BenSon

Alll the good ones had been said so i'll just say Tycho Brahe because hes interesting. And most astronomers aren't ~Scott

NaOCl thats sodium hypochlorite... Gas eh? well that would be either oxygen or chlorine. I would guess oxygen 2NaOCl = 2NaCl + O2. If its yellow and gives you pneumonia then its chlorine not oxygen. ~Scott

I dont' know anyone in a high IQ society but i do know people who are arrogant and obnoxious. I think you have just as much chance as ruinning into arrogant people down at the pub as you do at the high IQ place... ~Scott

Buzzz, try picking up a physics textbook Congratualtions you've realised that the eye can only let so much light in and the brain can only process this so fast. What has that got to do with traveling at the speed of light? what you originaly said was incorrect... Time travel is not an illusion of light, a person would age slower aproching the speed of light how is that a trick of light? What is brightness come on pick up a dictionary. What clock? what laws of physics? you'll have to be more specific then that. Leave christ out of this one please. Two-inches away?!?! Calaulations please? Why does running get you somewhere faster, well somethings we are just not ment to understand Whatever, thats bearly coherant...You need to explain your points better instead of mentioning something and just jumping of down the rabbit hole. .Yes lets abandon this pesky science thats just smoke and mirrors and go along with the bible seeing as that has so much solid predictions. Minds and thought wich are energy? ever heard of matter? You are thinking too much into special reletivity here, incorrectly. That is all ridiculous, to make cliam like this at least make a half assed attempt to explain why we would turn into light energy by moving quickly? Listen I made a serious attempt at deconstructing your original post. I was patient enough to go through and explain where you failed logicly like you asked. You haven't even made an attempt to revlauate your theories to what i corrected for you, instead you have just gone on further with more ideas that your basing on your original incorrect assumptions (which i changed for you). By paying no attention to the information i gave you is insulting this may be the pseudoscience forum but i dont see how you could think anyone would take your questions/ideas seriously if you ignore feedback that dosen't agree with your absurd theories. Ihaven't the patientence to go through this ridiculous post seriously and help you because you ignored my help before and i don't see why you would do any different this time. ~Scott

I dont know if this has been said yet but 'Dr Strangelove' is hilarious..... ~Scott

yeah its easy to determine the Ph if you have the molarity

My bro found an enormous diamond/carpet python in someones roof, we think he used to be someones pet because after a couple of day we could pick him up and handle him. That was pretty sweet so i'd suggest one of those guys, he ws seriously long about (he was eaisly over five foot). ~Scott

1) Your right thats homolysis forming two radicals 2) I think your wrong the answer is (E) i think that aldahyde and alcohol make a hemiacetal, ~Scott

I'd assume the chems in the beaker are sodium hypochlorite and HCL(aq) and the fumes being funnled into the idodide. The make Cl2 out of NaCl electrolyse it that would be pretty easy but it could take a while. ~Scott

Original post You would like to see your failed logicly here huh? Lets start with your comparison of special reletivity to a decomposing body. A body in a warm environment will decompose faster then a frozen body not becuase time is moving slower for the frozen body but because the cold environment stops bacteria/fungus ect breaking down the body. Also your (hotter things burn up) is only because hotter particle undergo move collisions and have a greater preportion of particals in activation energy then colder particles, this causes them to react or as you crudely put it "burn up" not all reactions are combustions or decompositions. Secondly your example of the person traveling five times slower then you aghing slower is also logicaly unsound. The speeds reached by your car would not be significant to cause time to move noticeabley slower to you. If you amplified this example to light speed you would still be wrong the person traveling at light speed (99.9c) would have time slow down compared to the observer (in an inertial frame of reference) its called time dilation not contraction keyword dilation Here i believe is the crux of your illogical assumptions "It only seems to make sense to me that if time slows down the faster you move, then time, for you, is moving faster." You made the initial correct assumption that time would be moving slower for you when you approch light speed, However time running slower means exactly that, time for you is running slower not faster, just because observers are aging quickly in a short amount of time (in your perception) it could appear that time is moving quicker but you are aging slower so time is moving slower as you age slower... Well i tried my best to weed out the illogical bits as you asked any more problems with this one? ~Scott

You can work out how much you will need so you dont waste materials but an excess of Cl2 will not hinder the reaction. The surplus Cl2 will just bubble out into the air so this is probably a good one to do outdoors. ~Scott

Did you even read the link provided? There is proof against the myths that surround the conspiracy theories of the moon landing. Also if your going to make a comment like that you should always provide evidence as to why the rational explainations about moonlanding consipracies "could be invalid". ~Scott

I've had the unfortunate experience of inhaling fuming sulfuric and bromine at the same time. Some poorly prepared bromine water... On the same day My teacher was washing out a container that said NaCl on it as soon as she poored water into it the bottom blew of (It was actualy conc H2SO4), sending acid across the room. ~Scott

You wont have to heat it butane's boiling point is around 0C ~Scott

Thats quite a broad question, I can think of a few interesting research projects but it would help if you narrowed it down a bit is there a particular field or type of project you want to do? ~Scott

LiAlH4 = Li+ AlH4- I think this is the most likely breakdown of that so the answer would be AlH4- But I suck at chem which you can probly tell from this discussion but i have to get something right eventually. ~Scott Edit: I just went back to the first post this guy had the right answer first up, sorry i caused so much confusion, I think I damaged his brain enough for one day

Arghh your confused! my brain is about to melt. I told you i tie myself up in knots with this stuff I go around in circles think oxident-reductant-reducing agent-oxidised-reduced-oxidisingruducingchlorormatrixpentanol......I think your right i had it backwards I thought a reductant oxidised the other species (cuz i'm lost) but it actually oxidises itself thein lies my problem... ~Scott

No worries, lets just hope i'm right! ~Scott

No the H- would be a very poor reductant because it is meant to cause something to oxidise not reduce. In order for H- to be a reducant it would become H2- ! And that just not right. Let me state the i took reducing agent to mean reducant (i'm not familiar with the term reducing agent) So if reducing agent means oxidant then reverse everything i have said.... ~Scott

2) Firstly its not Oil Rig it Leo says Ger... Anyway the way i read this question it is looking for the strongest reductant, And a reductant causes oxidation. So the strongest reductant would be a cation because it is most likely to make someing lose electrons (oxidise). That being said i think the best choice would be Li+ or Al3+. I'd like to just put this out there though i usually tie myself up in knots doing these questions so i wouldn't be surprised if your right. 3) Yeah the answer is D ~Scott

Yeah i'm out of germanium too, i'll have to pick some up with the milk... ~Scott

Yes your right GeO does exist but it decomposes at around 700C not sublimes. ~Scott

Don't forget CO2 thats pretty common. ~Scott

I'd agree its the only other group two metal there. ~Scott

Eh i'll give it a shot but i don't know if i have the patience! ~Scott