John Cuthber

Because the people who advocate on seem to feel they should advocate the other. If you can find a group that opposes abortion, but promotes the use of condoms then you have found a group that's either irreligious or rather rare.

But the (assumed) view of the police is that blacks are violent. and that's why they arrest so many of them. That factor is inherent in the process of arrest. So, it's a self fulfilling prophecy. Looking at arrest rate as a proxy for criminality should be reasonable, but, if (as we suspect) the police are biassed then it's no longer valid. If you use that measure of criminality to drive the arrest rate then there's a feedback loop. Essentially they are arrested for being black, so they are arrested for being black.

Water containing materials that attack noryl is not drinking water.

That's the love that tells you to kill people for being gay and tells you where to get your slaves from.

Oh give me a clone yes a clone of my own with the y chromosome changed for x and when I'm alone with this clone of my own, I'll be thinking of nothing but... reprogramming DNA

OK, pick something that you think isn't physical.

Or they may not. The word "may" in your sentence is very important. Also, we know that non physical things like "Thursday" exist. They don't say anything about the existence of God.

I suspect that only one of us is a chemist. There are lots of materials that can be referred to as cement. One of the oldest and simplest is lime mortar which sets by reaction with CO2 in the air to form calcium carbonate, so I will pick that as an example (even though it's not a good choice for making pools) Calcium carbonate is slightly soluble in water (about 15 mg/ litre). If there's exposed mortar in the pool then the calcium carbonate will dissolve until the solution is saturated- about 15 grams will dissolve in each cubic metre. It will raise the pH slightly. If I add enough HCl to react with that material then I will lower the pH. But the water will no longer contain calcium carbonate, so it won't be a saturated solution any more. More calcium carbonate will dissolve into the water until it's back to (nearly) 15 mg/l. and the pH will rise again. So I add more acid to get back to the value I want. But that means that the water isn't saturated any more... and so on.

Are these available where you are? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glow_stick

I have a model of the UK national lottery. I predict that it will draw 7 balls with numbers between 1 and 59. Does my model produce reasonable predictions?

Look for the MSDS for washing soda. https://fscimage.fishersci.com/msds/21080.htm Also, as a kid I rather liked these sweets (which contained chloroform) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victory_V

I'm not sure, but I'd look at these. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_reasoning

Yes. An you can look at that the other way round. Because the heat needed to vapourise hydrogen is so small, the boiling point of hydrogen is very low. However we want something where hydrogen sticks to it reasonably well at room temperature. And that means that the heat of absorption must be in the same ballpark as the thermal energy . The thermal energy is about RT per degree of freedom r=3.81 J/K/mol So We know that , at 20C i.e . 293K the thermal energy is about 2.5 KJ/mol per degree of freedom I'm fairly sure that only the translational freedoms count here (the sorbed gas might still vibrate + rotate) So that's about 7.5 KJ/ mol. And that's the binding energy where a molecule of hydrogen has a roughly 50:50 chance of being in the gas phase. We want most of it stored in the metal. So we need a factor of "a few more times" such that the Boltzmann distribution puts almost all the gas into storage. We are not up to a sorption energy of 15 to 30 KJ/ mole. That's something like 10% of the combustion energy. So your engine which- as you say delivers something like 60KW- has a fuel store that needs you to dissipate something like half a megawatt of heat. (and it has to do it without the "sponge" getting significantly hot- otherwise the gas simply won't stick.) So rather than the problem of cooling a 60KW engine running at , say, 250C in an air flow of a few tens of metres per second, you have to remove 500 KW of heat from something that you want to keep below something like 50C and which is stationary.

And it killed people. Thanks for that. Without your remarkable observation there, I might not have realised that not taking a drug was an substitute for taking a drug.

Why do people think that "irregardless" is a good word to use? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irregardless Anyway, regardless of that, silicones are used as heat transfer fluids, and heat-sink compounds. They can't conduct all that badly. I wonder if some of the lower values found are for foamed products.

You don't seem to want to accept the difference between "If you believe Hubble, then you believe that Einstein was completely wrong" and "If you believe Hubble, then you believe that Einstein was completely wrong about one thing". Similarly "So if you believe Hubble, and you accept that Einstein was wrong, why do you fight that Einstein was right?" is differernt from "So if you believe Hubble, and you accept that Einstein was wrong about one thing, why do you fight that Einstein was right about something else?" And the answer is evidence. In every case where it has been tested (and that's a lot of cases) Einstein's theories have turned out to be right. Why were you even asking the question?

I rather doubt that Gabriel's point was directed at you specifically. His view is that everyone should forgive. It's like communism- it only works if everyone does it (properly, all the time). However, regardless of what others do, if you forgive then, at least, you save yourself the effort of maintaining your dislike or bearing a grudge or whatever you call it.

I saw NortonH's comment about the Koran and wondered about it. I plead ignorance of the languages and alphabets, but the pictures of animals made me think it almost certainly wasn't that Book. Anyway, sulphuric acid would rot the paper instantly. And it still wouldn't provide the "action at a distance" effect that we see here. There's a fundamental problem with the idea of some magic chemical here. Anything volatile enough to set up a high concentration of vapour an inch or so from the paper would be so volatile you wouldn't be able to keep it in an open cup. But with a plausible- i.e. much lower- concentration, it would be difficult to have an effect.

I strongly suspect that there are people who claim to do so and who are quite happy to sell you those predictions. Indeed, but you were talking nonsense. However, here's a quick question for you. Is it going to be easier to do the calculations in 2 dimensions, or three? That's not hard. Seriously, this is an essentially impossible problem to calculate. And in practice, it's impossible. Even if you were in the audience so you could "see" the initial conditions, they won't let you bet after the draw starts, so it's too late. Yes it is, and if you get it wrong by a small fraction of a percent, you will get the wrong answer. Fundamentally, you seem to have missed a very obvious fact. If the outcome was predictable from the laws of physics then, since those laws are the same every week, the numbers drawn would be the same every week. They are not.

I may think that much of what Gabriel says is hogwash, but he has something of a point about that- and the pages he cited are evidence. Essentially, bearing a grudge is stressful.

Get a good night's sleep. On a more general note, I'm told exercise is a pretty good antidepressant.

I'm glad they were cleaned properly. Do you understand why grease etc in them would ignite? It's not the presence of pure oxygen- that doesn't cause a fire with many things (apart from those that will catch fire in air). When you open the cylinder head valve, the inlet of the regulator or valve is suddenly rammed full of high pressure gas. The sudden increase in pressure raises the temperature (like a diesel engine) and that will ignite stuff. In the presence of pure oxygen, under high pressure, that fire will be particularly intense- even the metal of the regulator may catch fire in those circumstances. But the guys hands holding the matches are not in 2000 PSI oxygen.

Trial and error, or something like what I suggested, adding a known amount of acid to a known sample of the water.

Iron dust isn't something you can see through. so it's not what is spread on the paper. Not at any sensible rate. A match wouldn't light in pure oxygen. Why would that help? Match heads are already very combustible.

If the beams are a few cm above the paper the "chemical" could be just for show. Something like wallpaper paste to keep the paper wet (and non flammable) might make things easier.