dragonstar57

I was doing some research on the flame temperature if various fuels and a lot of them had temperatures for in air and also for in an oxygen environment. is it "better" to burn things using liquid oxygen or is it the same as long as you have enough oxygen? a 2/3rds h2 and 1/3rd o2 flame will burn at about 2700 Fahrenheit which isn't hot enough to turn steel into a liquid. would it be possible(or feasible) to have a liquid torch and would it burn hotter than the 2700 degrees for a perfect mixture of the gasses *edit* my spell check plugin is a bit broken and it replaced temperature with tempature if someone could fix that for me that would be awesome!

wasn't sure where to put this but when I tried to connect to the irc I got this edit my png I atached didn't seem to work so http://imgur.com/a/QYu49 imgur link!

isn't it impossible to distinguish any 2 = forces? a iron robot would be unable to tell if he experiencing gravity or magnetism or acceleration.

I suppose an argument could be made for the idea that it should be in speculations because the topic is centered around pseudoscience but it is in more of fact cheeking capacity than which typically is in the speculations section. also I have a question. could someone compare and contrast fukshima and chernobyl? if there was a hydrogen explosion which breached the containment building isn't it the same?

is this true?i'm inclined to disbelive just because c2c is to psudoscientific for my taste.

so why aren't we handing these out in areas where clean water is an issue?

I know about solar distlization. I was wondoring if a solar oven would be better for cleaning water of microbial contamination. woldn't it be more eficient to simply heat it to the point where it kills the microorganisms in the water?

I heard recently that in many places much of a person’s time is spent collecting fire wood to heat water for the purpose of sterilization. I was wondering if a solar oven could be used instead of fire. I'm thinking of something like this. a plastic box with reflective surface with a reflective interior measuring 1Mx1Mx1m and a lid which would be propped open at a 45 degree angle (and is reflective) would this be an effective solar water purifier?

Wouldn’t particulate matter (like if the water was muddy) block the uv whereas the microwave frequency would be able to get through? so you would have to add microwave energy faster than heat leaves the system? How would the power requirements compare to UVGI? Would it be possible to use microwaves to kill pathogens with a modest power supply?

If I heat a sample of water with a dangerous microbial contamination (whatever common, dangerous waterborne illness) until it boils the microbes die. My question is why do they die? Is it the microwaves that kill them via radiological effects or is it the heat that does it? (ie the microwaves interacting with the microbes vs the microwaves interacting with the water and the water interacting with the microbes) Could a microwave be built to kill bacteria with low intensity microwaves? Low intensity microwaves which could be generated by power from a hand crank or pedal style generator? If so could microwaves used to sanitize water in developing nations with simple gear like magnets and broken microwaves?

I saw a ufo then it landed and I saw it was my neighbors kitdrone. then it ceased to be a ufo and became a ifo (identified flying object)

does anyone have a way for me to reloacte to a universe with magic?

recently I heard saw the Planck scale referred to as the resolution of reality (obviously a matrix reference rofl) but it got me to thinking would pi stop at a decimal accurate enough to calculate distances on the planck scale? (sorry if this is a really stupid question I'm not well versed in physics and a google search yielded little) also wouldn't there be a point (if not at the planck scale) that an ending decimal would be so close to pi's true value that the difference would be completely indiscernible?(like if we could calclulate a circle the size of the observeable universe down to the radius of a electron or something)

how can I get my cakes not stick? I have tryed grease and flour and they still wont come out of the pan. I have tried parchment papper and they change it changes the shape of the cake. how do I get the cake out and be round and perfect? (things sticking or not is chemistry so it can be argued that this is the place for it and I think it might get more knowlageable awnsers here but I could see someone saying that this doen't belong here as it isn't like really like real chemistry...I gues"

my op in other words. why is space research and exploration important, and why is that more benificial than whatever else we could spend it on.

"why is nasa more important than feeding starving people?" I have heard this question a lot lately. (with the implication that nasa funding should spent on something elses like humanatarian aid but I have heard other variations such as sugesting the us should focus on its infustructure instead of having its head in the clouds) it is hard to try to explain that advanseing technology will help everyone... what are good argeuemtns for spending on nasa as oposed to giving it to starving people somewhere or on schools etc?

they won't let newbs post new threads there so i can't

im not a techie idk about any of that https://minecraft.net/download it wont let me unless I buy it and i want mods

I want to play try out the pc version of MC before I buy it. I know that a demo exists but it doen't include a downloadable client and wont tell me if my computer can handle it. I also would like to mod it if i can.

the criteria are too complicated to discuss in a forum. anything standard (ex some form of testing.) I could say in a short post would prove to be woefully inadequate. however there are some things which would be nice to have in greater abundance ie mathematics critical thinking spatial reasoning etc. I think education is great but perhaps we could extend our maximum abilities to?

I acknowledge that biodiversity is favorable I just think that we should try to encourage a trait that is obviously not currently being selected for. I'm not saying we should get rid of the stupid people rather lets try to get more smart people. not to mention if the range stays the same would that not keep the same level of biodiversity? ie if we took the entire bell curve and moved it up the diversity (range) doesn't go down.

to respond to the ethical problems you wouldn't have to prevent anyone from breeding just make it so certain people breed more than others which could be done without harming anyone or being overly oppressive. ps im aware of the eugenics thread but the tone was set by someone suggesting far more harsh action than I and I wanted to have a thread free of suggestions of sterilizing anyone with a iq below 100

would it be possible, if some incentive for higher iq individuals to have more children while dissuading lower iq individuals from having as many that we could create a selective pressure towards higher intelligence? it seems like we should try to better the species and help future generations. **edit "smarter people" the thread name was meant to be "Smarter People?" so if a friendly mod happens to see this please change it.

the question asks for the a balanced equation based on the reactants as seen below C12 H22O11 + O2-----> ???? because it is a combustion equation it has to be C12 H22O11 + O2-----> H2O+ CO2 then I start balancing and arrive at C12 H22O11 + O2-----> 11H2O+ 12CO2 this means I have 12 carbon and 22 hydrogen on both sides. but then oxygen happens I only have 13 on my reactants side and I have 35 on my product side. I have no idea what to do next *EDIT* someone on the IRC told me I need to change the molar coefficient of the O2. which was all I needed to arrive at C12 H22O11 + 12O2-----> 11H2O+ 12CO2 so I guess this thread is going to be removed or closed or something....

so you subtract one equation from the other?