Sedit

Can any one explain the mechanics behind why HCl dumped into a bucket of snow will quickly reach -42 degrees F yet shaved ice will not get there no matter how hard I try. My general hypothesis has to do with hydrogen bonding, or lack there of anyway, with snow compared to the structure of ice but was woundering if anyone had more insite into this then my self. ~Sedit

thank you UC i forgot all about that. I had a feeling so it must have been floating in the back of my brain some where. I see your from NJ to ..lol im sorry to hear that

Does Hydrogen have a disassociation frequency such as chlorine does to generate the radical? And if so what frequency range would it be in?

Go with the NST I have made coils of all shapes and sized and they are not hard at all to make a simple circuit that works... Its getting it intune without electricuting your self that may prove to be hard I used OBIT's for a power source and Due to the low MA it was some what limiting to the output and my smaller coils always out performed(plus they where more fun because i could play with them directly). It goes in as DC and the energy resonating between the time the capacitor takes to charge/discharge and the timing of the magnetic field around the coil expanding and collapsing need to be in sync with each other for the best results but after making a small one that can be adjusted easyer you will find that all the mathmatics in the world wont hold the information you will get from playing with it in the field PS: keep in mind almost nothing is an insulator at these frequencys of AC and you will get skin surface arcs across things.

correct me if im wrong here but would the use of a basic solution of NaOH washed over the benzylhyde HCN mixture convert the water layer to sodium cyanide with out messing with the benzylhyde? And if NaOH would be to harsh the sodium carbonate would be a more gental approch

What could one do if there problems are purely phycological? I had a problem with my mail about 2 years ago and ended up getting locked up over night for traffic tickets. You cant smoke in our county jail yet when i was in there the first few hours sucked really bad. Nothing physical i just wanted a ciggerett. To make matters worse i had one but no lighter. Now that was torture. After this i understand that it is a mental thing ihate smoking but to break the addiction not to nicotine but mainly to buying them i have found no cure anyone have any idea how to fix that? Thought hypnosis maybe possible for something like this considering iv hated the taste of smoke for years dont like how my skin and lips feel and i plain just dont like it but yet i buy more asap when i run out? only problem with a hypnotist is to many con's out there i havent yet gone to try it what are your suggestions?

Years ago i hear talk on discovery of 5 hookers from africa that didnt have aids does any one know what every came about from the study of these women Last i knew it was found that they all came from a genetic line with super huge agressive white blood cells but that is the last i heard. There immune system ate the HIV virus Like the common cold for christ sake. Thats evolution in the works folks

Cu vapor lasers usualy use CuBr if im not mistaken so yeh any salt should work as long as you can vaporize it Thing is i know a little something about lasers and im a little lost how the Cl- or Br ions dont affect lasing Iv heard from alot of differnt places that it is possible to get anymaterial to lase if you can get it in the right conditions, temp,Pulse lenght ,energylevel ect.. so i cant see why there wouldnt be some differnce between Br and Cl but they are used interchangably from what I understand "I've got access to a tunable laser that will go from about 850 -> 350nm... It's a Ti:Sapphire laser..." Nice i want one. thats a decent bandwidth for a tunable

cool thats something i have never heard of. Do you know if they create a continues spectrum or do they just make enough frequencys to apear white like the argon laser does? Tunable lasers dont realy have a very broad band to chose from though. In perspective to normal lasers the band is huge but compared to whilelight there isnt that much change. There still pretty cool though Iv been trying to build one but its being a pain because im having trouble passing the UV pump laser to focus though the dye cell

The closet thing i know of to coherent white light is an argon laser doped with Ne if im not mistaken After running though a prism this laser exploads into a messload of frequecys but when combined apear as white light They are a sight to behold when the laser passes out of the prism The Sodium Cloride laser i have seen mention of operates at high temperatures enough to vaporize the salt and then the lasing action takes place in the Na+ Ion Metal vapor lasers are becoming the thing to try in the laser field because many have extreamly high gain.Like the lead vapor laser(Red) or the copper vapor laser(Green/Yellow) which operate 'superradiantly' so mirrors are not needed and may just cause it to blowup if they where used The only differnce between a sodium vapor laser and a NaCl vapor laser would be a duel pulse needed in rapid sucession to ionize the NaCl vapor into Na+ Cl- then another pulse to cause the Na+ to lase All this must be done in a few nanoseconds or less and let me tell ya this isnt no easy task getting a thin enough dielectric for the capacitors so induction is low yet still be able to store the 4k-30k voltage required

if I raise the Earth so that the north pole of the Earth is parallel to the north pole of the sun there is little bending of light .................................................................... OK I may be new here but ill be the first to not ask for refrence.....but to call BS on this one. Why? Because A: einstiens equations where based around the bending of light around mass(or more accuretly deflaction of light) and B:WHY oh why do you say this? electromagnetism is not strong enough to bend the fast moving photon ....do you get that in mine/your terms?(i was just like your north, still kinda am but you have to understand that without proof theory means nothing) North while i admire your enthusiasm i just came from a christmas party an am not sure i can be more blunt at this point What your are basing your OPINIONS on is a few scarce documents on electrogravitation. And where i cant say i compleatly disagree you as a scientist musk ask your self for proof because without data science is worth nothing. If you cant show refrence please stop posting in my threed because Im pretty sure i have heard what you have to say and i would like people to talk to me and not discreadit you ok Now does any one have an idea what i have been TRYING to discuss and any sort of an answer to my problem without going into lala land with i hopes an I thinks???

yes they have made NaCl lasers . @john is has no matter as to weather it absorbs a specific freq but rather weather it emits it when it is excited . " realise red hot salt will glow red, but I don't think that there are any specific transitions involved). " there are specifics. When an element or chemical absorbs enough energy to become excited it releases some when the electrons drop to a lower state and emit a photon in the process what is needed for a laser is population invertion where more electrons are in the upper state then the lower state at any givin time The thinking here seems to be that the mediums color has any dependence on the output wavelenght which isnt really true what matters is what 'orbit' the electrons move from when moving from upper to lower state I could easyly go deaper in this topic if needed but for now yes a NaCl laser can and has been constructed i will get back to you as to the frequency but for now i would have to say it would be in either the yellow band,red or IR. But alas i know it has been done PS: just to put it into perspective one of the strongest 'easy' homemade lasers is the type that i am contructing at the moment it is a CuCl laser. It operates at 600deg c and outputs two bands in the green and yellow range

Examples please. I understand where you are comming from but please please give me a refrence because with out one it is in no way answering my question that has had me stumped for sometime, so please lets keep this ON topic and include a refrence if your going to tell me something that goes against what every one has learned to believe.

I seen on the show on history channel today called The Universe That explained that dark energy with a repulsive force is quickly becoming the strongest possibility for 'The End' but back on topic,if you understand what i mean in my last post about an expanding ruler, if the objects are light years apart would it then become visible to the observer that something was not quite right as opposed to if the two where side by side? I speculate that the object that was attempted to be mesured would appear to be shrinking correct? Because the Farther the object is away from the observer/ruler the more time drag would become evident and you would see the object earlyer in time ergo when it was at a smaller state. Now im just musing on the topic on hand at the moment but it always has been a curiousity of mine how one would go about measuring movement in something that we are matching the speed of. Like Being unable to see the background while two trains are moving in the same direction and same speed Einstein himself used something along these lines to explain relativity but I am unaware if he ever gave any examples of how one would go about measuring relative motion against an unknown background. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "to where you thought the spots painted on the balloon must be expanding. :-D That's not part of the picture" I do believe that they are expanding and not out of nievity but out of the fact that it dosn't make much sence to believe that the universe is elastic yet mass is uneffected by its expansion, even if it is a slower rate this may help explain a few thoughts of mine

ok here is me trying not to sound like a crack pot my self But my question is light has momentum correct which is a measure of g-cm/sec and that momentum can be imparted on contact with and object (like the radiometer bulbs <- if i got that name right(and the principle for that matter)) but since something increases in mass as it approches the speed of light wouldnt that make the already apprently small amount of mass that may be present in a photon a very small fraction of the moment of inertia that is being measured all ready? Also wouldnt that seem to state that like everyday mass wouldnt the amount of energy to go the speed of light be infinite? The about questions is what happends when a laymen tryed to teach himself science since he was little. The classic laws get butcherd:D

rodger that load and clear captian thank you Has anyone ever tryed an experiment to test for weight change in a system that absorbes photons or materials that light moves slower in?

"Any analogy has limits, you can't push it too far. Some people try to improve the balloon model by representing the galaxies as PENNIES glued onto the balloon. Then it is clear that expansion does not make them change size." The balloon was just an analogy I my self was using to state my question Where as other forces may be fighting against expansion they are still doing just that and putting energy into doing so. My main point of this thead is how would one measure a change in the size of an object if the ruler is expanding at the same rate as the object attemping to be measured

"obviously not happening" How you figure because until we find out how much darkmatter and how it works then this is seeming to be the highest probibility

I think the basic principal of backwards time was summed up in the post right befor my last one. In order to 'go back in time one would have to change there position in space/time look at it like this north If a clock on you and one on earth was reading exactly 12:00 when you left going twice the speed of light. You look at your clock and at exactly 1 hour into the flight you lookback to see the clock still on earth. where your clock reads 1:00 stating that an hour has past the one on earth is reading 11:00 stating that an hour was lost.. This is because since you out ran the light that was precently being given off from the clock on earth at 2x its speed you are now seeing the light from the clock from 1 befor you started your journey. If you went the speed of light the clock on earth would still read 12:00

Ah here it is im a little rusty so i had to resort to my old physics book here but i think the paragraph answers your question if im not mistaken " It has been shown that for a longitudinal wave, when a force is applied to a material, the material is distorted and a force opposing this distortion is created in an attemp to restore the status quo. This restoring force is a function of the elasticity of the material. The velocity depends upon the elasticity and density of the material in which the wave is being propagated" v=sqr(E/d) where d = density(lb/ft2) E = Elasticity(lb/ft2) v = velocity (ft/s) So after one determined the property of the material that the rod was made of this problem of Time would become childs play. PS. can someone show me how to use that math function that draws the eqations how there suppose to look. thank you

I fail to understand this. Isnt relativity in its most basic explination E = Mc2 used to explain that if you have mass you have energy and if you have energy you have mass. The way it is stated in the quote about it would violate M = c2/E (if i wrote that correctly) Which would be an alternate way of stating E=mc2 to state how much mass a givin amount of energy has? Am i wrong here?

imagin what it would look like if you traveld in a small circle faster then light you would start to stare at the back of your head... weird

How did you come to this conclusion? It has been my assumsion that science has felt that there are only a few endings to a finit universe and they are Static.. the universe always was and will be where it is today closed.. it will eventialy collapse onto it self in a big implosion, and Open.. where it will end with total black out where all galaxys are so far apart that a galaxy is left in total cold desolation. I value your quick responce to my post but i fail to see how any of the valid known expantion theorys states that it is based on the creation of matter from nothing.

This is a question that has been floating in my mind for some time now but because of lack of formal training and self taught mathmatical and science skills iv lacked a full out way of formulating this onto paper. Im sure many if now all here has seen the example of how space is expanding by the use of dots drawn on a ballon correct? Now every one stated how we can tell that the universe is expanding by measuring the distance inbetween each of those dots... This is where my confusion comes into play. the dots that one is measuring the distance in between are them self expanding at the same rate as the distance of the space inbeteen . If an observer is one of those 'dots' how could the possibly measure the distance inbetween point A and point B if there unit of measurement was expanding at the same rate as the distance is. did this make sence? Wouldnt the distance appear the same to the observer nomatter how fast the universe was expanding. something like this would also suggest that the red shift is observed because of the difference between the speed of expantion and then the speed of light if i remember my formulas correctly I have tryed to use something along the same lines to explain my belief that gravity may possibly be a side effect of the object we are standing ons expansion causing it to catch up to un instead of us falling towards it but this is always where i hit a road block because of my lack of formal mathmatical training If interest is shown in this i will take the time to dig up all my half scribbled notes and copy some of my more important practice equations if you will. Any thoughts? comments?

Call me crazy but i have always had the notion that the universe is a black hole...Sounds strange but what it would mean is that there is enough mass in a small enough area to bend space in on it self ..That means that space can never end because when you look forward you are seeing the space that is behind you in a sence. Kind of like if you went all the way around the earth you will end up at the same spot you started making the earth appear infinitly large to someone that didnt know any better.