Contents

Talk:Liquid helium

This  level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Physics Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Chemicals Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemicals, a daughter project of WikiProject Chemistry, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of chemicals. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details on the project.ChemicalsWikipedia:WikiProject ChemicalsTemplate:WikiProject Chemicalschemicals articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers. This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist. [[atmospheric pressure#Standard atmospheric pressure|atmosphere]] The anchor (#Standard atmospheric pressure) is no longer available because it was deleted by a user before. Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

• Liquid helium Could use a lot of info, such as uses of liquid helium and some technical informations and charts.

Should be merged with Helium and Superfluid, I think. Zaha 15:57, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I've taken a stab at rewriting and expanding this article. It would be nice if phase diagrams could be included. The article could be merged with Helium, but liquid helium is not always superfluid, especially in its commercial applications; so it would not be appropriate to merge it with Superfluid. M. S. Pettersen, 29 Sep 2004.

I removed this sentence: "Solid helium requires a temperature of 1–1.5 K and about 26 standard atmospheres (2.6 MPa) of pressure [ref: Natures Building Blocks, page 178]" Helium cam solidify at temperatures outside this range, so temperatures of 1-1.5 K are not required; and the pressure required depends on whether you're talking about helium-3 or helium-4. The correct information about the melting pressure is given in the table (see the cited reference by Wilks). (Wilks' book is a professional monograph, while Nature's Building Blocks is a popularizing work, which is either wrong, or misquoted here). 67.186.28.212 15:14, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm Pretty sure it is entropy, not enthalpy that causes the phase separation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.58.39.25 (talk) 01:00, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

YouTube links appear to be legitimate in that they appar to be intended for educational purposed and there is no indication that they are intended for a profit making purpose.--Spartaz 19:33, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the last paragraph. The fact that only 1 organism is known to survive 3K (whether true or not)I find irrelevant and (much more troubling) misleading. At temperatures much below 100K water in both the glass and crystaline form is stable. There is nothing unique about 3K. This paragraph implies there is something especially harsh about cooling a living organism to 3K. Basically the viability of your cells depends on how successful you are getting the cells into a vitrified state (e.g. by ultra rapid cooling to <100K). At temperatures below 100K, the molecular structure is stable. Basically anything you can cool and revive to 70K (liquid nitrogen) temperature (a wide variety of cells and organisms) could be further cooled to 3K with no effect on viability. Thus one can expect many (single cell at any rate) organisms to survive 3K. 173.79.64.128 (talk) 06:40, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Onnes liquified HELIUM in 1908, not "helium-4".

In 1908, NOBODY had any idea what different isotopes of the same element were -- because nobody knew anything about isotopes. They had not been discovered, yet. Furthermore, in 1908, none of these had been discovered either: 1. Protons
2. Neutrons
3. Stable and radioactive isotopes
4. The atomic nucleus
5. The mass spectrometer

5. Even the electron had only been discovered by J.J. Thompson in 1897.
6. The existence of the proton was not even suspected until Sir Ernest Rutherford did a lot of experiments and he started to think that there might be protons in about 1917.
7. The discovery of the neutron came years after this, in 1932.
8. Nobody even knew that hydrogen consisted mostly of hydrogen-1 plus a small minority of hydrogen-2 (deuterium) until Harold C. Urey of the University of Chicago separated out some heavy water in about 1930. That was an experiment that took many months and A LOT of electicity to do.
9. You can look up when helium-3 was discovered, but it wasn't early.
98.67.163.16 (talk) 21:35, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User:Beland marked the article with a proposed merger into the Helium article. I'd disagree, and indeed, suggest moving some of the liquid detail in the Helium article here. The Helium article by itself is already quite long, we should be looking at splitting chunks of it off, not merging stuff into it. Regards, Tarl.Neustaedter (talk) 22:13, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like a good idea to me; I changed the tag from merge to sync. -- Beland (talk) 02:50, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Because not everybody uses metric, it would best to include English equivalents. 162.231.1.130 (talk) 18:49, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you're dealing with liquid helium, you're doing fairly extreme science or engineering. Those fields are so firmly metric that there's no point in non-metric units. Ounces per gallon (even more, *troy* ounces, without specifying whether it's imperial or US gallon) is just meaningless for a fluid that isn't available to anyone outside such a dedicated cryogenics facility. Tarl.Neustaedter (talk) 02:32, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

So you're saying scientists don't use English at all in this subject even if they're in a country where English is use in other things? 173.55.37.52 (talk) 23:56, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

They don't use traditional English measurements on this subject. You generally don't borrow a kitchen measuring cup in a lab with liquid helium, so the usual measurement units are liter and gram. Tarl.Neustaedter (talk) 07:20, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Helium Liquefier (LHP50).jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:52, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]