Mad For Science

Try the potholler54 YouTube channel (no, it's not mine).

I am currently doing PhD research on gold leaching, part of which utilizes cyclic voltammetry. I have voltammograms with gold, silver and platinum RDE electrodes of NaCl, NaOCl, NH4Cl, CuCl2 (With N2, O2 injection and without gas injection) at pH 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12 and FeCl3 (With N2, O2 injection and without gas injection) at pH 2. I have determined the positions (current and potential versus Ag/AgCl) of all the peaks and I know how to determine E1/2, ne-, etc. The only thing I am not sure about is how to determine which peaks (reduction and oxidation peaks) pair to each other and how to assign peak pairs to specific redox couples. There are some I can identify through the literature (such as O2 and H2 gas evolution peaks etc.) and I can identify the silver chloride and silver oxide peaks with the silver electrodes from observations. My question; is there a formal procedure or method for the identification of redox couples from CV peak data (possibly using Eh-pH diagrams, tables etc.)?

You're off to a great start.

If something has no mass then it has no weight. Photons have a rest mass of zero but have an effective mass when it is in motion. Photons carry momentum, they cause a pressure on matter due to collisions. It has nothing to do with weight. Aether was a scientific concept that just turned out to be wrong. Light is not paranormal or unscientific simply because you can't conceive of wave motion without a medium. That is something that one of the many professional scientists would have noticed by now if it were true. It isn't. There have been many measurements taken by spacecraft that are far above the Earth's atmosphere that avoid those distortions. Yes, it can. Given known atmospheric conditions, it can easily be accounted for by mathematics and adaptive optics.

Unless either the laser or the detector are moving, you will not get a red shift and there is no aether to absorb anything. This has been well established by science. The Oort Cloud is the border of our Solar System. Stars and galaxies are much further away. There are literally dozens of places in the Solar System where the apparent diameters of any particular moon and the Sun are the same. We just happen to currently live in a place where those angular sizes are approximately the same at this point in time. It means nothing. 25 days for the Sun's equator and 35 days for the poles. You are cherry picking. They are also the two planets closest to the Sun (which is just as irrelevant). They are also the two planets closest to the Sun (which is just as irrelevant). Your 'model' of the Universe bears no resemblance to reality. In what way?

Those size ratios are not even close to reality: The diameter of the Sun is 109 times the diameter of the Earth.

If you stacked every elephant in the world on top of each other, they wouldn't like it. If you cut a hole in a net, the net will have less holes.

There's a 50% chance that you are correct, a 40% chance that you are not and a 20% chance that my math is wrong. Has anyone ever noticed that a lot of the words used in chemistry have something to do with a certain part of the anatomy? I mean there's; ANALyse ASSay ARSEnic Benzene RING BUTanal Diurea there is even a class of compounds called 'Arsoles'. Strange huh?

I have been running Seti@home for several years now. I am also running Einstein@home. These two seem to be the only ones with graphics.