Bagaimana naga keluar api

vixen

Originally posted by weta_studio at 23-6-2006 02:26 PM

jawapan yg bernas :clap:

His theory is flawed from the outset.

[ Last edited by  vixen at 27-6-2006 10:34 AM ]

Sephiroth

by vixen   

When did I say using fire as defense is wrong? Kindly read properly.What I was saying is that using teeth to ignite the gas isn't a very reliable method.Have you ever tried knocking two flints together to create spark? If yes,then you ought to know how tedious and unreliable it is,and does not produce spark that easily.This is what I was addressing.  

Depends on what chemicals which the teeth are made of, isn't it? Rock flint maybe hard to generate sparks from but what of other chemicals like iron etc? High concentration of such elements in teeth could spark sparks?

And Sephiroth if dragons are just spiritual or magical creatures to you then why are you trying to rationalize and find a biological basis for its fire-breathing ability? Maybe the dragon being a magical beast simply has some inherent magical ability(that defies scientific explanation) that it uses to exhale fire?

When are you atheist going to learn that not all you see is complete? When are you going to learn that there are things you cannot see due to your own natural limitations? ;)

Certain insects could only see in Infra-red (body temperature) and Shark species navigate the oceans by sensing electromagnetic waves on the rocks while Dolphins uses Echoes to navigate. Different creatures use difference sensors but that doesn't means anything they could not pick up using their sensors does not exist.

In same way, MOST Humans can only know their environment using 5 sensors and still analyse the World in 3 Dimensional. That does not means that there is no higher dimensions. And no, it has nothing to do with Magic either. :no:

vixen

Let's not turn this into another atheist-theist confrontation ok? I was hoping for a healthy discussion.

Since I have already answered all relevant question,I will make an exit.Maybe be back here if there is any worthwhile discussion going on.

Ciao.

Sephiroth

Hmph ... ;)

The difference between Theist with Science and Atheist with Science is :

Theist - Accept something and leave a blank space of possibilities to answers they do not know.
Atheist - Accept blind logic and close their minds to possibilities which they cannot think off themselves.

100 years ago, if someone to go and tell a group of people that Sharks could see using electromagnetic impulses in the Earth Crust, they probably get laughed at in the East and they probably get nailed to a cross and burned alive in the West. Yet, it is a fact today that Sharks navigate the waters using Electromagnetic impulses.

Same way, if I were to say that people could see Dragons if their receptors were tuned enough, people could laugh stating such person is mad. That does not means that Dragons don't exist. It simply means only a few speacial people could see this Ancient Ones.

LanoG

Whoaaaw! What a great debate about dragon... By the way, theory of dragon existent is not only from the West. Kalo kat sejarah negara China misalnya, ada gak kisah2 naga nie. Kat Malaysia nie pun ada pe... naga tasik Chini.

bobok

adoi la... jawab mcm dollah badawi. pusing2. ok i'll try to counter...

Originally posted by vixen at 23-6-2006 08:16 AM
I am talking about PURE methane,which has a very high flash point and very difficult to self-ignite.

Try to LEARN the reason why pure methane is never used in a compression-ignition without major modifications to the engine

ok, a russian company has, succesfully sold buses using pure methane as its fuel. it's a freaking 11m big bus that u can stuff up to 106 pessangers. and the engine, (borrowing your term) a compression-ignition. here's the spec:

http://self.bus.ru/eng/prod_liaz5292_57.htm

by the way, i may misunderstood what u really mean with "why pure methane is never used in a compression-ignition without major modifications to the engine".

if u change the fuel type, of course u need to change the engine built. u can't have the same engine run on diffrent kind of fuel. that is the natural constraint.

and methane flash point in merely -188癈 compare to diesel's 60癈. if somebody manage to increase temperature in diesel engine to 60癈, what ever makes u think they cannot increase it to 188癈 below the frozen point of water?  u can literally light up methane if u leave it at room temperature. did u actually do some homework before writing anything here?

try to type "methane flash point" in google serch box and click i'm feeling lucky.

if -188癈 is indeed very high, then we are in hell right now.

vixen

Originally posted by sayap at 6-7-2006 03:33 PM
adoi la... jawab mcm dollah badawi. pusing2. ok i'll try to counter...



ok, a russian company has, succesfully sold buses using pure methane as its fuel. it's a freaking 11m big bus that u ca ...

I will spare you the embarassment of calling you an idiot in the midst of everyone here,but you have just proven yourself to be one.And what you have posted only further strengthens my position and proves that you are wrong from the start.

Well,transit buses running on methane or CNG-based engine is nothing new.CNG engine technology has been around since 1990,if I am not mistaken.There are even CNG based trains and forklifts.

Do you even know how methane or CNG powered engines work? Obviously you do not.

CNG engine is a 'SI' engine - spark ignited - uses spark plugs for ignition just like a car,which was my point all along,that there must be some ignition mechanism to ignite methane.

This is because of very low cetane value of methane or CNG,heat from compression would not be adequate for spontaneous ignition,unlike other fuel like diesel that easily ignite on heat generated through compression.

So as I said in my earlier posts,given the combustion characteristic of methane (or natural gas),it would be impractical to do a diesel-style injection therefore modifications are necessary to any engine that is powered by it.

That is why methane or CNG based engines are modified with spark plugs,and others have a combination fuel system that use traditional diesel fuel to start the engine when it is at idle or low power settings.As the power output increases,the engine is switched over to use pure natural gas or methane.

Hope you are clear on this now.And anymore ad-hominem from you and I will gladly hit the report button.

[ Last edited by  vixen at 7-7-2006 10:22 PM ]

Satria-Naga

Originally posted by sayap at 22-6-2006 06:00 PM
gas methane kalau compress memang boleh combust. so dia sedut udara pakai mulut bagi gas dlm perut dia compress, lepas tu bila dah menyala (dia rasa perut dia panas) dia sembur lah.

sembur api t ...

Statement ko ni memang malatop habis laa... :lol
Yang tak tahan tu pasal anak dan telur naga tak tahan api!! :lol
Tapi kalau nak sembur api mesti kena ada sumber api dulu... cth cam obor tu...

Satria-Naga

Originally posted by vixen at 27-6-2006 08:26 AM

1.Explain what about it? Design? Just think of it as spark plugs for ignition like used in any 'SI' CNG powered engine.

2.Yes I suppose so,like cracking two stones together.Maybe the dragon gn ...

Logik gak...
Lagipun gigi naga besar cam batu... mungkin bleh produce spark...
Tapi biasa tgk dlm citer fiksyen... api tu cam keluar terus dari perut... macam dah terbakar dlm perut...
Mungkin graphic designer filem tu silap design kot :bgrin:

orang_awam

mungkin dlm perut naga tu ada pyrophoric punya material, so senang sikit nak terbakar

vixen

Yes as far chemistry goes,there is no reason that it could not work.Pyrophoric material acting as 'igniter' to methane.

But pyrophoric chemicals are not only volatile and flammable,but toxic as well.Unless the dragon is immune to it,I do not think that having pyrophoric material in the stomach is really a good idea.

And another thing,if the fire were to start from the stomach,how would the dragon flame-proof its internal organs?

[ Last edited by  vixen at 9-7-2006 03:43 AM ]

sol

mungkin ke the fuel  is hydrogen?
it is light ,its build up may allow the dragon to fly.. but when the dragon expelled it, through fire..
dia menjadi berat.. dan because of that the flight has to be terminated...
in other words ..the fuel is generated.
ok.. bye
lecturer blues

i wonder y u all spend so much time discussing a non-existance animal...
if u all r still standing to ur point that dragon is exist, post any of the diagrm of fossils of dragon found by ppl...
paleontologist findings will tell us everything.. if there is no, stop the irrelevant discussion

Sephiroth

by vixen   

And another thing,if the fire were to start from the stomach,how would the dragon flame-proof its internal organs?

I don't see why not. A lot of creatures in nature carries dangerous substance in their stomach (or other parts of the body).

Take Human stomach for example. It has special anti-corrosive material laced on the walls of the stomach and. Matter a fact, we get ulser if the acid in our body went over the limit (like no food for a long time, etc) which burns down this anti-corrosive material.

Termites is another good example. According to some website I went to, termites' bodily acid is so strong, it could even melt glass, yet does not kill the small termite.

[ Last edited by  Sephiroth at 10-7-2006 08:37 AM ]

LanoG

Originally posted by Sephiroth at 10-7-2006 08:35 AM
by vixen   
Termites is another good example. According to some website I went to, termites' bodily acid is so strong, it could even melt glass, yet does not kill the small termite.

Wow... just like an alien movie.

vixen

Originally posted by peterbeh_87 at 9-7-2006 05:03 PM
i wonder y u all spend so much time discussing a non-existance animal...
if u all r still standing to ur point that dragon is exist, post any of the diagrm of fossils of dragon found by ppl...
pa ...

Hehe..sorry... please do not lump me together with some of them.I for one,do not believe that such a creature ever walked on this earth..hehe..just giving my point of view and explanations..

weta_studio

Originally posted by peterbeh_87 at 9-7-2006 05:03 PM
i wonder y u all spend so much time discussing a non-existance animal...
if u all r still standing to ur point that dragon is exist, post any of the diagrm of fossils of dragon found by ppl...
pa ...

tak salah utk diskusi lagipun kalau dilihat kat discovery channel byk dokumentari yg mengarut dan imaginasi oleh biologist.Cuma apa yg kita nak tahu jika naga tu betul2 wujud dan bagaimana naga tu boleh mengeluarkan api dari mulut.Diskusi itu semua utk pengetahuan bersama

Originally posted by weta_studio at 10-7-2006 16:40

tak salah utk diskusi lagipun kalau dilihat kat discovery channel byk dokumentari yg mengarut dan imaginasi oleh biologist.Cuma apa yg kita nak tahu jika naga tu betul2 wujud dan bagaimana naga t ...

sumthin that is not logic, do we need to discuss??
if u say itz for extra knowledge, do u all agree tht is the fact???
Itz non exist at all!!! thatz the fact!!!

Sephiroth

by vixen   

Hehe..sorry... please do not lump me together with some of them.I for one,do not believe that such a creature ever walked on this earth..hehe..just giving my point of view and explanations..   

Why don't you write to Discovery Channel and tell them to stop making programs like "The Last Dragon" which aired last Sunday and such, regarding this mythical beast?

Through this discussion, we are learning a lot of things about animal kingdom and other stuffs, so no harm in discussing it.

Or maybe you just sore because we seems to have answer to everything you could shoot at us? :cak:

vixen

Spehiroth wrote:
Or maybe you just sore because we seems to have answer to everything you could shoot at us
--------
Please do not make presumptions about me.As matter of fact,I tried correcting mistakes and helped answer many questions.Check all my past posts again.Thanks.