What Happens to the Balloon?

That was quick Tin Tin

but no (meaningful) additional hydrostatic pressure will cause the balloon to contract

Are you sure? I know that water is not compressible but would not the air inside the balloon be put under pressure if pressure is applied by the surrounding water? I must be missing some thing. See what others can come up with, Ky.

Mmm - perhaps too quick! I've been re-thinking my original statement - I'm not too sure of it myself now! Lets say that the 'liquid' is compressible - then yes, the balloon would shrink with the increase in pressure. The temperature inside the balloon would also increase according to the ideal gas law (which air loosely obeys).

Great question! This one's gonna take some nutting out

Great question! This one's gonna take some nutting out

I loved the way you just jumped in with out knowing how deep the water was. Its soooo me. Thanks for your input, Ky.

Water is most definitely compressible. At my last company we put 27 liters of water into a 25 liter pressure vessel. It took a 100 hp pump creating 85,000 psi but it did compress. (The application was food preservation.)

Do you think the vessel might have stretched a little bit?

The vessel was a re-manufactured gun tube from an M60 tank, plenty strong. Yes it creaked a bit while pressurizing. The big problem was reacting out the 7 million pounds of force at the ends.

And the seals leaking, the seals were almost always leaking.

I agree. When physicists refer to incompressible liquids, it is by comparison to the compressibility of gases. Everything compresses under pressure.

Everything compresses under pressure. Yep. Even stars..

Compared to air water doesn't compress so it doesn't seem to be an issue here.

The water is there to provide an omnidirectional force to the air bubble.

Jon

That's awesome. What changes took place with the vessel?

Should have put a balloon in it.

That was the key engineering challenge. My boss patented a method of preventing the vessel from failing from fatigue failure by inserting a stainless steel tube liner inside the gun tube. We would get the gun tube very hot, expanding it, and after soaking the liner in liquid nitrogen, shrinking it, we put the liner inside the gun tube. As the two equalized in temperature the gun tube presented mechanical stress to the liner in the neighborhood of 85kpsi, enough to prevent cracks from developing in both the liner and gun tube.

We did a bunch of experiments with tomatoes. Since the pressure is hydrostatic the tomatoes got slightly smaller for a couple minutes while under pressure. But when we relieved the pressure quickly the cell membranes of the bacteria/spores etc. would burst, killing them. The end result was tomatoes whose shelf life was four weeks instead of one week. Think about how much money that could save just the fast food restaurants alone.

And yes, you're right, I should have put a balloon in it.

Interesting. Has this been put to practical use?

Yes, in the late '90s/early 2k's several guacamole/tomato/salsa/fruit juice companies were using it but the machines are very expensive and notoriously difficult to keep online for extended periods as far as I know.

Does that mean you could still do it? Yes please, Ky.

Sorry, we sold our one and only machine to the Army. They are using it to process MRE's.

We have used that technique on high pressure gas compressor cylinders. The trick is to get that liner in real freakin quick cause if it ever gets stuck or cockeyed going in you are REALLY screwed. It is an amazingly beneficial process. Didn't know the math though.

The concept here is very similiar to the Cartesian diver. The balloon will contract once the applied pressure exceeds that in the balloon, just like how the water will be forced into a Cartesian diver, causing it to sink.

DVader1000

That Cartesian diver in its self is very interesting. My question is asking for a more complex solution although it could be as simple as the little devil.

I am sure the air would compensate for the pressure from the water, by compressing and building up heat in the process. I mentioned an n'th amount of pressure to exaggerate the issue. There must be a point were the heat and the resulting expansion of the gasses and the surrounding water come to equilibrium after the water is heated by the contracted gasses.

Wow, this is starting to sound like creating some thing from nothing but its not. I just want to know what happens inside that balloon if sufficient pressure is applied. My neighbor wants to know as well, he hardly talks about any thing else at the moment.

Thanks for the link, Ky.

The Balloon will not implode. It will just get smaller and smaller with the increase in pressure. A submarine implodes because it is rigid!

Actually, the outer hull of a submarine does deform under pressure. Besides, the balloon skin will eventually rupture when the stress loading exceeds its design loading.

Guest 25 is absolutely right, besides the inner and outer balloon's pressure will be just slightly different, so no reason for the ballon to rupture.

What will happen is to have the several gases liquified at diferent pressures (depending on their density) and when they are all liquid, the ballon will stop shrinking.

The ammount of heat will be the same as in the original mass of gas exept that it'll have a higher temperature, but not so high to cause chemical change in latex.

Yahlasit

You didn't put any limits on the pressure being applied which is why I did not respond as to the first phenomena which is that the water would transfer pressure to the balloon filled with air and since air is compressible without going to far limits the balloon and air would be forced to occupy a smaller space.

But at "n" limits as to pressure there would almost certainly be a whole sequence of events along the way, including what you didn't seem to allow for, the compressibility of water when the pressure gets high enough.

Since I think your sole intention was to determine what happens to the balloon and the air in it the water compressing seems to blow your little experiment out of the water, so to speak.

Of course, speaking theoretically, if the pressure gets high enough you are talking about sending the whole kit and caboodle back to the conditions that existed just prior to the expansion of the universe out of an infinite point, i.e., "The Big Bang."

As somebody just said everything, literally, is compressible.

I did not read all the way down but now let's see if anybody else saw it that way.

j.

"I did not read all the way down but now let's see if anybody else saw it that way."

Nope! This seems to be a discussion between two neighbors that has migrated here, where we can complicate even the most elemental questions.

Did you read the good answers?

Ky gets to decide the good answers, it's his problem although not definitively stated, but I have now read all the answers.

It may be ego but I think my answer is the best because its theoretically the cleanest; it goes straight to the ultimate outcome.

You see I have this hangup with theoretical elegance.

j.

You see I have this hangup with theoretical elegance.

I would not call it a hangup but dedication to standard procedures. Some times things and or matters are not so standard, that's all that's to it.

Simplicity is the bride of Elegance and I would love to be invited to the wedding, Ky.

No Ky.

You don't understand.

Standard procedures are oh hum; boring. The thing about mental constructs, even when the adhere to real, concrete material reality (Past or present), is that they free you from standard procedures.

Taking a given theoretical proposition to its end is what I mean by theoretical elegance.

In this mind experiment you proposed n pressure.

n pressure taken to its logical end is Big Bang.

Conceptually that is elegant because it is the result of taking a concept, n pressure, through to its logical, and if you could get n pressure, Big Bang end.

j.

Hi Jack

Good to hear from you, no no, I mean it. Please except my reply as coming from thin air and, to all, this is something that I have pondered about for a while and have, just by posting it here on CR4, more information than I could have ever collated in such a short time. I thank you all for that. Very inspiring!

Now back to the future:

the compressibility of water when the pressure gets high enough.

Good point. We can take the "nth" degree out of the equation and now start explaining what would be the practicably implementable pressures that could be used. I have heard of diesel engines getting up to 35K psi. This was stated on some diesel fanatics web site which name I can't recall. How they supposedly achieved this, they did not say, but half of that would do just fine, I estimate.

Utelising this phenomenon would only be a small part of a larger system and I can not just neglect it all together because there seems to be something worth while researching. Because only I and one other man (not my neighbore) are working on this, in our heads, it is becoming more clear that it would be prudent to folow up on this. The dreaded acummilating of un-needed hard ware has to be avoided by theorizing first.

Now that we have a more "realistic" approach, see how that can help me in this endevour. I can't stop now, can I?

I still have a bit of studying to do over the weekend and will answer as I see fit in the mean time. Now that there are more participants that can follow the drift of this thread I will give as much information as I have. Maybe not all because that would prove something and it is way to early for that and would be my job to do and not the forum's.

Good to talk to you Jack, Ky.

But Ky,

It was so much more fun considering running the pressure up to the point of redoing Big Bang.

So much more elegant a thought experiment.

j.

I know, the fun has to end at one stage or the other though. Its hands on soon and I am looking forward to that, Ky.

The first thing That will happen is the balloon will get smaller, the air will get hot, but the water will not. Then during a relaxation time the water will warm and the hot air will get much cooler...

"are you seeking to design a new system?"

Say - one in which the piston goes in and out rhythmically and the air and water stay nice and warm with periodic burst of hot hot hot...

Please let me know if I can help -

Mr. Gee

I may be able to spot the problem, if there is one! for example a good close fit between the piston and cylinder will greatly reduce leakage and reduce problems with seal failure.

Dear Mr Gee

First, let me say that I have no idea were you are on this large, water ruled planet. As about as much as the forum and you know what I am trying to figure out, or put to work in my application, which I have done by now.

"are you seeking to design a new system?"

Well, I have designed it and have rudimentary hardware in place to make things work and react the way I had intended or better how these physical and chemical reactions would have demonstrated them selves any way, even if I would not have been there, observing. If it does not happen in nature its not going to happen at all, is it?

Now, the next step is asked for, and matters can get quiet violent, as we can imagine by now. This means that I will have to reduce the size of the experiment drastically, which I have done. The last proto type has given me enough information to get to the next stage and go, again, from there. From now on I will be "shooting with real bullets", so I have to be more careful.

Say - one in which the piston goes in and out rhythmically and the air and water stay nice and warm with periodic burst of hot hot hot...

Now that reminds me of something which happens in nature as well.

No, seriously, it is out of the question to give any details here. All I can say is that I have now two other individuals involved who are looking over my shoulder and are being very helpful analyzing what is or better potentially could be going on. The bubble, piston, balloon and water diagram is the simplest black box situation I could come up with and is by no means a full representation of the real situation at hand. Although my set up is more complex, it makes reactions easier to calculate, measure and govern. Lucky I don't have to do the calculations but some one else is taking care of that. That's me, on the left, standing at the dials, the one not wearing the safety goggles, because they keep fogging up.

Please let me know if I can help -

OK, I'll boil it down again with a little twist:

What would happen if I would introduce O,O2,O3,H2O2,H2, D and H2O in steam phase and liquid phase into the "balloon", not to mention other intermediate steps which are very hard to predict or fathom, measure. If this is not a radical situation, then what is. Very short lived situation, I agree. A little help with this one would go a long way but I guess only a practical experiment will show a result and then all the theory can explain what happened, after the fact. If at all possible.

I may be able to spot the problem, if there is one!

Like I said, I have some hardware and results in place that encourage me to go further. The problems are plentiful, here are some:

1. Machining of precision parts using materials of my choice. The parts would be the size of a cigarette lighter. I have drawings which could be translated to any CNC operated high precision manufacturing technologies, that are available nowadays.

2. Combining those in a way that they can withstand anticipated stresses like pressure, heat and currents.

3. Setting up a governing system by utilizing existing technologies.

3. Occupy premises that allow for experiments to be carried out and not be dangerous to man or mouse or property.

4. Differentiating between collaborators and sticky beaks.

5. If confirmed as practical, set up and begin the hideous process of patenting. I shudder just at the thought and have made my comments about this pest of an institution or better total destructive dictatorship, here on CR4. If it would take 100K to get all this done on my side, it would take ten times that (at least) to secure the IP rights and so on and so forth. I is like an impotence pill that has to be swallowed to stupor and not encourage development. Ah, don't get me started on this one. I need counseling not help with this problem.

6. Establish a team of scientist specialized in their fields (more for confirmation than any thing else). Key positions would be occupied by specialists who have the qualifications, which I have not. Who in this day and age would except the ideas of an untrained novice in an area of technology which has been covered and covered again and again? Help from the academy is not only welcome but crucial. If this assistance is not in place nothing will move much in the end.

7. Sell the idea, concept, technology (and move to a tropical island in the Pacific.). Honestly if I could not see a bit of humor in this situation I would not be doing this. As soon as funding or any other monetary issue become involved, things become poisoned and I am happy to still be as free as a bird. I would like to keep it like that for as long as possible and not answer to some bean counter, ever.

I know of other people, not only in Australia but all over the world, who spend more time on trying to get funding, than they spend on improving, establishing or even thinking about their technology. This is called "frack to bont" in my book. I wish all of us the best of luck though. I envy nothing and nobody. May the best man win and the better technology receive a chance.

These are only the main issues or problems concerning the further development. In fact, the 'out of context problems' are more difficult for me to understand than the technology its self.

Thank you for your very considerate reply, Ky.

Ky!!!

"frack to bont"

Thanks, I added that to my Aussie slang book.

Jon

Thanks, that has already helped a bit, Ky.

"If the balloon were to be non homogenous in thickness/elasticity the resulting shape may not be spherical."

I'm having trouble with this. Would not the reaction of the gas against compression be transmitted through the membrane equally in all directions against the incompressible fluid?

I think you need the ballon the keep the air in place.

lynlynch

It now has become a thread with two titles. What the heck...

I think you need the ballon the keep the air in place.

That makes sense because the gasses would dissolve in the water under such pressure, if not enclosed by a balloon or skin. Would they (the dissolved) still be released if subjected again to normal pressures if not inside the balloon? Could it maybe be compared to opening a bottle of champagne and not only releasing the drink but some bubblies too.

Very confused about some thing as simple as this, Ky.

Well, I'll drink to that!

I tried but it didn't help much

Was this balloon made by the Montgolfier brothers? Makes all the difference.

Yep, gases would be trapped and spread around in the fluid without the balloon, but they would not necessarily disolve 100%. There would be small but visible bubbles in the fluid. If you vent to atmosphere then pressure would equilize and gases would escape like champagne bubbles. This would be called 'bleeding' in a hydraulic system.

You are spot on. It is the bleeding part were things become interesting. When the gasses "come home" they will have a lot to say, never mind the 100%. Controlling that in a meaningful way is what I am after, and then some. What you are describing is more like the experiment I am planing. It would have been very difficult for me to phrase this as an opening question so I chose the single balloon situation to find people who can help me out. You have in some way and I thank you for that, Ky.

PS: Kentucky eh, would love to go there one day and show my drivers licence to a breath testing copper. A state with my name written all over it. Could I get away with it?

Well, ky, now that you are talking in practical terms rather than purely theoretical you have to start answering questions dealing with quantities. How much pressure are you planning to exert in your experiment? If you are building something to perform the experiment, then the amount of pressure that you can produce is finite and it depends on the power of your system. Knowing the amount power you need is a good place to start.

The accepted rule that 'liquids do not compress' is pretty much true for systems that exert hundreds of tons of pressure. The little bit of knowledge that I shared above is basic practical knowledge that comes from trouble shooting problems in hydraulic systems driven by water or denser fluids.

By the way, ky, people in KY are pretty friendly and quite forgiving so long as no one is hurt by your actions, but I still wouldn't try it with the DUI, the cop would be expected to give you the ticket whether he wants to or not. Speeding maybe , but not DUI.

The water is (nearly) incompressible.

The piston is (nearly) incompressible.

The cylinder wall can expand (a little).

(The rubber walls of the balloon may be very slightly compressible.)

The only thing with any significant 'give' is the air inside the balloon. Since the air is separated from the water by the walls of the balloon, it doesn't become super-saturated or react chemically in any way with the water.

I not sure why you need the balloon or the water. In either case as the piston comes down you end up with a thin layer of compressed air. Maybe the difference would be that the thin layer inside the balloon would be wrinkled and lumpy.

Actually the balloon is irrelevant the same thing would happen if you just had air alone in the cylinder and pressurized it with the piston.

That is right to a certain point. In this experiment I can have instant pressure release were as in a diving situation it would take a long time to have the air decompress. I am thinking of instantaneous release after a very fast compression.

I must sound like it looks when a cat walks around a hot pie. Very insecure, I mean, out of my league. I would love to stop speculating asap, Ky.

If the balloon was spherical before it went into the water, it would not be spherical afterwards because the water pressure at the top of the balloon is less than the water pressure at the bottom. The only way to obtain equilibrium is through tension in the strings holding it in place. The shape of the balloon after immersion would depend on the arrangement of strings and the surface area covered.

As the pressure is increased, the volume of the balloon is decreased and the shape of balloon will change in a manner consistent with the arrangement of strings.

I did mention that this has nothing to do with string theory. I mean at all, not now not under pressure, never ever. Hang on, maybe......, no I just don't want to go there. At least not yet, Ky.

PS:What you are saying is that the water pressure is higher at the top of a submarine? I doubt that very much.

No, Ky. You have it wrong. The water pressure is lower at the top of a sub than it is at the bottom. The difference is precisely 62.5 h pounds per square foot where h is the height of the sub and 62.5 pounds per cubic foot is the density of water. If the height of the sub is 15 feet, the difference in pressure between the top and bottom is 938 pounds per square foot.

You can doubt that all you like, but it is absolutely true.

Thank you for clearing this up.

I stand corrected. Bean counting was never my favorite thing. You are right, of course. No doubt at all. My neighbor is going to love this. Havn't seen him in a while but he'll be back, Ky.

The balloon was designed to compensate for the pressure differential of depth to maintain its roundness.

The shape of the air pocket means nothing unless you are going hell for leather to produce an omnidirectional shockwave.

Then someone thought applying pressure would make the balloon expand and burst and stop the piston. (short of numbers in the upper house)

Then the project was taken into the space station where there's no room to swing a cat and the balloon was no longer necessary so it was used for other experiments.

All kinds of stuff was done so some of the nit-picky crap could be disregarded because it had become a debate like "How many angels could dance on the head of a pin."

I was about to replace the water with mercury.

And on and on und so wieder. Crikey!

Jon

That was a well reasoned response.

kudukdweller9

You are right. With out giving further details it makes no sense to any one of you.

I have sufficient information now and will take it from here.

Sorry to have upset you and maybe others. It was a bit all over the place but it has given me something to go by. It has confirmed that it is worth while taking the next step, when ever that may be.

Thanks to all for the help, Ky.

PS: I have something better than mercury, here you go. Hope that painting soothes.

Ky,

This has been a fun thread.

I wasn't being upset or cranky. I was just stepping back and recapping observations about the brainstorming so I could practise some of my Australian slang I learned there this spring in Sydney.

I would be interested to know what you and your neighbor are doing down there without you giving away the farm.

I saw some old cannons for the "Russian Invasion" around Sydney you may find useful.

Jon

Good as gold Mate. The Sonoluminescence link was an eye opener and makes fascinating reading. Lots of Germans which helps my reading. I think I can correlate the information to fit my experiment and circumstances. I think it is the closest I am going to get to solving the problem and creating a practical solution. This will take time and resources but once I aim, I usually shoot.

I would be interested to know what you and your neighbor are doing down there without you giving away the farm.

He is doing nothing but is watching and commenting on what I am doing. If we had a fence he would be sitting on it. Even he is left in the dark about details and only one other person is in near full knowledge of the concept. I am still rearranging my design on paper, for him, not my neighbor, to see and comment on. We do this over the phone just to have a faster rapport.

I will keep you up to date with the development, maybe with PM. Funds for all this? Very meager but doable. Like I said I'm past the point of no return so I might as well go broke, again.

I hope you enjoyed your visit to Australia and next time drop in and we can have a couple of cold ones, Ky.

Ky,

Thanks.

And thanks for the invite.

Australia banned non Alcoholic beer so the cold ones will have to be soft drinks.

More brews for youse.

Shoot the noisey "Russels" and tell "Kenny" to take long soak after work.

If you run short on groceries there is always Wasaroo. Good if you don't cook it too long.

Jon

<...phase changes of the gases inside the balloon...>

Blimey! What on earth is the pressure that piston is exerting? What on earth would be the chemical reaction between nitrogen, oxygen, a smidge of CO₂ and a dollop of argon?

1,000,000,000 bars maybe ?

40,000psi is about enough for most metals!

PWSlack

I deliberately chose a mixture of gases that are contained in the mixture of air to avoid mentioning volatile gasses. I thought that if I could find out how nitrogen, oxygen, a smidgen of CO₂ and a dollop of argon would react, I could then extrapolate these results to the more volatile mixtures. I know that they would react differently but want to find out how far I can "tease" them. Similar to a sweet spot situation in an ICE.

The pressures I am thinking of could be in the realm of ignition pressures in a standard ICE. I am trying to find if these pressures would be enough to create phase changes in the "balloon". The "balloon" is the most abstract version of the whole process and only a black box situation. It can not demonstrate what I am after. It is only one little but possibly very important part of the over all system that it belongs to.

What on earth would be the chemical reaction between nitrogen, oxygen, a smidge of CO₂ and a dollop of argon?

Like I said, I thought I could extrapolate and not get involved in confusing discussions about what would happen if it were combustible gasses and fluids.

The above mentioned post #6 "it could be replicated just with air and piston pressure" is true but would not replicate the experiment I am after. Getting into any other details would not resolve this, by now 'not so simple' question to ask. Difficult to draft with out more information supplied.

'What could happen in theory' will broaden the search but hopefully not confuse matters. Thanks for the reply, Ky.

Ah, just fill the balloon with O2 and Acetylene to get a reaction.

Hint, hint?

Boom!

It would be the same as diving since all you are doing is simulating a deep water dive while still at the surface. The balloon will collapse as you exert pressure. Once the pressure is released it will expand to the normal size. If it were inflated under pressure and then the pressure was released the balloon would probably break, but at the very least expand. Since the pressure changes in all directions simultaneously and collectively, heat is usually not an issue.

charsley99

Once the pressure is released it will expand to the normal size.

Could this be rated as a phase change and would it have a cooling effect, similar to what happens with steam? Would not gasses liquefy under pressure and end up being cold?. Confusion is setting in again. I suppose I'll have to endure my neighbors thoughts on this for the time being. There seems to be a paradox in all of this, at least it registers as one in my thoughts.

It would be the same as diving since all you are doing is simulating a deep water dive while still at the surface.

That is right to a certain point. In this experiment I can have instant pressure release were as in a diving situation it would take a long time to have the air decompress. I am thinking of instantaneous release.

This reminds me of an episode of the Simpson's, were Bart shakes a can of beer in the hardware shops paint section and puts it back in the fridge, for Homer to open, which was clear he would. Chips any one?

This "Balloon case" is more like a can of worms but potentially just as volatile in thought as in practice, at least for me.

Thank you for your reply, Ky.

Isn't this how a fridge works? you compress air, and extracts the cold from it. I am pretty sure that compressed gasses will cool down, not heat up, due to less space for the electrons to run around the core. However, it is 10 years since my last chemestry lesson, and my memory is starting to fade...

Bah.. forgot to login...there you go, imagine myself in 20 years, it's not looking bright. I blame solvents and pesticides!

are you sure you are on the right thread?

A refrigerator works by compressing air, which by IGL heats it to some temperature higher than ambient, then removing the heat from the compressed air, bringing it back down close to ambient, then releasing the compressed air, which by IGL cools it to some temperature below ambient.

Refrigerators dont use air.

However compression heats, decompression cools.

I used an airflow (venturi principle) tool set for heating and cooling integrated circuits during troubleshooting.

Er, experiments using a hand-operated bicycle pump say otherwise. The pump heats up.

If the compressed air from the pump is now cooled to ambient and then expanded, the expanded air will be much colder than ambient.

A variation of this "air cycle" refrigeration is used in aircraft air conditioning systems.

If we consider simple thermo-D, wouldn't the solution be much simpler? Under enough pressure, the gasses would condense to liquids within the "baloon" and the water would freeze. Sorry, this is perhaps overly simplistic coming from someone with only physics 101/102, and a little more chemistry.

Cain_Dogg

Welcome Cain

That is what I just put in to my reply to c99 a minute ago. I had not read your reply yet. It contradicts. Some say, like myself, that heat would be the result of pressure were at the same time the result could be a change to the liquid state which is a cold state.

For the people in the know, let me repeat, this is not in my field of expertise and if it would not be of importance, I would just give it away and get to my other chores that are starting to pressure me.

In the end it is "only" a thought experiment.

Thank you for your thoughts, Ky.

Dear all

I have just noticed that the original title: "One complicated balloon in mid water" was changed to "What Happens to the Balloon?". I am not sure who and why it was done but no worries.

Because it has to do with the gasses contained in the balloon and not the container of the air its self, I have decided to make that a bubble. Just a bubble suspended in water. Water and gasses meet face on.

No, it is not held in place by advanced string theory but just in thought.

Gotta go, Ky.

Ky,

The bubble at low pressure in a liquid collapses due to the high pressure of the piston's effect on the surrounding medium. As the bubble rapidly collapses, the pressure and temperature of the vapor within increases. The bubble collapses to a minute fraction of its original size, at which point the gas within dissipates into the surrounding liquid via a rather violent mechanism, which releases a significant amount of energy in the form of an acoustic shock wave and as visible light due to total collapse and the temperature of the vapor within the bubble being several thousand kelvin, and the pressure several hundred atmospheres. This is what eats up ship propellers.

This happens in a sub at extreme depth when it implodes.

The inhabitants are instanlty burned by the compression and crushed by the hull and water.

Jon

kudukdweller9

I'll let this sink in for a while. I was not going to open this discussion with any speculation but tried to get away from it. After reading your post I thought I could have written the same and unless there is a satirical or mischievous component in your reply I agree with your approach.

What you have stated fits my understanding of the situation perfectly. See what my neighbor Crusty thinks about it. He is in on this too and is interested in the subject. Because he has seen some hardware, he knows why I am asking these questions.

This is what eats up ship propellers.

This is were I thought you were going a bit over board. How does that fit in. I know of sacrificial cathodes/anodes and other (you know who) matters going on, but high pressures?

I will obey and Google. Gotta link? Thanks for your reply, Ky.

"What eats up ship propellers"- cavitation is what this is called...

Ky,

That is the process that occurs in cavitation and compression that eats hydraulic cylinder walls and ship props.

The guy who researched it explained it at the University of Washington before the showing of the movie loosely based on the research his team did on how ships props were being eaten up in a short time. The team discovered that bubbles caused by decompression and recompression was causing energetic shockwaves that impact metal surfaces and work them like sandblasting. (Ultrasonic cleaning)

Extreme compression of the bubbles produced such high temperatures in the gases that they became incandescent. (Sonoluminesence)

The Movie was about cold fusion hydrogen generation.

Sacrificial cathodes/anodes have nothing to do with this process. Whatever the material is that produces this effect will be damaged by it.

Jon

The Movie was about cold fusion hydrogen generation.

Shocking! What am I in for.........?

Sonoluminesence. What a perfect way to observe what is happening. My spell check gives me a warning so I hope that it is what I think it is. Light emission? I'll look it up. I just did and I'll get back to you next year.

I will get to the bottom of this. You have helped, thanks, Ky.

Ky,

Spellcheck: Sonoluminescence. My keyboard acting up again?

The emission of short bursts of light from imploding bubbles in a liquid when excited by sound.

Cavitation has that effect too.

You are in for finding what Hollywood did to the research findings in order to make a fantastic fictional film.

The scientist showed what Hollywood does to spin dull research (his) into exciting fantasies and that was the theme of the event at the University.

In the research they found that Sonoluminescense, like most light in water, doesn't travel far and disturbance of seawater excites Bioluminescent creatures. Sonoluminescence would be confused with Bioluminescence.

Jon

ky-

Without the basllon, your gases will dissolve in the water.

This is very simple. The balloon will shrink and get warmer.

NSS

By how much and how warm under what pressure? Its a bit like chasing the last prime number but even to get close would be fine.

I thought it would be simple and now this. Thanks, Ky.

NSS,

More specifically the balloon will flatten toward it's uninflated state when the air in it compresses and the air will warm in accordance with the rate of compression and the rate of dissipation into the water.

Yes?

Jon

More specifically the balloon will flatten toward it's uninflated state when the air in it compresses and the air will warm in accordance with the rate of compression and the rate of dissipation into the water.

That is the basis of my question, coming to think of it.

If the pressure generates heat and heat expands the air, when is the system in equilibrium. At what stage does the pressure over ride the expansion and does that state or moment in time, constitute a phase change?

This is the paradox for me. How can two states be there at the same time. If that is the case, then there would be a huge amount of energy stored and not only kinetic but chemical. (Depending on and or equal to the pressure applied?)

This is really bugging me and I would love to start putting some more hard ware into place with out risking catastrophic failure. I am only talking about very small parts and not huge machines here. Like I said it would only be a small fragment of the whole concept I am working on. BTW I am not trying to generate energy this way. It is just a "byproduct" that would be a bonus to the complete setup. A bit like wanting to use exhaust heat to heat something.

I think it would help if I would be more scientifically trained, but I'm not. I have to go with what I can understand and I am understanding more by the day.

On a lighter note:

At what pressure will I stop trying to find out and when will the bubble burst?.

Thanks, Ky.

1. Shown drawing is wrong. Just before inserting the piston balloon will be floating on the water.
2. Hence piston when introduced will try to press (not push) balloon against water. Rest you can imagine.

I believe the OP said he didn't show the mooring lines that would keep the balloon in place.

Work with us here!

The drawing is right, it just not shows the string attached. It is a theoretical situation and string theory has nothing to do with it. If I could only understand or imagine the "Rest"then I would not have put the question forward.

Thank you, Ky.

If no thread the balloon Will burst. If there is sting it will contrast depending on the force applied by the piton. Shape may not be spherical.

Mistake: The balloon will get compressed. I used wrong word "contrast".

The shape of the balloon will almost certainly not be spherical. As more pressure is applied it will be all wrinkled up because the rubber walls (no matter how thin they are) will have some small amount of structural integrity. I think you will get a very small nearly spherical blob of highly compressed air, but there will still be a thin membrane of air pressed between the wrinkled up walls of the balloon.

OK, lets move it to the space station.

I was trying to get it away from there. Interesting, Ky.

But it wont float there!