Recent comments in /f/askscience
[deleted] t1_jbawcz5 wrote
[deleted] t1_jbautm6 wrote
[removed]
Allfunandgaymes t1_jbarp4g wrote
Reply to What happens at the end of a subduction zone? When the entire plate subducts? by kittens0423
First you need to realize that subduction happens over periods of time that the human mind can scarcely comprehend. Hundreds of millions of years. Over periods of time this large, and under immense pressure and temperature, crustal rock that subducts can be considered to act in a ductile or plastic manner similar to the mantle it descends into. Think of soil and soil creep - if you grabbed a handful of soil you'd call it solid material, but over decades or centuries, soil acts in a fluid manner as it creeps laterally under gravity and large stationary objects sink into it. Less than 0.1% of the mantle is thought to be molten, but this is enough to allow its lithic material to act in a ductile manner.
Then you need to understand that as a plate subducts, it is not at all rapidly dissolved or rendered into magma. Some of it does convert to magma and collect in magma chambers that slowly rise due to their buoyancy, which is how you get subduction-related volcanism. Think the suite of volcanoes at the perimeter of the Pacific "Ring of Fire". The immense pressure and heat generated by the spreading and subducting Pacific plate grinding beneath more buoyant crustal plates - with the addition of water and other volatile substances from the ocean - is what generates the magma which eventually rises and produces those volcanoes. Eventually, and over the course of hundreds more millions of years, the subducting plate sinks into the asthenosphere - the uppermost region of the mantle - where it may homogenize with the surrounding lithic material. The ancient Farallon plate, which subducted under the west edge of the North American plate ~50-100 million years ago, is believed to be currently undergoing this process. The plate itself can still be detected with seismological technology.
NeverPlayF6 t1_jbaqw17 wrote
Reply to comment by upvoatsforall in Does thin stuff placed between pan and induction cooker affect efficiency in a significant manner? by BitsAndBobs304
Just a heads up- laser thermometers are actually infrared thermometers that measure the IR emitted as blackbody radiation. Each substance has a emissivity coefficient that has a significant effect on the measured temperature. Most IR thermometers are set to a default of 0.95 which is fantastic, since that is the emissivity value of cooking oil... but if you're trying to measure the surface temperature of a pan, it could vary substantially.
MarcusMacG t1_jbaqlwu wrote
Reply to How much influence does a natural satellite (like the Moon) have on the formation of continents ? by Aubin_kun
If one planet does a near miss flyby of another planet it can form one one three general types of formations; strips, bulges or holes.
The Earth has several visible strips, Mars has a clearly visible bulge and hole.
Hope that helps
_Warp_Rider t1_jbaqfk0 wrote
Reply to comment by BusyDadGaming in How much influence does a natural satellite (like the Moon) have on the formation of continents ? by Aubin_kun
Love your word choices.
> Planetary airlock
>Cosmically defenestrated
Cosmic Defenestration sounds like interdimensional astral projecting.
atomfullerene t1_jbaq4wy wrote
Reply to comment by BitsAndBobs304 in Does thin stuff placed between pan and induction cooker affect efficiency in a significant manner? by BitsAndBobs304
The pan has to be hotter than the chicken to heat it effectively
FBogg t1_jbapyjf wrote
Reply to comment by BitsAndBobs304 in Does thin stuff placed between pan and induction cooker affect efficiency in a significant manner? by BitsAndBobs304
further distance between magnetic elements = weaker magnetic force = lower transmission at constant line voltage.
[deleted] OP t1_jbapk4e wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_jbap0cz wrote
Reply to comment by BitsAndBobs304 in Does thin stuff placed between pan and induction cooker affect efficiency in a significant manner? by BitsAndBobs304
[removed]
[deleted] t1_jbaox9x wrote
[removed]
ErikTheAngry t1_jbaoe0o wrote
Reply to comment by takesalicking in Does thin stuff placed between pan and induction cooker affect efficiency in a significant manner? by BitsAndBobs304
It'll probably stop the mess, assuming it doesn't tear.
Though personally I'd be worried about fumes.. confined between the pan and the element the temps could be considerably higher than the surface of the pan itself (not unlike how the temps rise when you put a lid on a pot). Aluminum fumes are no joke, which start to be a concern around 600C. Of course at those temps, silicone would just be a bubbling mess too.
Foil won't do anything to protect the ceramic top from a heavy piece of iron though. The silicone mat will provide a bit of padding to help avoid scraping the ceramic, and it offers a little leeway in setting down the cast iron.
All while being reusable.
Calembreloque t1_jbantwr wrote
Reply to comment by BitsAndBobs304 in Does thin stuff placed between pan and induction cooker affect efficiency in a significant manner? by BitsAndBobs304
Do you think that induction cooks things without heating them up somehow? There's no direct flame but at the end of the day the principle is still to heat the bottom of the pan so you can cook its contents. A quick look online will tell you that induction ovens can heat things up to 350°C.
[deleted] t1_jbanswn wrote
Reply to comment by Calembreloque in Does thin stuff placed between pan and induction cooker affect efficiency in a significant manner? by BitsAndBobs304
[removed]
[deleted] t1_jbannam wrote
Reply to comment by BitsAndBobs304 in Does thin stuff placed between pan and induction cooker affect efficiency in a significant manner? by BitsAndBobs304
[removed]
black_brook t1_jbanm1e wrote
Reply to comment by BitsAndBobs304 in Does thin stuff placed between pan and induction cooker affect efficiency in a significant manner? by BitsAndBobs304
People often underestimate the temperature the frying pan gets to because the food is actively cooling off by the moisture in it changing phase to steam. The pan needs to be hotter than the food will actually cook at to compensate for this, and the bottom of the pan will be hotter than the surface of the pan which is in contract with food and having heat actively draw off.
Calembreloque t1_jbangf7 wrote
Reply to comment by BitsAndBobs304 in Does thin stuff placed between pan and induction cooker affect efficiency in a significant manner? by BitsAndBobs304
Virgin olive oil (which has one of the lowest smoke points) starts smoking around 190°C, so if you use other oils (avocado, sunflower), strictly nothing would happen at 210°C. 210°C is a perfectly standard temperature for cooking. If you want your chicken to cook to 75°C (the safe temperature), your pan has to be much hotter than that otherwise it will take hours for your chicken to heat up.
andrewmaixner t1_jban7wi wrote
Reply to comment by Legitimate_Bat3240 in When humans next land on the moon, will our telescopes from Earth's surface be able to photograph the rocket on the moon's surface? by Nswl
Yes. My super-basic comparison is based on diameter or width (not surface area), Asia is != China, and the moon is spherical not mostly-flat. This is "X river is Y football fields long" quality of comparison ;)
[deleted] t1_jban56n wrote
takesalicking t1_jban3wk wrote
Reply to comment by ErikTheAngry in Does thin stuff placed between pan and induction cooker affect efficiency in a significant manner? by BitsAndBobs304
Why not aluminum foil? It's non-magnetic, thin, won't "burst into flames" or melt.
[deleted] t1_jbamzj5 wrote
Reply to comment by BitsAndBobs304 in Does thin stuff placed between pan and induction cooker affect efficiency in a significant manner? by BitsAndBobs304
[deleted]
Legitimate_Bat3240 t1_jbamjqk wrote
Reply to comment by andrewmaixner in When humans next land on the moon, will our telescopes from Earth's surface be able to photograph the rocket on the moon's surface? by Nswl
Surface area of the moon is a few million less sq miles than the total surface area of Asia.
[deleted] OP t1_jbamj4p wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_jbam2oj wrote
Reply to comment by BitsAndBobs304 in Does thin stuff placed between pan and induction cooker affect efficiency in a significant manner? by BitsAndBobs304
[removed]
KnoWanUKnow2 t1_jbawirm wrote
Reply to comment by Aubin_kun in How much influence does a natural satellite (like the Moon) have on the formation of continents ? by Aubin_kun
Assuming that the planet is bigger than the moon, then the planet would have a much larger impact on the moon than the moon would have on the planet.
Look at the moons of Jupiter and Saturn. They are squeezed and compressed by the planet's gravity, which causes volcanism. Io is the extreme example, as it is closest to Jupiter. But Ganymede has a liquid ocean under it's ice largely because the gravity of the nearby planet is squeezing it and the friction is warming up the interior.
Also tidal locking is a thing. That's good for your story. A moon that is tidally locked to it's planet (like ours is) will always face the planet. From our perspective the moon doesn't rotate, it's always showing us the same face. That's why the moon has a dark side. Not because it's literally dark, but because before we invented spacecraft no one had ever seen it, it was unknown.
So your theoretical moon would have the city always facing the planet, to remind the planet's inhabitants of what happened (although it would likely be much to far away to make out the city). It could also be a sulphurous volcanic wasteland, much like the surface of Io due to tidal effects.
As for the moon's effect on the planet, that depends on the size of the moon and how close it is to the planet. Too close and too large and tidal effect will break the moon apart. You seem to have settled on a small, close moon which likely would have very little effect on the larger planet. As an example the 2 small moons of Mars have almost no effect on the planet at all.
Our moon causes ocean tides on Earth. It may also have an effect on plate tectonics, not so much with moving them, but may be at least part of what's keeping them apart and not allowing them to bind together (The jury is still out on that one, the oceans being subducted and releasing water seems to play a much larger role). On the other hand, the Earth caused the moon to become tidally locked and also causes a regular pattern of moonquakes.