budullewraagh

i hardly think the current discussion is relevant, and i will explain below. 1. maybe 2. certainly not 3. more certainly not 4. i'd push for nullification just to piss off the republican extremists who have been pushing for states' rights and nullification forever the constitutionality or lack thereof of abortion, partial birth abortion, etc is totally irrelevant. i ask how any law related to abortion could possibly be enforced. would we prosecute hospitals? doctors? mother? fathers? all? would we launch a criminal investigation for every miscarriage? and we'd see a whole lot of back alley abortions, which we really don't want to see. so, in summary, we'd spend a whooole lot of money and we would hardly get anything out of it.

"I think the problem is there are some Israeli military members that believe genocide and indiscrimenant use of force is the only solution, just as some palestinian leaders believe the same against the Israelis is the only solution." while i do believe that the above is a problem, i ask what the israeli army and government are doing to fix these alleged errors. to date, i have heard no news of a rebel soldier being punished by his commanding officer. i have heard no news of a commanding officer being punished by an officer of higher rank, or the government for that matter. because they have done nothing to make amends, the israeli army and the israeli government certainly do not come out looking rosy from my perspective.

"Most organics happen to be compounds, both of H and C." actually all organics are, considering the fact that "organic" compounds are defined as having both H and C

what would happen? business would leave and people wouldn't have jobs.

yes but i pray you tell me whether carbon really does form less compounds than hydrogen, my dear woelen

wow. i apparently wasn't with it when i made the above post. i meant: can hydrogen really form more compounds than carbon? now consider: hydrogen can be found in every organic compound, every arrhenius acid, every hydroxide, every bi-whatever and of course in its elemental form. but carbon is found in every organic compound, in loads of allotropes, carbonates, carbides, cyanides, fulminates, acetylides, carbon halides (dichloroethylene, tetrachloroethylene, tetrachloromethane, hexachloroethane, etc) as well as a whole host of compounds that lack hydrogen but involve multiple carbon atoms and non-hydrogen atoms. and im sure im missing a bunch

ryan jones, please explain yourself:-p

read forum rules buddy: http://www.scienceforums.net/forums/showthread.php?t=7408 (this is the part where if i were a mod i'd say "closed" and i would close the thread)

i just played around with a few mechanisms and i found something interesting and mostly unrelated. if there is a reaction between ethanol and acetone, the interactin is between the lone pair of the ethanol's O and the pi antibonding orbital of the middle carbon in acetone, bringing the pi bonding electrons from C=O to form C-O- and leaving the EtOH+ bonded to the middle carbon of the former ketone. well, the O- could just perform a lone pair push to get rid of the EtOH+, but if another EtOH takes the proton off of the EtOH+ group before this push can occur (imagine doing this in slightly alkaline conditions), the push will not occur, as the methoxide anion is a terrible leaving group. This said, it is now possible for the still negative oxygen to perform a nucleophilic attack on the previously formed EtOH2+, forming an interestingly symmetrical acetal, 2,2 diethoxy propane. but anyway, i have class in about 5 minutes. btw i came to the conclusion that atmospheric oxygen must be involved in your reaction, yt, as the HOMO/LUMO interactions between EtOH and acetone would undoubtedly result in the first intermediate described above.

a continuation of the digression of this thread. highlights from previous posts: ^ecoli admitting he never saw spielberg's movie, then criticizing spielberg for message of said movie after spielberg's denial of any intent to portray said message. ^please note the bolded section ^me clarifying that the aforementioned question was indeed relevant to the discussion, then noting a few pieces of relevant information (pay attention to the bolded statements and figures) ^sayo makes a good point. which reminds me. i had an english teacher misinterpret a very ambiguous paper i wrote. she said it was on masturbation. i said it wasn't. she still tried to fail me. i pointed out the fact that she couldn't fail me for content, especially if i, the creator of said document, denied any references to masturbation. she backed down. ^mart making a good point that i mentioned above in my quote-by-quote commentary. ^ecoli trying to pretend that statistics (the only objective information available) are inaccurate in this case, then also stating the bolded, which i agree with, but was off topic. in the second paragraph, ecoli states that israeli violence is always in retaliation.

in case you didn't notice, i never said you said that. i dared you to say that. the rest of my post was actually pretty relevant to the discussion at hand, which had indeed, as you pointed out, strayed away from the original topic at hand. but to please you and so as to not let a travesty propogate, i think i'll just start my own thread

"Statistics are often misleading though. You can't simply determine right and wrong by analyzing pure numbers. Just because the IDF happens to have better technology then their Palestinian counterparts doesn't mean that their evil brutes and the Palestinian terrorist are completely justified. Death on either side is indeed a tragic thing, but just becasue the IDF has killed more Palestinians then Palestinians have killed Israeli's does not make terrorism ok." i could debate you on that, but i'd rather debate you based on statements i have actually made. you totally missed my point. i was not justifying the actions of palestinian militants. rather, i was pointing out the fact that israel is guilty of terrorism in its actions against the palestinian people. i also find it to be ridiculous for you to dismiss such statistics as the aforementioned by stating that the nearly 4:1 ratio in deaths of palestinians:israelis is merely a statistic and therefore not effective for portraying a situation. what would be better? biased essays from both sides stating "it's all their fault?" don't try that with me; it won't fly. but again, that was in response to something i wasn't referring to in the first place. "No matter how many people were killed, Israeli violence is always in retaliation to some suicide bomber or another evident, or perhaps in pre-emptive stradegies, planned with intellegence collected from Israel's excellent intellegence agency. It's definately a vicious cycle, but how come it always seems that Israel always plans to step up security measures after an attack, the most recent one is a good example." a little idealistic, are we? you know, palestinians would say that their violence is in retaliation for attacks on palestinians that israelis would call retaliation to palestinian attacks, which palestinians would call retaliation against israeli attacks, which israel would call retaliation for palestinian aggression. etc. but of course israel is righteous:rolleyes: and you just try to say that all israeli actions are righteous and not at all excessive. oh dear. by golly, those (us made) israeli weapons blew up a childrens' hospital as well as a "suspected palestinian militant." once again, those "oops" incidents are nearly four times as deadly as those aggressive acts committed by palestinians. would you say that israel should refine their practices so they don't kill so many bystanders? or should the "accidental" ethnic cleansing continue?

he is. i actually like the comic. it isn't politically correct, but i hardly care. it touches on important issues

a year ago i made KI3 by failing to add enough Cl2 to a KI solution. my mistake was that the tube leading to the KI soln was forced above the surface because of pressure. so i've had this 60mL bottle of potassium triiodide in water for about a year now and the label on the bottle has begun to show stains, which is weird. i kind of want to finish the oxidation get iodine crystals. last time i used HCl+NaOCl after fractionally crystallizing the hypochlorite from bleach. i know it sounds pretty crazy, but i kept the water of crystallization and it didnt explode. but come to think of it, i should be able to crystallize again, then add these crystals to the KI3 solution to yield KCl and I2 because aqueous NaOCl is effectively NaOH+Cl2 in this scenario and as the Cl2 reacts, the equilibrium will be pushed towards creating more Cl2. come to think of it i could add the rest of my KI and i could just convert it all to I2 at once. so, my problem is finding the best possible way to collect the iodine crystals and dry them. i have a 500mL erlenmeyer flask, two 400mL beakers, a glass u tube, a glass funnel, a 500mL florence flask, a 100mL graduated cylinder and a crucible. and no rubber stoppers. so i was thinking of possibly performing the initial reaction in the florence flask then sort of draining the excess water off, then heat to, say, 75 celsius and allow the iodine to sublime upwards into the u tube and down into a collecting flask containing anhydrous MgSO4. my problem is that the u tube won't fit perfectly into the top of the florence flask, so i'll need to seal whatever gaps with duct tape. or would duct tape and/or the adhesive thereon be attacked by the iodine? luckily, on the other end, i could put my funnel upside-down with the stem inside the u tube and the funnel leading into the collecting flask. next, i'd use a similar apparatus and heat the iodine at, say, 50 celsius to have it sublime and go to a final collecting flask where it will (hopefully) be dry. what say you? is there an easier way?

i would say that it is indeed relevant. above, there was discussed the possibility of the public deeming terrorist actions by palestinian militant groups to be acceptable as a result of the film's exposing the perspectives of said palestinian militants. i would say that those actions are indeed justified from the perspective of the said militants. otherwise, they would not commit such actions. but back to the point, what the public thinks of israel's actions in palestine is very relevant indeed. i believe that general public in the us thinks that israel is attempting to defend its citizens and that it has, on occasion, made errors. perhaps if there were only a few isolated cases, "oops" would be a little more acceptable. however, according to statistics, the israeli army has been better at killing palestinians through "accidents" than palestinian militants have been through targeting civilians: according to: http://www.palestinercs.org/crisistables/table_of_figures.htm 3,769 palestinians have been killed and 29,358 palestinians have been injured since the 29th of september, 2001. according to: http://www.israel-mfa.gov.il/MFA/Terrorism-%20Obstacle%20to%20Peace/Palestinian%20terror%20since%202000/Victims%20of%20Palestinian%20Violence%20and%20Terrorism%20sinc "1,093 people have been killed by Palestinian violence and terrorism since September 2000." it's no wonder that the palestinians are pissed off. they're getting killed and their banks were raided in late 2000, so they have no money either. and who wants to open a business in palestine if it will probably be destroyed? the palestinians are poor and faced with little option but to hate israel and seek the only aid available, from hamas and related groups. generally this involves the patriarch of a family sacrificing himself and fighting as a hamas member and the children growing up learning bomb chemistry, projectile physics and how to hate israel. but blowing up israelis is not permissible, i believe. however, i don't believe that the general public is getting a good image of israel's actual intentions, which could use some publicity.

yes you can indeed replace the Na with H. it's all related to conjugate acidity/basicity: the reason H2SO4+MX-->HX+MSO4 (where m=metal cation and x=anion) is because HSO4- is a really weak conjugate base and metals tend to be really weak conjugate acids. consider: H2SO4+CsF-->HF+CsHSO4 Cs+ is not going to want electrons, ever, so it will stay as far away from them as possible. the H+ is a much stronger conjugate acid, and actually does make legitimate bonds with things (nonmetal hydrides, metal hydrides, organics, etc) and so it will bond to the stronger conjugate base (F-) and yes, it will also ionize to some degree. on the other hand, the Cs+ and HSO4- really don't show any significant covalent character because HSO4- is such a weak conjugate base and Cs+ is such a weak conjugate acid. so to form HAlO2, you need to find a mineral acid whose anion is a weaker base than AlO2-. take, for instance, H2SO4. so H2SO4+NaAlO2-->NaHSO4+HAlO2 i would think that HAlO2 would show more of a basic character than an acidic character

"I understand that that understanding the background of your enemies is a healthy thing, but this movie might be misinterpreted to mean that because we understand the root causes of the terrorist's actions, that it would mean that the actions themselves are excusable... which is not the case, no matter how you look at it." well, in response i ask you what you think the general response is to israel's aggressive actions in palestine

webster says sexual harassment is: "uninvited and unwelcome verbal or physical conduct directed at an employee because of his or her sex" interestingly, a whole lot of things we call "sexual harassment" really aren't just that

i disagree entirely. some schools are that way, sure, but schools like harvard that have as much money as they have would rather keep their reputation than make money from tuition, because with their reputation they keep the money flowing to them (consider grants, donations, etc). stanford spends $30k/year on maintenance for each and every palm tree they have. many would call that excessive, but they can spend that much and do spend it. in recent years, the philosophy of harvard admissions has been more of what the student would bring to the student body than whether the applicant would pass his/her classes. most people who apply to harvard would pass, if not do well in harvard classes, but they don't pick the best students. whether the kid could pay or his/her potential economic value 10 years down the road is less relevant to harvard, though you could say that they carefully craft their classes so that people will fondly look back on their college life and donate, but even then, the odds are low that the student would have much money to donate, let alone donate it.

you realize that he could have been asking about graduate studies. anyway, i find it funny that you are "thinking of going" there. wait until harvard accepts you:rolleyes: anyway, i took orgo 1 and 2 this summer at harvard. it was fun, and my professor was really amazing. you'll find that the harvard professors are really well educated and cool people to be around. my class was a whole lot of work because it was a full year condensed into 8 weeks (7 weeks of class really). but i've heard that harvard classes tend to be easier than, say, mit or uchicago classes.

i still dont understand how evolution can be compared with intelligent design. intelligent design concerns the design of life, right? evolution concerns the change in allele frequency over a period of time. supporters of intelligent design should have placed their case as an alternative to abiogenesis, evolution

permanganate does it just as well

no need to explain what nitrosyl chloride is and how it's formed; i'm well aware. interesting how nitric acid acts as a base in that reaction. come to think of it, the fact that nitrate salts can perform the reaction isn't so surprising. i suppose the product of water when the acids are used would be replaced by potassium hydroxide when potassium nitrate is used?

how could you make nitrosyl chloride? in addition, Cl- is a stronger conjugate base than NO3- so you won't get HNO3 from HCl

dont make the HCN- you're tempting fate. i'm sure sarin smells good (after all, it IS an ester) but im not tempting fate