budullewraagh

you don't say...

that isn't right...you must be speaking of NaOH Na(OH)2 wouldn't exist...

dynamite is nitroglycerin with sawdust. the wood chips make it more stable. nitroglycerin was actually first synthsized by the italian chemist ascanio sobrero of turin. he had been studying the effects of nitric acid on organic compounds. he dipped glycerin into a cooled mixture of H2SO4 and HNO3 and poured that into H2O. an oily layer of ng separated out. he tasted the compound and noted that "a trace placed on the tongue but not swallowed gives rise to a most pulsating, violent headache, accompanied by great weakness of the limbs." what's interesting is that nitroglycerin in nobel's time was usually contaminated by acid used in the manufacturing process. it slowly decomposed yielding N2, CO2, H2O and O2 causing the corks of zinc cans it was stored in to pop off. people were stupid...one time ng oil had been used as a lubricant on the wheels of a cart transporting ng. many ships blew up... countries banned ng... so nobel used neutral solids and found that sawdust worked best. good call, yt

of course, of course. and yeah, it's a shame that we can't make a stable isotope of Fr. perhaps that should be my life's work. only problem is that i'd never be able to make a decent amount of Fr; it'd oxidize instantly when in contact with just about anything. yt, do you know how many At atoms have been in existence on earth at any given time? i know it's indredibly rare also, but im just curious as to how it compares with Fr

i know what keyloggers do; my question was why he wanted to do it

hmm...you think that clay is really AgCl? i'm not so sure since the decomposition reaction would yield Cl2, which isn't pleasant. good luck with your experiment

it's sad what can happen when one gets ambitious with computers. might i ask why you did it in the first place? would it be accurate for me to answer for you stating: "because i felt like it"? i know how you feel and im sorry this happened to you

i dont think he meant with his hands.

what about individualism? i dont care what nation i'm from. i am a freelance philosopher.

[rant] looks like vietnam to me. seriously. has anybody here seen the article congress posted on their website? http://congress.org/congressorg/issues/alert/?alertid=5834001&content_dir=ua_congressorg yeah, we're having a draft in approximately one year. for what? to "liberate" a country (which actually means slaughtering their civilians by the tens of thousands)? food for thought: it is common knowledge that hussein killed 5000 kurds in 1995. personally, i believe he killed more; quite a few more. i do not believe that the casualties he inflicted were far above 10000. a report from the united nations awhile back said that coalition bombings and economic sanctions have led to the deaths of 500,000 iraqi children alone since the end of the first gulf war. the united nations estimated at least another 300,000 iraqi civilians would be killed by a us invasion, and it seems they were correct. this isn't liberation really; what liberty has been given to the countless innocents who have been slaughtered? let's take a look at this from an economic stance now. the cost of the iraq war keeps rising, of course; for a look at the price, go here: http://www.threeworldwars.com/world-war-overview.htm it's written in .php so it's constantly changing. let us compare the prices of world war 1, 2 and the iraq war now: Financial Cost of WW1 $196.5 billion (adjusted for 1990 dollar values) Financial Cost of WW2 $2,091.3 billion (adjusted for 1990 dollar values) meanwhile, we have the new iraq war which many have speculated will cost upwards of $1 trillion. yes, folks, that's half the cost of all our efforts in world war two. perhaps if bush weren't selling out his citizens, the price would be lower, but instead, the cycle is simple: bush tells his cronies what stock to buy and then he awards rediculously large contracts to these companies without putting them up on a competitive market. the taxpayers get shafted. kickbacks anyone? iraq had nothing to do with national security; it only made our situation worse. it's safe to say that every house we destroy yields another member of al-qaeda. every person we kill yields another angry family and potential supporter of terrorist groups. i don't blame them; al-qaeda is their only way. same thing is happening in israel now: 1.palestinian home gets blown up. 2.hamas goes to family, recruits father in exchange for education for his children, food, water and shelter. 3. father dies, children learn first-hand and second-hand why to hate israel and the united states. hussein did not have nukes. hussein had no intentions of obtaining nukes. hussein had a few chemical weapons. most of them were the ones rumsfeld sold him in 1984. meanwhile, north korea watched this situation carefully. they realized that iraq, who didn't have wmds, was attacked for no reason. they decided not to make the same mistake hussein did. yes, kim jong-il decided to make nukes because of iraq. now a crazy facist has a nice stockpile of nukes that keeps growing. all north korea asked for was a document from the united states stating that the us didn't have the intention to attack north korea, but bush was stupid and he didn't produce one. as a result, north korea keeps getting nukes. and this president is all into national security? what the hell man? there are 15,000 chemical factories across the us. many of these are just outside major cities. a reporter for a pittsburg newspaper decided to investigate. he found that he could walk in through unlocked gates at each of the 60 factories he went to. there was no security; he actually sat on top of a huge tank of anhydrous ammonia one day and nobody saw him. he walked past a nice large tank of boron trifluoride on a 60 minutes interview (http://www.60minutes.com if you don't believe me there's video footage). nobody caught him. if he were to do so much as puncture that container, 13 million new yorkers would have been at risk; most would have been killed. 58ppm kills. and this isn't guarded? and bush claims to be good on national security? [/rant]

6 million jews and 6-7 million catholics, gypsies, homosexuals, handiacapped. records were kept; the germans always have been precise in their actions. actually, one of the main reasons for the efficiency of the holocaust is ibm. they sold machines to the nazis that made death camps much more efficient. sad but true

hey...that's my site;p

eh, you never know. Fr is some crazy stuff. if there was more Fr, a reaction between a solution of HF:SbF5 with powdered Fr (to increase surface area) would be insane. Seriously, it would be more powerful than most explosives

the problem with Si is that it's far too metallic to be used. it oxidizes and forms more polar bonds than C. the glory of C is that it can form a bond with H and have an electronegativity difference of .2

always remember the rule: like polarity dissolves in like polarity. a polar solute will dissolve in a polar solvent a nonpolar solute will dissolve in a nonpolar solvent a polar solute will not be soluble (well perhaps a little but not much) in a nonpolar solvent a nonpolar solute will not be soluble (well perhaps a little but not much) in a polar solvent

eh, what are you implying? the answer is that yes, forensics investigators would be able to find out through qualitative tests: soluble in H2O, soluble in ethers, does not effect litmus->alcohol

more info on this compound: http://www.state.nj.us/health/eoh/rtkweb/0878.pdf search for it here: http://chemfinder.cambridgesoft.com i would link you directly, but the page is called result.asp so it wouldn't help.

no think of the organic acids; the O-H bond isn't ionic. CO2 isn't really soluble in H2O...

atomic mass of P=30.973761 atomic mass of O=15.9994 let me check your work... molecular mass P2O3=110 48/110=.43636363636... 62/110=.56363636363... let's see what cambridge university, england has to say about P4O10... http://chemfinder.cambridgesoft.com/ChemIndex/ChemIndex/ChemIndex_action.asp?formgroup=base_form_group&dbname=ChemIndex&dataaction=Get_structure&Table=MolTable&Field=MOL_ID&DisplayType=sizedgif&width=225&height=200&StrucID=2373 it's hygroscopic, decomposes in H2O, has a vapor density of 4.9, a melting point of 340 degrees celcius, has a density of 2.39g/mL and a molecular mass of 283.88904. quite the interesting compound.

ever notice how at land fills a great amount of CH4 is burned all the time? that's such a waste. CH4 can't undergo condensation polymerization since it's the same compound and can't donate an OH. CH4 can't undergo addition polymerization because it isn't an alkene or alkyne. still, shouldn't there be a way to do something like; CH4(n)->C8H18(n/8)+H2(n/2) of course, it would be difficult controling how much polymerization occurs, but still, couldn't the CH4 be used to produce useful fuels?

right, if one could do the following reactions: 2H2O+(x energy) --(catalyst a)-->2H2+O2+(y energy) 2H2+O2+(z energy) --(catalyst b)-->2H2O where z<y, we would have a profit of energy. of course, this would come from the surroundings but hey, it doesn't really change much. i suppose this system would make for a good refrigerant.

'ts ok

oh, but it is. search for it if you wish but you could just take my word; Ag-C(3x bond)C-Ag is a primary explosive also, for you pyros, here's a list of explosives http://www.atf.gov/pub/fire-explo_pub/listofexp.htm

except silver acetylide:p

you need a catalyst for that reaction. i forgot what it is but i won't be able to find it. thanks though.