John Cuthber

The distillation ban is on the statute book.

They did.

Since a flat mirror is cheap and easy and it would work I guess it's optimal.

Reminds me of selling nuclear shelters... No dissatisfied customers ever complained.

Nope. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flurothyl Much more importantly, high pressure oxygen- which can clearly be breathed- is a convulsant, not a narcotic.

Enough have failed that we know they really won't "last forever". That looks a bit like a "No true Scotsman" argument.

Why would I?

Good news; you are wrong.

The traditional version is "what happens when an irresistible force acts on an immovable object?". And the answer is that they can't both exist (at least, not in the same universe).

Only if you pay attention to it.

No.

It is a theoretical implementation. I haven't actually done it.

No That's "rubbing your hands together on a cold day". Fusion is a bit more complicated. You are unlikely to have "cracked" something when you have to ask what it is.

As far as I can tell, there's only one topic there.

Something like this would be the obvious way. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_scanning But it hardly matters how I'd do it. The fact remains. The point exists and it has all those numbers associated with it And it would do so even if there was nobody else in the world.

The point 1 inch east of the tip of my nose has a set of 3 Cartesian coordinates based on an origin at the corner where the floor meets the door. It also has a set of three polar coordinates, altitude, latitude and longitude. So that point has, in fact, 6 numbers. That's before we look at things like a magnetic or gravitational field (and their first, second and nth derivatives). So you are wrong. You should stop now, because this is a science site and you are not doing science.

If you are making alcohol for drinking, you certainly don't need vacuum distillation- not bothering to add the most expensive and unnecessary bit makes things cheaper. (Buying a 3d printer etc is unlikely to make things cheaper) If you are making high purity alcohol for lab use then... you still don't need a vacuum still.

A geometric mean is the best measure of central trend for a log normal distribution. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Log-normal_distribution#Occurrence_and_applications

Where Does Holy Water Come From? Peckham Spring? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mother_Nature's_Son_(Only_Fools_and_Horses)

I'm still trying to get an answer to this. I am not allowed to distill beer in the UK; I don't have a license to do so. But the people who make whisky make it by distilling beer. They typically make beer that's stronger than the usual version. About 7 to 10 % https://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2010/aug/23/science-art-whisky-making but whisky is made by distilling beer. I have made beer and wine. Did you somehow imagine that I thought that you made beer by distillation? That's not what I said, is it? Just in case you wondered about my credentials; I'm an enthusiastic drinker of spirits and have visited distilleries in 3 different countries. One of them, I was there working And my dad worked in a brewery for decades. Gakusei, next time, before you assume I am wrong about the processes, you might want to check that you have read what I said properly. ..because it is already distilled.. So, if it's distillation that matters, brandy will be the same... So, once again, it seem you are wrong. Confident, but wrong.

And that's without the "antidote" effect of the ethanol. The data above show that beer- which is essentially what moonshine is distilled from contains at most 27 mg of methanol per litre. 2.5 ounces is about 70 grams or 70,000 mg. So, ignoring the fact that ethanol acts as an antidote, you would need to extract the methanol from 70,000/28 = 2500 litres of beer to get enough methanol to kill you. Does your still hold 2500 litres of wash? If not then there simply isn't enough methanol in the whole thing to kill you. here's one I have a cavalier attitude to things that are far too small to be important. But, as I already pointed out, there's other junk in there which you don't want to drink. So "topping and tailing" is a good idea.

Yeast does not make significant methanol. Methanol is formed from pectin (though the yield is poor). There's very little pectin in grain. So, once again, where is this purported methanol in moonshine coming from? I had a look on the net and found this https://www.ijstr.org/final-print/feb2020/Simultaneous-Gas-Chromatographic-Quantitation-Of-Ethanol-And-Methanol-From-Beer.pdf which says According to published information on alcoholic fermentation congeners detected in various alcoholic beverages, methanol levels are as follows; beer (1-27 mg/L), wine (8-151 mg/L), fortified wine (125-329 mg/L), brandy (176-4766 mg/L), whiskey (6-328 mg/L), rum (6- 131 mg/L), and vodka (0-170 mg/L). If a litre of weak (3% ABV) beer contains 27mg of methanol and 30 ml of ethanol then, unless you screw up the distillation, the moonshine will contain a thousand times more ethanol than methanol. The ethanol would kill you long before the methanol would. The wine has more methanol, but also more ethanol, so , again, it's not the methanol that will kill you. Were they chemists?

Formates aren't particularly toxic https://www.fishersci.com/store/msds?partNumber=S648500&productDescription=SODIUM+FORMATE+CERTIFIED+500G&vendorId=VN00033897&countryCode=US&language=en I suspect that the problem is that formic acid is produced within the eye and causes local damage, but I'm not sure

Only superficially (Though it will burn if you get it hot enough. The rules about the ends of names aren't reliable. Most metals (apart from the ancient ones like iron and copper) have names ending "ium". But helium isn't a metal. The "inert" gases have names ending "on" (except helium) but silicon isn't an inert gas and nor is boron.

Silicon is interesting, but brittle. I'm not sure it would be practical in the kitchen.