Cap'n Refsmmat

First things first: you need to figure out how many grams of hydrogen are in 1.21 grams of water. This'll tell you how much hydrogen was in the reactant. The remaining mass of the reactant would have to be carbon (because that's what you usually get in combustion reactions). The ratio of hydrogen to carbon in the reactant gives you the coefficients on the chemical equation, and from there you just compare with the molar mass given in the problem. (You may find that what you have has, say, half the molar mass -- then just double the coefficients.) That's all there is to it.

Those gene tables show the different possible combinations of the mother and father's genes. Each parent has two copies of each gene, and "donates" only one copy to its offspring. So in your table above, if both parents have one dominant copy of the gene and one recessive copy of the gene, the offspring might receive two dominant copies, a dominant and a recessive copy, or two recessive copies.

When you hit the Reply button, just scroll down and hit the Manage Attachments button under Additional Options. You should be able to upload files from there.

Assuming this works as well as you've made it out, the question here is whether or not there is a good way of delivering the current to the right areas. You can't just pass electricity through the entire body at once -- it'll just take the paths of least resistance. Also, I suspect it's only certain pathogens that would be particularly sensitive to electricity -- and of course there may be various cells native to your body that may be as well, leading to side effects. As a side note: we experience millions (or at least thousands) of volts of electricity every time we experience static shock. What matters is the current, and current applied to the wrong places can kill you. I'd be extremely careful with this idea if I were you.

Because Rutherford's (actually, JJ Thompson's) model did not predict a small, high-mass nucleus, like Rutherford's experiment showed.

The key is that the atom is so spread out that a few meandering electrons simply do not have the attractive power to stop a speeding alpha particle.

Crap. I take it I should have gotten the hint from that being a covalently, and not ionically, bonded molecule?

It's still 2- when paired with hydrogen peroxide. Each H in [ce]H2O2[/ce] has a 1+ charge, for a total of 2+. The peroxide balances it out with 2-. And yes, the S would be 2+.

You've the first one right, but for the second, peroxide has a -2 charge, not a -1 charge. (You'd get that number from a table of polyatomic ions.)

I doubt you will find something that will record when you are exposed to an electromagnetic field that could be "harmful", because it is debatable whether they even are harmful -- nobody knows at what strength they might be. One simple experiment would be to build a large Faraday cage out of thick aluminum foil (preferably several layers) or fine metal mesh. All you do is build a wood box and wrap it in the foil (leaving a door to get in, of course), then step inside and seal it up. You would receive much reduced electromagnetic radiation inside the box, and you can then see if you actually feel better.

Everyone wants to know the shape of the universe. It's a rather interesting question. But: is there a practical application of the knowledge? If I find out that space is a sphere, what does that allow me to do besides change our textbooks?

Aha. The sequence looks like it was generated by looping with a loop variable (let's say i) that increases by one each time. Each new number in the sequence is generated by multiplying the previous number by i. So you start at one, multiply by two, then take two and multiply by three, and so on. So all you need is a loop with a variable that increases by one each time and a variable storing the previous number in the sequence.

There actually once was a B-36 with a nuclear reactor in the fuselage and a good bit of lead shielding. The reactor didn't actually power the plane, but they did show that carrying a reactor was at least possible. However, the question of what happens in a crash is a good one...

There's also the quantum Wite-Out.

Is the goal to increase the albedo of the polar regions then? From what I understand, the melting point isn't all that different -- it's just that the thermal conductivity of the stuff is so low that it takes ages for it to melt. The question is whether the effect is any greater than the energy expended on creating it.

This is the same problem Galileo once considered hundreds of years ago, so you're not alone in wondering. The answer is, they'll hit the ground at the same time. Gravity accelerates all objects at 9.8m/s2, regardless of their density or weight.

I'm not sure such a response deserves the user title "Scientist".

You could just set the oil slick on fire when you're done with it. Voila, no more oil left.

You'd have to take the base 13 logarithm of both sides. [math]\log_{13}(13^{4x-5}) = 4x -5[/math] If you calculator can't do base 13 logs (to find [math]\log_{13}(6)[/math]), you can do this: [math]\log_n(a) = \frac{\log_{10}(a)}{\log_{10}(n)}[/math]

Do you mean [math]13^{4x} - 5 = 6[/math] or [math]13^{4x - 5} = 6[/math]? Either way, actually, it's just a logarithm. To get the 4x "down" you need to take the logarithm of both sides. Remember that [math]\log_3 (3^x) = x[/math] and so on.

Yes.

30 posts and 10 days (I adjusted the number for some reason).

That's "jiggawatts".

Hundreds of migrant squirrels on treadmills. Actually: http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/sep08/6690

There are no ads on that site, so he stands nothing to gain by linking. Saves us a bit of bandwidth, really.