I Mercury as a plasma at 150 Kelvin

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the feasibility of creating mercury plasma at 150 Kelvin, with participants questioning the validity of such a theoretical engine. It is noted that at this temperature, mercury would likely be solid, contradicting the notion of it being in a plasma state. The low vapor pressure of mercury at 150 K means it cannot evaporate without significant heating, raising concerns about condensation on containment walls. Participants emphasize that pressurization alone cannot create plasma at such low temperatures. Ultimately, the thread concludes with a reminder to avoid engaging in pseudoscience discussions.
gary808
Messages
6
Reaction score
6
TL;DR Summary
Can you have mercury as a plasma at 150 kelvin?
I was reading up on a theoretical engine employing the following, “Mercury plasma pressurized at 250k atmospheres, at a temperature of 150 degrees kelvin (-123° C), and swirled within its accelerator to 50k RPM.”

Does pressurizing mercury so much somehow allow a plasma to form at such sub-zero temperatures?
This seems to fly in the face of what I understand should be super-heated plasma.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Might help to say where you read it.
 
  • Like
Likes russ_watters
Ibix said:
Might help to say where you read it.
Or maybe not, since the source was not valid. :wink:

@gary808 -- your question is "Can you have mercury as a plasma at 150 kelvin?" right? What defines a plasma? What parameters (like pressure) can affect the plasma state other than temperature?

gary808 said:
Does pressurizing mercury so much somehow allow a plasma to form at such sub-zero temperatures?
 
  • Like
Likes gary808 and Ibix
  • Informative
  • Like
Likes vanhees71, gary808, berkeman and 1 other person
berkeman said:
Or maybe not, since the source was not valid. :wink:

@gary808 -- your question is "Can you have mercury as a plasma at 150 kelvin?" right? What defines a plasma? What parameters (like pressure) can affect the plasma state other than temperature?
Yes. My point is in debunking pseudo-science. Just wanted to double-check with the experts. Pressurization isn't a factor. If it's 150 kelvin, then it is likely a solid, or else it's not 150 kelvin but a super-heated plasma instead.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71
gary808 said:
Yes. My point is in debunking pseudo-science. Just wanted to double-check with the experts. Pressurization isn't a factor. If it's 150 kelvin, then it is likely a solid, or else it's not 150 kelvin but a super-heated plasma instead.
We don't debunk pseudoscience at PF. Thread is closed.
 
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field'
Imagine a charged sphere at the origin connected through an open switch to a vertical grounded wire. We wish to find an expression for the horizontal component of the electric field at a distance ##\mathbf{r}## from the sphere as it discharges. By using the Lorenz gauge condition: $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A} + \frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=0\tag{1}$$ we find the following retarded solutions to the Maxwell equations If we assume that...
Hello! Let's say I have a cavity resonant at 10 GHz with a Q factor of 1000. Given the Lorentzian shape of the cavity, I can also drive the cavity at, say 100 MHz. Of course the response will be very very weak, but non-zero given that the Loretzian shape never really reaches zero. I am trying to understand how are the magnetic and electric field distributions of the field at 100 MHz relative to the ones at 10 GHz? In particular, if inside the cavity I have some structure, such as 2 plates...

Similar threads

Replies
45
Views
11K
Replies
29
Views
15K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
4K
Replies
21
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
23K
Back
Top