Sodium Hydroxide can exist as a solid. Hydrochloric Acid can't, at least in the real world.
You mix hydroxyl radicals with hydrogen ions you get water. But it's exothermic. It takes less energy to maintain a water molecule than to maintain positive and negative ions, so, depending on how fast you do it, you either get hot water or an explosion of boiling water in your face, assuming you get the proportions right and can control the reaction. Otherwise, you get hot acid or hot alkali or some mixture of both. Neither is going to want to stay in its ionic state long enough for you to think about it, though. It's going to start eating through the container or grabbing carbon dioxide out of the air. Nothing you'd want to play with.
Basically, the idiot who wrote the CTV article has taken a straight scientific story and turned it into a gee whiz pseudoscientific fantasy.
Look, unless you believe in alchemy and slow retort cooking under the full moon, the only thing you're going to get from this contraption is Hydrochloric Acid and Sodium Hydroxide, a strong acid and a strong base (alkali), both of which have antibacterial properties. From the technical description of the actual device, it looks like they're using some kind of ceramic membrane to prevent the positive hydrogen ions and the negative hydroxyl radicals from actually recombining with the Sodium Chloride to form the respective acid and base, so what you end up with are free hydrogen radicals (basically just free protons) and free hydroxyl radicals (basically water that's missing a proton). Neither of these is safe in any sense I can imagine. I certainly wouldn't want to be around if the two products came into contact with NaCl by accident. Heat, Light, Boom, Burn! Or maybe just a slow dermal sizzle.
There's a real pastiche of data here. Variations on a theme mixed together in a haphazard way. None of which adds up to what the CTV article suggests. What you get when you send a reporter to cover a technical story.
Useful technology no doubt, but nothing you'd want to drink.
Seriously, though, I take it there's some theoretical system that makes integers major upgrades and decimals minor improvements? Has this been codified anywhere? Like, is there a Revision Enumeration Verifier (REV) somewhere that gives out browny points for proper implimentation of the Upgrade Numbering and Initializing Control System (UNICS)?
Nobody has given the least thought to what they are going to do with all this peculiar junk after it gets to the end of its useful life. Just dig a big hole like any good primate and throw it in, right?
Leave it to an anonymous coward to miss the point completely. Awfully sensitive for somebody who thinks he's in the right. You are one of the morons who kept complaining that Bill Clinton didn't get a majority. This fucking emperor wanna-be didn't even get a plurality.
Do you realise it took an act of congress to get that changed? Same morons who are running around now trying to fix the consequences of their own deregulation lunacy.
Actually, I have, and it doesn't work. From what I've read on Usenet, it doesn't seem to work for anybody else, either. Just more useless "Windows technology." I did notice that the losing-the-modem problem didn't happen when I accidentally hit the reset button instead of the fan speed control and it rebooted after checking the file structure. Windows is still as quirky as ever. The quirkiness is just more deeply buried now. Now if it would just STAY buried....;o) Maybe I could try driving a stake through its heart.:O)
Are we positive they aren't one and the same person? Have you ever seen Bill with a moustache? Have you ever seen both of them in the same room at the same time?;o)
Seriously, though, this running around toppling the odd dictator every year or two, 30 billion here, a hundred billion there, it's all great if you want to rule the world as George III seems to want to do, but there's always going to be another bozo down the road who won't toe the imperial line. Just because the buildings in Washington are all Greco-Roman Revival doesn't mean this is going to work in the 20th Century. Remember the British Empire. They virtually ruled the world until the Second World War brought them to the brink of bankruptcy.
Depends on what you mean by "bad hardware." If you mean hardware that XP hasn't been well designed for, you may be right. I have had similar problems, specifically, an external serial modem that XP loses track of when I reboot, and a SCSI card it intermittently loses the driver for. I haven't had the kind of constant crashing I had with 98SE--but considering how long this series of OSes has been around, that's not saying very much--and I do have to reboot every now and then because it loses track of the location of the IP address server. Don't even get me started on why they rewrote the USB part of the OS so every USB equipment manufacturer had to extensively rewrite their drivers.
So why is this thing defined in terms of metric units when it's obviously not a metric unit itself? Certainly they wouldn't invent two (2) units with the same symbol, "g".
Since weight = mass x acceleration due to gravity, the metric unit of acceleration due to gravity would be given in terms of Newtons/Kg or m/s^2. 9.8 m/s^2, or 9.8 Newtons/Kg, is a physical constant. It is not a unit. It is NOT correct to speak of 1000g unless one is talking about mass. 1000 x the acceleration due to gravity at the earth's surface would be 9800 m/s^2, or 9800 Newtons/Kg. I.e., the aforementioned weapon is capable of producing an acceleration of 9800 m/s^2 or 9800 Newtons/Kg. It is NOT capable of producing "1000g" unless it's also a cookie machine and can produce 1000g of chocolate chip cookies.
The use of the plural term "Gs" to refer to multiples of the constant g is technobabble. Constants do not have plurals. This is just another example of the kind of lazy American usage that led to the abomination "Saudi," presumably some mythical city in Arabia, during the Gulf War.
My sense of humor is fine, thank you. Unless you have something constructive to say, kindly go back to your Nintendo.
Let me rephrase that for the genetically deprived. No, I swore I wasn't going to try to explain the complex to the terminally simple. Figure it out yourself, Einstein.
They're going to let you change the line at the top of the browser, without going into the registry, from "Microsoft Internet Explorer" to "Bill's Internet Explorer." Hey, these guys have been diddling around for just too too long for anybody to take anything they do seriously. I don't care how many free copies of Windows they give to the Camaroons.
Will somebody please enlighten me as to why anybody in their right mind would pay more money for AOL just so they can see more pop-up ads? Is there something I'm missing here? What added value do you get from AOL for all that extra money? I'm serious here. Inquiring minds want to know....
"as IBM needs Wintel more than Wintel needs them."
I'm beginning to think that this is precisely why they are doing what they are doing. There's the whole Power PC business, and now they're building huge plants to produce state of the art chips that could conceivably include processors?
I'm not pushing conspiracy theories here. I just have this general impression that IBM has spent years trying to fix their original blunder vis-s-vis MS DOS and the introduction of the "IBM compatible" PC.
Slashdot Mirror
Sodium Hydroxide can exist as a solid. Hydrochloric Acid can't, at least in the real world.
You mix hydroxyl radicals with hydrogen ions you get water. But it's exothermic. It takes less energy to maintain a water molecule than to maintain positive and negative ions, so, depending on how fast you do it, you either get hot water or an explosion of boiling water in your face, assuming you get the proportions right and can control the reaction. Otherwise, you get hot acid or hot alkali or some mixture of both. Neither is going to want to stay in its ionic state long enough for you to think about it, though. It's going to start eating through the container or grabbing carbon dioxide out of the air. Nothing you'd want to play with.
Basically, the idiot who wrote the CTV article has taken a straight scientific story and turned it into a gee whiz pseudoscientific fantasy.
Look, unless you believe in alchemy and slow retort cooking under the full moon, the only thing you're going to get from this contraption is Hydrochloric Acid and Sodium Hydroxide, a strong acid and a strong base (alkali), both of which have antibacterial properties. From the technical description of the actual device, it looks like they're using some kind of ceramic membrane to prevent the positive hydrogen ions and the negative hydroxyl radicals from actually recombining with the Sodium Chloride to form the respective acid and base, so what you end up with are free hydrogen radicals (basically just free protons) and free hydroxyl radicals (basically water that's missing a proton). Neither of these is safe in any sense I can imagine. I certainly wouldn't want to be around if the two products came into contact with NaCl by accident. Heat, Light, Boom, Burn! Or maybe just a slow dermal sizzle.
There's a real pastiche of data here. Variations on a theme mixed together in a haphazard way. None of which adds up to what the CTV article suggests. What you get when you send a reporter to cover a technical story.
Useful technology no doubt, but nothing you'd want to drink.
6, 6.1, 7, 7.2, 8, 8.3, 9, 9.4....
Didn't I see this in an IQ test once?
Seriously, though, I take it there's some theoretical system that makes integers major upgrades and decimals minor improvements? Has this been codified anywhere? Like, is there a Revision Enumeration Verifier (REV) somewhere that gives out browny points for proper implimentation of the Upgrade Numbering and Initializing Control System (UNICS)?
No, you're right. They "impact upon." ;o) Please reserve your argh!s for TRUE abominations!
Nobody has given the least thought to what they are going to do with all this peculiar junk after it gets to the end of its useful life. Just dig a big hole like any good primate and throw it in, right?
Dr. Frankenstein lives on.
Maybe I'll get to metamoderate it back up.... ;o)
Complicated crap:
No solution to canned meat.
--The Lumber Cartel
Shouldn't that be "intranet"?
Moderate this you fucking asshole.
Leave it to an anonymous coward to miss the point completely. Awfully sensitive for somebody who thinks he's in the right. You are one of the morons who kept complaining that Bill Clinton didn't get a majority. This fucking emperor wanna-be didn't even get a plurality.
Do you realise it took an act of congress to get that changed? Same morons who are running around now trying to fix the consequences of their own deregulation lunacy.
Son, they don't "make" you dictator for life, you have to do it yourself. Shoot the head of the opposition like Saddam or steal Florida like W.
Care to mention some models?
Actually, I have, and it doesn't work. From what I've read on Usenet, it doesn't seem to work for anybody else, either. Just more useless "Windows technology." I did notice that the losing-the-modem problem didn't happen when I accidentally hit the reset button instead of the fan speed control and it rebooted after checking the file structure. Windows is still as quirky as ever. The quirkiness is just more deeply buried now. Now if it would just STAY buried.... ;o) Maybe I could try driving a stake through its heart. :O)
Are we positive they aren't one and the same person? Have you ever seen Bill with a moustache? Have you ever seen both of them in the same room at the same time? ;o)
Seriously, though, this running around toppling the odd dictator every year or two, 30 billion here, a hundred billion there, it's all great if you want to rule the world as George III seems to want to do, but there's always going to be another bozo down the road who won't toe the imperial line. Just because the buildings in Washington are all Greco-Roman Revival doesn't mean this is going to work in the 20th Century. Remember the British Empire. They virtually ruled the world until the Second World War brought them to the brink of bankruptcy.
No easy answers, just a cautionary note.
Depends on what you mean by "bad hardware." If you mean hardware that XP hasn't been well designed for, you may be right. I have had similar problems, specifically, an external serial modem that XP loses track of when I reboot, and a SCSI card it intermittently loses the driver for. I haven't had the kind of constant crashing I had with 98SE--but considering how long this series of OSes has been around, that's not saying very much--and I do have to reboot every now and then because it loses track of the location of the IP address server. Don't even get me started on why they rewrote the USB part of the OS so every USB equipment manufacturer had to extensively rewrite their drivers.
Get back under your bridge.
For $100,000,000,000 you could BUY Iraq from Saddam Hussein.
So why is this thing defined in terms of metric units when it's obviously not a metric unit itself? Certainly they wouldn't invent two (2) units with the same symbol, "g".
Since weight = mass x acceleration due to gravity, the metric unit of acceleration due to gravity would be given in terms of Newtons/Kg or m/s^2. 9.8 m/s^2, or 9.8 Newtons/Kg, is a physical constant. It is not a unit. It is NOT correct to speak of 1000g unless one is talking about mass. 1000 x the acceleration due to gravity at the earth's surface would be 9800 m/s^2, or 9800 Newtons/Kg. I.e., the aforementioned weapon is capable of producing an acceleration of 9800 m/s^2 or 9800 Newtons/Kg. It is NOT capable of producing "1000g" unless it's also a cookie machine and can produce 1000g of chocolate chip cookies.
The use of the plural term "Gs" to refer to multiples of the constant g is technobabble. Constants do not have plurals. This is just another example of the kind of lazy American usage that led to the abomination "Saudi," presumably some mythical city in Arabia, during the Gulf War.
My sense of humor is fine, thank you. Unless you have something constructive to say, kindly go back to your Nintendo.
Let me rephrase that for the genetically deprived. No, I swore I wasn't going to try to explain the complex to the terminally simple. Figure it out yourself, Einstein.
Not funny at all. Actually, quite incisive, especially considering it's a "female" robot.
I didn't realise you could get away with that. ;o)
They're going to let you change the line at the top of the browser, without going into the registry, from "Microsoft Internet Explorer" to "Bill's Internet Explorer." Hey, these guys have been diddling around for just too too long for anybody to take anything they do seriously. I don't care how many free copies of Windows they give to the Camaroons.
Will somebody please enlighten me as to why anybody in their right mind would pay more money for AOL just so they can see more pop-up ads? Is there something I'm missing here? What added value do you get from AOL for all that extra money? I'm serious here. Inquiring minds want to know....
I know absolutely nothing about needlepoint. ;o)
"as IBM needs Wintel more than Wintel needs them."
I'm beginning to think that this is precisely why they are doing what they are doing. There's the whole Power PC business, and now they're building huge plants to produce state of the art chips that could conceivably include processors?
I'm not pushing conspiracy theories here. I just have this general impression that IBM has spent years trying to fix their original blunder vis-s-vis MS DOS and the introduction of the "IBM compatible" PC.