|Головна » Статті » Наукові статті » Статті українських науковців||[ Додати статтю ]|
Pazynych V.G. WATER VS. ICE
Pazynych V.G. Kyiv, Ukraine
WATER VS. ICE
I want begin this discussion from a very simple but illustrative example. The inhabitants of the north river valleys the very quietly accept forecast how much snow will fall next winter. They are starting to worry on the spring in anticipation of the freshet water. Why? Why people are more interested in how powerful will spring flooding? The answer is hidden in the genetic memory. Mankind has survived many disasters caused by the meltwater especially in post-glacial times. It's all still live in our memories today. People intuitively understand the running water is stronger and therefore is more dangerous than moving ice.
Teachers in schools and professors at universities almost two hundreds years love to confess to pupils and students on the terrible deeds of the glaciers. How they had dug the ground, broken the rocks and forests, dragging and triturating all to powder. But efforts of teachers are avail. On examination The student's answers are as written in textbooks. However, they are most afraid of the water. It is because genetic memory is still strong.
Since these stories are passed from teacher to teacher of many generations today, these fables are sounding pretty convincing. However, no one of the narrators did not seen how the continental glacier acting. But they continue telling about this dogma.
This situation reminds me of colleague’s response to the student's question "how big the influence of electrical field on dynamics of the water flow. Reply was "It's insignificant." The next question was my, "It was proven experimentally or theoretically? " Reply was, "This is my opinion". It is sad. This student will keep in the memory this opinion for many years and in the future he will repeat this answer for own students, over and over again. This is not science.
The language of science is concise, specific and clear. Here's an example. Let assume the ice moving at the fantastic speed of 300 m per day (after converted to the system unit 1 second it is something 0.0035 m/s). At the first glance it is absolutely nothing. But this is "opinion" only. The right result needs comparisons the kinetic energies of the ice and water flows. For calculations take the average velocity of lowland rivers is around 1 m/s. Using the basic formula of classical mechanics, which characterizes the energy of motion body - W = mV2/2, we calculate the ratio of the running water energy at normal speed and ice at abnormal speeds. It is - 82944. In this case the energy of 1 kg ice moving at speed 300 m per day is equivalent the energy of 0,012 g water moving at the speed of 1 m/s. This ratio for actual speed of 100m per year is reduced by several orders of magnitude.
It is suspected, that the energy of a single tubercle bacillus emitted by sneezing is higher than the energy of one kilogram of ice moving at fantastic speed.
That’s all. Somebody that can or wants proves the falsity of the results or has other "opinions" I invite for discussion.
| Теги: |
|Матеріали по темі:|