does this sentence make sense?

"Without oxygen, the flame would have ceased to exist at all."

I am trying to say that without oxygen, fire never would have existed in this world in the first place. Thank you:D

5 Answers

Relevance
  • ?
    Lv 7
    2 months ago

    Without oxygen, there could be no fire.

  • 2 months ago

    Not grammatically, although the reader can work out what you mean.

    "Without oxygen, a flame could not exist."

  • Anonymous
    2 months ago

    How about 

    Without oxygen, the flame would have perished.

    or

    For fire to exist, a flame needs to feed on Oxygen.

    (Oxygen does not burn, but as an oxidizer, it supports the process of combustion. So if you already have a fuel and a fire, adding oxygen will feed the flames. 

    The reaction can be dangerous and violent, which is why it's better not to store or use oxygen around any sort of flame.)

  • Anonymous
    2 months ago

    If it wasn't for oxygen, a spark would never have turned into a flame, and fire would never have existed. 

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Anonymous
    2 months ago

    "ceased" means ended after a beginning. Without oxygen, it does not begin at all. So, the sentence is not correct.

    Second error is a common one in trying to learn English.

    Use of article THE, A, or omitting.

    "the flame" refers to a particular flame (fire).

    You explained the thought correctly.

    An incandescent light bulb has a vacuum in it, and releases light and heat. It isn't an oxidation process, but we sometimes say "burns" anyway.

    Humans need oxygen as almost all living things, so without oxygen, there would be nobody to experience the fire.

    Our Sun is a nuclear furnace. 

    Why not?: "Without oxygen, a flame would not exist"

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.