Oil filled water cooling loop?

[lilhasselhoffer]

When you stop posting bullshit, I'll stop refuting it. It takes how many watts to raise 1 lb of water one degree? This is science!

EDIT:

to clarify, a watt is a measurement of the rate of energy, not the amount. This is why your power bill reflects kwh, not kw. The rate of energy (kw), over a specified time(h).

Perhaps you missed the point. Perhaps you forget that this is a dynamic system, not some stationary calculation. The CPU feeds energy into the liquid at a rate, based upon the difference in temperature. It doesn't just magically dump it all at once. Said energy is measured in the amount of Joules (a unit of energy) per second (a unit of time), which is colloquially referred to as a Watt. This is why TDP is expressed in Watts.

The water is changing temperature constantly. There was a flow rate stated. The water doesn't just change temperature once, it is constantly dispersing power. As such, when the water passes through the cooler and dumps 1 degree Celsius it will effectively dump energy into the environment. Said energy dump occurs over time across the entire radiator, and is also expressable as Joules/second. In case you missed it the first time, that's Watts.



At this point, you're either trolling or don't know what the base units are. The reason you have a KWh on your power bill is because is is measuring the amount of energy you use, not the amount of energy you disperse over time. Pay attention to your damn units. KWh is calculated by the power consumption (J/s, or Watts) multiplied by the amount of time (let's express is in seconds). Baby steps here, but (Joules/time)*time=Joules. KWh is a bass ackwards way of measuring consumed Joules.


Edit:
So we're clear, this level of complete misunderstanding is why I asked you for proof earlier. You state things as "fact" without ever proving them. Hell, a grade schooler is taught to check their units in science, but that seems utterly beyond you.

Maybe this will help. A KWh is 3.6*10^6 Joules. Instead of using a tiny unit, we convert to KWh so that we can understand it.


Edit:
As to the initial comment, it can take any number of Watts to heat a pound of water one degree.

1055 Joules = 1 BTU
1 BTU raises 1 pound of water 1 degree Fahrenheit

Assuming perfect insulation in all cases:
1 watt for 1055 seconds would heat the water one degree F.
1055 watts for 1 second would heat the water one degree F.
527.5 watts for 2 seconds would heat the water one degree F.
The answer you were supposed to come to was 1055 Joules, no matter how it is added, would raise one pound of water one degree F.

Science works by theory, measurement, and checking units. You failed theory, by missing the fact it was a dynamic system and therefore energy is transferred over time. You failed measurement, by not understanding what your units represent. You failed a unit check in such a spectacular fashion as to likely be one of the people at NASA who managed to make a rover miss its target by not converting metric to imperial.

Worst of all, you've failed the human part of science. Instead of showing me how I'm wrong, you spouted a bunch of crap then claimed "it's science you idiot." Fine. Just never get anywhere near my HVAC, or the damn thing won't ever work.

Also, stay the hell away from my computers. I don't trust anyone who can't even understand the difference between energy, energy over time, and total energy utilized.



If you're too damned lazy to do the math yourself, here's the quick and dirty way to measure a single flow.
Flow rate * time = volume of fluid
volume of fluid * density of fluid = mass of fluid
find the molar mass of the fluid
mass of fluid / Molar mass of fluid = moles of fluid
Measure temperature difference across the radiator
find the heat capacity of the fluid (water is about 75 Joules/mole/Degree C)
Heat capacity * moles of fluid * temperature difference = Joules of energy

If you have a constant flow all you have to do is get the moles of fluid in a moles/unit time measurement. You'll note that the units it comes out in are then Joules/s, our good old friend Watts.


If you'd like to poke a hole in that logic, go ahead. I've provided units, measurement, concrete logical pathways to get to the answer, and you've yet to even demonstrate the understanding that dynamic systems aren't static.

 

[cadaveca]

If you'd like to poke a hole in that logic, go ahead. I've provided units, measurement, concrete logical pathways to get to the answer, and you've yet to even demonstrate the understanding that dynamic systems aren't static.

Great, so you've got the part about wrong units straight. So please stop using watts as a reference.

Your base logic is sound, but please continue the math and show the equations for the flow from the CPU, the heat added, the flow through the rad and how the water at inlet vs outlet is only one to two degrees. Within the math of that the fallacy (or correctness) of what you assert will be. I do have the prepared calculations here on paper in front of me (thanks to my prof). Or, as an alternative, show your own testing in your own loop, since you can't properly calculate how much of the power consumed by the CPU is output as heat...


That's what I'm asking you for. The math that proves skinnee's observation. I question the whole "any loop will only have 1-2 degree diff between inlet and outlet", and that is all. You asked to not re-hash an old argument, so I won't... I'll ask directly for the equations.

 

[lilhasselhoffer]

Great, so you've got the part about wrong units straight. So please stop using watts as a reference.

Your base logic is sound, but please continue the math and show the equations for the flow from the CPU, the heat added, the flow through the rad and how the water at inlet vs outlet is only one to two degrees. Within the math of that the fallacy (or correctness) of what you assert will be. I do have the prepared calculations here on paper in front of me (thanks to my prof). Or, as an alternative, show your own testing in your own loop, since you can't properly calculate how much of the power consumed by the CPU is output as heat...


That's what I'm asking you for. The math that proves skinnee's observation. I question the whole "any loop will only have 1-2 degree diff between inlet and outlet", and that is all. You asked to not re-hash an old argument, so I won't... I'll ask directly for the equations.

To reply in the same fashion you did earlier, pay me.

I've proven my math. I've demonstrated that you somehow can't understand dynamic versus static systems. If you want me to do the math for you again, fork over the money.


Does that sound familiar?


Edit:
Let's make it immensely familiar.

I have a degree in engineering. My degree says that I know more than you do, and it also means that if you want something from me you should pay for it. If not, then shut the hell up and believe.


If it isn't immensely clear by now, this parrots the argument you made to me earlier. Kinda shitty being on the other end, no?

You know, let's do one better. I have a degree. I'm a certified engineer (and if you'd ever taken that test you'd understand exactly how insane it is). I've got a textbook in front of me, and I double checked my notes from the class before doing the initial proof. Pay up, or believe.


Edit:
Let me be charitable. You obviously didn't even put forward an ounce of effort to review the old thread. I stated quite clearly the assumptions. If you want me to calculate a case in which the temperature is more than 1-2 degree (as per the presented reasonable situation) I'll happily take checks or money order.

 

[cadaveca]

Edit:
Let me be charitable. You obviously didn't even put forward an ounce of effort to review the old thread. I stated quite clearly the assumptions. If you want me to calculate a case in which the temperature is more than 1-2 degree (as per the presented reasonable situation) I'll happily take checks or money order.

Nah, it's pretty simple. Your "proof" is skinnee's observations. No big deal. But again, as you've said, we are dealing with a dynamic closed system, and that system can have various configurations that can counteract skinnee's findings. Flow Rate, block design (like impingement, etc), are all factors that affect a loop's efficiency, and as such, affect water temps at inlet/outlet. Simply changing tubing size, restricting flow on inlet or outlet, can affect water temps. The ideal is 1- 2 degrees between inlet and outlet, not the standard.

I'm not sure why that seems untrue to you, but that's OK. I'll continue to reiterate this no matter who posts that. It doesn't take much effort.

 

[RejZoR]

Is there any other liquid that absorbs more energy than water but doesn't boil in conditions experienced in water cooling loop?

 

[lilhasselhoffer]

Nah, it's pretty simple. Your "proof" is skinnee's observations. No big deal. But again, as you've said, we are dealing with a dynamic closed system, and that system can have various configurations that can counteract skinnee's findings. Flow Rate, block design (like impingement, etc), are all factors that affect a loop's efficiency, and as such, affect water temps at inlet/outlet. Simply changing tubing size, restricting flow on inlet or outlet, can affect water temps. The ideal is 1- 2 degrees between inlet and outlet, not the standard.

I'm not sure why that seems untrue to you, but that's OK. I'll continue to reiterate this no matter who posts that. It doesn't take much effort.

You seem to miss the point. I did calculations based upon a reasonable approximation of what you'd see in a water cooling loop. If you'd like to make an unreasonable loop, you're more than welcome to do that. It's an exercise in being a moron, and arguing that because other configurations exist that no math can ever be right.

Why am I so very adamant that you're being an obstinate ass? I don't know who skinee is, nor do I give a crap about them. I've demonstrated why general observations about "optimal" water cooling are as they are.

I've also demonstrated that you could theoretically have 4 devices in a loop, and only experience a temperature differential of about 4 degrees.



You seem to want this to be a simple problem, but allow me to hit the very simple things which you seem to not understand.
1) HVAC primarily deals with convection heating. Water coolers primarily deal with conduction heating. Different equations, different methodologies, but somehow you equate the two. I'd just love to see how you account for all these variables you seem to want to interject. Unfortunately you don't have any mathematics or logic demonstrated, nor do you even state what assumptions are being made. Seems like an argument of "there are exceptions, so there can never be a reasonable approximation" is what you're saying.

2) You don't seem to understand why certain flow rates are chosen. Again, something HVAC nearly never accounts for is laminar and turbulent flows. I'd love to see you justify why above a certain flow rate water coolers don't work better, remembering that tube diameter and surface finish are all components of the equations you seem to not be able to produce. I'll give you a hint, conduction becomes convection when laminar flow becomes chaotic. The reason this isn't accounted for is variable densities within a convective flow make the math...painful. Ask your professor to describe heating in a convective oven. If they do anything but whip out that blue book I'd be surprised. When I asked my professor it took nearly an hour to setup the equations, and it was a single point source of heat being modeled, not a surface.

3) Who said anything about standards for this measurement? What I said was a system should have a minimal variance in temperature across the radiator. I cited degrees, but I should have cited degrees Celsius for perfect accuracy. What was proven earlier is that a system running under reasonably optimal conditions could dissipate 250 Watts of energy for every degree Celsius that the radiator inlet and outlet varied by. You asked me about the amount of BTU (a measurement of energy, not rate of energy), and implied that I didn't know what I was doing (somehow equating energy and energy rates without clear linking). If you'd like to be an ass, let's assume some crazy shit to make my reasonable approximation inaccurate. Let's first assume you use 1/32" diameter tubing, so that with a reasonable flow rate the velocity would be insane (leading to chaotic flow). Let's further compound the problem, and instead have a dual socket 2011 system with 4 390x cards. Now let's compound the problem further, the computer is an enclosed air space, meaning that the ambient temperature is variable and thus a dynamic balance calculation has to account for thermal rejection outside of your system and within the enclosed space. You've now gone from a home computer, into the territory of a rack space server. While still possible, how does this influence how a home system might work?

All of that sounds pretty stupid, no? We work under the auspices of some assumptions, because reality is hugely more complex. I assume a reasonable tube diameter, and a minimum of bends so that laminar flow is reasonably present. Throw that assumption out the window, and you can't reasonably ballpark anything. I assume that ambient temperature is constant, because nobody seems to list the volume of air within their room (or how the house is temperature monitored for that matter). If that isn't the case the change in temperature across the radiator fluctuates as ambient increases, leading to a long form equation which varies wildly with enclosure size and atmospheric conditions. I assume a reasonable amount of power dissipation (100-600 Watt TDP) because most people aren't out there buying enthusiast processors, and they've got a single GPU. If you change the assumptions, or are intentionally obtuse, you can prove anything. You seem to be hell bent on doing so.


4) Would you like to be more obtuse? I'll give you a few more topics which aren't ever accounted for in calculations, but do influence reality. First off, fluid does compress and does have minor variations in density with varying temperature. Next, every single fluid flow has a fouling layer, along which the velocity of the flow is substantially less than the rest of the flow. Fouling layers are influenced by fluid viscosity, tube finish, and velocity of the flow. Given that the fouling layer moves slower, it picks up particulate matter rather quickly, influencing thermal conductivity by both increasing surface area and changing surface composition. Moving on, if you get small enough you suddenly enter the world of micro-fluidics, and your water loop can now function as a phase change cooler (making conduction seem ineffective by comparison at cooling). None of that is accounted for. Finally, water isn't just water. We haven't done the immensely complicated math of finding the actual heat capacity of our substance, accounting for everything from ions to distilled gasses. Where exactly are those calculation?



In short, whenever you can provide every single calculation, for every single cooler, you haven't brought anything to the discussion. If that isn't fair, then why exactly are you asking it of me? I offered a simple rule of thumb, applicable to most systems at most times, and you've demanded that because it isn't 100% for everyone that it be thrown out the window. Fine, show me your math. Do what you expect of me, or pay me. You seemed content with that argument before, so either it was bullshit then or you're full of it now. If that answer is unacceptable, I suggest you write the 3-4 pages of equations that would be needed to calculate everything out. I'm sure that your HVAC training has led you to believe that it's not really that complicated. Here's a little bit of advice, they remove about 90% of the variables because their influence is minor and at room temperatures their influence amounts to fractions of a degree. If you don't believe me I implore you to learn the math. After a week of proving everything out in class (and a four hour lab to demonstrate it all working), our professor whipped out that little blue book, and gave us its estimate of the situation. It was off by about 7%, and took less than 5 minutes to look up. The reason rules of thumb exist is because they're good approximations of reality inside the bell curve (where most things are). That blue book isn't worth crap on the outliers of the bell curve, but I'm not looking at the outliers you seem hell bent on making the majority.

 

[cadaveca]

Why am I so very adamant that you're being an obstinate ass? I don't know who skinee is, nor do I give a crap about them. I've demonstrated why general observations about "optimal" water cooling are as they are.

I've been around the OC scene for years. Since 586 days. My first watercooler used a 85 Bonneville heater core, and a had to braze on my own fittings. That's just what we did back then. The actual originator of the "1-2c between inlet and outlet" was a user named Skinnee, who did a huge whackload of watercooling testing many many years ago (like a decade ago). Those of us that have been in this hobby and did watercooling in Athlon XP days know who skinnee is and what Skinnee Labs meant to the community. You might actually say that his testing lead into a tonne of decent watercooling options. Anyway, ever since he's posted that, I've seen this regurgitated countless times. But he was the first.

Here is his page:

http://skinneelabs.com/



So, I guess in the end, we'll just do this every time you decide that you need to post this. NO sweat off my back. You can post pages of written stuff to try to back your ideas up, but do keep in mind, most people will simply TL;DR.

There used to be days when cooler reviewers used simulated heatloads for cooler testing.

 

[Arctucas]

Heh...

PC water cooling; Distilled water, a couple of drops of benzalkonium chloride, no dis-similar metals in the loop, it is all good.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

Wasn't me? I use straight distilled water in mine and have had no issues thus far.

I'm not against using a bit (<5%) of radiator fluid or methanol in a loop since just that will do a good job inhibiting bacterial growth w/o significantly affecting the performance of just water.

I use some valvoline pc additive in distilled water and a bit of anti corosion fluid now and have had no issues in the last 2 years.
I did with just distilled water,, have several bio outbreaks one of which killed a pump.
Oil is for full submersion only imho and I'm going that way next rig but I'm waiting on both money and Zen.

 

[dorsetknob]

Vodka with a dash of martini to lubricate the pump which stirs and circulates to cool the system

Bond's the name

 

[lilhasselhoffer]

I've been around the OC scene for years. Since 586 days. My first watercooler used a 85 Bonneville heater core, and a had to braze on my own fittings. That's just what we did back then. The actual originator of the "1-2c between inlet and outlet" was a user named Skinnee, who did a huge whackload of watercooling testing many many years ago (like a decade ago). Those of us that have been in this hobby and did watercooling in Athlon XP days know who skinnee is and what Skinnee Labs meant to the community. You might actually say that his testing lead into a tonne of decent watercooling options. Anyway, ever since he's posted that, I've seen this regurgitated countless times. But he was the first.

Here is his page:

http://skinneelabs.com/



So, I guess in the end, we'll just do this every time you decide that you need to post this. NO sweat off my back. You can post pages of written stuff to try to back your ideas up, but do keep in mind, most people will simply TL;DR.

There used to be days when cooler reviewers used simulated heatloads for cooler testing.

Here's the shortened version then.

You're full of shit. At this point, I'm willing to eat a ban to simply state the obvious.

Someone apparently went to the trouble of real world testing, but you dismiss that as "not 100% of the time." Someone else used the math to prove the point. Despite this, your response is "but I can intentionally damage my system to get different performance." Well, prove it. Prove that damaging a system appreciably changes the output. I'd also like you to prove that playing in traffic is a bad idea. I'd really appreciate you backing up your bullshit with a single fact or equation.

Oh wait, I forgot. You don't do the whole proof thing. I've seen pastures recently fertilized with less crap in them.



Edit:
One last thing. I've been doing it for a long time means nothing. I know 80 year olds who drove since they were 18. Despite that, driving a new car is dangerous because they still want to pump the breaks, rather than trust ABS. Not understanding the fundamental mechanics, and subsequently dismissing all the proofs offered, is a sign of a retarded mental faculties not genius. Experience isn't an automatic ticket to understanding. It definitely isn't reason that your opinion and statements are gospel over reality.

 

[peche]

Heh...

PC water cooling; Distilled water, a couple of drops of benzalkonium chloride, no dis-similar metals in the loop, it is all good.

you forgot about this ...

Silver coils...

 

[Norton]

a couple of drops of benzalkonium chloride

A quaternary Ammonia compound such as this should do very well as an antibacterial agent in a loop.

It does a great job killing off the bacteria/microbes at my treatment plants

 

[cadaveca]

Edit:
One last thing. I've been doing it for a long time means nothing. I know 80 year olds who drove since they were 18. Despite that, driving a new car is dangerous because they still want to pump the breaks, rather than trust ABS. Not understanding the fundamental mechanics, and subsequently dismissing all the proofs offered, is a sign of a retarded mental faculties not genius. Experience isn't an automatic ticket to understanding. It definitely isn't reason that your opinion and statements are gospel over reality.

Meh. I'll still keep responding as I have been, regardless, without having to resort to personal attacks. There's no emotion in my posting. You've had me refuting your post, and it angers you? You feel the need to constantly refute me, even. Maybe you should take some time off the internet.

 

[lilhasselhoffer]

Meh. I'll still keep responding as I have been, regardless, without having to resort to personal attacks. There's no emotion in my posting. You've had me refuting your post, and it angers you? You feel the need to constantly refute me, even. Maybe you should take some time off the internet.

Get bent.

Not a personal attack, but a refutation of an obstinate individual who, when pressed for the slightest modicum of proof continually fails to deliver. Hell, that would be one thing, but you don't stop there. You say people are incorrect, and don't have the simple courtesy of stating why. You make baseless accusations built on nothing, explain nothing, and believe that you deserve to be listened to. I'll offer you some advice now, either understand and demonstrate your points or your points deserve the same respect my toilet paper does.


I'll offer you an apology whenever you prove anything. As yet, there is no proof that you've been able to demonstrate. None.

 

[cadaveca]

Get bent.

Not a personal attack, but a refutation of an obstinate individual who, when pressed for the slightest modicum of proof continually fails to deliver. Hell, that would be one thing, but you don't stop there. You say people are incorrect, and don't have the simple courtesy of stating why. You make baseless accusations built on nothing, explain nothing, and believe that you deserve to be listened to. I'll offer you some advice now, either understand and demonstrate your points or your points deserve the same respect my toilet paper does.

I did already in this thread post why you were wrong. You didn't agree with those reasons. So whatevs... your anger is blinding you. You seem incapable of having a discussion with someone who doesn't agree with you. PLease note the lack of thanks on your posts, but present on my own... not because I'm right... but because I remain calm and civilized about it.

Take a step back, calm down, heck, have a beer. If you can't afford that, send me your paypal email and I'll buy you a case.

 

[lilhasselhoffer]

I did already in this thread post why you were wrong. You didn't agree with those reasons. So whatevs... your anger is blinding you. You seem incapable of having a discussion with someone who doesn't agree with you.

Take a step back, calm down, heck, have a beer. If you can't afford that, send me your paypal email and I'll buy you a case.

What in the hell?

It's not really that complicated. I suppose you could make it complicated, but having taken this in school now, it's pretty simple to calculate airflow stuff, but to do it right, you do need some tools, like a pressure gauge, which of course, I have in my tool box (and part of our learning was to use different tools and see how they give different results, too). That's the thing with refrigeration... you need the gas knowledge, waterflow, airflow, pressure, electrical, blah blah blah ad nauseum.

Anyway, you can consider all you want about water flow and rads and pressure drop in the loop, but if you do not provide proper airflow, it's all for naught. Like the idea that has been bandied around for ages that water temp from inlet to outlet of a rad will never differ more than 1 degree C... All done by people not using proper calculations, yet is accepted as fact because it was measured that way in certain practice.

Accusation of incorrect mathematics, with no proof.

Q: What's a BTU?

A: The amount of heat required to raise one pound of water one degree Fahrenheit


Q: How many watts in a BTU?


A: 3.413.


Fill in the rest.

Fundamental misunderstanding of units. There are no Watts is a BTU. You failed to understand that a Watt is one Joule per second. The amount of Joules in a BTU is about 1055.

I can't tell exactly how this sort of idiocy is allowed to occur. Let's look at definition, that you provided.

What is a BTU - The amount of energy required to heat one pound of water 1 degree farenheit. It is a unit of energy.
What is a Watt - The amount of energy consumed over the course of time. It's expressed as Joules/second
What is a Joule - a unit of energy.

What in the Hell? You accuse me of not understanding, but this sort of fundamental misunderstanding of units is what you bring to the table?


Prove a damn thing, please. Just for giggles, bring that quotation to your professor. If they don't ask you how you managed to not fail basic HVAC courses I'm not sure I'd trust them near a heating element. CHECK YOUR UNITS.

 

[cadaveca]

Oh, you missed the bit where I leave holes for people to poke at on purpose. It furthers the discussion. I expect to be corrected, but politely.

I guess it simply takes a far better man to stay calm and offer correction rather than getting upset and emotional about it.

 

[crazyeyesreaper]

 

[lilhasselhoffer]

Oh, you missed the bit where I leave holes for people to poke at on purpose. It furthers the discussion. I expect to be corrected, but politely.

I guess it simply takes a far better man to stay calm and offer correction rather than getting upset and emotional about it.

I'm not sorry. Whenever I politely asked you to check units you suggested I was incompetent and didn't know how to do the math.

You proceeded to completely not understand how units work, and continue to tell me I didn't know how to do the math.

When the math agreed to the measurements you provided I was told it was still wrong.


Talking to a brick wall, that accuses you of idiocy while committing fundamental errors of understanding is difficult. Especially when they want to play the "I'm taking the high road" attitude. Especially whenever asked nicely they simply tel you "nuh-uh."

 

[stinger608]

I know, right? Like a dinner and a movie.

 

[cadaveca]

I'm not sorry. Whenever I politely asked you to check units you suggested I was incompetent and didn't know how to do the math.

You proceeded to completely not understand how units work, and continue to tell me I didn't know how to do the math.

When the math agreed to the measurements you provided I was told it was still wrong.


Talking to a brick wall, that accuses you of idiocy while committing fundamental errors of understanding is difficult. Especially when they want to play the "I'm taking the high road" attitude. Especially whenever asked nicely they simply tel you "nuh-uh."

Nuh-uh. When did I do that? that doesn't sound like me AT ALL.

My chosen vocabulary gets under your skin. Oh well. It still doesn't change the fact that it is more than possible to have a larger delta on a rad than 2c. Hence the whole pointing to BTUs and watts. Its simple math.

 

[lilhasselhoffer]

Nuh-uh. When did I do that? that doesn't sound like me AT ALL.

My chosen vocabulary gets under your skin. Oh well. It still doesn't change the fact that it is more than possible to have a larger delta on a rad than 2c. Hence the whole pointing to BTUs and watts. Its simple math.

Give me the conversion units for BTU to Watts.

Can't do it. The reason you can't is that BTU measures an amount of energy, and Watts measures a momentary usage of energy at a specific time.

In a static equation, like HVAC enjoys playing with, you need an amount of energy to either heat or cool a gas to the desired temperature. According to your point before, this is why we measure KWh on our power bill.

In a dynamic system, such as a closed water cooling loop, you need to know change rate of power. This is why TDP, for a chip isn't in BTU. The amount of time it's on multiplied by its power dissipated over time varies as the amount of time on varies. Water cooling loops are dynamic, thus you measure the amount of input energy over time, and the output energy over time.




As far as continuing to claim you can get more than 1-2 degrees C (and maybe that's why you've got an issue, since you never prove anything I can't tell), I agree. As stated above you can get that with either imprecision in measurement or with a system dissipating an excess of 500 Watts of energy thermally. Say, in a socket 2011 processor with two 390x's and a giant radiator. Thing is, that configuration isn't common. It's outside the common setups, what I called the bell curve earlier. Most people aren't capable of spending thousands of dollars on computers then several hundred more on extremely high end water coolers. It can be done, but as its a fringe case it's not being considered because it's not useful to the majority of people.

Seriously though, you work with gasses that require phase change to get them to cool (as a dig, isobaric, isochoric, or isothermal assumptions for the liquid phase?). You do something that dangerous, and missed basic units? I implore you to invest in a life insurance policy.

 

[Sir B. Fannybottom]

I'm not sorry. Whenever I politely asked you to check units you suggested I was incompetent and didn't know how to do the math.

You proceeded to completely not understand how units work, and continue to tell me I didn't know how to do the math.

When the math agreed to the measurements you provided I was told it was still wrong.


Talking to a brick wall, that accuses you of idiocy while committing fundamental errors of understanding is difficult. Especially when they want to play the "I'm taking the high road" attitude. Especially whenever asked nicely they simply tel you "nuh-uh."

bruh chill its just internets why u heff to be mad?

 

[flmatter]

I'll buy you a case.

I can afford beer but if you are offering free beer, PM incoming