I am a chemical engineer by education, if not by practice. There are several reasons why catalysts are degraded despite not being consumed in reaction.
The issue is that catalysts are typically formed into fine, spherical pellets to maximize the surface area of catalytic material exposed. This is because catalytic reactions are characterized by an intermediate reaction between the reactants and active sites on the catalyst. As a result of their being made into pellets, a variety of things can occur that reduce the active surface area. As a result of temperature and pressure, the pellets may adhere to form larger particles, which will hence have lower surface area. Additionally, chemical entities present in the reactor may physically adhere to the pellets creating a diffusive barrier to the catalyst. The catalyst can probably be recycled after its effective lifetime, but the cost is certainly not zero (probably similar to production costs in ore refining).
Additionally, although catalysts are not consumed <b>in the reaction they catalyze</b>, they may take part in reactions other than the one of interest. In this way, catalytic material may degrade over time, although platinum is fairly inert.
Hats on backwards, baggy pants, an attitude that gives the impression they are entitled, no manors, an education system that is more involved with outcome based education...
Somehow, I think if they owned manors, they would have little or no need to be doing any kind of work.
Yeah, that'll do you a great deal of good when they decide to just shoot you first. Of course, all the morons going around gung-ho about their guns completely forget that, if they have guns, then almost certainly criminals will more more and better guns, seeing as they're an essential part of their "business".
Or were you imagining killing some poor unprepared guy walking down the street who really couldn't care less about your deranged mental situation?
But is it worth more than your life? The first thing all these "GONNA GET MAH GUNZ!!11!1!!eleven!" guys forget is that swinging around a gun is a great way to get shot in the back. Especially since the average looter will probably be an impoverished black guy with significant experience in killing people on the street.
Hi everybody, I can post an entirely fictional nerdgasm fantasy rant too!
In reality, all that would happen is that the next day, said bully would come back, shoot you in the head as you walked down the hall, piss on your dead body, have a nice, cold beer, and get away with a stint in juvenile until 18 because of his "history of being bullied in school" (way to go, dipshit).
Sorry to bust up your dreams, but they'll just start by firing nerve gas through your windows. Then they'll snipe your dog. You can't win, don't try to be the tough guy.
People don't choose where to live; they're born where they live. Even to the extent that people move, perhaps once in their lifetime, they almost certainly don't do it based on the availability of Internet access. You could just as easily ask why rural locations ought have sanitation, electrification, or any other utility. The great thing about society is that we as a people believe there are certain things which everybody should be able to enjoy, even if it requires a transfer of wealth to accomplish it. Whether or not you think Internet service is one of these is up to you, but don't try pretend that the only fair way resources can be distributed is every man for himself.
The finding is controversial because it has been commonly known that arsenic esters (R-AsO3) are rapidly hydrolyzed in water. For example, the main cause of arsenic poisoning is its replacement of phosphorus in adenosine triphosphate (ATP), followed by the quick decomposition of the arsenated compound, preventing cells from performing metabolism. The NASA paper claims that the bacteria have somehow found a way to create stable arsenic compounds despite the fact that cells are highly aqueous environments. I don't believe anybody is disputing that the bacteria can grow in the presence of arsenic. Rather, the controversial claim is that arsenic is replacing phosphorus. For example, an alternative explanation would be that the bacteria possess very effective mechanisms to pump arsenic out of the cell, similar to how halophiles are capable of removing large quantities of salt ions.
On another note, I don't think it's fair to be attacking NASA about this, though their decision to hold a press conference appears politically motivated (i.e. a grab for money/attention). Their space program is consistently underfunded, and they've been deploying robotic missions as much as usual.
As for whether the paper's claims regarding the incorporation of arsenic into molecules stands up, that will have to ultimately be confirmed by independent experiments. It's not like the bacteria are some kind of state secret, so it's premature to call anything "under fire" at the moment.
Disclaimer: I don't know anything about biochemistry, I'm just another IT guy.
Actually, concerning capital punishment in the U.K., I find it curious that the members of Parliament can give lengthy speeches on the inequity of the death penalty, and indeed to call for European and British intervention globally, when public opinion appears to be in favor of the penalty. I took a brief look at "Bring Back the Death Sentence" on the suggestions website, and the majority of comments indicate either complete or conditional support for the death penalty.
I see no way to be sad about executing you. As a matter of fact we should first remove all useful organs and body parts and then send the remains to an alligator farm where the meat will be appreciated. One less pretentious savage in this world makes for a happy moment. Now if we would get a mind set to do the same with your mother and everyone you know the world would be a much nicer place.
There, fixed that for you. In addition, I would suggest that we broadcast it over all the public media, so everybody can confirm the success of the execution, lest you escape justice.
One of the largest problems to be faced with this endevor is that I a open source developer could really care less if my software even runs or compiles on a Windows machine.
It's great to see how enthusiastic you are for this! Not like all those guys who couldn't care less!
"I am certain that these organisms contain oxygen in some of their molecules, like DNA, RNA, amino acids, etc."
Why?
FTA: " The creature's cells apparently lack mitochondria, the organelles that use oxygen to power a cell. Instead they are rich in what seem to be hydrogenosomes, organelles that can do a similar job in anaerobic (or oxygen free) environments."
Someday, there will be a way to link to articles, and on that day you can stop looking like a duuf.
mschaffer refers to oxygen in the sense of the atomic species. It is certain that all known life forms have oxygen atoms in them, and mschaffer is simply being pedantic.
When was the last time your landline phone company or electric utility came out with anything new and exciting?
Never. And I like it that way. I like knowing that when I pick up my phone and call someone, it will Just Work. Likewise, I like knowing that I can plug my appliances into my power outlets and have them turn on.
For a lot of things, nobody wants "new and exciting" versions, merely "not broken" versions, something that does not exist with the American Internet system.
Are you serious? The first thing I would do if I managed to become a genetically superior aristocrat is to restrict the availability of superior genetics to the chosen and force all others to submit to genetic therapy that would forever destroy theirs, and any of their offspring's ability to ever threaten me or my descendants. In the world you describe, that is the ONLY possible outcome, and in fact, the only MORAL outcome in the world you describe.
The "market" is not just driven by money, it is also driven by "I'll give you mine if you'll give me yours" and "I'll give everyone mine because knowing thousands of people appreciate my kid the same way I do makes me feel good" ego reasons.
Cut out all 3 of these reasons and the market dries up, and less is produced. Yes, you will still have some produced for self-use and you will still have some produced and published by people who don't realize nobody is out there looking at it.
The problem with this statement is that there would still be just as much child abuse. Unless you're saying that it's all fine as long as we don't know about it, which does seem to be the prevailing attitude.
Slashdot Mirror
I am a chemical engineer by education, if not by practice. There are several reasons why catalysts are degraded despite not being consumed in reaction.
The issue is that catalysts are typically formed into fine, spherical pellets to maximize the surface area of catalytic material exposed. This is because catalytic reactions are characterized by an intermediate reaction between the reactants and active sites on the catalyst. As a result of their being made into pellets, a variety of things can occur that reduce the active surface area. As a result of temperature and pressure, the pellets may adhere to form larger particles, which will hence have lower surface area. Additionally, chemical entities present in the reactor may physically adhere to the pellets creating a diffusive barrier to the catalyst. The catalyst can probably be recycled after its effective lifetime, but the cost is certainly not zero (probably similar to production costs in ore refining).
Additionally, although catalysts are not consumed <b>in the reaction they catalyze</b>, they may take part in reactions other than the one of interest. In this way, catalytic material may degrade over time, although platinum is fairly inert.
Hats on backwards, baggy pants, an attitude that gives the impression they are entitled, no manors, an education system that is more involved with outcome based education...
Somehow, I think if they owned manors, they would have little or no need to be doing any kind of work.
Considering that they can kill 100 million people at a time with a single push of a button (and limitless ammo too), yeah, I'm pretty sure they can.
Yeah, that'll do you a great deal of good when they decide to just shoot you first. Of course, all the morons going around gung-ho about their guns completely forget that, if they have guns, then almost certainly criminals will more more and better guns, seeing as they're an essential part of their "business".
Or were you imagining killing some poor unprepared guy walking down the street who really couldn't care less about your deranged mental situation?
But is it worth more than your life? The first thing all these "GONNA GET MAH GUNZ!!11!1!!eleven!" guys forget is that swinging around a gun is a great way to get shot in the back. Especially since the average looter will probably be an impoverished black guy with significant experience in killing people on the street.
Hi everybody, I can post an entirely fictional nerdgasm fantasy rant too!
In reality, all that would happen is that the next day, said bully would come back, shoot you in the head as you walked down the hall, piss on your dead body, have a nice, cold beer, and get away with a stint in juvenile until 18 because of his "history of being bullied in school" (way to go, dipshit).
Sorry to bust up your dreams, but they'll just start by firing nerve gas through your windows. Then they'll snipe your dog. You can't win, don't try to be the tough guy.
People don't choose where to live; they're born where they live. Even to the extent that people move, perhaps once in their lifetime, they almost certainly don't do it based on the availability of Internet access. You could just as easily ask why rural locations ought have sanitation, electrification, or any other utility. The great thing about society is that we as a people believe there are certain things which everybody should be able to enjoy, even if it requires a transfer of wealth to accomplish it. Whether or not you think Internet service is one of these is up to you, but don't try pretend that the only fair way resources can be distributed is every man for himself.
The finding is controversial because it has been commonly known that arsenic esters (R-AsO3) are rapidly hydrolyzed in water. For example, the main cause of arsenic poisoning is its replacement of phosphorus in adenosine triphosphate (ATP), followed by the quick decomposition of the arsenated compound, preventing cells from performing metabolism. The NASA paper claims that the bacteria have somehow found a way to create stable arsenic compounds despite the fact that cells are highly aqueous environments. I don't believe anybody is disputing that the bacteria can grow in the presence of arsenic. Rather, the controversial claim is that arsenic is replacing phosphorus. For example, an alternative explanation would be that the bacteria possess very effective mechanisms to pump arsenic out of the cell, similar to how halophiles are capable of removing large quantities of salt ions.
On another note, I don't think it's fair to be attacking NASA about this, though their decision to hold a press conference appears politically motivated (i.e. a grab for money/attention). Their space program is consistently underfunded, and they've been deploying robotic missions as much as usual.
As for whether the paper's claims regarding the incorporation of arsenic into molecules stands up, that will have to ultimately be confirmed by independent experiments. It's not like the bacteria are some kind of state secret, so it's premature to call anything "under fire" at the moment.
Disclaimer: I don't know anything about biochemistry, I'm just another IT guy.
So the only races that exist are white and black? Indeed, I wonder who the racist here is.
Actually, concerning capital punishment in the U.K., I find it curious that the members of Parliament can give lengthy speeches on the inequity of the death penalty, and indeed to call for European and British intervention globally, when public opinion appears to be in favor of the penalty. I took a brief look at "Bring Back the Death Sentence" on the suggestions website, and the majority of comments indicate either complete or conditional support for the death penalty.
I see no way to be sad about executing you. As a matter of fact we should first remove all useful organs and body parts and then send the remains to an alligator farm where the meat will be appreciated. One less pretentious savage in this world makes for a happy moment. Now if we would get a mind set to do the same with your mother and everyone you know the world would be a much nicer place.
There, fixed that for you. In addition, I would suggest that we broadcast it over all the public media, so everybody can confirm the success of the execution, lest you escape justice.
Well, welcome to the world of classified information, where if operatives get outed, they get a bullet in the back of the head.
Maybe they should stop doing things that make them deserve getting shot in the head?
They're estimates were bullshit. They're claim that there were no plumes is bullshit. Their claim that they're fully funding the cleanup is bullshit.
You're attempt at trolling is quite poor.
4 Tb is 512 GB.
Sure you can. Integers can mean whatever you want them to. 1 = 1/3. 2 = 2/3. 3 = 3/3.
One of the largest problems to be faced with this endevor is that I a open source developer could really care less
if my software even runs or compiles on a Windows machine.
It's great to see how enthusiastic you are for this! Not like all those guys who couldn't care less!
"I am certain that these organisms contain oxygen in some of their molecules, like DNA, RNA, amino acids, etc."
Why?
FTA:
" The creature's cells apparently lack mitochondria, the organelles that use oxygen to power a cell. Instead they are rich in what seem to be hydrogenosomes, organelles that can do a similar job in anaerobic (or oxygen free) environments."
Someday, there will be a way to link to articles, and on that day you can stop looking like a duuf.
mschaffer refers to oxygen in the sense of the atomic species. It is certain that all known life forms have oxygen atoms in them, and mschaffer is simply being pedantic.
When was the last time your landline phone company or electric utility came out with anything new and exciting?
Never. And I like it that way. I like knowing that when I pick up my phone and call someone, it will Just Work. Likewise, I like knowing that I can plug my appliances into my power outlets and have them turn on.
For a lot of things, nobody wants "new and exciting" versions, merely "not broken" versions, something that does not exist with the American Internet system.
You seem like a very inferior person, especially judging from your pretentious and self-important manner of speech. How about I come and kill you?
Are you serious? The first thing I would do if I managed to become a genetically superior aristocrat is to restrict the availability of superior genetics to the chosen and force all others to submit to genetic therapy that would forever destroy theirs, and any of their offspring's ability to ever threaten me or my descendants. In the world you describe, that is the ONLY possible outcome, and in fact, the only MORAL outcome in the world you describe.
The "market" is not just driven by money, it is also driven by "I'll give you mine if you'll give me yours" and "I'll give everyone mine because knowing thousands of people appreciate my kid the same way I do makes me feel good" ego reasons.
Cut out all 3 of these reasons and the market dries up, and less is produced. Yes, you will still have some produced for self-use and you will still have some produced and published by people who don't realize nobody is out there looking at it.
The problem with this statement is that there would still be just as much child abuse . Unless you're saying that it's all fine as long as we don't know about it, which does seem to be the prevailing attitude.
The tetrahedron has a center, dumbass.
Actually, if everyone goes to buy a new PS3, SONY will lose money hand over fist. They sell their units at a major loss.
And if I ever met you, I would rape you personally.