Straight Dope Message Board > Main What's the temp of a static charge spark?
 Register FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read

#1
01-17-2003, 03:21 AM
 Daylon Guest Join Date: Jul 2002
What's the temp of a static charge spark?

You know..the little blue arc that shocks the hell outta ya and causes people to pull an orange robe buddhist at the gas station?

Why doesn't it burn ya? Too short a timeframe? I'm thinking it's gotta be a couple thousand degrees...

??

#2
01-17-2003, 12:24 PM
 engineer_comp_geek Robot mod in beta testing Moderator Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Pennsylvania Posts: 6,572
It's an electric arc, not a flame. When something resists the flow of electric current (which pretty much everything except for superconductors do) then the energy gets converted into heat. The flow of electricity in a shock like that is too short and contains too little energy to heat up things noticably. A lightning bolt, on the other hand, is exactly the same thing on a much bigger scale. Most of the damage done to people by a lightning bolt is burn damage, and many forest fires and brush fires are started as a result of a lighning strike every year.

Electric arcs like what you describe are typically a discharge of several thousand volts (probably between 10,000 and 80,000 volts if you can see the spark) but very low current. Your stove cooks with a much lower voltage, but a much higher current. Much more energy gets transferred to the heating element because of this. Lightning is several million volts with several hundred thousand amps of current, which is so much energy that it can cook darn near anything despite being such a short duration.

Your fingers do get heated up slightly during a static discharge, but not enough to really be noticable. The pain comes from your nerve's responses to the electricity flowing directly down through your nervous system.
#3
01-17-2003, 01:01 PM
 Coffeeguy Guest Join Date: Nov 2002
That. Is. So. Cool.
#4
01-17-2003, 04:52 PM
 Daylon Guest Join Date: Jul 2002
Yeah.....but WHAT"S THE TEMPRATURE.... you just said it's converted to heat? How hot is a spark?
#5
01-17-2003, 05:32 PM
 ultrafilter Guest Join Date: May 2001
Quote:
 Originally posted by Daylon Yeah.....but WHAT"S THE TEMPRATURE.... you just said it's converted to heat? How hot is a spark?
It's only converted to heat in the presence of high resistance, which you don't have. The spark that makes you jump doesn't really have a temperature.
#6
01-17-2003, 05:33 PM
 ultrafilter Guest Join Date: May 2001
Perhaps a clarification is in order.

The temperature of an object is essentially a measure of the average kinetic energy of its molecules. A spark contains no molecules, and therefore has no temperature.
#7
01-17-2003, 05:38 PM
 World Eater Guest Join Date: Sep 2001
Orange robe buddhist?

What is this?
#8
01-17-2003, 05:46 PM
 Derleth Guest Join Date: Apr 2000
He's referring to the wild dancing performed by some Buddhist sects and the Hare Krishnas (which may or may not be Buddhist, I don't know).
__________________
"Ridicule is the only weapon that can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them."
If you don't stop to analyze the snot spray, you are missing that which is best in life. - Miller
I'm not sure why this is, but I actually find this idea grosser than cannibalism. - Excalibre, after reading one of my surefire million-seller business plans.
#9
01-17-2003, 05:52 PM
 Splanky Guest Join Date: Nov 2002
He's probably referring to the famous picture of a monk who burned himself alive at a gas station in protest of something or other.

I think the picture is on the first RHCP CD (or this is another flaming monk)

http://www.southwestern.edu/~bednarb...obock/monk.jpg
#10
01-17-2003, 05:54 PM
 Splanky Guest Join Date: Nov 2002
That would be RATM (Rage Against the Machine) not RHCP (Red Hot Chili Peppers). I feel so stupid.
__________________
Splanky

proud-walking jingle in the midnight sun
#11
01-17-2003, 05:56 PM
 TheeGrumpy BANNED Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Anchorage, AK USA Posts: 820
Along the same lines...

Is the tiny "crackle" associated with a spark just a miniature thunderclap? If it is, that suggests that the air is heated for a moment, causing a small "boom."
#12
01-17-2003, 06:03 PM
 Splanky Guest Join Date: Nov 2002

This is the most well known shot of the incident, with the gasoline canister next to him and the car in the background.
#13
01-17-2003, 06:06 PM
 Daylon Guest Join Date: Jul 2002
A spark contains no molecules, granted...it's a shifting of electrons... are you saying that electrons in a spark have no temperature?

Does the energy only get converted to light then? Not temperature?

Right, by orange robed buddhist, I was referring to the recent spate of news articles where people have blown themselves up accidentally by static discharge while filling up their cars at gas stations...

Splanky has the right pic I was referring to.
#14
01-17-2003, 06:26 PM
 Whack-a-Mole Guest Join Date: Apr 2000
I don't know about a spark but they have certainly measured the temperature of lightning which averages around 30,000 K (or about 53,000 F).

Given that lightning and sparks are essentially the same thing just on different scales I would assume sparks have a temperature as well.
#15
01-17-2003, 06:30 PM
 Whack-a-Mole Guest Join Date: Apr 2000
Ok...getting closer here...

The temperature of a spark in a spark plug is around 800-900o C. (Cite: http://www.sciencenet.org.uk/databas...9/t00171d.html )

I'll grant that a spark from a spark plug is a lot juicier than what you get off your light switch after shuffling over the carpet but I can't find a cite for a 'normal' spark (yet).
#16
01-17-2003, 08:02 PM
 Daylon Guest Join Date: Jul 2002
At 900 to 900 degrees centrigrade, is that considered plasma? Are sparks just itty bitty bits o plasma then?

SUperheated gas, ionized electrons = plasma right? Is that what makes the light?

Soo....right now we we figure it's somewhere between 0 and 53,000 F.

;-)

D.
#17
01-17-2003, 08:36 PM
 bbeaty Guest Join Date: Aug 1999
Quote:
 A spark contains no molecules, and therefore has no temperature.
A spark is not "electricity", instead it is composed of nitrogen and oxygen molecules which have turned into plasma. You can't have sparks in vacuum, vacuum is a perfect insulator.

I've looked at my skin under a microscope after zapping myself with "static" sparks. The spark produces a tiny white spot on the skin. It's probably a burn mark, since skin has fairly high resistance, and the value of electric current during the spark is fairly immense. Also, the resistance of the white spot is lower than the surrounding skin, so once a spark has made its mark, later sparks will tend to "jump" to that same spot on your finger.

Spark temperature is more than enough to ignite flammable vapors. If your house has an electric stove, you might not know that modern gas stoves don't have "pilot light" flames, instead the gas burners are ignited with a high voltage spark generator.
__________________
(((((((((((((((((((((( ( (O) ) ))))))))))))))))))))))
BILL BEATY _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ billb,amasci.com
http://amasci.com _ _ _ SCIENCE HOBBYIST
beaty, chem.washington.edu _ Seattle, WA USA
#18
01-17-2003, 09:08 PM
 Desmostylus BANNED Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Sydney Posts: 5,539
Quote:
 Originally posted by bbeaty You can't have sparks in vacuum, vacuum is a perfect insulator.
Vacuum isn't a perfect insulator. You can quite easily get current to flow through a vacuum, but you would call it an electron beam or a pseudospark, rather than a spark.
#19
01-17-2003, 09:16 PM
 Speaker for the Dead Guest Join Date: Jun 2000
What would an electron beam/pseudospark look like?
#20
01-17-2003, 09:47 PM
 Desmostylus BANNED Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Sydney Posts: 5,539
An electron beam doesn't look very interesting. No photons are involved, so you can't see it.

The CRT in a computer monitor uses an electron beam. Nothing visually interesting happens until the electrons hit the phosphors on the screen.
#21
01-17-2003, 10:13 PM
 bbeaty Guest Join Date: Aug 1999
Quote:
 Originally posted by Desmostylus Vacuum isn't a perfect insulator. You can quite easily get current to flow through a vacuum, but you would call it an electron beam or a pseudospark, rather than a spark.
But that's cheating. If a region of space contains electrons (or ions, or any other sort of charged particles,) THEN IT ISN'T A VACUUM ANYMORE.

I could also "prove" that water is a good conductor, all I have to do is dump salt into it. But that says nothing about the conductivity of PURE water.

A perfect vacuum is a perfect insulator, since there are no charge carriers present. Yes, electrodes can contaminate a vacuum, and once some ions or electrons have been injected, then a voltage will cause a current. But the electron cloud surrounding a hot filament in a vacuum tube is not "a vacuum."

Side issue: lightning is impossible in a vacuum since lightning is the electrical breakdown of a gas. If you place a huge e-field across a gas, the gas turns to plasma and you'll get an outbreak of glowing streamers. If you place a huge e-field across a vacuum, nothing happens since there are no gas molecules present which could ionize.
#22
01-17-2003, 10:35 PM
 Desmostylus BANNED Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Sydney Posts: 5,539
Quote:
 Originally posted by bbeaty But that's cheating. If a region of space contains electrons (or ions, or any other sort of charged particles,) THEN IT ISN'T A VACUUM ANYMORE.
Forgive me if I don't accept your argument. Defining a vacuum as something that can't have an electron in it and then claiming that a vacuum is a perfect insulator is not a useful representation of how things work.

You could also claim that light can travel through glass, but not a vacuum, because once there are photons in it, it isn't a vacuum anymore.
#23
01-17-2003, 11:15 PM
 engineer_comp_geek Robot mod in beta testing Moderator Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Pennsylvania Posts: 6,572
The electric discharge doesn't heat you because it's hot. The electric discharge heats you because there is electricity flowing through something that resists the current (your body). The heat that gets transferred to you is not generated in the spark, but rather in your tissues.

The air gets heated along the way too, and some of the oxygen gets converted to ozone. In fact, it's the rapid expansion and contraction of air due to the heating that makes the "zap" sound (or the thunderclap on the larger scale of lightning). None of this heat gets transferred to you however.

If you want to know the temperature that the air gets heated to as the electrons move through it, it's pretty darn hot (I don't know the exact numbers so I'll just go by what the others have posted). If you want to know the heat that gets to you from the spark it's pretty much nothing. If you were a superconductor you wouldn't generate any heat from the electricity flowing through you. Since you are not a superconductor, as the electricity flows through you, it generates heat, a small amount of heat in the case of a little spark, a rather substantial amount of heat in the case of a lightning bolt.

There's two bits of heat here. (1) The spark heats the air and (2) the electricity (not really a spark at this point) heats your tissues as it goes through them.

#24
01-17-2003, 11:51 PM
 bbeaty Guest Join Date: Aug 1999
(hijack!)

Quote:
 Forgive me if I don't accept your argument. Defining a vacuum as something that can't have an electron in it and then claiming that a vacuum is a perfect insulator is not a useful representation of how things work.
I have to strongly disagree. "How things work" for conductors is based on charge density and mobility. Injecting electrons into a vacuum CONVERTS IT INTO a conductor. (Just as dumping salt into pure water converts it into a conductor, just as triggering the formation of spark-plasma will convert air into a conductor.)

Measure a vacuum with an ohmmeter. It says infinite ohms. Do the same thing with air, or with pure water. These are insulators. Just because we're able to convert them into conductors does not mean they were conductors BEFORE we futzed with them.

Quote:
 You could also claim that light can travel through glass, but not a vacuum, because once there are photons in it, it isn't a vacuum anymore.

I'm not trying to be twisted. Our disagreement hinges on the defintion of "electrical conductor." There are two different definitions in common use:

1. "something through which electric charges can pass" (based on the incorrect "empty pipes" analogy for electric circuits)

2. "something which contains mobile charges" (based on Ohm's law)

So according to #1, a vacuum is a conductor because it doesn't stop electrons from flowing. But according to defintion #2, a vacuum is an insulator because it doesn't contain any movable charges. Which definition is correct? A physicist would go for #2 : Put a voltage across something, and if there is no current, then there must be no mobile charges available. Measure a vacuum with an ohmmeter, the meter will say infinite ohms.

A metal wire is nothing like an optical fiber, since wires are "pre-filled" with the material which flows and optical fibers are not. Wires aren't transparent to electrons. Instead, wires are like water hoses which are already filled with water. If an optical fiber was like a wire, then the fiber would have to be full of unmoving photons all the time, and in order to transmit light, you'd have to apply some kind of pressure across the ends of the fiber, and only then would the light inside begin to move.

To create a current in a wire we just have to apply a voltage across it's ends, and then the wire's own electrons will start flowing. To create a current in a vacuum we FIRST have to convert the vacuum into a conductor by injecting mobile charge carriers. Only then can we create a current by applying a voltage across the vacuum. The injected electrons have changed the conductivity of the vacuum.
#25
01-18-2003, 12:16 AM
 Desmostylus BANNED Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Sydney Posts: 5,539
I just think that the statement "vacuum is a perfect insulator" is silly. Even if you eliminate conduction currents, there are still displacement currents to worry about.

You have to very narrowly define "vacuum", "perfect" and "insulator" to make the statement true.

That makes the statement pretty much useless, unless you provide all of the qualifications that make the statement true.
#26
01-18-2003, 12:56 AM
 scr4 Guest Join Date: Aug 1999
Quote:
 Originally posted by Desmostylus I just think that the statement "vacuum is a perfect insulator" is silly. Even if you eliminate conduction currents, there are still displacement currents to worry about.
No insulator blocks displacement currents, so it's a bit of a stretch to call something a conductor on that basis.

I do agree that "vacuum" needs to be better defined. A laboratory "vacuum" of 10-3 torr pressure is a very good conductor; a 500-volt power supply can easily push current through it. A high-grade vacuum under 10-6 torr is, for most intents and purposes, a very good insulator. It's safe to apply thousands of volts on a bare wire and rely on the vacuum to act as insulation. To push electrical current through a high-grade vacuum requires not only a high voltage, but a method of supplying free electrons such as a heated filament.
#27
01-18-2003, 01:25 AM
 Desmostylus BANNED Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Sydney Posts: 5,539
Quote:
 Originally posted by scr4 No insulator blocks displacement currents, so it's a bit of a stretch to call something a conductor on that basis.
You are using a narrow definition of insulator. Your own statement implies that currents can pass through insulators. If I said to you something like "the signal current passes through the input capacitor to the op-amp", you probably wouldn't respond with "wait a minute, a capacitor is an insulator". Maxwell's version of Ampere's law makes no particular distinction between the conduction component and the displacement component.

Quote:
 Originally posted by scr4 To push electrical current through a high-grade vacuum requires not only a high voltage, but a method of supplying free electrons such as a heated filament.
No heated filament is required. The corona effect occurs.
#28
01-18-2003, 02:12 AM
 scr4 Guest Join Date: Aug 1999
Quote:
 Originally posted by Desmostylus You are using a narrow definition of insulator. Your own statement implies that currents can pass through insulators.
True, AC current can pass through an insulator. Is that a problem? In all the references I've seen, an insulator is defined as something with a high resistance. Not impedance, but DC resistance.

Quote:
 No heated filament is required. The corona effect occurs.
I thought "corona effect" refers to electrical conduction by ionized air molecules. If you have cold electrodes in high-grade vacuum and apply high voltage, how exactly are ions generated? And what kind of voltages are you talking about? I've used several thousand volts in 10-6 torr vacuum chambers successfully (i.e. without accidental discharges). I admit I've never looked into what happens if you use 10,000 volts.
#29
01-18-2003, 02:34 AM
 Desmostylus BANNED Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Sydney Posts: 5,539
Quote:
 Originally posted by scr4 True, AC current can pass through an insulator. Is that a problem?
Do you see why the statement "vacuum is a perfect insulator" isn't a great one?

If you mean by "insulator" something with high resistivity, then okay. If you interpret "insulator" as meaning that current can't pass through it, then it requires further explanation.

Quote:
 Originally posted by scr4 I thought "corona effect" refers to electrical conduction by ionized air molecules. If you have cold electrodes in high-grade vacuum and apply high voltage, how exactly are ions generated?
You don't need ions. Electrons get stripped directly from the conductor.

You can't just state that vacuum is a perfect insulator, without explaining all of the assumptions behind the statement. That is, that "vacuum" precludes the existence of electrons, that "insulator" refers only to resistivity and not to the conduction of current, or that the existence of time varying electric fields is precluded, and that "perfect" isn't meant to refer to breakdown voltage or dielectric constant, etc.
#30
01-18-2003, 02:42 AM
 Daylon Guest Join Date: Jul 2002
Damn..you start out with 'how hot is a spark' and you get treatises on vacuum efficiency...

So how hot is it? LIttle bit o plasma, then the reaction to your skin is negligble because the short duration that the heat is applied isn't enough to damage anything...

So far we have:

1) Static electricity sparks super heat the air, generating the 'pop'
2) it hurts more due to direct electricity to the nerves rather than heat
3) it's somewhere between 0 and 53,000F.

Soooo...back to my original question... HOW HOT IS A SPARK? (static electricity, socks on a shag carpet kinda spark)

???

D.
#31
01-18-2003, 02:52 AM
 scr4 Guest Join Date: Aug 1999
Quote:
 You don't need ions. Electrons get stripped directly from the conductor.
So what is the field strength or voltage required to do this? If it's true I'd like to know; I've never worried about this when conducting experiments in vacuum.
#32
01-18-2003, 03:10 AM
 scr4 Guest Join Date: Aug 1999
Quote:
 Originally posted by scr4 So what is the field strength or voltage required to do this? If it's true I'd like to know; I've never worried about this when conducting experiments in vacuum.
Sorry, I shouldn't have said that. Yes, I realize it does happen, but only under extreme conditions. Something on the order of 200 kilovolts for a 1-mm gap.
#33
01-18-2003, 03:59 AM
 engineer_comp_geek Robot mod in beta testing Moderator Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Pennsylvania Posts: 6,572
Quote:
 Originally posted by Daylon So how hot is it? LIttle bit o plasma, then the reaction to your skin is negligble because the short duration that the heat is applied isn't enough to damage anything... So far we have: 1) Static electricity sparks super heat the air, generating the 'pop' 2) it hurts more due to direct electricity to the nerves rather than heat 3) it's somewhere between 0 and 53,000F. Soooo...back to my original question... HOW HOT IS A SPARK? (static electricity, socks on a shag carpet kinda spark) ??? D.
The answer to your question, with respect to the heat applied to your skin (which seems to be what you keep asking) is that it is not hot at all. There is no heat transferred from the spark to your skin.

The temperature of the air is going to vary, since the spark can range from what you can feel but doesn't even cause a visible spark, up to holy cow what a big blue bolt that was. At the bottom end you're not going to get much above room temperature. At the top end it will be pretty close to that of a spark plug, which someone else posted was in the range of about 800 deg C. I poked around on google trying to find the temperature at which you actually start to see the blue light but wasn't very successful.

You seem to keep asking for the heat that would be transferred to your skin, and the energy being transferred to your skin is not in the form of heat.

You keep saying things along the line of "the heat is applied..." There is no heat applied to your skin. The answer to the way you keep wording the question is the spark has no heat. It's kind of like asking how much heat is in a 120 volt wall socket. There's lots of energy there, but it's not in the form of heat.
#34
01-18-2003, 04:01 AM
 Daylon Guest Join Date: Jul 2002
Nope..not asking in terms of heat applied to skin.

More specifically I think i'm asking "what is the temperature of a static electric spark such that you can see the visible blue flash with the naked eye"

?

D.
#35
01-18-2003, 09:10 AM
 Mr. Skinny Guest Join Date: Apr 2002
Daylon, If I had seen your thread yesterday I could have got an expert answer for you quickly. We have an Electrostatic Discharge Laboratory where I work, and I'm sure they can answer your question.

Unfortunately, I will be out of town next week, and unable to pose your question to them.

I'll check this thread when I get back to the office. Maybe I can have an answer for you on the 27th or 28th.
#36
01-22-2003, 07:48 AM
 Daylon Guest Join Date: Jul 2002
In the mean time - anyone else know?
#37
01-22-2003, 08:06 AM
 Cartooniverse Charter Member Join Date: Oct 1999 Location: Betwixt My Ears Posts: 10,831
Non Physicist Chiming In Here.

Quote:
 Originally posted by ultrafilter Perhaps a clarification is in order. The temperature of an object is essentially a measure of the average kinetic energy of its molecules. A spark contains no molecules, and therefore has no temperature.
A lightning bolt contains no molecules either, and it's difficult to convince me that a lightning bold has no temperature. Can that be?

Can it be that burns caused by lightning strikes are not from the bolt itself, but from the effect of frighteningly high voltage passing through objects ( trees, cows, people ) whose bodies provide resistance, and therefore generate heat in the resistance of that voltage?

Cartooniverse
__________________
If you want to kiss the sky you'd better learn how to kneel.
#38
09-28-2011, 08:20 AM
 Firewall Guest Join Date: Sep 2011
I don't get this. Lightning contains air molecules heated to high temperature as do electrical sparks in the atmosphere..as far as I know.

Am I wrong?
#39
09-28-2011, 09:23 AM
 Saint Cad Guest Join Date: Jul 2005
Mr. Skinny is out of town longer then he predicted.
#40
09-28-2011, 11:26 AM
 Machine Elf Guest Join Date: Feb 2007
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Daylon Nope..not asking in terms of heat applied to skin. More specifically I think i'm asking "what is the temperature of a static electric spark such that you can see the visible blue flash with the naked eye" ? D.
It's pretty hot, and in fact it may move a lot of current. Peak temperatures, as noted upthread, may be on the order of 50,000F, and peak current may be tens of amps. However, the duration of high current is on the order of nanoseconds, and the total mass of the air that is heated to 50,000F is very, very small, so there's not a lot of energy contained in the spark gap.
#41
09-28-2011, 11:38 AM
 Telemark Charter Member Join Date: Apr 2000 Location: Hub of the sports world Posts: 13,383
Just a reminder, this thread is 8 years old.
#42
09-28-2011, 12:23 PM
 Chronos Charter Member Join Date: Jan 2000 Location: The Land of Cleves Posts: 50,875
It's got the wrong answer, though. A static shock hurts precisely because it burns-- The current itself won't hurt you at all. If you suspect you'll get a static shock from a doorknob or whatever, you can take a key or coin or something out of your pocket, and use that to touch the doorknob. You'll still get the full current through your finger, but since the hot spark is in contact with the key, not your finger, it won't hurt.
#43
09-28-2011, 12:58 PM
 TriPolar Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: rhode island Posts: 21,602
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Firewall I don't get this. Lightning contains air molecules heated to high temperature as do electrical sparks in the atmosphere..as far as I know. Am I wrong?
Lightning is air molecules forming a plasma. Plasmas can have a wide range of temperatures, and I think air plasmas are pretty hot, but this is an unusual case of a plasma created by very high voltage and direct current. Sparks are basically the same thing. But what you feel temperature-wise from touching a spark is the heat generated by the current meeting resistance in your body. It is no longer a plasma as it enters your body. I suppose with enough energy your body could become a plasma too, but you would cease caring about temperature, and everything else at that point.
#44
09-28-2011, 01:28 PM
 naita Guest Join Date: Jun 2002
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Chronos It's got the wrong answer, though. A static shock hurts precisely because it burns-- The current itself won't hurt you at all. If you suspect you'll get a static shock from a doorknob or whatever, you can take a key or coin or something out of your pocket, and use that to touch the doorknob. You'll still get the full current through your finger, but since the hot spark is in contact with the key, not your finger, it won't hurt.
Using a key also means the current is conducted into your body over a larger area, so I can't agree it's proof at all that it's the heat, not the current, that causes the pain.

Since you can't really separate the high localised current from the heating of the point of entry there's not really any way to know, except physiological expertise, or measuring the temperature increase at the point of entry.

Also "the hot spark" would be unlikely to be the cause of the pain, it's a tiny volume of hot gas, and gas contains very little energy. If it's temperature that causes the pain I'd expect it to be the direct heating of tissue at the point of entry where the current is concentrated in a tiny area.
#45
09-28-2011, 06:42 PM
 ZenBeam Charter Member Join Date: Oct 1999 Location: I'm right here! Posts: 7,725
During winter, at work I use a key to avoid getting shocked. A lot of the charge collects on the key relatively slowly before the spark, so the total current out of my fingers during the spark is smaller, in addition to being over a larger area.

It doesn't hurt, but I can still feel it. So I suspect it is the current, not the heat, that hurts.
#46
09-28-2011, 07:17 PM
 Mr. Skinny Guest Join Date: Apr 2002
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Saint Cad Mr. Skinny is out of town longer then he predicted.
I entirely forgot about this thread (if that's not obvious). I still work in the same place though and the ESD lab is still next door.

*Skinny writes himself a note*
#47
09-29-2011, 01:11 PM
 Firewall Guest Join Date: Sep 2011
Thanks folks
So this business about a spark not having a temperature (cause it supposidly contains no molecules) is wrong...Right?
#48
09-29-2011, 01:30 PM
 TriPolar Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: rhode island Posts: 21,602
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Firewall Thanks folks So this business about a spark not having a temperature (cause it supposidly contains no molecules) is wrong...Right?
I disagree. A spark could be considered the voltage, the current, the molecules in a plasma state, the light emitted from the plasma, or any combination of those. The question isn't that clear.
#49
09-29-2011, 07:19 PM
 dracoi Guest Join Date: Dec 2008
Quote:
 Originally Posted by TriPolar I disagree. A spark could be considered the voltage, the current, the molecules in a plasma state, the light emitted from the plasma, or any combination of those. The question isn't that clear.
Well, I disagree with you.

Seriously, a spark is a spark. I get that there are components of a spark, that these components may be different temperatures and that temperature may even be irrelevant for some components or some sparks.

But we're not the Nobel committee and we're not drafting legislation. Surely, we can read between the lines to find a way to reasonably answer "What's the temp of a static charge spark?"

(Especially after 8 years)
#50
09-29-2011, 11:43 PM
 TriPolar Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: rhode island Posts: 21,602
Quote:
 Originally Posted by dracoi Well, I disagree with you. Seriously, a spark is a spark. I get that there are components of a spark, that these components may be different temperatures and that temperature may even be irrelevant for some components or some sparks. But we're not the Nobel committee and we're not drafting legislation. Surely, we can read between the lines to find a way to reasonably answer "What's the temp of a static charge spark?" (Especially after 8 years)
You know what? You're right. It's time to settle this.

 Bookmarks

 Thread Tools Display Modes Linear Mode

 Posting Rules You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts BB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is Off HTML code is Off
 Forum Jump User Control Panel Private Messages Subscriptions Who's Online Search Forums Forums Home Main     About This Message Board     Comments on Cecil's Columns/Staff Reports     Straight Dope Chicago     General Questions     Great Debates     Elections     Cafe Society     The Game Room     In My Humble Opinion (IMHO)     Mundane Pointless Stuff I Must Share (MPSIMS)     Marketplace     The BBQ Pit Side Conversations     The Barn House

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:41 AM.