• Skyrmir@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 day ago

    The reaction propagation is always from the ignition source to the media, so the ‘fire’ is always on the outside. Even if the inside is in the process of quickly becoming the outside.

    • HikingVet@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 day ago

      No, I get that. Not why I asked the question.

      If you have a compound like potassium super oxide chatch light in a vacuum, does it still burn because it has it’s own oxidizer?

      • Skyrmir@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 day ago

        By itself in a vacuum, no. Under gas pressure, when contacted by water it will react from the point of contact until all reactants are complete. I wouldn’t consider the reaction to be ‘fire’ though. At least not personally. Drop some hydrocarbons in the mix and you’ll get a fire as the oxygen produced gets something to react with.

      • higgsboson@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        Yes, that is how rockets get to space, for example. Earth’s atmo is ~21% Oxygen. So that is giving flames a boost. Careful not conflate “burn” with the presence of flames. In a vacuum, the flame could only exist briefly because there isnt the available Oxygen from the air. The reaction will (or might?) still happen, but without the oxygen to produce a flame.

        BTW, this has been studied in microgravity aboard the ISS.