hypervalent_iodine

! Moderator Note PureGenius, I want to add an official note to Sayonara's request. As per the rules of this forum, you are required to provide evidence for your claims. You have been provided plenty of opportunities to do this and members in this thread have made numerous requests, so consider this your last chance before the thread is closed.

Looks fine to me.

! Moderator Note roger4464, please stop spamming SFN with your speculations. Your thread on the matter was closed and you are not allowed to reintroduce it. Regardless, the main science forum is not the place for non-mainstream science.

! Moderator Note Hi Lucky7, Welcome to SFN. Please be aware that using this forum to advertise external sites, commercial or otherwise, is not permitted here. Additionally, it would be courteous to other members if you could please write a summary of the article and what it is you wish to discuss. Please do not respond directly to this modnote in-thread.

! Moderator Note Again, PureGenius, if you're going to make scientific claims you need to cite actual, scientific evidence. Religious texts will not cut it, so please stop bringing them up or this thread will be closed.

ACG52 was suspended for 7 days as of yesterday for more abusive behavior. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Leif was also banned following an abusive meltdown.

Everyone say goodbye to Leif. Bye-bye, Leif. (NB. I have hidden the offending posts)

! Moderator Note A number of posts from this thread have been relocated to here: http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/78266-thread-hijack-changing-universal-constants/ Please stay on topic.

! Moderator Note A number of posts in here are being / have been split into the trash as they are either wildly off topic and / or not in the spirit of the mainstream science section of the forum. Leif, you have to stop hijacking threads. If you have something you wish to discuss, do so in your own thread. And please be aware that speculative material (including anything by Sheldrake) is not appropriate for the mainstream area of SFN. If this keeps up, you will be suspended from using the site.

! Moderator Note ACG52, You have an incredibly short memory it would seem. Insulting other members or being generally rude and disrespectful towards them will not be tolerated.

newts has been permanently banned because there's only so much insolence we can handle.

! Moderator Note Just a friendly reminder, PureGenius, that religious texts do not meet the eligibility criteria for evidence. If you make scientific claims, you should use scientific resources and data to back them up.

! Moderator Note And I think you should be a little more careful with your posts. Insulting other members is not tolerated here. Please be more mindful of that in the future.

! Moderator Note Leif, Your posts have delved once agian into the realms of thread hijacking. This is to stop. If you would like to start a thread on your opinions (and if you haven't already done so), then please do. Be aware however, that you will be required to address people's criticisms with a little more than calling them obtuse.

! Moderator Note ayahuascacolombia, Please stop trying to recruit people to your ceremonies and making unsubstantiated claims. While this is not your thread, you are still required to back up your statements and respond to genuine questions about what you are saying.

You will need to show some kind of effort here. What part of the question are you struggling with?

zorro has been banned as per request and also for continued soap boxing.

This is probably best illustrated with an example question. Assume we have, say, 180.16 g of glucose (C6H12O6) and the question is asking you how many moles of carbon there is. To answer this you could approach it from a couple of routes, but the easiest way (IMO) is to first calculate how many moles of glucose we have in that 180.16 g. We use the following equation to solve this: (1) n = m / MW (where n is number of moles, m is mass and MW is molecular weight or molar mass) MW for glucose is 180.16 g / mol, so plugging in the numbers to the above equation gives you 180.16 / 180.16, which comes to 1 mole. To solve for the number of moles of carbon in the glucose sample, all you need to recognize is that there are 6 molecules of carbon for every 1 molecule of glucose (since it is C6H12O6), which means that all you have to do is multiply the answer you got from (1) by 6. Similarly, if the question asked you for number of moles of hydrogen, you would multiple the same number by 12 and so on. I hope that answers your question.

Personally, I think tutoring in person would be preferrable to doing it online. You might be best going to your college and asking for them (the course coordinator or someone similar may be able to help) to refer you to someone. You'll be more likely to get someone who is familiar with your specific course requirements that way as well.

! Moderator Note roger, 1. Your thread on the matter was closed because you could not listen to staff instruction. You do not get to reintroduce the topic. 2. Even ignoring 1., you are hijacking discussion. 3. If you continue on this track, we will ban you.

! Moderator Note Welcome back. In cased you missed them after your last hit and run series of posts, you were issued a few warnings that you might want to make yourself aware of. (see here and here) I would also like to extend a friendly reminder to you that this area of SFN does have a set of rules that you need to follow in addition to the general forum rules. It would also be wise for you to tone down the inflammatory aspect of your posts. This is a discussion forum and trying to rile people with troll-ish behavior or plain old ignorance mixed with aggression will get you nowhere. Lastly, I found it a little hard to decipher exactly what it is you're trying to talk about. If you could possibly rephrase your OP with a clear question and direction that you want this thread to go in, I'm sure members here would much appreciate it.

Furthermore, since this is off topic, I will be splitting your post and mine into the trash.

Mike, You have appealed to staff now 3 times about that closure. Every time, staff has discussed it and then told you that it was closed for justified reasons and that it will remain closed. Please stop spamming us with this request. The answer will be the same every time.

That entire website is complete and utter rubbish (but did almost complete my crackpot bingo card) and I doubt anyone here has time to really list every reason for why. I will however point out my favourite image from the page you reference: Which is preceded by the text: "This Second Level Connection completes the building process of the entire first single cell to the point that it is a complete unit with a magnetic attraction power ratio of 2.25-1 holding it all together." ...right.

Iggy has been suspended for a week for making vulgar, abusive comments.