jdurg

Nope. The azeotrope forms at about 95-96% ethanol. I think it's sulfuric acid that tends to form an azeotrope at 98% unless you add a very large excess of sulfur trioxide.

Just remember that anhydrous ethanol will absorb water from the air and soon form the 95% stuff again unless you seal the container tightly and don't allow ANY water to get near it.

Sadly, insurance companies only really pay attention to the evidence recorded in a police report. Their reasoning is that the police are an independent party and are unlikely to alter the physical data in order to benefit one side or another. Also, the police reports are generated right there at the scene of the accident shortly after the accident took place, so there isn't really a whole lot of time for the evidence to be altered. While your investigation may give you peace of mind, I highly doubt it will alter the thinking of the insurance companies at all.

Okay, so the money spent on law enforcement and the trials and imprisonment of marijuana offenders isn't spent by the government, but appears out of thin air? The oil and pharmaceutical supplies aren't purchased from foreign countries, but are just given to us out of the kindness of their hearts? If anything, it creates a very NEGATIVE cashflow for the USA because they have to spend all this money trying to maintain it as an illegal drug. Marijuana was made illegal for a reason, even if it was a racist reason. (A quick search in a legal library will show that marijuana was first made illegal because the government didn't want the Mexican immigrants using the stuff and becoming 'poor quality workers'). The oil industry will always be involved in a modern economy. There are far too many useful chemicals and compounds that are derived from fossil fuels, and there is no such thing as a 100% clean and green energy source. It just cannot happen no matter how hard people pray for it. There may be cleaner alternatives, but for every alternative you can think of there is at least one group who will protest it for one reason or another. Suddenly making pot legal will not solve all the problems in the world. I have no problem with the medicinal, or hell even the recreational, use of marijuana. I think it is an amazing plant that has a lot of different uses that we just haven't tapped into yet. However, I also know the downside of the plant and its usage, and what troubles it can cause. As a former/semi-user myself, if I went and said that my use of marijuana had no effect on me I'd be a complete and utter lier. Emotionally I am detached from just about everyone and everything in my life. I have to work much harder to keep my focus on things and make sure that I am doing what I am supposed to do. I quite using marijuana on a routine basis over three years ago now, and only on rare occasions do I still use it. Still, I will never forget how it did affect me and what dangers it can bring. Sadly, I don't think our society is smart enough to be able to use the drug responsibly without causing undue harm on others which in the long run will cost all of us. I think alcohol is a far worse substance, but there is no way it will ever be made 'illegal'. I personally would abstain from voting on whether or not to make marijuana completely legal unless numerous Phase 1 through Phase IV clinical trials were performed on the drug in order to confirm the short and long term effects of this chemical.

Thomas, you need to SERIOUSLY lay off of the conspiracy theory novels you've been reading. hehe. Not everything in existance is the result of some major conspiracy. A conspiracy takes far too much time and money for our government or any business to truly achieve.

Well if you want to get all physical and stuff, yes, you're right. (But I'd still say that the surface of the shuttle facing away from the sun must feel mighty cool to the touch).

One thing to remember about the space shuttle, which most people seem to just ignore, is that the shuttle is exposed to outrageously cold temperatures in space. Outer space isn't a room temperature paradise. It is brutally cold out there. While it's nice that this paint can withstand high temperatures, if it can't tolerate the cold temperatures then it will be just as usefull as wrapping the shuttle in saran wrap. Outside the Earth's atmosphere there is an insanely high amount of cosmic radiation and temperature extremes. If you're facing the sun, then the temperatures you're exposed to are quite high. When you are no longer facing the sun, the temperatures plummet to frighteningly low levels. The paint would have to be able to withstand this constant flip-flop of temperatures out there. Plus, it would have to be able to withstand the insanely high temperatures experienced when going into outer space and then when coming back in. As for using it in place of the insulating foam, that's a bit risky. All of the 'testing' that has been linked to has been room temperature testing. Things behave a LOT differently at sub-zero temperatures. I have not seen one test where this paint has been subjected to liquid nitrogen temperatures and then still performed at the same level. What if this paint cracks at those temperatures or suddenly becomes a very good heat transfer agent at low temperatures? That would lead to critical failure and the loss of life. You can't just add it on top of whatever's there already because mass is such a crucial part of a space flight. You need to make the craft as light as possible in order to escape the Earth's gravity. Any excess mass, no matter how small, requires a large amount of rocket fuel in order to propel it out into space. So adding on a mere 500 pounds of this paint, which isn't guaranteed to work in outer space conditions, is just a huge risk to add on to an already risky project.

Looking at the MSDS of that fireproof paint, there's a lot of little fiberglass and other slicate based compounds in there. Those things aren't good to get into your lungs. The application of the paint wouldn't pose too much of a problem, but if you then sanded it off later you'd be putting a lot of fiberglass and silicate particles into the air. It would be kind of akin to asbestos. Remember, lead paint really doesn't pose a problem at all during application of when it's on the wall. It's when the paint is 'messed with' that you get a problem.

The sulfate ion is a very poor oxidizer. Just because it has a lot of oxygen atoms in there doesn't mean it's a good oxidizer. Fluorine is an incredible oxidizer, and it doesn't have any oxygen atoms in there.

The analogy with the sealed room is a good one, but it is easily explained. If you have a room and seal it off, there are many, many, many, many surfaces for the water vapor to condense on. As a result, you don't get water droplets forming in the air and falling down. In the clouds and atmosphere, however, there isn't anything for the water vapor to condense on except for the bits of dust and ice crystals up in the clouds. Therefore, since it's the only place the water can condense on it forms the little droplets in the clouds. When those droplets are too heavy to be supported by the air currents, they fall down to the ground as rain. For it to start raining, you need a moist air mass which is moving into a cooler mass of air. This happens as warm humid air rises, or as humid air moves into cooler air masses. When this happens, the water vapor in the air condenses. Cooler air cannot hold as much moisture as warmer air, so that excess moisture condenses out onto little bits of dust or ice crystals in the air. This is how the clouds form. If there is enough of the humid air, so much moisture will condense out that the air currents in the atmosphere simply cannot hold the weight of the water. The water then falls down to the ground as rain. For it to stop raining, the moisture that's condensing out of the clouds needs to either finish condensing and forming droplets, or the air has to become warmer and allow more moisture to evaporate into the air. This is why in the spring and summer you tend to get more thunderstorms than in the winter. During the summer months, the humidity levels tend to rise significantly as well as the temperature. The sun heats the ground from above while the atmosphere remains relatively cool. As this hot humid air rises in the afternoon thanks to the constant heating throughout the day, it soon begins to condense out and form droplets. The large gradient between hot and col air causes pretty significant updrafts which pushes this condensing air and ice crystals far up into the atmosphere. The crystals rub against each other and form static charges which eventually discharge in the form of thunder and lightning. To form rain, you need the following: A warm humid air mass cooling off in contact with a cooler air mass. If the air in the upper atmosphere is at a similar temperature as the air in the lower atmosphere, no rain will form as no water will condense. For the rain to stop, the air has to become desaturated due to warming temperatures, or the moisture level in the air simply has to be exhausted.

It's a simple matter of saving face. If the DEA moves Marijuana down from Schedule 1, then all the propaganda and falsities they've been proclaiming for years will be proven as a pile of dung. The Government doesn't want to EVER admit that they were wrong, so they stubbornly leave it as Schedule 1.

One thing that is also a unknown at this point is how the immune system of people in developed countries differs from the immune system of people in these African Villages. Generally speaking, people in the USA, UK, Japan, etc. have a much greater immune system due to modern medicine than many of the people in these remote African villiages do. All of the effects of Ebola have been seen happening to the people in these African villiages. We still don't know exactly how it will pan out in a more 'modern' civilization.

The thing to remember is that you really can't tell if someone is a marijuana user just by looking at them. (Pretty much the same thing with most drugs out there). The only ones you remember are those who cannot handle it. Those who frequently use it but are still responsible citizens don't seem to be 'counted' when people look at the results. I've been absolutely stunned by some of the people I've met who habitually use marijuana. I NEVER would have expected them to be users until I saw them pull out the joint. I myself used to be a user of marijuana and can see all sides of the argument. (As a diabetic I found that pot was a safer alternative to me than alcohol. As for the blood sugar lowering, my BSL's never dropped while using weed. Perhaps it's because I have no active Islet cells in my pancreas so I cannot produce insulin). Marijuana has a lot of untapped uses in it which unfortuneately we'll never be able to fully examine. The US Government is kind of 'stuck' on the issue. If they come out and say 'yeah, the stuff can be useful', then they'll be admitting that they've lied for decades. If they say 'this stuff has no use whatsoever and should be made extinct', they'll be called hypocrites and liers as well since they have approved the drugs dronabinol and marinol which are made of Delta-9-THC. I honestly believe that before any decisions should be made NUMEROUS and lengthy clinical trials should happen. As for the recreational use, I have only one idea that I could think of which would be a good one, but the enforcement would be a pain in the butt. Right now, you need a driver's license to drive a car, correct? Well, why not issue 'marijuana licenses' to people? Set an age for usage and have people apply to their state governments to get a license to smoke pot. Per the guidelines of the license, you would not be allowed to smoke pot while driving, nor would you be allowed to smoke pot while in a public area. It would simply give you the license to smoke pot while resting in your own home. If you committ a crime while using marijuana, that license is revoked and if you are caught using it again you will be treated just as if pot was illegal. If a cop raids your garden but you have a license to use marijuana, then you're in no trouble. If you don't have a license, then you get a court date. I think it would be very difficult to enforce this 'law', but it would be a way to give responsible people the right to use it, and irresponsible people would not be able to.

Well that's not exactly particle physics there. It's simple science. ANYTHING that is based upon scientific findings will soon be known to everybody who wants to know. It's not like we can hide nature from people.

Not to mention that if it's the pure gas, releasing it into the environment really can't happen. The gas is so freaking light that it just flies right out of the atmosphere, then converts into helium which is just as light and just as escapeable.

That second link seems very 'not right' to me. If tritium was that damned lethal and that expensive, there's no way in hell you'd see any of those trasers out there which have a tritium based 'core' which gives off the electrons needed by the phosphorescent coating. With the lethality and cost that is explained in that article, it would make those keychains incredibly deadly and outrageously expensive. It's proposterous to think that tritium is that dangerous as once it has decayed it becomes helium. So the only radiation it gives off is from it's own decay. The problem would be in the form of tritium oxides as it can then be better absorbed by our bodies. Still, I think that second link really exaggerates things.

Just take a quarter/dime/half dollar and look at the sides. The Cu shows through clearly.

You've got it backwards there. Successful fusion requires such high temperatures and pressures that we simply cannot achieve those criteria without the use of another bomb. In order for successful fusion to occur in a bomb, nuclear fission has to take place first. The fission provides enough heat and pressure to fuse together the lighter isotopes and create a fusion reaction. So every 'hydrogen bomb' out there is triggered by the detonation of a fission bomb which then sets off the fusion process. So in actuality, the fusion fuel is surrounded by the fission device. When the fission bomb detonates, it creates the conditions needed for the fusion to take place.

As a Type 1 (Insulin Dependent) Diabetic, I agree with what has already been posted above. In a normal human being, the liver and the pancreas work in conjunction to make sure that the level of sugar in the blood remains at a constant 85-120 mg/dL. (I'm not sure on the exact range for a 'normal' person, but that's the range I try and achieve). When you eat, it triggers the islet cells in your pancreas to generate insulin so that the body can absorb the sugar into the cells and metabolize it. The thing is, the islet cells don't exactly 'stop' when they are supposed to, so your liver also breaks down glycogen into glucose in order to cover any excess insulin that is produced by your pancreas. Now in a diabetic, things are a bit different. For Type 2 diabetics, their pancreas produces insulin, but it's either not enough or their cells simply can't make use of it. This causes their blood sugar levels to rise. (Hyperglycemia). For Type 1 diabetics (myself), an autoimmune reaction causes their body to destroy all of the insulin producing cells in their pancreas, so they don't have any way to produce insulin on their own. Because of this, they have to take injections of insulin in order to to control their blood sugar levels. Hypoglycemia (Low levels of blood sugar) is a short term danger while Hyperglycemia (High blood sugar) is an insidious long term danger. Blood with a lot of sugar in it is thicker than normal blood. As a result, your heart needs to pump a bit harder and delicate tissues in the kidneys and eyes begin to get damaged by this 'thicker' blood. Tiny blood vessels and nerves in your extremities can get damaged by this high level of sugar causing you to lose feeling and circulation in your feet in particular. Wounds will heal slower, and over time your vision will get worse and worse as blood vessels in your retina begin to rupture and your retina dies causing you to go blind. The brain needs sugar in order to function, and if there is not enough sugar in your blood it's exactly like being intoxicated on alcohol. Your judgement is the first thing that goes, followed by your ability to do things like stand up, focus, walk, speak, type, etc. Pretty soon, if you don't get enough sugar in your blood, you will go unconcious and unless your liver is able to cover that extra insulin in your blood, brain tissue will begin to die. Now back to the liver. As I stated earlier, the liver naturally breaks down glycogen into glucose in order to give your body a constant supply of sugar. This sugar allows you to function. If it weren't for this constant glycogen break down, you'd only have energy to function when you were infusing sugar into your system. This is part of the feedback mechanism which results in you craving sugar after you've eaten some. When you eat sugar, you get the rush as your pancreas starts producing insulin so that you can metabolize the glucose. Because of this high influx of glucose, your liver cuts back on the glucose production while your pancreas continues to make insulin. So shortly after taking in a bunch of sugar and metabolizing it, there's a little catch-up period where your liver isn't making enough sugar to cover the insulin in your system. As a result, you crave sugar and want to get more of it as you have a temporary period of a low blood sugar. For a diabetic, the fact that their liver is constantly producing glucose but they don't have enough or can't make use of their insulin causes a problem. The background glucose production will build up and create a high blood sugar. Therefore, diabetics usually inject a long-acting insulin which will cover the background glucose production of the liver. The insulin doesn't cover the sugar increased caused by eating a meal, but it does handle that background sugar production to keep the blood sugar in check. The thing is, sometimes we do things like do a lot of excercise which causes our liver to slow down or stop glucose production for a while. Meanwhile, the background insulin in our system is lowering our blood sugar. As a result, there can be a case where there's too much insulin and not enough sugar in the blood. This is why we carry glucose tablets with us. It allows us to quickly get glucose into our system and make up for what the liver doesn't naturally produce. There may also be the case where we give ourselves too much short acting insulin and cause our blood sugar to drop too low. Again, we take the sugar to cover this. For diabetics, drinking alcohol is a very dangerous thing to do and they must monitor their blood sugar like crazy if they drink. When you drink, the liver immediately starts converting the ethanol into something else as it metabolizes it. The primary function of the liver is to detoxify you. Glucose production comes second. So if your liver is taxed by metabolizing the alcohol, it won't be producing glucose, and it won't do so for quite some time. So while a diabetic drinks, their blood sugar may increase tremendously from all of the carbohydrates and sugars in a lot of drinks. As a result, the diabetic may give an insulin injection to counteract the hyperglycemia. The problem is, because the liver is so busy detoxifying the person, it won't be able to make enough sugar to cover the background insulin as well. So a few hours later, the background insulin is busy working, parts of the short term insulin are busy working, but the liver is too busy cleaning the person up. As a result the blood sugar drops precipitously and the drunken diabetic, who may be passed out or asleep at this point, could have a fatally low blood sugar. A diabetic who drinks MUST watch what they take in while drinking and make sure that their blood sugar is a little bit high when they go to bed for the night. There have been nights where I've been out drinking and when I come home my blood sugar is about 385 mg/dL. When I wake up the next morning, it has dropped to 81 mg/dL. If I had given myself a shot before going to bed, I could die in the middle of the night.

Deuterium performs very slightly differently than protium (normal hydrogen) does in chemical reactions. It's not anything really marked, but it is noticeable. If there's enough deuterium in your body to replace a large proportion of the normal hydrogen atoms, it can alter the chemistry enough to make you pretty sick as it slows down chemical processes essential to life. Again though, you need to take in a large amount of the stuff.

Are you guys also taking into account that once an atom of U-238 decays it can no longer give off any more radiation? Once it has decayed that atom no longer exists. It's not like the U-238 decays and then gives off another particle when it's daughter product decays, etc. etc, and you wind up with alpha particles produced in triplicate. So once the initial decay happens, you have to take that atom out of your 'count' for what's leftover. This is true for all the gamma rays, alpha particles and beta particles.

The inhaled form is dangerous because then the alpha particles are exposed to living tissue that is reproducing and dividing. Externally, your skin is composed of dead cells. Dead cells don't divide. Dead cells are immune to cancers. Skin cancer involves the subdermal layers which are comprised of living cells which reproduce. This is why UV rays cause skin cancer. They have enough energy to move through the dead cells. Alpha particles simply cannot get through the layers of dead skin. I'm still trying to find it again, but when I was doing my 'quest for knowledge' on DU before, I found a great website that listed the energy of the radiation given off by uranium as it decays and compared it to commonly encountered sources of radiation. What was remarkable was how 'average' the radioactivity of uranium is. There are a great number of elements/isotopes out there which are far more radioactive than DU is.

That's kind of a myth. The human nose is INCREDIBLY sensitive to many toxic compounds such as arsine, hydrogen cyanide, hydrogen sulfide, hydrogen selenide, etc. etc. Some of these compounds will numb the scent receptors so you'll soon lose your sense of smell, but in all of these compounds you can smell their presence LONG before the gases reach toxic levels. HCN has that lovely odor of bitter almonds. In my freshman year of college I had to take an inventory of our school's chemical supply, and there was a LOT of chemicals that needed to be accounted for. I must have spent four or five hours in front of the cyanide/cyanate/thiocyanate/etc. chemicals on a hot, humid day. The entire time I could smell the bitter almond odor from faint traces of HCN in the air. I had a pretty nasty headache when I was done and felt pretty tired, but I'm still alive.

Thomas, don't forget that alpha particles are stopped by a few inches of air around them. Due to their large size (They are a bare helium nucleus after all), their energy is quickly dissipated. Alpha particles are more of a short range hazard than a long range one. If you have a small particle, yes there is less 'blockage' from other uranium atoms, but there is also a lot less alpha particles. On a larger particle, you have more external surface area so while more particles are 'blocked', more particles are also released. So the smaller size doesn't really result in more alpha particles. I'll need to look this up to confirm it, but I also don't believe that Uranium gives off x-rays during its decay. In reality, the difference between x-rays and gamma rays is pretty minimal. They are both high energy photons given off by an atom. X-rays originate from the electron shells of an atom, while a gamma ray's origin is in the nucleus. In many cases, gamma ray and x-ray is used interchangeably. Uranium gives off gamma rays upon it's decay. A gamma ray is analagous to the light given off by an excited electron when it falls back down into it's ground state. A gamma ray is given off by a nucleus when it falls back down into it's ground state after rearranging itself.

Pennies are made out of a relatively pure zinc core with a very thin copper layer/plating on the outside. Dimes, Half Dollar and Quarters are composed of a solid copper core with an outer layer of a copper/nickel alloy. With the penny, the Cu coating is so thin that what happened is you quickly oxidized the copper and the heat caused the oxides that formed to quickly vanish away leaving the low melting zinc inside. What may have also happened is that the liquid zinc dissolved the copper. On the dime, it's just a simple manner of oxidation of the Cu/Ni layer as the torch isn't hot enough to melt the copper.