ironizer

Hmm... nevermind I guess, I invented my own. Got the idea last night, this design uses 3 gears and a lever. Basically if one wheel is slowed down, it will transfer the rest of the torque to the other wheel. Super simple, works on relative motion between two gears. Now I just need to learn how to draw in Solidworks so I can mill these out.

I want to build an RC car so I can familiarize myself with the machine shop at my school. The car will be simple and I have everything figured out except the differential. I want to put an electric brushless motor on the rear axle, but I don't think I could just have 1 drive shaft for both rear wheels and gear it up that way. I need to figure out how to make a differential so the outer wheel can rotate faster during turns. I know most RC cars have some system like this but I haven't been able to figure out how it works. Also I can't seem to figure out how to invent one myself so I need some links/ideas. The tools available to me are: precision lathes, 2-axis mills, water jet cutter, bandsaw, grinders, drills, hand tools, etc... Any help appreciated.

How can I calculate the maximum potential generated? I don't know how to calculate the field, all I have is the magnet but how do I measure its field in Tesla or Gauss?

Nothing I do ever works. I made my solenoid type thing with about 300 turns, and Im using strong neodymium magnets... I get 0.02 volts when I pull the magnet out very fast... it is not enough. I want to make a series of these solenoids so when I move the magnet across I want to "feel" a drag, and I want to actually produce some electricity (it will be AC but it's okay). If I move the magnet at 20-30m/s I want to get at least a few volts. So what's the trick to making one of these generators? Am I building it wrong? What sort of resistors can I hook up so that I feel it hard in my hand to swipe the magnet across the top or the solenoids?

The hit they gave us was to separate the two equations. I don't know what that means.

Yeah I see what you're saying. But even if you don't make the assumption, you can still solve 13th power equations using Newton's method. Try both, then we can see if it's close enough to just assume the reaction goes to completion.

Oh my bad. Sorry. Question is: "Calculate the equilibrium pressures of all gases."

Give me a clue please. I have no idea what do do: Suppose 1.51 atm of CH4(g), 2.23 atm of C2H6(g), and 15.53 atm of O2(g) are placed in a flask at a given temperature. The reactions are given below. CH4(g) + 2 O2(g) <-> CO2(g) + 2 H2O(g) KP = 1.0 x 10^4 2 C2H6(g) + 7 O2(g) <-> 4 CO2(g) + 6 H2O(g) KP = 1.0 x 10^8 Thanks a lot. Anything helps.

Ok so I was reading up some more on this, but nobody talks about why this oxidation stuff makes sense. Maybe it just doesn't, I don't know. To me it seems like somebody made all these rules up. Book doesn't explain why things are like that, example: Fluorine is always assigned -1, so SF6 would be -6 fluorine and +6 sulfur. Why? This is exactly why I hate chemistry, nothing makes logical sense. You can't just "think about it" and understand it. In physics and math you can figure things out on your own, in chemistry you just have to memorize crap and take someone's word for it, and not even be given an explanation. I can't wait until the end of the quarter so I wouldn't have to put up with this BS. And why is it called oxydation where there isn't necessarily any oxygen involved?

The problem with paying attention in class is that he didn't go over Redox reactions until today, so I guess I wasn't supposed to know this until now. And I did pay attention to the Redox lecture, but I don't really understand the meaning of the Oxidation Numbers. What are they? How are they useful?

Ok this question is the real BS: The blood alcohol (C2H5OH) level can be determined by titrating a sample of blood plasma with an acidic potassium dichromate solution, resulting in the production of Cr3+(aq) and carbon dioxide. The reaction can be monitored because the dichromate ion (Cr2O72-) is orange in solution, and the Cr3+ ion is green. The unbalanced redox equation is shown below. Cr2O72-(aq) + C2H5OH(aq) → Cr3+(aq) + CO2(g) If 31.05 mL of 0.0600 M potassium dichromate solution is required to titrate 30.0 g of blood plasma, determine the mass percent of alcohol in the blood. I have no clue where to even start. I don't know how to balance that equation, as I dont even know how the atoms move around.I dont see any poly ions in the alcohol or the dichromate. So hits please.

This one is extremely easy to figure out. I figured it out on my own when i was 15. If you switch, you get twice as better chance of getting the car. This problem is a quick IQ test I offer people when i meet them to see if they're smart or dumb.

Ye true, UC's answer is what I was looking for. Now it makes sense. But the answer is still useful, I don't really need to learn to "fish" here because chemistry is BS and as soon as I'm done taking the required 2 quarters of chem I'll kick chemistry in the nuts and ditch it for good. Then I can go do my physics/maths and all the other useful studies. 49.0 was what I had to enter in, because they give the grams to 3 significant figures. Now I'm done and I can go watch some of the Australian Open. Go Federer.

I don't even see what the question is asking. What does it mean, "what's the % KClO3 in the mixture?" ? Is it KClO3 mixed with KCl or what?

I can't figure out what this means. What is it even asking?

This is COOL. It's just a proof-of-concept thing, not a practical passenger vehicle.

There is already enough incentive for "new" energy. If anyone finds something practical, reliable, and clean, then I'm sure they wouldn't need some government bureaucrat to get him to develop his technology because he'd be rich anyways. So this whole "government helping advance technology" is just hot water. Politicians use it to get into office and make themselves sound like "good people" to liberals.

Ford is the father of automobiles. Along with Mercedes.

So I've made a very simple, ideal model of a heat engine, and my calculations just don't match up to the carnot thing: efficiency = 1-(Tc/Th) It looks like this: I supposed a rectangular block, base of 1cm by 1cm, and a piston free to move up and down this block without friction. Also suppose that the walls are completely insulated thermally (no heat can transfer through, as to not screw up our calculations). Now we know that 1 atm = 1.03323 kg/sq cm, and the piston is 1x1cm so it must weigh 1.03323kg in order to apply a downward pressure of 1 atmosphere constantly. Assume a vacuum outside our piston, only gravity pushes the piston down. So I've done 2 calculations, one with helium and one with chlorine. PV=nRT, P is 1, n is 1 because we calculate using one mole each, and R is constant. I know that the specific heat capacity for chlorine is 33.95 J/mol for each degree Kelvin. So I did this: suppose we apply 100 joules of heat INSIDE the rectangular cylinder, and the new temperature would be 100/33.95=2.945 degrees Kelvin increase. The 33.95 capacity says its for room temperature, so I calculated the volume of the gas at room temperature (R*(273+25)) and subtracted that from the new volume (after we applied our 100J heat) so it's R*(273+25+2.945) and I get a .24170839 Liters increase in volume, after applying just 100Joules of heat. If our rectangle is 1x1cm, it means that the height (distance the piston moves) is increased by 2.41708 meters, and we use work=F*D to find our increase in potential energy. Remember our piston weighs 1.03323 kg, so we do 1.03323*9.8*2.41708 = 24.47308 JOULES mechanical energy (potential). This is 24.47308% efficiency (we started with 100J) WTF?! Did I screw up somewhere? I checked it over about 18 times and nothing looks wrong. But when we use the equation efficiency = 1-(Tc/Th) we get 1 - (273+25)/(273+25+2.945) = 0.009785 or 0.978% efficiency theoretically possible. 0.978% is a bit different than my 24.47308%. I did the same thing for 1 mole of helium, and I got 39.97339%, because helium has lower specific heat capacity (20.786 J/mol K). So carnot's theorem says that the efficiency is based solely on the difference in operating temperatures, I'm finding that my efficiency depends on the specific heat capacity and that's about it. I know carnot's engine is a bit different, he does some weird crap, but my simple system can be made to cycle as well. I could have a "valve" that would let the temperature return to room temperature (273+25) as it was before we applied 100J, and then we could repeat the process. I can't draw any lines. Is my stuff better than carnot's engine, or did I just fail at math? Help! Thanks.

Yep, by now I got LiPo and brushless motor with computer radio. I'm hauling ass. Thanks.

I think the problem with brute force is that a computer cannot "notice" patterns. Computers can't just try combos to see if they make sense. My messages will be hidden in the code, so only someone who thinks the same way I do would be able to figure it out. I haven't actually made the code yet, I just have it in my head. It'll probably take me a few days to do it, maybe longer.

It would be a pretty much like "A is Q" except i have some kick-butt tricks up my sleeves to hide the patterns. I don't know what you mean by that key, but mine you would use the "book" every time you want to encode something. The problem is that if somebody gets a hold of that "book", they can decode any message very easily. I want make a bet with a cryptographer to see if they can beat my code. Problem is, I don't know any cryptographers. Also, brute force and math analysis would do you no good. Computers don't have intelligence, and they would not be able to think the same way I do.

I've heard people say that all ciphers (speaking of substitution/translation) are crackable, especially with brute force (supercomputers). I bet 1000 bucks I can make a code that will be impossible to "crack". Here's how it will work. I will make a small book that will explain how to encode/decode the gibberish. It will have what letter translates to what, etc. Then, I will write a paragraph, page, (an excerpt from a book, or anything in the english language) with my code. I'll give you both the english text and the code. Then i'll give you the code to a new paragraph, and you have to figure out what it says. .... you won't be able to. But: someone with the little book i make will be able to easily translate the code into the english language. I want to know how this cracking works. How would it eve be possible to attempt to guess my code's pattern?

I want this degree because I want to skills to do what I want. I like to design cars and engines, and I started studying thermodynamics on my own, and it's pretty cool. I like having brain challenges (like trying to figure out special relativity etc.) but I hate doing useless processes over and over for 5 hours.

Is the work load very large, because I can't sit down and spend 5 hours on an assignment... my attention span is not long enough for that. I would get bored and want to get up and do something else. I can learn easy when I'm in the right mood, but if I try to cram a lot of stuff into my head when it's not the right time (maybe 2 in the morning? ) I just get exhausted and it does more bad than good. How will that go?