John Cuthber

OK the original question was "Which ones produce more heat then other decay(gamma, alpha, beta), and more importantly that will not hurt me and less risky?" There's a clear indication that he's concerned about the risk. That risk is the reason why he won't get hold of any radioactive material that will meaningfully generate heat. Feel free to say it's not relevant. Also, unless you can prove otherwise I think it's fair to say it's true. You certainly won't get hold of it legally and I don't think this site condones breaking the law. "he didn`t ask that! that`s Twice now I`ve had to call you on this, either answer the question that was ASKED or say nothing." This "Alpha decay is the easiest to block, so that is what I suggest you use. I think it produces the least amount of energy per decay, though. How much heat (watts) do you need to generate?" also doesn't answer the question. Nor does this "okay, i'll quantify that with 'for any specific material the rate of heat produced will be proportional to the decay rate.'" Nor (rather ironicaly) does this "he didn`t ask that! that`s Twice now I`ve had to call you on this, either answer the question that was ASKED or say nothing." All I was doing was pointing out that this thread was (and still is) a wild goose chase. (Obviously, I have heard of the internet. Perhaps someone would like to give me the address of a site selling large amounts of high activity radioisotopes? or perhaps they would like to keep quiet.) Incidentally, "(FYI, I get .114 W/g output for Am-241) " means that a smoke detector has enough Am in it to produce something like 23 nanowatts of power; I wouldn't like to have to measure a heat flux that small.

How would chlorine survive being deionised? I think you have a case for complaint.

2 NaClO --> 2NaCl +O2

You might have more success with a boride rather than a borohydride. The idea of a bunch of wedge shaped magnets making a monople isn't new.The idea was raised in the Daedalus column of New Scientist Sept 10 1970. It was (so I gather) analysed by Dr Epsilon and Mr J Middlehurst in Wireless world Dec1978 p 67 and Sept 1979 p82. The analysis is described as unsympathetic.

Is this the weird university that only lets people in if their names start and end with a capital letter? Also, are imaginary drugs placebos?

Nobody is going to let you have enough of any radioactive material to produce any useful heat.

"A surface is needed to make the chemical reaction " Care to think about that in the context of the early universe?

"Originally Posted by John Cuthber Evolution only acts in response to how many children you have. What you do before that cannot malke any difference. Incidentally masturbation is pretty common amongst animals so it's a safe bet we were doing it before we were human. Evolution acts on the fitness of individual, which is, in part, a measure of your offspring. What you do before you have children most certainly affects your fitness. For example, if you cut off your genitals before you have children, this will most certainly affect your Darwinian fitness!!" Unless (as a hypothetical example) you cut them off because it would let you use them in some strange cloning experiment which would alow you to produce hundreds of children. Then you would be an evolutionay winner because you had lots of kids. Evolution measures success by how many copies of yourself you leave behind; it doesn't know or care what else you do. Evolution has a strong reason to produce creatures that want lots of sex- that's the obvious way of getting lots of offspring. A lot of animals (including humans) find themselves short of an oportunity to express that urge; no prizes for guessing what they do about it.

"Perhaps you are thinking of inhallation anasthetics such as haloperidol, which are more much more potent than N20..." Haloperidol isn't an inhalational anaesthetic. NO2 is toxic; I doubt it has any major phyisiological role but it's proably made in small quantities by the oxidation of NO which is a transmitter.

Evolution only acts in response to how many children you have. What you do before that cannot malke any difference. Incidentally masturbation is pretty common amongst animals so it's a safe bet we were doing it before we were human.

My advice would be to drink coffee, and talk to someone while you make and drink it. People are usually a good for people.

The "holiday" tree is fascinating. Last time I checked Christ was the "son of God" to Christians, but even to most of the other major religions here He's a prophet. Most religious people here in the UK shouldn't logically be bothered about celebrating His birth. (though even Christianity ought to have a view on blatant commercialism). (No offense meant to any passing Buddhists or Sikhs) What's more interesting is that the tree is a pagan symbol rather than a Christian one. (Same for the Easter bunny). Shouldn't the Christians be objecting to the pagan symbolism? (BTW, is there a WIKI page about everything?)

"Over here, PC is a tool of the left, and critisism of it is a tool of the right; it's the lefties who try to rename christmas to winter holiday, whilst the right moan about PC stopping them from shooting imagrants " I'm not sure aout whoich side is using it. If someone has banned "Christmas" on the grounds that it's "not PC" then it's perhaps a tool of the left. If (as I suspect) that never actually happened but it was a story made up by the right to ridicule the left then it's a tool of the right. It reminds me of the "ElfAndSafety loonies" at the health and safety authorities who banned playing conkers in schools, teaching rock climbing, and using ladders "because it's dangerous". Unfortunately for the press this never actually happened so they just made it up anyway. http://www.hse.gov.uk/myth/index.htm It's a different sort of strawman; "The political left are stupid because they try to ban the use of the word black in schools". It's not true, it's not even plausible, but it will fool some of the people.

The flasks about a dozen items down this list? http://www.raylab.co.nz/catalog.asp?section=product&groupID=27&dir=group

Hot zinc will react with steam to produce hydrogen. I'm not sure any H+ ions are involved in that case.

There's a really important thing to know about those diagrams (and yes, they are structural formulae). They don't bother to put all the carbon atoms in. All the corners of the hexagons and pentagons, except there there is an "O" are carbon atoms. For example the glucose has 6 carbon atoms but only one is explicitly put there as a "C" in the diagram.

what do you want FeCl2 for? There might be a substitute that is easy to get.

Please don't fall into the trap of trying to make (for example) a pH8 solution by dissolving 10^-8 moles of HCl in a liter of water. I think you will need to learn a bit about buffers.

"Wait a tick. Wouldn't dissolving a lump of iron under oxic conditions yield FeCl3? One would either have to start with Fe(II) or use a reducing agent." Iron is a very good reducing agent. That means another way to get FeCl2 is to start with FeCl3 (used as an etchant) and add iron; steel wool works reasonably well. Use an excess of the iron and then filter it off.

My guess is he's lying. As long as he keeps threatening to get hold of a bomb he gets publicity and some sort of kudos from the rich west; we might be prepared to pay him not to get one. Provided that he doesn't get one he doesn't need to worry about keeping his promise to nuke Tel Aviv, but, while he keeps talking about it he gets kudos at home (at least from some camps) for being a strong leader. I think it might be amusing to consider giving him a bomb- we have lots and we are not using them for anything. And then reminding him that, if he uses it, he will get destroyed utterly. What would this do to his credibility, particularly with his neighbours who would get the fallout?

Unsurprisingly there's a list in wiki.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ig_Nobel_Prize_winners My personal favorite is the Royal Navy winning the peace prize for shouting "Bang!" rather than actually firing missiles

"I ... have had a lifetime of conscious awareness of the electromagnetic fields that appear to govern our existence " Hm? Anyway there's very little Al expousre from beer (and other) cans because they are coated on the inside. If there's any evidence of mass chronic heavy metal poisoning I'd be interested to see it. Frankly I doubt it's true and trolling seems a more likely explanation. If Zarkov wants to provide some sort of evidence, that would make things much easier for him. I wonder why he hasn't. The obvious reason would be that the evidence doesn't exist ie he is deluded or lying.

Well, I agree with this bit "Hydrogen potential is an artifact " but I'm not sure about the rest. As I have pointed out before your theory is arbitrary and produces (so far as I can see) no testable hypotheses. It is, therefore, not science.

OK, I thought about this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pound-Rebka_experiment and I still think Planck's work stands. Please explain why you think the constant isn't constant.

"It is not usually the alcohol that causes hangovers, but the secondary products caused by the type of material fermented, and/or by the heat affects during distillation, causing the production of other chemicals. " Er, I think the usual format for this sort of reply is "someone who isn't me" tried drinking lab grade alcohol mixed with cola and can vouch for the fact that pure alcohol is perfectly able to give you a hangover. If you can face a fry up in the morning then you haven't got much of a hangover. While it's probably true that paracetamol (acetaminophen for those across the pond) is the last thing your liver needs, your head may have a different opinion. In my experience it's often the head that wins. The only thing that reliably cures a hangover is time.