-
Posts
1421 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by thedarkshade
-
-
Anything happened recently? Yeah today. I broke my record on SMS' exchange with my girlfriend. We exchanged 200 sms (each one) today. Out previous record was 130. But that means more money to spend, so I'm not really thinking of breaking it again.
0 -
Karen Owens wrote The God Delusion? My copy says it's by some guy named Richard Dawkins. He's theto the doc to the PhD. He's smarter than you; he's got a science degree!
Oh YDOAPS, stop fooling around. It's not a complicated thing to know. If you have read TGD you must have seen this part used in it. And yeah, great song btw:-)
0 -
Sorry if I post anything mentioned before but it's just too much to read.
The production of sulphuric as goes as it follows.
You first need [ce]SO2[/ce] which you can get by:
[ce]2S + O2 -> 2SO2[/ce] or
[ce]4FeS2 + 11O2 -> 2Fe2O3 + 8SO2[/ce]
then you need [ce]SO3[/ce] which you get from:
[ce]2SO2 + O2 -> 2SO3[/ce] in this case you need a catalyst which is [ce]V2O5[/ce]
and the third phase is getting the acid, but you do not directly put into reaction [ce]SO3[/ce] with [ce]H2O[/ce] due to loss of [ce]SO3[/ce] (AFAIK). It goes like this:
[ce]SO3 + H2SO4 -> H2S2O7[/ce] and then 'tame' it with water
[ce]H2S2O7 + H2O -> 2H2SO4 [/ce] and this way [ce]H2SO4[/ce] is highly concentrated.
0 -
The oxidation of ammonia to NOx is the basis of the commercial production of HNO3.
First phase:
[ce]4NH3 + 5O2 -> 4NO + 6H2O[/ce]
Second phase:
[ce]2NO + O2 -> 2NO2[/ce]
Third phase:
[ce]3NO2 + H2O -> 2HNO3 + NO[/ce]
This proves it.
0 -
So, for HClO3 and HClO2 there is no true anhydride.
I just checked my chemistry book an it is as it follows:
[ce]Cl2O5 + H2O -> 2HClO3[/ce]
[ce]Cl2O7 + H2O -> 2HClO4[/ce]
0 -
Or said otherwise the solution is dominated by H+ ions.4. When the pH decreases, this means that the water contains more acid.0 -
Perhaps you might find anything on the links below:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Litmus_paper
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phenolphthalein
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methyl_orange
If you think that I'm not really helping by just posting links, that'd be as a result of feeling sleepy.
0 -
It indeed is a fascinating book (though I haven't read it all yet). But there was one particular thing I found it underestimating for theists. It's in the beginning of the second chapter (I think) when he quotes "Isn't God a shit?!". I had no problems with that, but a God is a very important thinkg for theists and that would be a big offense for them. I mean, the entire book is offensive for a strong theist but this kinda direct insult was just not necessary.
0 -
I think you have chosen an interesting direction, really, and I think it's the kinda direction that pays back (a good job, and money), so I see no reason why this could be a bad decision at all!
0 -
"Can an omniscient god, who
knows the future, find
the omnipotence to
change his future mind?"
--Karen Owens
Ummm... source: The God Delusion (I guess)
0 -
Ok ok I agree, but I couldn't think of anything simpler, and I did put "rough" before analogy.The tree analogy doesn't really work because the tree has an easily measurable height.0 -
IMO no! Time is considered as subjective idealism which means that its existence is depended from the observer, it cannot just exist on its own.So, in an absolutely empty space, with no energy or substance, would the time dimension still exist?
0 -
Yes, but we have more and more complexity in life as we move to 'higher levels' of evolution. Therefore the most primitive organism we know could me considered as the simplest form of life.Surely life by it's very nature is already complex?0 -
They could leave the username though.You can't see who.0 -
We have the location option. You can see where I am from, look look:D
0 -
I agree. It doesn't even fit with oxidation numbers [math](NH_3OH)^{-2}[/math].NH3OH is nonsense.edit: wow, great post paulo!
0 -
For an entity to be both omnipotent and omniscient at the same time.
Well prove that entity exists!
(I know what you mean, I'm on your side:))
0 -
First we won't really give straight answers but only hints that would possibly lead you to the answer. I hope you will manage to get there somehow
1) Acids with bases give salts plus water is released (water is sometimes needed only to equalize the equation). Here's one example
[ce]HCl + NaOH -> NaCl + H2O[/ce]
When a strong acid reacts with a strong base you have a neutralization reaction since the pH will be 7, pH=7. This is the case on the reaction I posted above
When a strong acid reacts with a weak base, the pH<7, and so the medium will be acidic. (i.e. HCl + NH3).
And when a weak acid reacts with a strong base the pH>7, so the medium with be basic.
In your case you have a weak (organic) acid reaction with a strong base, so I guess you know why the pH is the way it is.
2) This will help you doing stoichiometry yourself:-)
3) You will need only (I guess) [math]c=\frac{n}{V}[/math] to do that. Or it would be better [math]c=\frac{m}{MV}[/math], which is the same thing.
0 -
That's purely possible.Coming up with something that is impossible.0 -
So how can the other frames be other than illusions.
A rough analogy would be this: Suppose that you and a friend of yours are looking at a tree. You are 100m away from the tree while your friend is 20m away. From his view the tree looks higher than from your view, but that's only because he is closer to the tree.
The same stand with different reference frames. Different reference frames give different conclusions, not because one is right and the other wrong, but simple because it is being analyzed by different frames. And observers in different reference frames do not contradict each other. Each one's conclusion is correct by their reference frame.
0 -
AFAIK you need to get down to -253 C to get liquid hydrogen and minus 6 more and you get solid hexagonal hydrogen, so this is a big enough reason that in normal conditions you can get only gas hydrogen.
0 -
I suppose next you're going to tell me that there's no santa claus!
Oh there are a lots of them out there, but unfortunately they're all fake.
BTW, the OP mentioned Kaku, a person who I truly admire. When read his "Visions" I found it very exciting, but I was missing something while reading it, I was missing the sense of reality. Kaku can sometimes make some really extravagant predictions (or his opinions) on how science will evolve, and sometimes I think they look pretty childish. Now why do they look childish? Well because there yet is not global awareness of how important science is. I can tell that looking in my own country. Nobody cares about it, very few people are interested to understand and share with the others the fascinating world of science. Human stupidity is just way to high to understand that wars with ethnic bases are nothing but a huge degradation of a modern understanding of the world.
So the only real and practically impossible thing to do is end the hate existing between nations, religions and ethnicities and when that is done, Kaku's dream might come into play!
0 -
I would agree on this Mr Skeptic, but in this particular case unit conversion is actually pretty simple, basic physics stuff, so I guess the OP will have no problem on doing that.Bad idea, it is very important that he understand unit conversion. He should then be able to convert any types of units, and to derive formulas like the one you posted for doing more than one conversion at once. Oh, and technically you are multiplying by 3.6 s/m km/h, and you don't replace any units later0 -
If the space travelers is length contracted his body would become distorted. I dont know why I cant ask if this really happens. He only has one body,and something really happens to it or doesnt.
Why distorted? It would just 'shrink' (contract) with respect to the velocity it is traveling with. You can even calculate it yourself using Lorentz contraction.
0
forum reputation
in The Lounge
Posted