/sci/ - Science & Math

>>7037926

Looks like a Hofman elimination to me.

>>7035358

Well, see, if you really wanted to produce clean water without any harmful bacteria and such, you could dump as hit ton of strong acids into it, raising the pH levels to beyond the survivability of germs, and then let that flow through the pipes to people's faucets.

Or, you could clean the water with stuff that also benefits people, albeit in a small way. Whichever.

>>7035332

Iodine is a true bro. Hangs out with itself, great indicator, good for medicine. Even as a free radical, just chill all the time.

Are people equating water treatments as medications here?

Let me get this straight: state provides water through municipal public utilities, but must give it to you full of bacteria, algae, and other shit that will make die horribly.

Okay.

>>7035198

And other industries have made goodly amounts of side profit capturing former pollutants and turning them into useful chemicals. Sulfur dioxide, for example, is easily transformed into useful sulfuric acid.

If we can discover more efficient methods of recycling waste product into useful chemicals, you'll see this happen more often.

>>7034731

"I don't drink water; fish fuck in it." - W.C. Fields.

>>7034587
>tell someone that there are preservatives in a food, they freak out and wont eat it.
>tell same person that the same food has antioxidants in it, they consume it in huge volumes.

People are fucking stupid.

>>7032726

Egad, what a blunder.

>>7030998

That's only if we want absolute pressure. We're not interested in that here.

>>7030987

That's fairly close to my numbers. It was taking roughly 23.8 C change to move 1 PSI in either direction.

>>7030646

You're not necessarily dealing with organic chemistry here anyway, as complex compounds can form with inorganic ions. However, your answer probably lies not in the element itself but what it is bonding to. It takes a pretty strong oxidizing agent to get Cobalt to a 4+, 5+ oxidation state.

>>7030500

Even if we don't, you end up with a situation using IGL where Avogadro's law sets them equal to each other, which cancels them out, leaving you with just Gay-Lussac's law.

Which, just dealing with pressure and temperature, says that to go from RT (298 K) and 12.5 PSI to 10.5 PSI requires a temperature drop to ~250 K, or -23 C, and it never got that cold in Foxborough. Coldest recorded temperature I could find of the surrounding air was about 278 K, which would only drop about 0.8 PSI or so.

Unless my math is completely off.

However, if there are other shenanigans involved, it is still probable.

>>7029770

I assumed that the psi readings were gauge pressures.

Also, don't we need a couple more variables to use IGL?

And now, by association, I wonder if he's thinking of Bent's Rule.

>>7029760

I don't think he was only going for sp3 configurations, it was just one example ("tetrahedral shapes, etc..."). Though I'll be fucked as to what else he's thinking of. Most of the answers given in this thread are about all I can come up with otherwise.

>>7029142

Yep. Too many variables unaccounted for, because it is pretty ludicrous to assume that Foxborough got down to -25 C by halftime.

>>7027522

You're not thinking of hybridization, are you?

>>5250830 first year Chemistry

Stuff exists.

>>and Physics

And it moves.

>>3952164

er... -5 / 3x+2 that remainder should be.

>>3952099

What's the problem? Just remember that when you have a lead coefficient to a power of 3 and the next given coefficient is a power of 1 there must be a coefficient to the power of 2 in between, even if that coefficient is a 0.

So, in your division bracket, write this:

9x^3 + 0x^2 - x - 3

Divide by 3x + 2.

Answer should be 3x^2 - 2x + 1 - (6 / 3x+2) or something like that. Did it in my head so the math might be off.

Bodily fluids don't have DNA. Cells have DNA contained in the nucleus.

>>3883217

Uneasy? You know how many times we'd have probably been wiped out by an extinction event if not for that planet?

Jupiter: The Solar System's Hoover.

>>3854329

Yes. If they existed, it meant we made them somehow. That'd be beyond our current capabilities. Ergo: more advanced.

>this thread

>>3850475 Why are drugs not legal?

Reality? Or ideology?