard to see through my windshield on
>> rainy days.
>I don't see any connection between any of this and the invisiblity of
>water vapor.
>> Why do weather reports talk of visibility?
>Because some people are interested in it.
Pilots in particular.
************* DAVE HATUNEN ([email protected]) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Ellie C writes:
>> THen I must be having hallucinations when the hills disappear because of
>> little droplets of water. I wonder why people buy fog lights. I wonder
>> what that stuff is that makes it hard to see through my windshield on
>> rainy days.
>I don't see any connection between any of this and the invisiblity of
>water vapor.
>> Why do weather reports talk of visibility?
>Because some people are interested in it.
Pilots in particular.
************* DAVE HATUNEN ([email protected]) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
Oct 22nd 2004, 5:00 am
#122
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Sunsets in paris...
On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 19:47:28 +0200, Mxsmanic
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Hatunen writes:
>> Humidity in the air changes its density and its refractive index;
>> the change in looks may be subtle, but it is there.
>With nothing to compare it to, it's invisible.
As I've pointed out elsewhere, the refractive index varies by
density; you can see water vapor where there are differences in
density. There is alwasysomething tocompare it with.
************* DAVE HATUNEN ([email protected]) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Hatunen writes:
>> Humidity in the air changes its density and its refractive index;
>> the change in looks may be subtle, but it is there.
>With nothing to compare it to, it's invisible.
As I've pointed out elsewhere, the refractive index varies by
density; you can see water vapor where there are differences in
density. There is alwasysomething tocompare it with.
************* DAVE HATUNEN ([email protected]) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
Oct 22nd 2004, 5:00 am
#123
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Sunsets in paris...
On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 19:47:59 +0200, Mxsmanic
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Hatunen writes:
>> You're confusing invisibility with transparency.
>Water vapor is both.
Wrong.
************* DAVE HATUNEN ([email protected]) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Hatunen writes:
>> You're confusing invisibility with transparency.
>Water vapor is both.
Wrong.
************* DAVE HATUNEN ([email protected]) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
Oct 22nd 2004, 5:18 am
#124
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Sunsets in paris...
On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 20:04:09 +0200, Mxsmanic
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Hatunen writes:
>> But it alters the refractive index.
>By only one part per million or so.
I'm sure you have some data to back up that technical claim.
************* DAVE HATUNEN ([email protected]) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Hatunen writes:
>> But it alters the refractive index.
>By only one part per million or so.
I'm sure you have some data to back up that technical claim.
************* DAVE HATUNEN ([email protected]) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
Oct 22nd 2004, 5:47 am
#125
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Sunsets in paris...
Hatunen writes:
> Humidity in the air changes its density and its refractive index;
> the change in looks may be subtle, but it is there.
With nothing to compare it to, it's invisible.
--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
> Humidity in the air changes its density and its refractive index;
> the change in looks may be subtle, but it is there.
With nothing to compare it to, it's invisible.
--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
Oct 22nd 2004, 5:47 am
#126
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Sunsets in paris...
Hatunen writes:
> You're confusing invisibility with transparency.
Water vapor is both.
--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
> You're confusing invisibility with transparency.
Water vapor is both.
--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
Oct 22nd 2004, 5:56 am
#127
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Sunsets in paris...
On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 23:54:21 +0200, Mxsmanic <[email protected]>
wrote:
>Ellie C writes:
>> Maybe not if your taking photos, but it sure makes a difference
>> when you're looking at the sunset.
>What difference is that?
>> Humidity changes everything. Edges become blurrier, aerial
>> perspetive has more effect the higher the humidity.
>Water vapor is invisible.
Now Mixi, I have just read downstream (and am now glad I didn't
partake in that part of the thread!), and looking at that statement
you just made, it is obvious you purposefully led Ellie into a silly
definition trap.
That's not very nice you know, and a bit sad too, especially when it's
clear what she meant, even if it wasn't scientifically accurate.
---
DFM
wrote:
>Ellie C writes:
>> Maybe not if your taking photos, but it sure makes a difference
>> when you're looking at the sunset.
>What difference is that?
>> Humidity changes everything. Edges become blurrier, aerial
>> perspetive has more effect the higher the humidity.
>Water vapor is invisible.
Now Mixi, I have just read downstream (and am now glad I didn't
partake in that part of the thread!), and looking at that statement
you just made, it is obvious you purposefully led Ellie into a silly
definition trap.
That's not very nice you know, and a bit sad too, especially when it's
clear what she meant, even if it wasn't scientifically accurate.
---
DFM
Oct 22nd 2004, 6:02 am
#128
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Sunsets in paris...
Mxsmanic <[email protected]> wrote:
> Jeremy writes:
>> Mixup is playing his usual infantile game of deliberately
>> misunderstanding the point of a posting in order to create an argument.
> At what age does one play the game of denying one's own mistakes?
How old are you?
miguel
--
Hit The Road! Photos from 32 countries on 5 continents: http://travel.u.nu
> Jeremy writes:
>> Mixup is playing his usual infantile game of deliberately
>> misunderstanding the point of a posting in order to create an argument.
> At what age does one play the game of denying one's own mistakes?
How old are you?
miguel
--
Hit The Road! Photos from 32 countries on 5 continents: http://travel.u.nu
Oct 22nd 2004, 6:04 am
#129
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Sunsets in paris...
Hatunen writes:
> But it alters the refractive index.
By only one part per million or so.
--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
> But it alters the refractive index.
By only one part per million or so.
--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
Oct 22nd 2004, 6:04 am
#130
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Sunsets in paris...
Mxsmanic <[email protected]> wrote:
> Miguel Cruz writes:
>> Well, whatever they are, I'll wager they have some sort of connection to
>> humidity, and they are far from invisible.
> Water vapor has a much more direct connection to humidity, and yet it is
> invisible.
So what?
George Bush is much more closely connected to his underwear than he is to
Iraq, and yet he's having an impact there.
miguel
--
Hit The Road! Photos from 32 countries on 5 continents: http://travel.u.nu
> Miguel Cruz writes:
>> Well, whatever they are, I'll wager they have some sort of connection to
>> humidity, and they are far from invisible.
> Water vapor has a much more direct connection to humidity, and yet it is
> invisible.
So what?
George Bush is much more closely connected to his underwear than he is to
Iraq, and yet he's having an impact there.
miguel
--
Hit The Road! Photos from 32 countries on 5 continents: http://travel.u.nu
Oct 22nd 2004, 6:25 am
#131
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Sunsets in paris...
On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 13:04:52 -0500, [email protected] (Miguel Cruz)
wrote:
>Mxsmanic <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Miguel Cruz writes:
>>> Well, whatever they are, I'll wager they have some sort of connection to
>>> humidity, and they are far from invisible.
>> Water vapor has a much more direct connection to humidity, and yet it is
>> invisible.
>So what?
>George Bush is much more closely connected to his underwear than he is to
>Iraq, and yet he's having an impact there.
*tries to remove mental image*
---
DFM
wrote:
>Mxsmanic <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Miguel Cruz writes:
>>> Well, whatever they are, I'll wager they have some sort of connection to
>>> humidity, and they are far from invisible.
>> Water vapor has a much more direct connection to humidity, and yet it is
>> invisible.
>So what?
>George Bush is much more closely connected to his underwear than he is to
>Iraq, and yet he's having an impact there.
*tries to remove mental image*
---
DFM
Oct 22nd 2004, 6:26 am
#132
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Sunsets in paris...
On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 20:04:09 +0200, Mxsmanic <[email protected]>
wrote:
>Hatunen writes:
>> But it alters the refractive index.
>By only one part per million or so.
Wouldn't that mean that it is NOT invisible?
---
DFM
wrote:
>Hatunen writes:
>> But it alters the refractive index.
>By only one part per million or so.
Wouldn't that mean that it is NOT invisible?
---
DFM
Oct 22nd 2004, 7:37 am
#133
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Sunsets in paris...
On 2004-10-22 18:44:17 +0200, Hatunen <[email protected]> said:
> On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 14:48:30 GMT, devil <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 04:07:35 -0700, Jeremy wrote:
>>
>>> [email protected] (chancellor of the duchy of besses
>>> o' th' barn) wrote in message
>>> news:<1gm18tj.2ho02p1bmv7k7N%this_address_is_for_s [email protected]>...
>>>> Miguel Cruz <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Mxsmanic <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>> Ellie C writes:
>>>>>>> Humidity changes everything. Edges become blurrier, aerial
>>>>>>> perspetive has more effect the higher the humidity.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Water vapor is invisible.
>>>>>
>>>>> What were those white puffy things I saw in the sky today?
>>>>
>>>> Mxsmanic is, in fact, correct.
>>>>
>>>> David
>>>
>>> Correct in the narrow sense that what he said is, in isolation, true.
>>> Incorrect in the larger sense that, as he might put it "I am unable to
>>> find the words 'water vapor' in Ellie's post".
>>>
>>> Humidity obviously has an effect, as it implies a greater likelihood
>>> that condensation will occur locally, with the consequences described
>>> by Ellie.
>>>
>>> Mixup is playing his usual infantile game of deliberately
>>> misunderstanding the point of a posting in order to create an
>>> argument. A poor substitute for a life, but there ya go...
>>
>> It's more complex than that. Humidity can have an effect in the form of
>> fog obviously (which is more or less what we are talking about here).
>
> Are we? All of us?
>
> I don't often agree with Mxxx but I do here. Humidity is water
> vapor and it is transparent (not, as Mxxx seems to belirve,
> invisible).
Surely humidity is the *amount* of water vapour in the air? As such it
doesn't help or hinder the viewing of anything, but as I stated above,
a high humidity implies a high propensity for condensation to occur.
That's simply common sense - a rare commodity round here, admittedly.
J;
--
Encrypted e-mail address. Click to mail me:
http://cerbermail.com/?nKYh3qN4YG
> On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 14:48:30 GMT, devil <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 04:07:35 -0700, Jeremy wrote:
>>
>>> [email protected] (chancellor of the duchy of besses
>>> o' th' barn) wrote in message
>>> news:<1gm18tj.2ho02p1bmv7k7N%this_address_is_for_s [email protected]>...
>>>> Miguel Cruz <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Mxsmanic <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>> Ellie C writes:
>>>>>>> Humidity changes everything. Edges become blurrier, aerial
>>>>>>> perspetive has more effect the higher the humidity.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Water vapor is invisible.
>>>>>
>>>>> What were those white puffy things I saw in the sky today?
>>>>
>>>> Mxsmanic is, in fact, correct.
>>>>
>>>> David
>>>
>>> Correct in the narrow sense that what he said is, in isolation, true.
>>> Incorrect in the larger sense that, as he might put it "I am unable to
>>> find the words 'water vapor' in Ellie's post".
>>>
>>> Humidity obviously has an effect, as it implies a greater likelihood
>>> that condensation will occur locally, with the consequences described
>>> by Ellie.
>>>
>>> Mixup is playing his usual infantile game of deliberately
>>> misunderstanding the point of a posting in order to create an
>>> argument. A poor substitute for a life, but there ya go...
>>
>> It's more complex than that. Humidity can have an effect in the form of
>> fog obviously (which is more or less what we are talking about here).
>
> Are we? All of us?
>
> I don't often agree with Mxxx but I do here. Humidity is water
> vapor and it is transparent (not, as Mxxx seems to belirve,
> invisible).
Surely humidity is the *amount* of water vapour in the air? As such it
doesn't help or hinder the viewing of anything, but as I stated above,
a high humidity implies a high propensity for condensation to occur.
That's simply common sense - a rare commodity round here, admittedly.
J;
--
Encrypted e-mail address. Click to mail me:
http://cerbermail.com/?nKYh3qN4YG
Oct 22nd 2004, 7:49 am
#134
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Sunsets in paris...
On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 17:56:05 GMT, Deep Frayed Morgues
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 23:54:21 +0200, Mxsmanic <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>>Ellie C writes:
>>> Maybe not if your taking photos, but it sure makes a difference
>>> when you're looking at the sunset.
>>What difference is that?
>>> Humidity changes everything. Edges become blurrier, aerial
>>> perspetive has more effect the higher the humidity.
>>Water vapor is invisible.
>Now Mixi, I have just read downstream (and am now glad I didn't
>partake in that part of the thread!), and looking at that statement
>you just made, it is obvious you purposefully led Ellie into a silly
>definition trap.
>That's not very nice you know, and a bit sad too, especially when it's
>clear what she meant, even if it wasn't scientifically accurate.
Because water vapor, per se, has an important function in
meteorology, it's not simply a pedantic point, and I'm on Mixi's
side on this one. It is water vapor that makes air less dense and
causes it to rise (as does heating the air) it is important to
make the distinction clear. For instance, humid air (with water
vapor) rises until the temperature of the air has reached the dew
point where condensation occurs, creating a cloud (water
droplets).
************* DAVE HATUNEN ([email protected]) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 23:54:21 +0200, Mxsmanic <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>>Ellie C writes:
>>> Maybe not if your taking photos, but it sure makes a difference
>>> when you're looking at the sunset.
>>What difference is that?
>>> Humidity changes everything. Edges become blurrier, aerial
>>> perspetive has more effect the higher the humidity.
>>Water vapor is invisible.
>Now Mixi, I have just read downstream (and am now glad I didn't
>partake in that part of the thread!), and looking at that statement
>you just made, it is obvious you purposefully led Ellie into a silly
>definition trap.
>That's not very nice you know, and a bit sad too, especially when it's
>clear what she meant, even if it wasn't scientifically accurate.
Because water vapor, per se, has an important function in
meteorology, it's not simply a pedantic point, and I'm on Mixi's
side on this one. It is water vapor that makes air less dense and
causes it to rise (as does heating the air) it is important to
make the distinction clear. For instance, humid air (with water
vapor) rises until the temperature of the air has reached the dew
point where condensation occurs, creating a cloud (water
droplets).
************* DAVE HATUNEN ([email protected]) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
Oct 22nd 2004, 9:51 am
#135
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Sunsets in paris...
On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 20:04:09 +0200, Mxsmanic <[email protected]>
wrote:
>Hatunen writes:
>> But it alters the refractive index.
>By only one part per million or so.
never seen a mirage?
--
Martin
wrote:
>Hatunen writes:
>> But it alters the refractive index.
>By only one part per million or so.
never seen a mirage?
--
Martin
