eisfeld

Wait until you realize that it also doesn't state the ambient temp and so none of the formulas anyone - including you - posted can be actually applied to get the heat loss in Watt. And what about your formula for convective heat loss? What fluid are we talking here? Oh and what's the flow rate? Hm yea, we don't seem to know, do we. Let me put it like this: You guy CANNOT use this NONEXISTING DATA to CALCULATE the answer and Complete the Homework Assignment. This conversation has boggled the mind indeed.

What are you on about? Who is talking about design phase of a pipe? Man it's a school physics question. You are way overcomplicating things. You claim people don't get things but you bring zero arguments of why the simple approach via conservation of energy (not mass or momentum) cannot be used. Please, just ONE argument. It's not about sounding credible. It's about basic physics. If you claim the approach is wrong then please state why.

Are you trolling? Heat loss is heat loss. OPs homework question wants to know how many Watt. Power is power. Energy is energy. The method by which it is taken away does not change the amount. Radiation. convection... maybe it's being cooled through lasers? Whatever it is, it does not matter. That's the beauty of setbkk's approach. It lets you ignore all factors like material of the pipe, thinkness, color or if a fluid flows over it because it just looks how much goes in, how much comes out and the rest is your uncle, sorry is the heat loss as per question.

No. I really don't see your point. Your example was nonsensical. If your ambient temp is the same as inside the pipe then of course there wont be any real heat loss. It's an absurd example. What you are missing is the simple fact that setbkk suggested a very simple way to calculate the heat loss by utilizing the conservation of energy law. If you know how X amount of energy goes in and Y (Y being smaller than X) comes out then the difference is your heat loss due to radiation. It's simply an easier way to get the answer IF one knows in and outlet temp, velocity and material going through (air). Are you honestly disputing this super simple physics fact? Are you really coming up with details like sensor accuracy? It's a homework question! I could as well question your approach by saying that your formula is not taking into account changes in material density and surface areas when temperature changes. What if there is wind blowing over the pipe? What if it gets so hot that it melts? See you can come up will all kinds of contrived nonsense details that make things more complicated then the situation at hand demands. Where is color in your equation? Your rude attitude is totally misplaced. What does this have to do with anything in this thread? The OP is asking about a simple homework assignment of a very simple standard physics or engineering task. And here you are argueing about blackbody radiation and pissing on peoples legs. Lots of pseudo intellectual blabla with a rude tone that misses the point.

Simple. Heat loss would be nada in your example (maybe slightly not nada if you actually specified an outlet temp that is not equal to inlet temp).

No, setbkk's approach (if OP had the outlet temp) would work regardless of the ambient temp. It's very simple: Power Inlet = Power Outlet + Power Radiated. If you know the inlet temp + flowrate you have inlet power. Similar for the outlet power and so you can easily calculate the radiated power. If you measure on a cold day instead of a hot day you will simply see a different outlet temp.

Maybe don't tell others what their opinion is. And to say that absolutely nobody thinks that sending NATO soldiers into Ukraine is obviosly false. You can find people who'd support that if you just bother to look. I am not aware of any plans of western pilots actually manning the jets for Ukraine. I don't even understand what you are saying here. It is correct that having NATO pilots actually fly jets in Ukraine would be the same as sending soldiers that fight on the ground. But it's not happening. Neither in Ukraine nor Taiwan. No western soldier has done any fighting in Taiwan. So what's the point? Of course NATO tries to not get into a direct military confrontation if it can be avoided. And the same applies to Taiwan. Let's be clearer: what you meant to say is that I *should not* be interested in sending NATO soldiers to Ukraine (at this point). Because things would escalate quickly. Correct but what's the point? A country not being a NATO member doesn't mean that NATO completely ignores whatever happens to them. All it means is that the Article 5 defense clause dose not automatically trigger. Russia invading Ukraine nonetheless poses a threat to the west. And so would China invading Taiwan pose an issue. Even without nukes no country would be speaking about invading Russia or China. There is zero interest in doing so. These two powers are very big. Ukraine and Taiwan are not. They cannot defend themselves as is pretty obvious in Ukraine. They'd be defeated a long time ago without the support from their allies. It can't be a solution to hand everyone nukes and so we arrive at the present situation where big countries have to step in and help the smaller ones that can't defend themselves from aggressors.

Q = 2 * PI * (coefficient of material) * (pipe length) * (temp difference) / (ln(outer radius / inner radius)) The radii you can easily calculate from the diameter. Temp difference as well assuming room temp. Then just look up the coefficient for stainless steel and plug it into the calculator.

I wouldn't agree on that. You are saying some allies are worth defending and some are not. You say Britain should be defended but Ukraine should be left to rot. And you know full well that it wont stop at Ukraine or Taiwan because both are not the first either. It's also about containing imperialistic ambitions of Russia and China. There are plenty of reasons to not just ignore it when some countries get brutally invaded. So yea, can't agree at all on this basic point. A very loaded question. They did not send soldiers to Ukraine to fight. Jets are being sent. They are sending only hardware and economical support. Defending a small player when a bully comes can be a very good idea because it puts the bully into his place. And if you do it only on a defensive basis then what's so bad about that? It's the only viable way to actually prevent invasions. No country would dare to attack a NATO country because they know all too well it wouldn't end well for them. These defense alliances work extremely well and allow smaller countries to actually survive in the presence of a powerful hostile neighbour.

Reuters was able to speak to multiple residents in the area who heard a loud bang before the plane fell from the sky and one guy was quoted as saying he saw one of the wings flying away. That would explain the uncontrolled straight down fall. https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/prigozhin-plane-crash-villagers-hear-bang-then-see-plane-plummet-ground-2023-08-24/

This is where I disagree. First of charging someone does not mean they get convicted. And, like I mentioned even if convicted there is nothing about being guaranteed time in prison. If your lawyers told you so then probably to persuade you to go into mediation or they knew the case was severe enough that getting time is likely. Or maybe they knew something about that particular case, judge etc. pp. There are many many factors. For example if the person showed remorse and appologized. The list is long.

I've been through court cases in Thailand (on the plaintiff side). I know well how they push for mediation. But all that still doesn't change that no, you will not be mandatorily imprisoned and deported. Plenty of defamation cases end with a simple fine. It really depends on the severity. There is a big difference if joe-shmoe defames a government officer or influential person or if he just cursed at a random person on the fresh market.

Fair enough but there is still no minimum or mandatory prison sentence and nothing about deportation.

Video of the plane falling from the sky

Seems like Prigozhin as well as his second in command at Wagner are both dead. Crossing Puting tends to have accutely reduced life expectancy as a side effect.

MOSCOW, Aug 23 (Reuters) - Wagner mercenary chief Yevgeny Prigozhin was listed as a passenger on a private jet which crashed on Wednesday evening north of Moscow with no survivors, the Russian authorities said, raising fears among his allies that he had been killed. There was no immediate official confirmation that Prigozhin, Russia's most powerful mercenary and a self-declared enemy of the Russian Defence Ministry, was physically on board. Reuters could not confirm that he was on the aircraft though a Telegram channel linked to Wagner pronounced him dead. Article: https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ten-killed-private-jet-crash-north-moscow-tass-2023-08-23/

Well obviously not wearing a helmet is a big giveaway but it's also stuff like shorts and flipflops on a scooter. Or for example new tourists that clearly drive in a manner that is different from the rest of the traffic. After a while you tend to be able to spot the usual suspects in those areas. Some of them the police already recognizes individually because they get caught over and over. It's a pretty ridicolous situation. I ride with a full face helmet, have proper clothing etc. They know riders like that are usually not easy targets for missing license, insurance etc.

There is no mandatory prison time. The law stipulates a maximum imprisonment of 1 year or a maximum of 20k THB fine or both. There is no minimum. Usually a low fine will be imposed. There is nothing about deporting at all in the relevant law because it doesn't deal with immigration.

That's not true according to mathematical statistics. A sample size of around 1,100 already allows you to get a statistically significant representation of a pupolation of tens of millions with error margin of less than +-3% because of the exponential increase of population size in relation to sample size. And that's why you will see most nation wide surveys in many countries always have a sample size of 1,xxx participants. Would 500,000 be more significant? Sure. In the range of 0.138% margin of error at 95% confidence. 5M would be even more significant. But the amount of significance that you gain has diminishing returns. A very rough estimate for the margin of error an be obtained via 1/√N where N is the sample size. The exact value is a bit more involved to calculate.

That's not making things better. If enough people do that they'll try to find ways to stop people from running away and that might not be very safe. Just stop, show them your license and be waved on, what's the big deal? They stop the foreigners in these areas because the vast vast majority of them have no helmet or license and can easily afford to pay and never learn. I've known plenty of foreigners that didn't care and just saw it as a nuisance. I have helmet and license and don't get fined. I actually rarely get even stopped because I don't signal from afar that I'm an illegal rider. There are other places in Phuket where the police stops a lot of Thais, mainly around the Phuket Town area.

The article you linked to states they built the naval base for Ukraine. No permanent US troops stationed there. It was a reaction to Russia taking crimea and increasing military presence further in the area. We all know where that ended. The US has no bases in Taiwan and have no plans to do so either. They don't have permanent stationed personel there. Red lines or not. There is zero legitimacy to invade and destroy another country just because you feel threatened. Neither Ukraine nor the US threatened to invade Russia. Neither Taiwan nor the US threaten to invade China. But it is Russia who invaded Ukraine and it is China who is threatening of invading Taiwan. Simple as that.

Not going to happen for multiple reasons. They didn't achieve their goal yet btw. Thaksin needs to get out of prison first. Another reason is that in order to remove the Senate from the PM vote would require a change in the constitution which requires the approval of the Senate.

You can film and share the video. Just don't add stupid defaming commentary to it. Let people draw their own conclusions. So film and share. Don't film and shame.

Hu? I don't get it. You said you hoped he used an anonymous account and VPN. He clearly didn't try to stay anonymous when he himself went to the police station.

Not sure what that has to do with my post. I was replying sarcastically to a poster that suggested to deport the man. A man who appears to be Thai. Hence plane to Thailand...