From ???@0x00000C01 Tue Oct 26 01:05:28 1999 Path: rQdQ!rQ66!remarQ73!remarQ.com!supernews.com!news.interpacket.net!u-2.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.cwix.com!wn3feed!worldnet.att.net!wnmaster1!not-for-mail From: Rambler III Newsgroups: alt.folklore.urban Subject: Re: New Cite for Glass Flow Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 17:48:36 -0500 Organization: Rambling Enterprises, Ltd Lines: 57 Message-ID: <3814DE44.702C@worldnet.att.net> References: <3802b059@duster.adelaide.on.net> <7uea44$quc$1@bunyip.cc.uq.edu.au> <7ugbna$bpt$1@bunyip.cc.uq.edu.au> <7uit5a$9me$1@agate-ether.berkeley.edu> <38135CCC.EEC4447A@ccsu.edu> <381453D0.5885@worldnet.att.net> <38149E70.B3AB0EB@ccsu.edu> Reply-To: Walker.HG-MGM@worldnet.att.net NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.74.68.74 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net 940892149 15505 12.74.68.74 (25 Oct 1999 22:55:49 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@worldnet.att.net NNTP-Posting-Date: 25 Oct 1999 22:55:49 GMT X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-WorldNet (Win95; U) Xref: rQdQ alt.folklore.urban:518752 Status: N Charles Wm. Dimmick wrote: > > Rambler III wrote: > > > Charles Wm. Dimmick wrote: > > > > > > Katie Schwarz wrote: > > > > > > > Brett W wrote: > > > > > > > > > >Thus I can apply whatever theories I have on water to honey. The only thing > > > > >I have to worry about is the viscosity. Glass and pitch both have > > > > >significantly high viscosities say they are pretty much the same. > > > > > > > > The viscosity of glass is several orders of magnitude (i.e. millions > > > > of times) greater than the viscosity of pitch. That means that while > > > > the pitch drops every seven years or so, windows don't sag on shorter > > > > than geological time scales. > > > > > > As a geologist, I can assure you that they don't sag on geological time > > > scales either. > > > > > > > I have read that glass in some English Cathedral windows has indeed > > "sagged". > > I have read a lot of stuff that isn't true, also. > What's your point? > > Charles The poster said that glass is stable. > > The viscosity of glass is several orders of magnitude (i.e. millions > > of times) greater than the viscosity of pitch. That means that while > > the pitch drops every seven years or so, windows don't sag on shorter > > than geological time scales. Not so. All glass does not have the same "viscosity" ot hardness. Panes of glass in some windows of English Cathedrals have flowed [sagged] toward the bottom of the pane. There was an article in Natrional Geographic. Satisfactory? What's your point, Charles Wm. Dimmick? Check with your physics, chesistry, or whatever department. Do your own research. -- RAMBLER III "You must not spend your whole life looking for other people's systematic mistakes. You must make some of your own." Peter Van de Kamp, Astronomer