I know PS is not PDF, but I said it because I thought that's what he was talking about when he said print to PDF.
I agree with your evaluation of office workers' abilities as well.
You know, that fancy sleek iDesk looks awkward to me.
I'm nearsighted so I really have to strain to see text on the screen if my face is more than 18 to 20 inches away. From the pictures, it would seem one's head would sit a good two and a half feet from the screen at least. I have contact lenses, but I can't look at computer screens for very long with them in before they start hurting. For some reason I don't blink as often looking at computer screens. Rewetting drops work for a while, but it's just easier to sit closer.
I agree with you completely big, rectangular and flat is the way to go. Much more comfortable.
As my chemistry professor explained it, yeah the new ones are all unstable,existing for fractions of a second only. But, apparently there is some hope that there might be some barrier, that after a certain atomic number, there might be more elements that can exist for longer periods of time.
I don't know what you would use those elements for, but it would be pretty damn cool.
There were actually put into limited production, but then the 70's fuel shortage ended and no one cared enough to have them actually made en masse, if I recall correctly.
Your problem is tv. I get my (non-nerd news) from news.bbc.co.uk and my subscription to the Wall Street Journal. If you give it a try, I think you'll find that you're disgusted a lot less by the BBC than you are with CNN. It's really not very UK-centric either. It's very world-centric, if you know what I mean, and I think does a better job of covering American news than CNN does.
Re:What I would Actually like to see.
on
Aquarium Modcase
·
· Score: 1
I saw a couple problems with what you've said. I'm glad you said it though because it made me see how rediculous my previous calculation was before. I don't even want to say what I did to arrive at that absurd number. I haven't touched chem in about 4 months.
Water that is neutral, that is that has an equal amount of hydronium and hydroxyl ions, has 1 x 10^-7 M of each ion. That means that for approximately every 10 million water molecules there is 1 hydronium ion and 1 hydroxyl ion.
1 x 10^-7M is a measure of concentration. What do you mean that water(you didn't specify how much water) has that much of each ion? A concentration is a not a measure of quantity.
Also, the term "hydroxyl" is only proper when the ion is part of an organic compound. Organic compounds contain carbon. Water is not an organic compound, so the proper term is "hydroxide."
Now, let's take a look at what a pH of 7 means. You were right with the first number; a pH of 7 does in fact mean that the H+ concentration is 1 x 10^-7M. M as in molarity, as in moles per liter.
Moles per liter you say? Why yes, moles per liter!
Now, we know from the density of water (assuming STP) that a liter of water has 1 kilogram, or 1000 grams of mass.
(1 x 10^-7 Moles H+ / 1000g water) * (18g water per mole water) and we are left with 1.8 X 10^-9 moles H+ per mole water. Multiplying the numerator and denominator by 1 x 10^9 and canceling moles, we get 1.8 parts per billion, and since for every hydronium, there was also a hydroxide, that means that the ion concentration is 3.6 parts per billion.
I can't tell exactly what you meant from your second paragraph. From the way you phrased it, you could be understanding the process, or you could not. So let me just say that the water isn't really breaking down per se; the concentration of hydronium and hydroxide ions in neutral water is going to stay the same.
You can heat it and cool it all you want, the number of hydronium and hydroxide ions is going to stay the same. What does change is the dissociation constant. More water molecules are breaking in to hydronium and hydroxide, but at the same time, more hydronium and hydroxide ions are combining to form water. You can calculate this with a bunch of entropy and enthalpy and gibbs freen energy stuff that I forgot how to do.
To say water dissociates faster at higher temperatures is technically correct, but you have to also say that it's being "built up" faster. If I didn't already know better, I could have gotten the impression that pH changes as temperature changes from your statement.
*sigh. I'm going to miss chemistry. I start uni in a week, and my majors only required one general chem course. Since my AP credits fulfill the requirements, and I didn't have much room in my schedule I'm not taking it. It's sad.
As for that webpage, well I kind of already knew everything there. I'm just so rusty, lol!
Re:What I would Actually like to see.
on
Aquarium Modcase
·
· Score: 3, Informative
*Smacks head
Oh yeah! You're right. That's Le Chatelier's principle. You're also right about hydronium. I always just pretended that water dissociated into hydrogen and hydroxide instead of hydronium and hydroxide because it made my stoichiometry easier.
Yeah, it was Fritz Haber who had an excellent method of synthesizing ammonia from nitrogen and hydrogen, and got a nobel prize for it even, IIRC. During world war one, he was a patriot and a tremendous asset to germany. He was instrumental in developing poison gas after the introduction of trench warfare. He saw Germany's defeat as a personal failure. He and his staff were world renowned and made many important contributions to physical chemistry. Here's the irony: when the 1930's roll around, the great patriot's contributions are forgotten, and suddenly he's just another "dirty Jew" to the Nazi party. Haber is forced to leave the country.
Slashdot Mirror
I know PS is not PDF, but I said it because I thought that's what he was talking about when he said print to PDF. I agree with your evaluation of office workers' abilities as well.
*raises eyebrow.
When you go to file, print, and select to print to file instead of to a printer, I believe the format is usually PostScript.
Hurrr hurr hurrr.
Maybe teh XBOX should hav ctrl atl del also!!!!!!111
LOLLLOOOLLLOLOLORRRRZZZZ!!!!!!!!1111
Maybe you should RTFA.
It's still a Wintel world.
Ok, look here and here
Yeah, that's way to far away. How can these girls see the screen?
Maybe they have superpowers.
You know, that fancy sleek iDesk looks awkward to me. I'm nearsighted so I really have to strain to see text on the screen if my face is more than 18 to 20 inches away. From the pictures, it would seem one's head would sit a good two and a half feet from the screen at least. I have contact lenses, but I can't look at computer screens for very long with them in before they start hurting. For some reason I don't blink as often looking at computer screens. Rewetting drops work for a while, but it's just easier to sit closer. I agree with you completely big, rectangular and flat is the way to go. Much more comfortable.
Maybe it's just because Macs are actually used in the film industry a lot for video editing, etc. They just happen to have them on hand maybe.
It's true.
I would just like to say, that given the chance, I would have put a bullet in that bastard's face.
Sorry, but that was the funniest thing I've read all month.
I tried searching for your sig on google, but it returned no matches. It's a cool quote, mind telling me when the National Security Agency said that?
Two pretzels were walking down the street, and one was assaulted.
As my chemistry professor explained it, yeah the new ones are all unstable,existing for fractions of a second only. But, apparently there is some hope that there might be some barrier, that after a certain atomic number, there might be more elements that can exist for longer periods of time.
I don't know what you would use those elements for, but it would be pretty damn cool.
I wasn't serious. You obviously need to watch more Star Trek.
Everyone knows all you need is some dilithium to stabilize the deuturium/anti-deuturium reactions.
Hmmm, Hey check this out:
Chrysler Corporation Turbine Car
There were actually put into limited production, but then the 70's fuel shortage ended and no one cared enough to have them actually made en masse, if I recall correctly.
Your problem is tv. I get my (non-nerd news) from news.bbc.co.uk and my subscription to the Wall Street Journal. If you give it a try, I think you'll find that you're disgusted a lot less by the BBC than you are with CNN. It's really not very UK-centric either. It's very world-centric, if you know what I mean, and I think does a better job of covering American news than CNN does.
Water that is neutral, that is that has an equal amount of hydronium and hydroxyl ions, has 1 x 10^-7 M of each ion. That means that for approximately every 10 million water molecules there is 1 hydronium ion and 1 hydroxyl ion.
1 x 10^-7M is a measure of concentration. What do you mean that water(you didn't specify how much water) has that much of each ion? A concentration is a not a measure of quantity.
Also, the term "hydroxyl" is only proper when the ion is part of an organic compound. Organic compounds contain carbon. Water is not an organic compound, so the proper term is "hydroxide."
Now, let's take a look at what a pH of 7 means. You were right with the first number; a pH of 7 does in fact mean that the H+ concentration is 1 x 10^-7M. M as in molarity, as in moles per liter.
Moles per liter you say? Why yes, moles per liter!
Now, we know from the density of water (assuming STP) that a liter of water has 1 kilogram, or 1000 grams of mass.
(1 x 10^-7 Moles H+ / 1000g water) * (18g water per mole water) and we are left with 1.8 X 10^-9 moles H+ per mole water. Multiplying the numerator and denominator by 1 x 10^9 and canceling moles, we get 1.8 parts per billion, and since for every hydronium, there was also a hydroxide, that means that the ion concentration is 3.6 parts per billion.
I can't tell exactly what you meant from your second paragraph. From the way you phrased it, you could be understanding the process, or you could not. So let me just say that the water isn't really breaking down per se; the concentration of hydronium and hydroxide ions in neutral water is going to stay the same.
You can heat it and cool it all you want, the number of hydronium and hydroxide ions is going to stay the same. What does change is the dissociation constant. More water molecules are breaking in to hydronium and hydroxide, but at the same time, more hydronium and hydroxide ions are combining to form water. You can calculate this with a bunch of entropy and enthalpy and gibbs freen energy stuff that I forgot how to do.
To say water dissociates faster at higher temperatures is technically correct, but you have to also say that it's being "built up" faster. If I didn't already know better, I could have gotten the impression that pH changes as temperature changes from your statement.
*sigh. I'm going to miss chemistry. I start uni in a week, and my majors only required one general chem course. Since my AP credits fulfill the requirements, and I didn't have much room in my schedule I'm not taking it. It's sad.
As for that webpage, well I kind of already knew everything there. I'm just so rusty, lol!
No.
Right. Something is wrong with my brain tonight.
Neato.
There are tools to import pst files into other mail clients.
That explains why I don't get it then.
*Smacks head
Oh yeah! You're right. That's Le Chatelier's principle. You're also right about hydronium. I always just pretended that water dissociated into hydrogen and hydroxide instead of hydronium and hydroxide because it made my stoichiometry easier.
Yeah, it was Fritz Haber who had an excellent method of synthesizing ammonia from nitrogen and hydrogen, and got a nobel prize for it even, IIRC. During world war one, he was a patriot and a tremendous asset to germany. He was instrumental in developing poison gas after the introduction of trench warfare. He saw Germany's defeat as a personal failure. He and his staff were world renowned and made many important contributions to physical chemistry. Here's the irony: when the 1930's roll around, the great patriot's contributions are forgotten, and suddenly he's just another "dirty Jew" to the Nazi party. Haber is forced to leave the country.