Itoero

I tried several ways to burn nitrocellulose. Burning it in a glass jar is pretty nice. I would like to burn it in a graduated cilinder. But will the glass of the cilinder be strong enough? It creates a lot of pressure... Made 2 videos about it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ceT0HTj9c2Y https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBJEtYQQQXs

That's pantheism.

Is it possible that KHSO4 forms a solid when there isn't enough H2SO4? Tomorrow I'm going to do this experiment with 3 times as much moles H2SO4 as KNO3...I'm pretty sure this will cause the nitrating solution to stay liquid.

It depends what in the bible you consider to be true or false.

Einstein was also wrong in his idea's of Quantum theory. He tried to debunk Heisenberg's uncertainty and was not a fan of quantum entanglement. What do our physical laws say about black holes? It's not clear what the big bang was, so I suppose I was wrong to make assumptions about physical laws. That's true. So it's science in general that causes the belief in the supernatural to decline/evolve. But isn't 'religion' a wrong term? Einstein was supposed to be a deeply religious non-believer. If you look to his beliefs then he wasn't religious at all. Einstein uses the word 'religion' as it was 'philosophy'. If you replace 'religion' with 'philosophy' then it imo makes more sense: Philosophy without science is blind. Science without philosophy is lame.

I meant that before Darwin the creation of humanity had no explanation. What other factors can there be for all those creation stories and the massive amount of gods? Then what did Einstein mean with 'religion' ? He was an agnost and admired Spinoza's work.

I think the Miller Urey points to the 'fact' that the origin of life does not demand anything supernatural. Inorganic matter can create organic matter without the help of a pink unicorn. I did read a couple times that the inorganic molecules in the Miller Urey did not correspond with what was present on the early earth.

The Miller Urey (and many experiments that came after) proves organic molecules can spontaneously (with electricity) form. It's not about abiogenesis. I don't think the origin of life demands something supernatural.

We can't explain abiogenesis. We know about the evolution of life. But how life got there is still unsolved.

I let it in water for maybe an hour, I could then loosen it from the glass jar and separate the cotton balls. None of the cotton was dissolved so a good cooling bath does prevent cotton from dissolving. I washed and dried the cotton balls. I just tried it and I'm pretty sure it's trinitrocellulose. It has a very fast and big combustion. I suppose there is something from the reaction H2SO4+KNO3 that forms a solid when it cools down. That's why adding more H2SO4 is necessary I think.

I tried it again and it failed again. The cotton balls did not dissolve but the balls feel very hard and look like they are glued together. How is that possible? This is definitely the last time I did this experiment. It looks like I've made plastic. Doesn't cellulose mononitrate look like this? I added an overdose of water so if H2SO4 escapes, it's immediately diluted.

I do think the big bang is supernatural...it goes beyond our understanding and can't be explained with the known physical laws. Yet it has nothing to do with God or pink unicorns. Supernatural doesn't point to God. Supernatural is just supernatural. It's basically unexplained science. Before Darwin, the creating of life had no explanation so it was supernatural. That's why people invented all those gods. Now we know about evolution so it's no longer supernatural. This something that Einstein said about the subject: "Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind." I do think that's nonsense. A scientific mind does not need religion.

Science can't prove or disprove God. 100% proof does not exist in science.

The solubility of cellulose in sulfuric acid raises when you increase the temperature. So the solubility lowers when you decrease the temperature. When the nitrating solution is at 0°C, I suppose none of the cellulose will dissolve yet it still nitrates. So my nitration failed because I didn't cool sufficiently. Is this line of thought correct?

This article is about cellulose interaction with sulfuric acid. At 65% sulfuric acid, cellulose should dissolve completely. http://www.hindawi.com/journals/isrn/2012/428974/ So if you add more then twice as much sulfuric acid then KNO3, don't you just dissolve a part of the cellulose? You do need more then 65% sulfuric acid to dissolve cellulose so maybe you need to add a lot more sulfuric acid to dissolve the cellulose. H2SO4 is used to make HNO3 and to make the nitrating ions so the % sulfuric acid should be rather low after adding KNO3.

This the reaction you gave: 2H2SO4 + HNO3 => 2 HSO4(−) + NO2(+) + H3O(+) shouldn't this reaction go like this? H2SO4 + HNO3 => HSO4(−) + NO2(+) + H2O If so, then I need +/- twice as much H2SO4 as KNO3. Then I need 0,73 mol KNO3 which is 73 gram. When I use HNO3, then I need 61 ml HNO3 and 80ml H2SO4. So why do people always use more H2SO4? When I added the first cotton, it seemed to dissolve...how is that possible? What causes the structure of the cellulose to change so it looks like plastic?

Maybe the moles of cotton? Cellulose does not have a fit amount of glucose molecules so you can't really know how many moles cellulose are in 5g. I think H2SO4+KNO3= HNO3+HKSO4 (is K2SO4 formed when you add more KNO3?) I need the double amount of H2SO4 compared to HNO3. Does that mean I need about 3 times as much H2SO4 as KNO3? Then I need 50g of KNO3 and 80ml H2SO4 just like in my experiment. I did not stir the solution before I added the cotton....kinda stupid of me. KNO3 and HNO3 are both less dense then H2SO4. So when you add KNO3 slowly, most of the HNO3 will stay on top while the unreacted H2SO4 stays at the bottom. Can that be the cause the cellulose seemed to dissolve and the one that didn't dissolve is of a very low quality...?

I answered Sensei.

So it's better to try and fail? practice makes perfect I've made guncotton many times, but its just some time ago and I always used HNO3. 50g KNO3 =0,495 mol 5g cotton =0,028 mol 80ml H2SO4 =1,469 mol (it's not 100% so it's less mol) 1000g H2O =55 mol

When I add cotton to H2SO4 it seems to dissolve. So when this happens when nitrating, does it mean I should add more KNO3 or just mix the nitrating solution better?

You believe everything the media says I suppose? And you do understand that the security status was only in the weeks after the attacks? Everything is back to normal, except for the Syrian refugees of course. I tried to make nitrocellulose. When I added the first cotton, the cotton seemed to dissolve. Why is that? After cooling down I noticed some hard white pieces. The nitrocellulose also doesn't burn that fast.

Where do you got that idea from? Belgium is not going through paroxysms of panic. Why would we? Nothing happened.

huh? Why do you think that?

What would happen if I mix magnetic ink with water and place it in oil?

ah ok Then it's probably better to use vegetable oil and water. I suppose oil is more hydrofoob then kerosene. Why does the magnetic ink stay in the oil and it doesn't just mix with the water? Is there a kind of surface tension that prevents the magnetic ink from leaving?