CaptainPanic

I also don't think that sulphuric acid is produced. Not enough oxygen. The component itself however looks like a base to me (the charge separation on the O-S group can accept a proton on the oxygen atom)... So, you will have a change in pH, which you will feel and which triggers the tears in an attempt to wash it out and neutralize it. Just my 2 cents. I'm not the expert.

I believe that nec209 made only 1 little mistake... and that was the use of the word science/scientist. Read the 1st post again and replace "science/scientist" by "media" and "study" by "article", and it all makes perfect sense. nec209 is actually angry at the media for bad reporting, for drawing the wrong conclusions from studies, from highlighting the wrong aspects of a study, for sensationalism, for misinformation and for pure lies. In addition, I believe nec209 is angry because media will not study other scientists' work. They just pick one study, and report on that. The result is that one day you read that EMF might kill you, and the next day it's harmless. The actual studies on which the media based their stories probably referred to each other, and also included an error margin or some other statistical analysis. But I hope that nec209 will reply to my post, and clarify... after all, I am putting words in his/her mouth, which is a little impolite.

The most important is to know what knowledge you want to transfer to your audience. Both board and projector (powerpoint or overhead) can get great results if used correctly. All can also result in a boring and incomprehensible talk about nothing.

Firstly, there is no direct relation between the expenses you mention and the deficit. It is not as if those expenses are the last straw that broke the camel's back. All expenses are equal, so your question should simply be: "is it constitutional to borrow money?" or "is it constitutional to have a national debt?". You can then open a second thread, in which you can ask whether it is a good idea to spend money on poor people and sick people? Or you can just reply in one of the threads already open about socialism vs. neglecting poor and sick people. Secondly, why is the "defense" ("offense") budget not in your list? According to this wikipedia website, the expenses for social security, healthcare and defense are about the same. I can understand that you don't want to list all expenses of your government... but your choice of expenses suggests some form of subjectiveness. Finally, you cannot discuss a debt (which is a result from a balance) without including all the money flows. The biggest flaw in your question is that you don't include income. A detb is not necessarily a result of spending too much. It can also be caused by too little income. I believe that you should furthermore include the theories of anticyclic spending. Some say that governments should spend more in bad times, and less in good times.

LOL - you guys still have seasons? I thought they broke down! I voted warmer myself. Our winters are significantly warmer, and the summers slightly warmer. The trend is that we're setting temperature records (high) year after year.

Gly-Clene is a brand-name, not a chemical. there is only 1 company who make the stuff, and they seem to keep the process a secret. I don't know what "GlyClene" is. None of the websites I find through Google are any good. Typically, the websites are making (big) mistakes. In other words, they're writing scientific gibberish... Have a look at the 3rd paragraph of this one: That means nothing. You cannot have megawatts per day. That is [energy per time per time]. I wouldn't worry too much about this process. If they patent it, and it's successful you will hear about it anyway.

I think she's playing a computer game with the guy to the right of her. And she's just looking smug because she just beat him. They're not watching the collisions at all.

I use books I've finished uni in chemical engineering - sorry that I am too lazy to write down all the books I have used. University also provided books written by professors that were printed by the university itself. Much cheaper for the students that way. I still use my books.

The weather on average over the last months / years where you live: Warmer or colder than the past (that part of the past that you remember yourself)? If we gather enough data, we might submit this to the Internationan Panel on SFN Forum Member Climate Change Opinions (IPSFNFMCCO).

If you don't like science, you can **** off. (*) Go back to your cave, make a campfire, and catch your own food. If you don't see the benefit of science, then frankly this world can do without you. Because of science, you get to live to be 80 or older, you only have to work a lazy 8 hrs per day, you get your food from a fridge in a building around the corner, and your kids have a nearly 100% chance of survival. That beautiful past you seem to be dreaming of was a time when people did not have the time to develop cancer, because they died long before that. Life expectancy was 50-60, but people didn't know any better. Most worked boring jobs in factories - doing the same every day. Or were you talking about the good old days of Newton, when the plague was still around, when 80% of the population were illiterate farmers taking a crap in a hole in the ground and having only 1 type of food on the menu? If you don't like this world because nobody promises you to live to 100 without any diseases, if you want the nanny state to promise you all is safe - then take some LSD and dream on. No, it is true, some products that are being developed are not 100% safe. But if you don't understand the science, then don't get angry at the scientists. But this stupid consumers market with poor information is not the fault of the scientists. If it was up to us, you would get a booklet with all the facts with every product... but tests have shown that all the dumb consumers don't read all the crap anyway. When was the last time you entirely read the tiny paper that comes with medicines? Exactly. So stop complaining, thrown away your cellphone if you don't like it... and be angry at yourself... but not at me. (*) Apologies for flaming in the name of science.

Parameters that are of importance are: - The depth of the water level in the tube and the pipe should be the same - to generate the same pressure. - The length of the test tube / pipe that contains water (the water level rises inside the pipe) must be the same. The air will slowly diffuse through the nearly completely stagnant water in the pipe, and then once it's in the "bulk" of the tank, the mixing will transport the air away quickly. So, the longer the pipe that contains water, the slower the air will diffuse out. That is also a solution to the problem I described in my previous post. Other than that, I have no answers. It might still be a very small normal leak... a little scratch on your hose barb can cause a tiny leak. If something as little as 1 ml of air per day is a problem, I have no idea how to test it for leaks.

Doublechecking if I understood the question From what I understand: you have a liquid pool. A pipe of some kind that is closed off on one end with a pressure meter, and is open at the other end. And you stick that pipe into the pool. The deeper, the pipe (or the higher the liquid level) the higher the pressure of the gas in the pipe. This means you always have a higher pressure in the pipe than the outside air... Answer If the gas (air) is in direct contact with the liquid phase, air will dissolve. Henry's law will tell you the equilibrium state: if you have a certain gas pressure (approx. 1 bar), it will tell you the concentration of the gas in the liquid.Note that the pressure of the air in contact with the liquid is different on 2 places: inside the pipe and the outside air. The liquid will be saturated with air, meaning it is at equilibrium... it's at equilibrium with the outside air! But, the pressure on the side of the pipe is higher than on the side of the outside air! So, the concentration of the air dissolved in the liquid on the side of the pipe is higher than on the side of the outside air! So, we have a single liquid phase which has more air dissolved on one end than on the other. What happens next is that air will slowly diffuse through the liquid to where the concentration is lower... This in turn enables the dissolution of more air from the side of the pipe. After the air diffused all the way through the liquid phase (possibly there is even normal mixing of the liquid, which will speed things up?), the surface in contact with the outside air has a higher concentration in air than the equilibrium value... and air will evaporate. And that's how you lose your air. Remember: A liquid is not air tight if you give the gas enough time to dissolve, diffuse, and evaporate again. And the bigger the surface area (the contact between the air in the pipe and the liquid), the more air you can dissolve per time. There isn't much you can do about this I'm afraid. You must physically prevent the air from dissolving. Use a piston or a plug, or something like that. p.s. This is a typical chemical engineering problem. If this would have been put in engineering, insane_alien or I would have picked it up faster.

Happy nerds!

I have other sources myself, but this looks like good study material.

What about this forum? I should report myself for spamming.

Politics became a Laundry Detergent Advertisement.

HOLLOWMAN2212, - Not many people know what this is - not many people know what it's called. But you had the big versions of this when you were a kid, so you can help us: - We want to know how it works - so please explain us! You just need to know the name, but you know what is at the end of the black hose that goes down. A pump for example? And are those balls made of glass? Explain us more about this machine. aND DON'T USE CAPS. It's not necessary. To all others: I know that it looks like this thing is moving because of heat transfer from the fingers to the thingy. But I seriously doubt that any glass ball can transfer that much heat that fast. And also: the "hot" temperature on both sides is similar, meaning that the other side must somehow cool down very rapidly too - if this works with a temperature difference. I doubt it. I think it's a "magic" trick. There's a reason why there is more to this than just 2 spheres and a glass rod on the inside.

There is a horror story in the making... The climate skeptics really seem to step it up suddenly. They seem to think that the worst thing in the world that can happen is that we invest in sustainable energy. The media are completely filled with their ideas this week - mainstream media, radio, tv, blogs, forums. Skeptics are everywhere suddenly... with the Copenhagen meeting just around the corner. The glaciers aren't melting. The deforestation doesn't have much impact on CO2. Climatologists committed fraud on a large scale. It's a forest of articles, blogs, posts, people linking to each other - and with each new article linking to other blogs, linking to other sources... Nobody seems to offer a new theory. The whole campaign seems like a bunch of unrelated articles... but the only thing they all have related is that they just want to destroy the current theory. I'm afraid that they might succeed in convincing the uneducated layman that this is a giant conspiracy of "The Scientists" against "The People" in which "The Scientists" want to "The People" that there is a "Global Warming" danger so that they can Spend All The Money. *evil laughter* Can someone explain why people think that "The Scientists" are the evil here? How did this happen? The only explanation I have is too evil to dream of: Is there a planned worldwide smear campaign against CO2 reduction going on? Are there really people who are employed by someone to sit behind a computer full-time to start blogs, and write articles about this? I don't want to believe it has come to this. Our beautiful internet - it seemed such a good idea, but all it did was enable some people to misinform the masses even easier.

I believe that the republicans are in a league of their own. They just misinform, lie, use smear tactics... The amount of crap we've had to swallow during the 8 years under Bush - sorry, it's just unforgivable... the bastard changed the world for the worse, and should be tried for crimes against humanity. And I kindly request the Americans not to forget that period too soon. The 2 posts above are shockingly forgiving... they seem to claim that democrats and republicans are similar... you poor bastards. Did you forget already? During almost the entire Bush period, over 90% of the Europeans thought America was "part of the problem rather than part of the solution". That's because Europe was fed lies, Europe was dragged into two wars, Europe was abused to harbor torture-prisons, and the CIA gave themselves the right to arrest people on European soil. And the country with the biggest military machine in the world gave us the choice: "you're either with us, or against us"... And all of that was supposed to be OK, and even necessary. All of those tactics and policies were defended with lies... that was a republican in charge, with republicans having majorities... and that was your country doing that. The only reason the average European thinks that America is not the Evil Empire is called Obama. Remember that. Apologies for a very strong opinion... it seems in place here. I tried hard not to curse.

Republicans especially seem to be telling lies all the time. And if it's not a lie, then at least I still do not agree with it. Of course, I'm a European, and Europeans and republicans don't mix very well... we've grown apart during the last 8 years (Bush) or so. The democrats seem to be better... but are dragged into a mud fight. It's frightening that worldwide (also in Europe!) political and scientific debates are turning into fights that I remember having with my friends at the age of 6. Arguments don't matter anymore. Shouting does. Faulty argumentation is just as valid as proper science.

D'oh!

Did you do any research on this yourself? I'll just link to the answers you gave, then you can see for yourself. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lipase http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cellulase http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urease Sorry for not helping you. It's the forum policy not to give answers with homework. And in this case, it's so easy to answer, that you can put in that little extra effort.

Haha, you lost! (Assuming that it was the game to pretend that the Hasselburgscreen illusion is something real).

A result is what you get from a measurement. A thermometer will tell you the temperature. The value of the temperature (25 deg C) is the result of the measurement. The conclusion can then be that "the heater is clearly not working" because you had expected the temperature to be 100 deg C by now. Or the conclusion can be something else. Sometimes in scientific papers, there is a large overlap between conclusions and results (they are almost the same) - because the paper only wants to communicate the results, and the authors have little to conclude.

I like our current system (constitutional monarchy - a democratic monarchy with some capitalism and some socialism). But I think we need better voters. One change I'd like to see: I believe that scientists and engineers should get a larger voice in decisions. But there are plenty of possibilities in the current system to achieve this.