studiot

Forgive me but 35.8% was quoted (my information came from a BBC news item last week which is in the same ballpark) I did say renewables not just some of them. So what if wind and solar are 23.6% ? All that means is that half as much again is from other forms of renewables! You haven't investigated my question I can easily find that level of expenditure saving, to invest in something more useful.

Here are a few states recognised by Chemists. The crystalline state The gaseous state The metallic state The amorphous state (charcoal, elastic, rubber etc) The vitreous state (glass, supercooled boron trioxide) The liquid state The dissolved state The disperse state (colloids) The ionic state The interfacial state I'm glad you found phase diagrams because that was on my list of 12 little pieces ( not yet finished but here are some more) (3) Binary mixtures , phase diagrams, eutectics, the phase rule. (4) pH, pOH and p(X) (5) Chemical applications of polarised light. (6) The Boltzman distribution (7) Metallic bonding and Fermi levels (8) Electronegativity v electron affinity

That tells me you don't really want to hear what anyone else has to say. I was about compliment you on that amazingly penetrating insight, but then I realised you were using it as an excuse to promote nuclear. Since you can only countenance Mamon what would you do with £130 billion to spend on renewable probjects? I outlined my manifesto in (1) and (2) of my previous post. (3) and (4) comprise further icing on the cake. Oh and I think that towards the end of 2019 Last week's official figures are more current than 2017.

The UK government announced last week that we get about 1/3 of our energy from renewables at this time. However I disagree with the conclusions re nuclear you have drawn from this for several reasons, including but not limited to 1) The money currently being wasted on nuclear could be far better employed elsewhere. 2) There are many other considerations such as measures to reduce need and therefore demand. 3) There are perfectly viable measures available to provide alternative storage at times of low or high wind or simply wind blowing the wrong way. 4) Alternative fuels to fossil could be employed in combustion based electricity plants.

Far better that you have solved it yourself with a hint. Well done and thanks for coming back. +1

Have you heard of substitution of variables? See if it rings a bell and post what you make of it.

It is your hypothesis which is why I asked you to derive the specific classical equation from your premises. It is not enough to state "the new theory makes the same prediction as classical theory", you need to prove this.

How do you explain the waveguide equation (experimentally verified many thousands of times every day) ? VpVg = c2 Where c has its usual meaning as a constant Vp is the phase velocity Vg is the group velocity

How does this relate to what I said? Is it something to do with 0/0 see attachment from Susskind ? +1 to swansont for catch.

What an excellent and positive viewpoint. +1 We should perhaps add to this the issue of the creation / destruction of something abstract. Creation and destruction are transitive verbs which means they operate on something and require an 'object noun'. Therefore the OP needs to clearly define the 'object' noun in this case.

All of them? We are talking about an electric field not an electric current here. For instance Do I have to google all of them for you?

Can we please have one speculation per thread? If a subject is worth speculating it is worth a thread of its own.

OK I will see what I can come up with in the way of a list, but it will have to be to topic headings, rather than page numbers I do not have access to the 11th ed. In the meantime here are a couple of linked challenges for you to investigate and think about. 1) Chemistry recognises more states of matter than Physics, which recognises only 4 (solid, liquid gas ans plasma). Can you think of any? 2) A large part of Physical Chemistry is about the combined action of large collections of particles which obey many common equations, for example the bulk of free electrons in a semiconductor have been called an 'electron gas' because they obey similar laws to the gas laws. So the 'particles' are not always molecules or even atoms. Can you identify any more? Hint some are called colligative properties.

This mathematics is meaningless without definition of your terms. As a matter of interest have you come across Eddington's insight about what he called configuration? as being more fundamental than space or time? This could serve as a time definition in the way you seem to want. Note he used the word 'configuration' in a slightly different manner than we do today.

Hi, Harry. Atkins offers no concessions to those who are not studying Applied Maths and/or Physics. Are you also taking either/both of these? He has written some excellent books and rather cornered the (UK at least) market in textbooks at this level. But you need to say which edition you are working from because there are many and each is laid out differently. For instance I hav ethe 5th and 6th editions, Page 850 starts a chapter on "Processes at Solid Surfaces" (5th) #Whilst page 850 in the 6th is towards the end of a chapter on transport phenoma in general and the diffusion equation in particular. I would also not recommend jumping in at random points because at any point he assumes the underlying Physics and Mathematics. I suggest it would be better to ask folks to pick some subject heading out so that you can follow them in some sort of logical order.

That would be at variance with all the links to medical studies I posted.

I look forward to someone who really knows about this subject explaining what it is all about. Why for instance are we talking about a Venturi effect? This is a purely mechanical constriction. Are you suggesting that a constriction and therefore a pressure differential occurs due to ionic charge repulsion?

Both good points that bring out the fact that noise in resistors doesn't only depend upon temperature. Vn = √(4kTR∆f) So low resistance, narrow frequency bands also contribute to low noise. RF amps are usually very low impedance.

Biological responses to imposed electric fields have been known and studied since at least the 1960s. Acceleration of wound healing is one positive one. https://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/pressroom/presspacs/2018/acs-presspac-december-19-2018/e-bandage-generates-electricity-speeds-wound-healing-in-rats.html Google has many articles.

Here is a quote from Susskind that may help bring out what Swansont and Mordred have been telling you.

You have learned your lesson well. Take a gander at this older thread on batteries The picture is a clickable link. Good luck with your interviews and sure, post queries here.

Yes your figures are interesting but need some explanation of the experimental setup. +1 Were you connecting both meters at the same time to the same points ? Or were you plugging first one in then the other.?

Taken yesterday at the Frome Cheese Show.

Thanks for the vote. One thing that confuses many people is the question of which is the anode and which the cathode, which is positive and which negative and which way does the current flow. Understanding this leads to many exam questions. Discussion of this this would be off topic here, so if you want more on that subject, start a new thread.