I'm inpressed by the fact that you didn't simply dismiss the problem out of hand by citing a density or bouyancy issue. You were going great until you missed an important feature of hot air, as I'll attempt to explain below.
[Youjaes]: From time to time, I like to visit various sites to challenge a very basic concept from the time of Archimedes: Bouyancy.
[tvan] Unfortunately for our purpose here, which is to find a solution to the question you posed, the above means you have acquired a bias against finding a simple explanation. Indeed, you later state that you have developed your own theory now.
Actually, I found a solution before I came up with this problem and before I learned to doubt the principle of bouyancy as an absolute.
[tvan] Meta Research has become a magnet for theories because we aren't much influenced by preconceptions or majority opinions, but stick with observation, experiment, and reasoning. However, we cannot ignore the fact that, when approached by someone with little experience with the peer review system who has already made an investment in a particular direction, the discussion often goes badly. I hope this does not describe you, and that you are still open to a simple explanation different than the one you have settled on.
The equations I use are based on previously peer reviewed material, specifically, "The Handbook of Physics", edited by E. Condon (1960's). With a minor expansion of his equations for the dynamics of a rigid body, I'm able to predict anomalous results in a number of experiments. Before finding these equations, which I had to do quite a bit of digging to find, I was trying to derive these equations based on the anomalous results of experiments I had done. When I found them, I was both elated to have found the answer, and disappointed that I wasn't the first. Still, I found them useful and I began my quest to tell people about it. Later, I was reviewed by the USAF and was requested to become a 'spokesman' for these ideas. Frankly, I'm somewhat agoraphobic and I suffer from severe nerve damage, so I prefer to remain a private person. I do feel an obligation of patriotism to tell people of these ideas, however I don't feel the need to 'take credit' for finding what was already known.
> [Y]: Why does warm air rise?
[tvan] The answer comes from understanding what it means for an air molecule to be "hot". That means it travels faster. The hotter it is, the faster it travels; and vice versa, because these are one and the same thing.
[snip]
You've missed an important aspect of "hot" that is nearly universally overlooked, specifically the "spin" of the molecules. In terms of the conservation of angular momentum, the internal and external angular momenta couple, producing the appearance of an antigravitational effect.
An example of the coupling of angular momenta is Schaffer's Pendulum, the device used in aircraft artificial horizons. Effectively, the device acts as if its center of mass coincides with the center of the Earth instead of its geometric center of mass.
> [Y]: There aren't any popular theories to explain this behavior, though I have one of my own that predicts this situation. For now, I'll leave everyone to ponder what I've written. Antigravity, here we come.
If one teacher doesn't have a good answer, ask another. But if your quest is to sell your own theory rather than to find a satisfactory explanation, you will need to continue your journeys to various other web sites. -|Tom|-
My quest is to challenge common beliefs that are counterproductive to the advancement of society.
James
Topic Author
