 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott wrote:
>> FWIW, how much heat does an Intel Core 2 Quad generate?
>
> About 120W under full load.
...so, more than an entire human being?
Perhaps *this* is why the human brain is in little danger of burning to
a crisp? ;-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 09 Jan 2009 10:26:48 +0000, Invisible <voi### [at] dev null> wrote:
>>> How come human
>>> brains don't ignite and burn during normal operation? I don't see any
>>> really large heat sinks on a human...
>>
>> It is fluid cooled and what about those heatsinks on the side of your head?
>
>Water cooled? Elite!
>
>But I mean, *damn*, you'd have to have a high-volume fluid pumping
>system, and a very large surface area to dissapate the heat over.
>
>
>
>...oh, wait...
Yes, the cardiovascular system is an effective heat exchanger working with the
lungs and skin. :)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> About 120W under full load.
>
> ...so, more than an entire human being?
>
> Perhaps *this* is why the human brain is in little danger of burning to a
> crisp? ;-)
Maybe not burning to a crisp, but if you raise the temperature of your
innards by just a few degrees things begin to screw up very rapidly. You
have quite a sophisticated temperature control system to keep you at around
37 degrees inside...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen wrote:
>> ...oh, wait...
>
> Yes, the cardiovascular system is an effective heat exchanger working with the
> lungs and skin. :)
More impressive is the scientific *fact* this this system is somehow
able to keep the contents of the human body at a temperature drastically
*lower* than the surrounding ambient, even though the human body itself
generates heat, in utter defience of the 2nd law of thermodynamics.
I'd never believe it if I hadn't seen it with my own eyes...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott wrote:
> Maybe not burning to a crisp, but if you raise the temperature of your
> innards by just a few degrees things begin to screw up very rapidly.
> You have quite a sophisticated temperature control system to keep you at
> around 37 degrees inside...
Or, to put it the correct way round, your life processes are designed to
work at one specific temperature *because* you have an elaborate system
designed to keep things at exactly that temperature. ;-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> More impressive is the scientific *fact* this this system is somehow
> able to keep the contents of the human body at a temperature drastically
> *lower* than the surrounding ambient, even though the human body itself
> generates heat, in utter defience of the 2nd law of thermodynamics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evaporation
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 09 Jan 2009 11:48:15 +0000, Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>Stephen wrote:
>
>>> ...oh, wait...
>>
>> Yes, the cardiovascular system is an effective heat exchanger working with the
>> lungs and skin. :)
>
>More impressive is the scientific *fact* this this system is somehow
>able to keep the contents of the human body at a temperature drastically
>*lower* than the surrounding ambient, even though the human body itself
>generates heat, in utter defience of the 2nd law of thermodynamics.
>
>I'd never believe it if I hadn't seen it with my own eyes...
Sorry, but the ambient temperature is generally lower than body temperature.
When it is higher we use evaporation, as Scott says.
Although it is amazing the temperatures that we can tolerate. Once I was working
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> More impressive is the scientific *fact* this this system is somehow
>> able to keep the contents of the human body at a temperature drastically
>> *lower* than the surrounding ambient, even though the human body itself
>> generates heat, in utter defience of the 2nd law of thermodynamics.
>>
>> I'd never believe it if I hadn't seen it with my own eyes...
>
> Sorry, but the ambient temperature is generally lower than body temperature.
Yes, _usually_ it is, and this is quite unsurprising.
> When it is higher we use evaporation, as Scott says.
didn't die. Indeed, although he came out looking half dead, a
radiothermometer confirms that his *internal* temperature barely moved.
> Although it is amazing the temperatures that we can tolerate. Once I was working
*serious* protective clothing...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 09 Jan 2009 12:55:19 +0000, Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>
>didn't die. Indeed, although he came out looking half dead, a
>radiothermometer confirms that his *internal* temperature barely moved.
>
Again several years ago, when I was working offshore, I worked for two days on a
separation train where the ambient temperature was IIRC about 50deg C. There was
a team of us taking turns monitoring the instrumentation as the HVAC system had
failed. We would spend about 30 mins in the heat and 30 mins cooling down then
back into the heat. All of us were able to keep it up foe 12 hours a day. I
can't remember how much water we drank but we were given salt tablets as well.
Remember "Production Rules". :)
>> Although it is amazing the temperatures that we can tolerate. Once I was working
>
>*serious* protective clothing...
No serious PPE (Personal Protective Equipment). Safety boots, jeans, tee shirt,
overalls, leather/cotton gloves and hard hat. I tried removing my tee shirt but
the metal on the overalls was too hot to touch. I know what the temperature was
because I took a mercury thermometer up to check as I wanted to know what the
temperature was and a bi-metallic strip thermometer was reading over 100C.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen wrote:
> No serious PPE (Personal Protective Equipment). Safety boots, jeans, tee shirt,
> overalls, leather/cotton gloves and hard hat. I tried removing my tee shirt but
> the metal on the overalls was too hot to touch. I know what the temperature was
> because I took a mercury thermometer up to check as I wanted to know what the
> temperature was and a bi-metallic strip thermometer was reading over 100C.
can only assume that your drenched clothing somehow kept you a few
degrees cooler than that or something. (Surely water must evapourate
stupidly fast at almost boiling point!)
Reminds me of the time I was trapped by a fire. I didn't realise that
skin could actually excrete water that fast. I'm not kidding, I had
water *pouring* off me like water flows out of a tap. I have no idea how
much water there is in the human body, but I'd suggest fatal dehydration
couldn't take very long at that speed. (I had one *bad* headache
afterwards!)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
