John Cuthber

Woulldnt all those accelerating magnets lose energy from the system by emitting electromagnetic radiation?

I got a reference to that paper from Google and the few fractured sentences that Google gave sugested that the original paper might answer the question of what happens to the diamagnetism of Bi when it melts.

I'd like to know what the whole paper says.

There's certainly some effect of crystal structure as shown by the second paper I cited.

I don't know a lot about differential diagnosis, but I do know examiners often ask unexpectedly difficult questions.

Is there any proof that there's only one disease involved?

I know what a Curie point is thank you.

Does anyone have access to this paper?

http://www.jstor.org/pss/95646

P371 of this

http://www.rsc.org/delivery/_ArticleLinking/DisplayArticleForFree.cfm?doi=CA9058805365&JournalCode=CA

suggests rather strongly that the crystal structure affects the diamagnetism of Bi.

The behaviour of liquid water is, of course, nothing to do with the crystal structure; why mention it?

If you took a balloon diving with you it would get squashed. It would occupy less space so you would get more baloons to the kilometer. Also the air in it would be compressed so that too would be denser.

What I'm really not certain about is the effect of lower atmospheric pressure on the balloons a long way up. An inflated balloon at the top of Everest has less (mass of) air in it.

I think the overall effect is that only the weight of the rubber counts because the air in the balloon is bouyed up by the air outside it. If I weigh a balloon, then blow it up and reweigh it the weight is very nearly the same.

This is a more interesting question that it first looks.

A related effect means it's very imortant to have fans on spacecraft. People do not spontaneously "reignite".

"0.147g/126.07g/mole - 0.001 "

Pardon?

Imagine you are at the foot of a very high column of balloons. Apart from you, there is nothing to hold them up. If they are heavy enough they will squash you.

IIRC the diamagnetism goes away on melting so it's to do with the odd crystal structure,

your 12hp motor is 9000w, taking 750W as 1hp.

 

my initial calculations factoring 2hp (1500W) by 7 = 10500W

 

which is plenty, however there seems to be argument from some here about this, it would be interesting to see THEIR answers to your question

How do you justify multiplying the power by 7?

Please do this with the world's power stations and solve the energy crisis.

The simple fact is that if you try this trick what will happen is the motor will overheat because you are overrunning it.

If you tried running a 12 HP compressor with a 1 HP motor it would initially run fine but, as the pressure in the air receiver rose the force on the pistons (and thus on the motor) would rise. After a while the pressure would be so high that the motor would stall and burn out.

With 10HP you wil probaly get away with it for a while.

Why would the balloons at the bottom pop? Surely they would just get squashed.

Make sure that the container it is in is big enough to contain the foaming.

Also, don't forget the suck-back trap.

Oops! that last unit should be litres.

10 ml is a perfectly reasonable answer for a titration.

I think you have multiplied by the molar mass of NaOH twice.

.0000977 moles of acid takes the same number of moles of NaOH and you can calculate the volume of that without needing the molar mass of NaOH.

0.0000997mol/0.0100 mol/litre =x mol

Is this what you mean?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anandamide

The experiment has certainly been repeated many times. For a long time (and perhaps still) there was a pendulum set up in the science museum in London and a similar one in the university of Manchester. I guess there are others.

http://www.scienceandsociety.co.uk/results.asp?image=10196799

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manchester_Conference_Centre

As you say, the coriolis effects are pretty convincing.

The original problem of the "earth at the centre of the universe" idea i.e. the complications of the orbits of the planets and sun remains a major problem for those determined to believe in it.

Anyone who doesn't believe the evidence we currently have simply isn't paying attention.

Making compressed air takes energy. The compressor will have a rating of so many cubic feet per minute at such and such pressure. That is a power rating. Ignoring the efficiency and things like friction losses that requiremment is why it needs 12HP and 10HP quite simply won't do it.

Given that the displacement (CF/M) will be the same (because the RPM is the same) the pressure will not be as high- if you try to run this system at full load you will overload the motor.

Stop pretending that you can ignore the power rating.

Chlorinating ammonia is a bad idea.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitrogen_trichloride

I will do it for $50- nothing like competition in the market.

What you described is Cantor's tenerary set, or the Cantor set for short. The result is an uncountably infinite set of points that has Hausdorff dimension of about 0.63, has set zero measure, is closed, and is nowhere dense.

Thanks for that, I understood almost every word, but not a single concept.

im no math genius,

Is there a "Quote of the week" award here?

230,000 hits on Google for "10 year" lithium suggests that not all Li batteries discharge quickly.

yet the reason we define it as inf is due to our lack of a word to describe said event

Royal "we"?

A vertical column makes it easier since all three are less dense than air and will want to diffuse up.

Thanks for clarifying your expertise in this matter.

the acid will eat away the metal.

That's the whole idea.