Re: [Phys-L] Re: Sizes of atoms (was evidence for non-classical behavior)

[Dan MacIsaac <Dan.MacIsaac@NAU.EDU>]

On Sunday, July 10, 2005, at 03:00 PM, John Denker wrote:
> I don't understand the teakettle method.  What's the observable?
> What's the connection to kinetic theory?  Steam comes jetting
> out of the teakettle ... don't "ballistic" advection effects
> completely overwhelm any diffusion effects?

Watching water vapor condense.  Invisibly small gas forms visible
droplets of liquid.

> I don't understand the baggie-weighing method.  How is the
> observable connected to the size of atoms?  What role does
> condensation of atmospheric humidity play in the method?
> (Is that the point, or is that a nuisance-effect?)

Conservation of mass through phase change to invisible mass.  It's
still there, though invisible is important.  Leads into "gas has mass."
  Maybe a little off-topic but important to the logical analysis the
teachers run through

>
Dan MacIsaac, Associate Professor of Physics, SUNY-Buffalo State College
222SciBldg BSC, 1300 Elmwood Ave, Buffalo NY 14222 USA 716-878-3802
<macisadl@buffalostate.edu>  <http://PhysicsEd.BuffaloState.edu>
_______________________________________________
Phys-L mailing list
Phys-L@electron.physics.buffalo.edu
https://www.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l