Leaderboard

Then this is probably the best advise given this thread. Well, I thought I was, but I will try to make my terms equate to the terms in Griffith's. I'm on it. I'll post something relatively soon.

Yep, waste and pollutant is not the same. Waste is defined from manufacturing point of view, while pollutant is defined from ecological point of view. (Although even 'pollutant' does not seem as a good word - it has a broader meaning - maybe 'poison' wold do better?)

I thought for any new members that we have, it might be nice to introduce yourself. feel free to do so here

I have a question about HPLC. My peak is very small (it’s more like a little line). It is definitely not like Gauss peak, but I have to find column efficiency. Can I calculate it using the formula Ne=16*(t’r/Wb)^2? Or what else should I do? I found the information that I can only calculate it when the peak is big.

A music pioneer died today. Richard Wayne Penniman, AKA 'Little Richard' and the 'Architect of rock and roll'. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Richard

In exactly which battles is nationalism an ally? (note, it's "the enemy"'s nationalism that starts the unnecessary battle in the first place.)

For those who don't understand science, it often seems like an emotional dismissal when someone who does offers a quick refutation, but it's not. I don't know what you do for a living, but as an analogy, imagine going to a home builder with your new invention, a tool that drives two screws into a wooden stud at once, saving half the time! But the carpenter immediately tells you they aren't interested, and explains why nails are better. You can't understand why he's not thrilled, but it's because you don't understand why home builders don't use screws in studwork. You explain why screws hold the wood tighter together than nails, and he tries to explain why that's not good for framework that needs to swell and shrink a little. The builder is taking you seriously, he's not just emotionally throwing your idea away. He simply knows why it won't work, and you're not listening.

When I first saw your thread on list of current Activities tab, my first thought from the title was Oh no, not another one of these. However I looked quickly through the first few lines that is displayed in the Activities tab and saw the stuff about 12 this and 12 that. So my second thought was no, this is even worse. So I didn't even bother to open to your thread. In order to fairly respond to this thread I have now looked it up and the first thing that springs to mind is the Moderator's stated reason for closing the thread. You had apparantly already been told not to bring the subject up again. Evidently you chose to defy moderator instructions. Unlike the moderators as an ordinary member I can choose which threads to look at and which not to bother with. So I salute them for performing this unpleasant but necessary task on my behalf.

I disagree; the products of combustion of fuels are waste, just as food scraps and sewage solids are - which are also (potential) nutrients for other living things. They are especially problematic waste products when the flows of them exceed the capacity of natural as well as technical cycles to recycle and re-use them.

I know what you mean, and the liberation/generation of CO2 is a concern for the vast majority of people. That being said, CO2 is not waste. It is essential for life on the planet, and part of a 'cycle'. ( its constituents are the basis for all life on the planet ) Certainly not the definition of waste

In the equation, r is measured from the center of the Earth. It seems that you just plugged 424 in for r. The answer you got would have been the GPE for the spaceship if it were sitting on the surface of a world with the mass of the Earth, and just 424 m in radius. For one, you have to convert km to meters, and for the other, you are looking for the difference in GPE between sitting at the surface of the Earth and being 424 km above it, not just the GPE for some point.

For a simple two-level system it is exponential. As studiot has stated, for many-state systems there are extra factors to consider In addition, you can "reset the clock" by interrogating the atom and confirming it hasn't decayed, keeping it in the excited state for much longer (the quantum Zeno effect). You can also inhibit or enhance the decay by putting the atom in a cavity that changes the density of states into which the emitted photon would couple. If there are no photon modes supported, the atom doesn't decay at all.

It's complicated by the fact that the electron in general doesn't return to the ground state by the same sequence of energy levels it jumped up. Some transitions are forbidden, for spin and other reasons. This is why for instance luminescence occurs and the difference in timing accounts for the difference ebtween phosphorescence and luminescence. Well would all appreciate full English words in your answer.

How about you learn how to create math as inputting values to existing formulas isn't math! If (a) = -0.5 and (b) = 0.5 then a+b=0 and a^3+b^3 still equals 0 . And if you mean the suns density question , the answer is var (p) where p is density . cm^3 on the Sun are dynamic in energy levels dependent to the kE going on ! Friction between particles creating heat energy etc. Tensor x = <E Tensor y = <E Tensor z = <E Not difficult too understand ! We could use +x or -x if you'd like . +v(x)=tensor <E etc... P.s Just to add something ''juicy'' . A cold core reactor will retain plasma flow around the core . The cold core will act as a ''tractor beam'' .

Canadians are the most deceitful lousy phony nation. Not only they don't talk about aboriginal genocide ,they have stopped talking about covid virus. Whole Montreal nord is infected now. Mother is infected-stupid workaholic fool. She simply sits home and does nothing. Canada has shittiest healthcare. And no bloggers to talk about it on youtube-except immigrant freaks talk about "travel".

If you we're to find controversial religious toned scientific material, would you be a scientist and take it seriously, or would you be emotional and throw it in the trash can. Strange is an interest individual who seems to think it's okay to just trash scientific discussion. I think this moderator should be removed for blocking legitimate scientific material. I don't think his ethics are on the level. I think he's bankrupt.

Ban time for me again ! You are still a bunch of arrogant mediocre minded fools who know jack shit about physics . Your Nasa boy included , Cia lmao fools .