276°
Posted 20 hours ago

The Melting: Lize Spit

£9.9£99Clearance
ZTS2023's avatar
Shared by
ZTS2023
Joined in 2023
82
63

About this deal

Anyway, sea level rise is not the only effect we need to worry about happening due to global warming. It is just the easiest one to predict and measure. Looking at atmospheric pattern changes is more complicated because there are many other short-to-medium-term changes adding "noise" to the trend lines. For instance, the Anaszi culture in the U.S. southwest seems to have been extinguished by a centuries-long shift in rainfall in that region, long before the industrial revolution. So, it is difficult to look at the current drought in the southwest as clearly due to global warming caused by humans. Hard to prove it is or is not. Here T, ΔS and ΔH are respectively the temperature at the melting point, change of entropy of melting and the change of enthalpy of melting. The freezing point of a solvent is depressed when another compound is added, meaning that a solution has a lower freezing point than a pure solvent. This phenomenon is used in technical applications to avoid freezing, for instance by adding salt or ethylene glycol to water. [ citation needed] Carnelley's rule [ edit ] When those who lean right come out from behind the Wall of Denial and face up to the climate problem with eyes open, head on, we will begin seeing more constructive climate policies that are much more effective. And the point I was trying to make is that, if somebody really is a believer in the effects of the natural cycles playing a role in how the climate is warming, today, then he/she should note that those cycles are currently shifting towards more solar energyt going into Antarctica and less into the Arctic at this time and into the future for quite a while. So, the conclusion should still be that the sea level is going to rise due to melting of Antarctic glaciers. How the specific glaciers behave is just details of the overall process.

From a thermodynamics point of view, at the melting point the change in Gibbs free energy (ΔG) of the material is zero, but the enthalpy ( H) and the entropy ( S) of the material are increasing (ΔH, ΔS > 0). Melting phenomenon happens when the Gibbs free energy of the liquid becomes lower than the solid for that material. At various pressures this happens at a specific temperature. It can also be shown that: These new ways of observing the glacier allow us to understand that it's not just how much melting is happening, but how and where it is happening that matters in these very warm parts of Antarctica," Cornell University researcher and Icefin team member Britney Schmid said. The metal with the highest melting point is tungsten, at 3,414°C (6,177°F; 3,687K); [4] this property makes tungsten excellent for use as electrical filaments in incandescent lamps. The often-cited carbon does not melt at ambient pressure but sublimes at about 3,700°C (6,700°F; 4,000K); a liquid phase only exists above pressures of 10MPa (99atm) and estimated 4,030–4,430°C (7,290–8,010°F; 4,300–4,700K) (see carbon phase diagram). Hafnium carbonitride (HfCN) is a refractory compound with the highest known melting point of any substance to date and the only one confirmed to have a melting point above 4,273K (4,000°C; 7,232°F) at ambient pressure. Quantum mechanical computer simulations predicted that this alloy (HfN 0.38C 0.51) would have a melting point of about 4,400 K. [5] This prediction was later confirmed by experiment, though a precise measurement of its exact melting point has yet to be confirmed. [6] At the other end of the scale, helium does not freeze at all at normal pressure even at temperatures arbitrarily close to absolute zero; a pressure of more than twenty times normal atmospheric pressure is necessary. Because the Thwaites Glacier slopes down towards the sea, it is particularly susceptible to climate and ocean temperature changes that could lead to rapid and irreversible ice loss. The collapse of Thwaites would cause seawater levels to rise by around 2 feet (65 centimeters). This could, in turn, destabilize neighboring glaciers, potentially increasing future sea levels by almost an additional 10 feet (3 meters).

Important to know

Icefin is particularly useful for investigating the grounding zone of Thwaites, the point at which the glacier touches the ocean floor, which has previously been almost impossible to study. The grounding zone of this glacier has retreated by 8.7 miles (14 kilometers) since the 1990s, making Thwaites one of the fastest-changing glaciers in Antarctica. The factors causing this retreat are, however, poorly understood.

Upon further heating, they gradually soften, which can be characterized by certain softening points. Like many high symmetry compounds, tetrakis(trimethylsilyl)silane has a very high melting point (m.p.) of 319-321 °C. It tends to sublime, so the m.p. determination requires that the sample be sealed in a tube. [14] Predicting the melting point of substances (Lindemann's criterion) [ edit ]

Melting Point Determination

Freezing point" redirects here. For other uses, see Freezing point (disambiguation). Ice cubes put in water will start to melt when they reach their melting point of 0 °C Frankly, I think it is probably better communication of the reality and severity of the sea level situation for the governments to be seen to be actively planning for that future, instead of just using it as a scare tactic and implying that the whole thing can be avoided. My own planning is that my present home may become unlivable with greater and greater probability over the next few decades, with the actual transition date depending on when a hurricane with the actual devastating effects hits here instead of somewhere else. It could happen this summer . It probably will happen in the next 30 years.

I am not arguing that humans aren't contributing to the projected acceleration of the sea level rise rate. I am just arguing that we need to stop publishing articles that imply we can stop the rise if we just do . For a solid to melt, heat is required to raise its temperature to the melting point. However, further heat needs to be supplied for the melting to take place: this is called the heat of fusion, and is an example of latent heat. [ citation needed] Probably not. Much of the melting is due to the cycles of the Earth's orbital precession and axis tilt precession. And the current parts of those cycles are heading towards more warming in the Antarctic and less in the Arctic. Unclear Engineer said:I am not arguing that humans aren't contributing to the projected acceleration of the sea level rise rate. I am just arguing that we need to stop publishing articles that imply we can stop the rise if we just do .For most substances, melting and freezing points are approximately equal. For example, the melting and freezing points of mercury is 234.32 kelvins (−38.83 °C; −37.89 °F). [2] However, certain substances possess differing solid-liquid transition temperatures. For example, agar melts at 85°C (185°F; 358K) and solidifies from 31°C (88°F; 304K); such direction dependence is known as hysteresis. The melting point of ice at 1 atmosphere of pressure is very close [3] to 0°C (32°F; 273K); this is also known as the ice point. In the presence of nucleating substances, the freezing point of water is not always the same as the melting point. In the absence of nucleators water can exist as a supercooled liquid down to −48.3°C (−54.9°F; 224.8K) before freezing. [ citation needed] So, without any evidence you want to claim that Milankovitch cycles - that act very slowly over 10's of thousands of years - are responsible for significant changes to Antarctic ice sheets within the last century, that they are a significant factor in the current observable rapid acceleration of ice mass loss. You are arguing without evidence that there is a significant natural component to Antarctic ice mass loss, that therefore attribution to human causes is exaggerated.

Unclear Engineer said:It is amusing to see people posting about "natural cycles" as a reason to not believe that sea level will rise.Past climate changes provide examples of both how susceptible and how world changing climate change can be. They aren't evidence that current warming is natural or harmless. Climate science deniers are often unmoved by facts or reason and ultimately descend into conspiracy theories - because how else can every science agency that studies climate keep saying it is real and very serious? And get all those satellites that show evidence of a warming world to agree too? Even Intelligence Agencies - that appear to agree the science is sound and the climate problem is serious - are in on it? Assuming that all atoms in a crystal vibrate with the same frequency ν, the average thermal energy can be estimated using the equipartition theorem as [16] E = 4 π 2 m ν 2 u 2 = k B T {\displaystyle E=4\pi A Kofler bench is a metal strip with a temperature gradient (range from room temperature to 300°C). Any substance can be placed on a section of the strip, revealing its thermal behaviour at the temperature at that point. Differential scanning calorimetry gives information on melting point together with its enthalpy of fusion. So, in reality, we need to be planning for substantial sea level rise even as we try to cut our human effects on the climate.Ken , the intent of that particular sentence in my post was a response to the previous posts that talked about other natural cycles (e.g., "Solar Maximum and Minimum activities. And pole shift events"), which have little-to-nothing to do with global climate. Yes, there are theories that somegthing like a grand solar minimum might trigger an ice age, but even if true, it would be in relation to the climate being set-up for it by the Milankovitch Cycles in the Earth's orbital and rotational precession patterns. Further information: List of elements by melting point Melting points (in blue) and boiling points (in pink) of the first eight carboxylic acids (°C) Climate activism only leans green and left because of failure of those who don't lean green or left to participate constructively - and chose instead to oppose and obstruct. That opposing hasn't been to prevent unreasonable left leaning extremism but to prevent legitimate accountability applying to commerce and industry. Sure, if you hand the issue over to others who do have other agendas in "you care so much, you fix it" style you can conveniently argue it is their other agendas that prevents you from supporting commitments to mitigate the problem but the science based advice has been the same advice irrespective of political leanings. By choosing to face up to it head on you can promote the means you think best - including your own agendas. No-one is stopping you.

Asda Great Deal

Free UK shipping. 15 day free returns.
Community Updates
*So you can easily identify outgoing links on our site, we've marked them with an "*" symbol. Links on our site are monetised, but this never affects which deals get posted. Find more info in our FAQs and About Us page.
New Comment