4 ms·
Maybe not be that remarkable if you consider that the filament is in vacuum, so not a lot of opportunities to conduct the heat. Heat is lost through radiation.
by phicoh 3y ago
Maybe not be that remarkable if you consider that the filament is in vacuum, so not a lot of opportunities to conduct the heat. Heat is lost through radiation.
In contrast, gas or candles warm the outside air directly, release hot waste gasses, etc. Lot's of energy that gets lost.
Trying to set something on fire with a classical light bulb is tricky. With a candle, instant effect.
- tialaramex 3y ago> if you consider that the filament is in vacuum Although it's possible to do this, I don't think commercial incandescent bulbs do, by the 1930s it was well understood that various noble gases work better and are affordable once you decide you're going to produce them in suitable quantities to make light bulbs. I'd be surprised if somehow those still produced don't use noble gases. At the point when inventors are first trying to make electric light they don't know these gases exist but by the era of the mass produced light bulb scientists know the answer to "What's invisible and doesn't react with hot metal?" is actually "Any of the gases on this part of my periodic table of elements†" not just "A vacuum". † In the late 19th or early 20th century this table would look all wrong to you, but it's clearly the same idea, and unless you remember your chemistry well or know from first principles why such a table must have a particular shape you can't fix their table, you just know it looks wrong.