bob000555

The excuse normally given is that we must sacrifice some rights for security, but is a country like that, almost like Stalin’s USSR, worth defending.

Perhaps in ancient Babylon they where having the same conversation as us: “We’ve already discovered the horse drawn cart, irrigation, and metal casting. What else is left to discover?” Perhaps during the industrial revolution people said “We already have steam power and that Ford fellow’s invented the horseless carriage. What’s left to discover.” Years ago no one could imagine the computer thus they could not imagine it could be invented; We can’t imagine the next big thing being invented yet because we cant yet imagine it. Though after someone invents it it will be painfully obvious: case in point the “Pasta Pot” duh just drill some holes in the top so they can drain their pasta with out a colander.

Or see if flames grow larger when exposed to the gas.

Apparently they use Aqua Regia, sodium cyanide, reverse electro plating, or chemicals. Which of the described options from this site sounds most plausible for home use? http://www.finishing.com/122/00.shtml

Back on topic...there's going to be two specials about him on the Science Channel

Your math needs a little work.

 

http://www.icasualties.org/oif/

 

If we assume that about half the wounds were bad enough to warrant being taken out of the war(Iraq has the highest ratio of loss limbs and head wounds since the Civil War) plus the killed in action it doesn’t even replace all the troops that can no longer fight.

not to mention:

http://nationalpriorities.org/index.php?option=com_wrapper&Itemid=182

Its usually just a saying used in business to justify a merger eg “the value of our company merged with theirs is grater then the sum of there individual values” only verry rarly is it ment literally.

I herd about a company that recycles old electronics. First they desolder any valuable components, then they strip the wires to recycle the copper. But where my question comes in. They chop off the tabs( http://cgi.ebay.com/3-pounds-of-gold-computer-connections_W0QQitemZ330078091564QQihZ014QQcategoryZ164QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem) and grind less valuable ic’s to extract GOLD. So here’s the question how do you think they separate the gold from the silicone/plastic. Perhaps with the connectors the dissolve the plastic in acetone leaving behind the gold leaf? Maybe the use the hno3/hcl mix stuff? Does anyone know?

SCIENCE VS. THE BIG BANG

 

Here are 42 reasons why the Big Bang is foolishness. These are scientific facts which disprove the theory of fog coming out of nothing and pressing itself into stars:

 

1 - Not squeezable. Nothingness cannot pack itself together. Try packing some fog into a star. Gas in outer space is millions of times more rarefied (thinner) in density than terrestrial fog—yet, billions of times by merest chance, it is supposed to have accomplished the trick.—p. 15.

as the gas compresses in the center the vacuum is forced outwards. Its like squeezing bubbles between your hands.

2 - Not stoppable. There would be no mechanism to push nothingness to a single point, and then stop it there.—p. 15.

Gravity: imagine if the Erath became a trillion times more massive and gravity compacted the atmosphere to the point of fusion.

3 - Nothing to explode it. There would be no match, no fire to explode nothingness.—pp. 15-16.

fusion

4 - No way to expand it. There would be no way to push (explode) nothingness outward. A total vacuum can neither contract nor expand. According to the laws of physics, it takes energy to do work, and there is no energy in emptiness.—p. 16.

you qussed it: fusion agene : as in the power of a billion H-Bombs

5 - No way to slow it. If it could explode outward, there would be no way to later slow outward, exploding gas in frictionless space.—p. 16.

As the mass of fusing gas expands the concentration decreases thus slowing fusion

6 - No way to clump it. It is impossible for gas to clump together on earth, much less in outer space without gravity. Gas moves from high density to low density, not the other way around.—p. 16.

The same way gas giant planets hold them self’s together.

7 - No way to produce stars. There is no way by which gas could clump itself into stars, planets, and galaxies. Only after a star has been formed, can it hold itself together by gravity.—p. 16.

In the compressing mass things would ejecting solids to form planets.

8 - No way to produce complex atoms. Aside from hydrogen and helium, which are quite simple, there is no way that loose gas in space can form itself into complex atoms (elements above helium).—p. 16.

The afore mentioned giant star.

9 - No way to go past the helium mass 4 gap. It is extremely difficult, and perhaps impossible, for hydrogen to explode past the atomic gap which exists at mass 5 and 8. In the sequence of atomic weight numbers, there are no stable atoms at mass 5 and 8. Because of the mass 5 gap, it is unlikely that hydrogen can change into heavier elements than helium. Because of the mass 8 gap, neither of them can change into heavier elements.—pp. 16-17.

you can only say this with certainty if you know the exact composition of the primordial soup so to speak.

10 - No way to compress loose hydrogen gas. There is no way that loose hydrogen could push itself into a solid or semi-solid out in space.—p. 17.

Gravity pulls the hydrogen in (response to question one). The compression becomes exponential as the central mass of hydrogen gets bigger and pulls in more hydrogen.

11 - Not enough time. There would not be enough time for the exploded gas to reach the edge of a 20-billion light-year universe and then change itself into billions of stars, before the explosions were theoretically supposed to have stopped.—pp. 17-18.

Remember the universe wasn’t always 20 billion light years its constantly expanding.

12 - No way to produce enough of the heavier elements. Even if hydrogen explosions could produce heavier elements, there are several other reasons why it could not produce enough of them.—p. 18.

I suggest you learn how heavier elements are produced in stars.

13 - Elemental composition of planets and moons is totally different than that found in stars. Scientists cannot explain why the stars primarily have lighter elements and planets especially have heavier ones.—pp. 18-19.

when a star explodes the heavier elements are attracted by gravity while the lighter ones float out to join another star .

 

14 - Random explosions do not produce intricate orbits. Haphazard explosions could never produce stellar rotations or orbits.—p. 19.

this has nothing to do with the big bang its just planets being held into the sun by its gravity.

15 - Why did the explosions stop? The theory requires that the star explosions (super-novas) suddenly stopped—conveniently just before light rays could reach us. Yet no adequate explanation is given for the sudden termination. In addition, because of known distant stars, there is not enough time needed for those super-nova explosions to occur—before they had to stop.—p. 19.

the fusing material was no longer dense enough to sustain fusion, until it gravitated together again(thus stars and planets)

16 - Too few super-novas and too little matter from them. Super-novas do not throw off enough heavy atoms in each explosion to account for all the stars which exist. Only a few super-novas have occurred in the past thousand years.—pp. 19-20.

but a billion billion super novas in the history of the universe would work.

17 - "Too perfect" an explosion. Many scientists agree that the calculations needed to figure a Big Bang and its aftermath are too close, too exacting to be accepted even by competent scientists.—p. 20.

all this proves is that the universe is miraculously unlikely not imposable.

18 - Not a universe but a hole. *Roger S. Peter calculated that, if a Big Bang had occurred, it would have fallen inward on itself (into a black hole), not outward into the universe. What a situation! one imaginary object being swallowed up by another!—p. 20.

one man’s calculations versus scientific consensus?

19 - Non-reversing, non-circling. Outward flowing gas, in frictionless space, does not stop or begin circling. It would just keep moving outward forever.—pp. 20-21

until qravaty recompresses it.

20 - Missing mass. There is not enough mass in the universe to meet the requirements of the various theories of matter and stellar origin.—p. 21.

A portion of the mass would have been converted to mass via e=mc2. When you consider a portion of a trillion trillion billion tons matter is a lot you can see how huge amounts of mass are missing

21 - Only hydrogen and helium found in super-nova explosions. The Big Bang theory requires that elements heavier than lithium were set free by super-nova explosions. But analysis of the Crab nebula (a gigantic super-nova explosion in A.D. 1054) reveals there are no elements heavier than light weight helium in the outflowing residual gases from it. Thus it appears that hydrogen explosions cannot bridge the mass 4 gap, no matter what the temperature of the explosion.—p. 21.

Again I suggest you learn how heavy elements are formed in stars before it dies.

22 - Older stars do not have additional heavy elements. The Big Bang theory requires that stars, which have not exploded, are producing heavier elements within themselves by explosions of hydrogen. But this has been shown to be false.—pp. 21-22.

When was this shown to be false?

23 - Intersteller gas has a variety of elements. The theory requires that floating gas in space (which is said to be the remnants of the Big Bang) should only have hydrogen and helium from the initial Bang, but research shows that other elements are also present.—p. 22.

Not all the gas is the result of the big bang infact most of it is the result of latter stars

24 - Stars and galaxies exist. A theoretical explosion could only produce outward flowing gas, not intricate stars, planets, galaxies, and their complex interrelated orbits. Scientists draw a total blank in explaining how this could happen.—p. 22.

Gravity yet agene the outward flowing gas is attracted into stars planets and galaxies.

25 - Only increasingly rarefied cloud. All the Big Bang could produce would be an increasingly less dense (more rarefied) outward flowing gas.—p. 22.

until its gravitationally recompressed by gravity.

26 - There are stars and galaxies all through space. If the Big Bang had really occurred, the stars and galaxies would only be found along the outer edge of the gas flowage instead of throughout space.—p. 22.

Not if you consider a trillion ejections and recompressions throughout the history of the universe.

 

I’ll respond to your additional questions at a later time.

Ah the genius of Bush’s spin machine: calling it a surge instead of “replacing the dead troops”.

Right woelen, sorry, i put the wrong ending on the iron salt.

konishewah-

Acetic acid in the vinegar liberates hypochlorous(sp) acid from the sodium hypochlorite. All stronger acids liberate weaker acids from their slats. To you second question its not actually rusting as that would be the formation of Fe2O3, its making iron chlorate, I wouldn’t be surprised if you get some iron acetate also.

I tried another experiment. I mixed copper sulfate, magnesium sulfate , and sodium bicarbonate . The Mixture was then heated to 280 degrees Celsius it formed to distinctive compounds ; a black one and a green one. The sulfates where reagent grade the sodium bicarbonate was medical grade. Ideas as to what happened.

 

I’m going to grind the mixture and heat it agene.

update: i ground and reheated it all the green is gone now its all black. Maybe the green was copper carbonate? Ohhh and my lab mits were on fire for about 2secs i wasnt burned.

They all get odd replys "hey pyro has it got nitroglycerine" any way im suprised you didnt get a dust explosion with that flour one.

oh im not stupid enough to mess with flash powder its just a vid i found on google.

Flash powder does not need confinement as demonstrated in this video that I found. It demonstrates a few of the most common pyrotechnic mixtures. One of my favorite things to do is fill a bottle with negative X poke a tiny hole in it an throw it in a lake http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5705524740871409535&q=flash+powder+whistle+mix&hl=en

How can you make pectic acid from pectin?

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

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

http://sci-toys.com/ingredients/pectin.html

my Latest is trying to make Phenyl Oxalate ester.

sadly I have no Phenol

the closest I have is Catechol and Hydroquinone.

 

after that, p-Dichlorobenzene, Methyl benzene, Benzoic acid and Trinitro Phenol. and I think almost every chemist has pure ASA in a jar too.

 

anyone have any ideas how I might be able to pull this off using these precursors for the Phenol side?

 

I have the Oxalic acid and all the other things likely to be required.

 

Making some glow sticks are you yt? (if your not and that made me sound like an idiot it glows when you add h2o2)

For me, the only bromates, which I can make easily are potassium bromate, barium bromate, and with some difficulty, strontium bromate. If I had cesium salts and rubidium salts, then I also could make CsBrO3 and RbCsO3 (and yes, I hope to receive 100 grams of CsBr soon).

The reason why these bromates can be made easily is their large difference in solubility at high temperature and low temperature. This makes separation of the bromates very easy, in fact, the K-, Ba-, Cs- and Rb- bromates are among the easiest to separate chems, due to their unique solubility as function of temperature.

Can't you mix barium bromate and a sulfate to get a new bromate and precipitate barium sulfate? For example CuSO4+Ba(BrO3)2->BaSO4+Cu(BrO3)2?

Oh I see what you mean but losing money from cutting taxes and spending billions on a pointless war at the same time, surly you must agree that that is Bush’s falt? As for the people who blame Bush for gas prices I completely agree with you .

 

For a minute there, I thought you were serious about the public servant dedication bit...

Yup Bush is one of the few that give politicians a bad name. And standing up for Bush because he gets blamed is like standing up for greenhouse gases because they get blamed for global warming.

~~~yey my 100th post~~~

ParanoiA that’s completely insane sure there are some corrupt politicians but the majority are public servants who have dedicated their lives to our nation.

More on topic- perhaps this will teach Bush that theirs more to being president then (trying) to deal with terrorism

Sounded like the same bush knocking you see in the mainstream media. Its what Ahmadinejad does when Americans aren’t listening that scares me. I saw on CNBC a movie taken from Al-Jazere(<- sorry woelen I almost certainly spelled that wrong), it was of him giving a speech and encouraging the crowd to chant “death to America death to Israel death to Brittan death to the infidels” and so on (I think they may have even said France ). So really it’s not what he says when he knows where listening but what he says when we’re not that concerns me. All in all it would have been much wiser to invade across the Basra river from the non existent weapons.

Is he the same guy talking about decapitiating people and developing a nuclear program?

talking and doing.

How did this thread turn from one about inactivity, into one about bitching?

 

People are speculating as to the route cause of the inactivity and it’s often negative.

Your right, i'm rong. Apparently my chemistry teacher is an idiot.