pippo

wasnt sure if this should be in Biochem, or inorganic, so here it goes: In fermentation, I heard that when yeast "digests" the sugar to create ethanol and CO2, a small amt of methanol also is produced, and stays in the solution. Its kind of an equilibrium. I heard the amt of Methanol is 0.5%. Then I said "wow- 0.5%" ?? Then the guy said "maybe it was 0.05%" (a doctor). Man, 0.5% is high. I make my own beer, and dont want to go blind, people! Is there an equilibrium of methanol and ethanol in this reaction? Thanks

Good way to tackle this is for you to somehow scan/post these results. Then, we can go to work.....

Luois, Again, your statement said "water", not "pure water". My pond is water. The air above it is the atmosphere. And it is in direct contact with it. I think by now, it is clear (no pun) and theres no need for you to try to change what you stated. My pond does meet those conditions. All the babble about what kind of water you [meant to imply] well, its too late. Stand by your statements.

John, All I said was when you say "any water", that includes water in lakes, water in ponds, water in oceans, water in a swimming pool. I was not the one that made the statement. Louis did. Thats all, My situation was a pond, yes, it has "any" water. It also happens to have fish (had). It also has algae. It also has frogs. It also has nitrates, phosphate, etc etc etc. I take you as a scientist, based on your competent and respectable posts here, no doubt about it. Not to mention the gracious replies you have given me in the past that were v helpful. Any water is any water. There is no natural body of water that is pure DI- right? Loius was the one who stated "any" water. I know what ppm is, and usually means by the applied science community. it usually means ppm in w/v. Besides, I was not the one who first used the ppm term- louis chose to use that- I was only responding to his term in the most usual acceptable way- was never disputing that ppm should not be the unit of measure. Even had he used the term microgram/milliliter or even another would not have changes the issue at all, so lets not waste our time on this trivial point . To focus on that is irrelevant, basically. Captain, Like I said above- I did not state "any water", loius did. Im not sure whats the confusion. When one says any water, that is a strong point, and a specific point. Thats the only issue I had with the statement. You cant say any water. Any water includes my pond, your pond, John's pond, Obama's pond. My pond contained at a high about 4-5ppm,, and a dangerous low of about 2. Thats all folks.

Gees, Johm, that just might be the best way to do this. Thanks, man! Gona try it tomorrow.......

John, That statement from louis is still not accurate. Read it again........It says "any" water. My pond situation proves it wrong. Politicians can make statement like that and get away with it. Not scientists.

Thanks. element. Only thing- I dont have Cl gas. dangerous stuff. I dont care if its not pure- as long as the Cl 2 value is there. Thats the only thing that matters. A bit more of nitric is not an issue.

Trying to see if its possible to make a free Cl aqueous by say, mixing some HCl and nitric conc to genetrate Cl2. Then test with thiosulfate to verify Cl2 content, then standardize. Tips/opinions appreciated.

I dont believe thats true. 8ppm is quite high, actually, especially in natural bodies of water. I can site at least one example- my actual experience, and a sad one: My pond which was stocked with fish had only about 2 ppm after heavy rains. They all died. Your 8ppm is way off.

Good tip, studio. never thought of that. Auto parts store here I come......

Tin will not dissolve in nitric.Unless I read your 1st sentence the wrong way......Just a tip. HCl is the way. With nitric trace added......

dissolving tin as pellets/teardrop/etc is not easy , even with HCl. You have to boil it, and boil it, forever. Now, if it was ground finer, even better. Also, HD HCl should be closer to 20-25%, not 15%. Concentrated is 37% (about 12 molar), hardware store /masons muriatic is about 9 Molar. Way more than 15%. I dissolve tin with HCl and a tad of Nitric. hard to come by, I know..........It really does the trick.

tHANKS, PEOPLE. iNTERESTING FOR SURE. i CAN SAY THE FLOW OF THE FLUIDS I AM WORKING WITH ARE , WELL, VERY THICK. lIKE HONEY, BASICALLY. oops- sorry about the caps........ Looks like there is no short cut- cheap way. But, I can still achieve what I want- I'll just sent various samples to customer, as he has to decide which viscosity he needs anyway, so no problem- I'll just have to remember, with thehelp of good notes, how I made it (example, g/L, etc. Thanks

people, trying to find viscosity of different liquids, and have not been able to find any practical methods- easy to devise. On this, I have hardly any equipment (centepois meters???) I heard you need graduated cylinders, glass marbles, stopwatch, thermometer, etc, but no real step wise methods. I take it water is perhaps, a standar 1.00 or something of that nature? (like pure H2o is almost 1.0 density @25 deg C) Any help appreciated.

Thanks, John, and element (sorry for long delay- out of town for 2 weeks). Good tips. Thing is, I have the Fe powder, and want to take advantage of it. It is pretty pure stuff. Not woried about NO2 fumes- no big deal- I work with metals all the time. Now, John, you warn about the basic Fe product which Ive seen before. youre right- it is yukky stuff,, and useless, and unwanted. In your opinion, could this occur if/when I introduce some water to the mix? If so, Should I just stick with addn of pure nitric to the Fe and give it time to dissolve? Thanks.

Fellow members, I ask for your help- I add nitric conc to Fe powder slowly. It dissolves after a while, and after cooling/settling, I get most of the Fe to dissolve to clear solution as well as a bunch of ppt (oxidized Fe?). I am trying to first, get all of it to dissolve without the brownish oxide, and second, to get ferric, not ferrous nitrate. Should I use any water anywhere? I can use either one, but prefer ferric. I know now, that there are some pretty sharp guys here, so I am confident I can get some good advice, eh?? Thanks!! Oh, in the end, I prefer the hexahydrate, but nona hydrate is OK too.

I would add that nitric has to be in glass. Also, chromic acid (liquid/dry) has to be in glass. HCl will eventually, say, over 2 years, "seep" through even heavy duty plastic. Glass is best for HCl. Sulfuric will turn it blackish, although, safe to use.

I get it. Thanks

But wasnt bacteria about the first life on earth? Seems to me bacteria and related fungi (monerids, right?) would have already been around and developed by that carboniferous period. Also, it was mentioned that time was warmer/wetter- just what is ideal for decomposition, correct?

Sorry, maybe late reply- been busy. SA may not sell to personal/individuals. If you have a lab, yes. But, still, they will put you through the ringer first (at least, thats what I understood recently)

Not sure what your goal is. I recrystallize Boric maybe once a year- not a huge demand for it, I guess. But, anyway, it has a low solubility in H2O. But I dont care as its cheap, and even though it results in low yield, no biggee. Cant tinker with Nature, eh? Also, if you really want to talk to Boron chemist, try US Borax- the superpower of boron in NA. Good luck.

Well, you just need to determine what grade you need, right? I mean , you mention a concern for the purity. What purity do you need? Its one thing to ask for a higher purity its another to know what % purity you threshold is. If all you need is 99+ why pay more for 99.9, get it? I work all day with 99.999% stuff, then for another order, 99.0-99.5 is perfectly fine!! Its all about the application and knowing the end user's needs. Good luck, man.

Wow- so much work/expense just to make sodium hydroxide. Amazing. Its the bleach of the chemical industry. (also, CaSO4- another name is plaster of paris, I believe...)

Are you in the Dairy Lab /testing/milk fat business? Try The chemical superpower Sigma-Aldrich- if theyll sell to yyou.

Well, Inow explained it very well, and many thanks, Inow. Yes, I too understand what you meant by "we were" etc etc. Good point about the weight put on our just 2 legs where the apes had 4 limbs mainly , to bear the weight. I knew it!! haha.....now I can tell my buddy back pain is soooo common in man cuz we morphed from monkeys which probably didnt have this pain! Now that I think of it, I remember a former friend who was a doctor of osteopathy - told me the same thing. They must have studied that real hard in their schooling/program, since they focus so much on back pain....... Ohhhhhhhh.....ahhhhhh......(stretching back muscles, after raking 2 acres of leaves from storm, thinkng maybe I should reach for ibuprofen or aspirin).........glad Im not a monkey though.