You seem to have submitted this question in slightly different form elsewhere. The arrangement you propose would decidedly produce a normal-ish flame, but there would be some visible differences, as I mention below. Never mind Titan, this has
been known for decades or possibly even two centuries on Earth. (I
don't know who first observed the effect.) A flame is simply (well,
actually not so simply; dissecting the structures of flames has been a
field of research for many decades, but the techincal details do not
affect us here) a pattern of reaction and heat generation in a jet of
gas squirting into some other gas with which it reacts vigorously.
Those we are most familiar with are fuel gases such as hydrogen,
methane, or acetylene squirting into air, but it has long been
documented that a jet of oxygen into an atmosphere of hydrogen say, will
burn in quite an ordinary way.
A more interesting point (don't try it at home, but it might be an
interesting laboratory experiment!) is what will happen if you burn a
jet of oxygen in an atmosphere of a smokily burning fuel such as butane.
In normal usage proper mixing of well mixed fuel in an excess of oxygen
produces a clean flame, but invert the roles of the gases, and I would
predict a smoky flame no matter how you introduce the oxygen, because
there should always be a zone of partly burnt butane where the supply of
oxygen peters out.
Other interpretations of expressions such as "Bunsens burning in
reverse" suggest far more esoteric outcomes, demanding such things as
unburning Zombie flames and crescent negentropy.
Creepy, no?
Jon
