Engine Flame Red or Blue?

Which engine exhaust is better?

  • Blue-White Exhaust?

    Votes: 38 90.5%

  • Orange-White Exhaust?

    Votes: 4 9.5%
  • Total voters
    42
Originally posted by Preacher

I assume you mean "copper". Thx for the tip.
Interesting: Rapid oxidation (being "on fire") BURNS green, and slow oxidation (aging/exposure to the elements) "rusts" green (which is why Lady Liberty is bluish green). Hmmmm.
Click to expand...

Potentially he/she could have intended to denote the latin "cuprium" which gave copper its chemical symbol (Cuprium... hence the Cu). Or it could have just been really dark and really late, and his index finger slipped over the o and the i over to the u and gave it a gentle pluck, and being so exhausted at such a late hour, one has a tendency not to give a damn towards mistakes in his/her posting. But hey, who knows? However, I'd doubt the existence of copper could ever be the reason for a flame burning green. I just find it foolish to think that a metal with such low combustibility would be present in great enough ammounts to comprise a majority of the fuel being burned to produce a green flame. That makes little to no sense... But who am I to put 28th century fuels in a box?
 
Originally posted by Antix


However, I'd doubt the existence of copper could ever be the reason for a flame burning green. I just find it foolish to think that a metal with such low combustibility would be present in great enough ammounts to comprise a majority of the fuel being burned to produce a green flame. That makes little to no sense... But who am I to put 28th century fuels in a box?
Click to expand...

You are very mistaken, all the ions of the periodic table burn with a *color*, this is because the fire´s energy *excite* the outer electron layer of the atom and we appreciate this in the change (or not depends of the ion) of the flame, so like i stated before the Copper *burns* green.
 
I realize perfectly ghost that often times an unknown element can be determined by the color it burns. My point with that post was simply this. In order for the flame to burn green, it would have to be composed PRIMARILY (which means most of it) of some element that, when excited, emites a greenish hue. I found it highly unlikely that copper would comprise the majority of a combustible material, unless they've started using other methods of ejecting material for movement. However, since the thing is emitting a FLAME I'd assume it's the old combustion theory.
 
Yes, but not only the ions have this particularity, you can burn other chemical compunds with the same result.
 
Originally posted by Antix
In order for the flame to burn green, it would have to be composed PRIMARILY (which means most of it) of some element that, when excited, emites a greenish hue.
Click to expand...

Trust me ghost, I'm not denouncing the possibility that something could burn green. I give allowance that it's most likely that some compound or other is causing the greenish hue. I just was pointing out that the probability of Copper being the source of their fuel was highly improbable because of its extreme ignition temperature... I just figured that something else would probably produce a green flame, not Copper. ;)
 
Of course i don´t think that any alien race will use as fuel the Ion Copper on their ships, they always use H+. :)
 
AFAIK

Say... as far as I remember,

WC fighters use ion engines... achieveing hundreds of KPS per seconds.

What kind of stuff do they exhaust by the way?
 
Originally posted by Antix


Potentially he/she could have intended to denote the latin "cuprium" which gave copper its chemical symbol (Cuprium... hence the Cu). Or it could have just been really dark and really late, and his index finger slipped over the o and the i over to the u and gave it a gentle pluck, and being so exhausted at such a late hour, one has a tendency not to give a damn towards mistakes in his/her posting. But hey, who knows? However, I'd doubt the existence of copper could ever be the reason for a flame burning green. I just find it foolish to think that a metal with such low combustibility would be present in great enough ammounts to comprise a majority of the fuel being burned to produce a green flame. That makes little to no sense... But who am I to put 28th century fuels in a box?
Click to expand...
1) I was confused for a sec about his calling it "Cupper"; I'm well aware of the chemical symbol for copper, gold, silver, etc. Unfortunately, there's no chemical symbol for Adamantium...oh, wait: Adamantium is an ALLOY, not a pure element...never mind
2)Verbose! ;)
 
Originally posted by WildWeasel
Of course, now we're way off topic...
Click to expand...

don't flame guys. And I was just kidding with the "confused" post. And let me add this as proof that I'm not the only one who can drift topics rapidly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top