gatewood

Sure, but the question doesn't need it. Say we paused a black hole just after its schwarzschild radius gobbled all the core of the star that formed it, and, hypothetically, we could take a peek inside. What would we see? What would matter compressed down, further than neutron (or quark) degeneracy, would be like? I mean, the core of my question would be: all that fell inside a black hole... still exists in some form? And if so, what you think it that form is? A Bunch of elementary particles? Energy resulting from annihilated particles? A bunch of photons and neutrinos?

holy ppl... im merely asking, what might you think happens to matter, as it compresses, beyond neutron degeneracy. E.g. what state of matter could it be said it is in... if at any? (like the hypothetical quark stars).

ohhh... please, cut the chase, we all know gravitational singularities are basically a placeholder for where our understanding of physics breaks down. What I mean to say/ask: (fun question) what would you think we'll see if we could compress , say, 10 solar masses to the size of an atom (not an infinitesimally small volume)? Suppose there where no such thing as a schwartschild radius, but we could still compress stellar amounts of matter down to atomic/subatomic scales and also still observe it.

Facepalm* N/A

I don't know why so many people get this idea that we'll go on for thousands of years as the same, limited biological species in a civilization "a la star wars/trek". We'll probably become or be superseded by an artificial superintelligence by this century.

Just a fun question: what state of energy/matter, could it be argued, that a gravitational singularity is in? I would say that, it broke down to the most fundamental form of energy. Could it be said that, it is an extremely exotic form of atom?

Let me see if I understand. The measurement is simply, how acidic you want the pool water to be? That'll be easy, simply by calculating or experimenting, to get the precise ratio for the desired pH.

It might depend, try to see the precise amount of aqua regia (nitric+hydrochloric acid) you spilled onto how many beads. If the ratio favors the beads, you probably have a mixture of urea and whatever product(s) resulted from the reaction. Depending on how pure you need your urea and if the mass ratio heavily favors the urea, you could probably still do without separating it. If you need to / insist on separating the urea, it miiight be possible to separate using regular/fractional distillation. Investigate and do some balancing equations, to see what products you got from the reaction, to know boiling and volatilization points (see if you get any azeotropes). Finally, do be careful, however, of the possible presence of urea nitrate, as it is explosive (though, if its there, you probably have too little of the compound, but still): https://europepmc.org/article/med/19575193

- First paragraph Ok, then its just like stacking a bunch of N magnets onto a single S magnet, the atom loses the electron affinity, simply because its electric field becomes more balanced with the new electron. E.g. the Ca++ has higher energy than a Ca+ because its electric field is even more unbalanced, and an O- has more trouble accepting an electron than a neutral O, because... well, it is even more electronegative. Simple. - Second paragraph (first half) But wouldn't the Ca++ actually compete with the O-- for the electrons to reduce themselves? - Second paragraph (second half) You taught me something rather interesting, thank you very much - Third paragraph Sure, I realized too late, how easy that question was 🤪 . Thanks for taking the time to clarify anyhow - Fourth paragraph Yes, it does pick up 2 alkaline metals. E.g. 2Na+: https://www.google.com/search?q=sodium+carbonate+molecule&tbm=isch&ved=2ahUKEwixjbOsopjxAhUJTqwKHRw7CSIQ2-cCegQIABAA&oq=sodium+carbonate+molecule&gs_lcp=CgNpbWcQAzIECCMQJzICCAAyAggAMgIIADICCAAyAggAMgIIADIGCAAQCBAeMgYIABAIEB4yBggAEAgQHjoECAAQQzoGCAAQBRAeUJtiWLFsYM1taABwAHgAgAGRBIgB3RKSAQswLjEuNS4wLjEuMZgBAKABAaoBC2d3cy13aXotaW1nwAEB&sclient=img&ei=-OTHYLGxDomcsQWc9qSQAg&bih=798&biw=1600&client=-b-d Well, I'm aware of the melting and boiling point difference between covalent bonds, which have low melting and boiling points, because the energy that binds the molecules is low, and ionic ones, which bind their molecules far more strongly, that's why, huge temperatures are needed to even begin to have them behave as fluids. And about the molecular weight, I was kinda aware of that, but it'll be a whole different topic to talk about more complex molecules such as aromatic compounds (I mean, cellulose is a huge polymer and it'll decompose way before even melting). Finally, I'm definitely gonna study that last part, thanks for sharing it The dover white cliffs are an entirely different creature, they're made mostly of chalk (calcite minerals), product of ancient coccolithophores and other microorganisms, their shells are made of calcium carbonate (most sea shells are made of it), a metal carbonate that is NOT soluble (the very part of hardwood ashes that won't dissolve with water).

Where the difference lies exactly?

Well, that's precisely the point isn't it? A hydration sphere surrounding a cation (firmly attached due to the high electropositivity of the cation). Its ok, I wasn't all too clear myself either. Hmmm... interesting. Forgive my ignorance, but you gave me a lot of questions buddy: 1. Could you elaborate a bit more on your first paragraph, if you would? (that last part) 2. Why does the close proximity of the ions produce a reduced electrostatic potential? 3. Why exactly does the second electron (to complete the valence shell) requires an extra kick to orbit oxygen? 4. Aren't the alkaline and alkali oxides, actually rather reactive? If exposed to the atmosphere, they will form metal carbonates... if I understand it correctly.

Thanks for the response. That's interesting, since carbonic acid is, more or less, an aqueous solution of CO2, wouldn't it be possible to volatilize it, by aerating the water? Or by degassing it?

Fair enough. I have another question: what happens to a metal carbonate when it is hydrated? Does it split into its metal cation and carbonic acid? (like how sodium chloride splits into its respective ions?).

Yes, you explained it neatly and pretty well, though I'm aware of this, given it's ionic bonding 101. The core of my question, lies more in the fundamental physics that are going on, during the bonding of 2 ions. The way I think I understand ionic bonds, is akin to how, 2 magnets have high potential energy when they're far apart, which gets turned into kinetic energy when "falling" into each other, then all such energy is released and the system is now at a lower energy state, once the magnets come in contact and are at rest. So given such model, it is not actually the transferring of electrons, which releases energy in itself, but the actual process of coming in contact. I mean, given how electropositive it is, wouldn't a +2 calcium cation quickly bind with basically anything with an inkling of electronegativity or negative polarity? (which is what I think, makes it so soluble in water, just like how sodium cations and chlorine anions break apart to bond with the negative and positive polarity ends of the H2O molecule, their electric fields have found more positive and negative fields on which to be balanced). The cation remains highly reactive till it finds an electronegative atom/molecule, on which to bond and balance the electric field. Though, to be fair, the O2 molecule is probably a bad candidate, since it is non-polar (it would require some energy to break the covalent bond).

Would it be possible to have, say, calcium cations in aqueous solution, react with O2 to form calcium oxide, if the concentration of the dissolved gas was high enough?