Mumbles Posted April 21, 2006 Posted April 21, 2006 I talked to him the other day. I don't know if he really wants his private stuff given away, so I won't post it. I haven't really heard of anything bad happening to him. He might just be busy with the end of school.
dragonman586 Posted April 24, 2006 Posted April 24, 2006 Why did this seem to die after the 700th post. Well I'm here to bring it to life again. I just got my U.F.O.s done and they work pretty well. I'll put up a vid eventually if i'm not feeling lazy.
d4j0n Posted April 25, 2006 Posted April 25, 2006 Anyone know of a source of convolute (parallel) tubes online besides skylighter? I emailed a bunch of companies who make custom ones for those who mass produce wire and paper and such but I havent gotten a reply...plus im betting that the min order is gonna be pretty high. *edit:So I found this site that makes custom tubes for a variety of applications, including pyrotechnic. http://www.ppgme.com/ppg/frame_tubes.html Also, while placing this order I need to know what max temp these tubes need to withstand. Anyone have a general idea of how hot an end burning 2oz rocket gets? I'd be happy to split an order by the way. Minimum order is $100 per line and I don't plan on buying that much. PM me and we can work something out. _______________________________ *2nd edit: kno3 and sulfur are being sold on ebay for like a dollar per pound... It claims to be technical grade, anyone have any info on this?
_DB_ Posted April 26, 2006 Posted April 26, 2006 Time for a random picture! My ESP axe There's a chord book on the chair but I never bothered learning them since I have no use for them. I just make stuff up and use tabs.
ewest Posted April 26, 2006 Posted April 26, 2006 d4j0n, Firefox has parallel tubes http://www.firefox-fx.com/paper.htm
FrankRizzo Posted April 26, 2006 Posted April 26, 2006 *2nd edit: kno3 and sulfur are being sold on ebay for like a dollar per pound... It claims to be technical grade, anyone have any info on this? You'd best check the shipping rate...that's usually where those sellers make $$.
Mumbles Posted April 26, 2006 Posted April 26, 2006 Thats because ebay only takes a commission out of the sale price. It can't touch the shipping, so the seller gets the full amount.
RUUUUUN Posted April 27, 2006 Posted April 27, 2006 OK this question has been bugging me no end. What is Electricity?
Pyrohawk Posted April 27, 2006 Posted April 27, 2006 Electricity? Hmmmmm I think its more or less a flowing stream of electrons. This is why metal is such a good conductor because of the way the electrons flow across the surfaces in metal bonds. But I'm no electrician and am completely pulling that from the air here so maybe someone else can answer better or just plain answer correctly!
RUUUUUN Posted April 27, 2006 Posted April 27, 2006 But that doesnt make sense, if it was flowing electrons, that would mean that the electrons would pile up at the end of the chain, like a capacitor. If they did that, it would mean that a charged capacitor massed in greater than a discharged one. does a charged capacitor mass in greater than a discharged one? I was under the impression it didnt. I don't know what electricity is but I think it travels by: One electron gets some energy, then passes it to another, which passes it to another, so on and so forth. That explains resistance: An objects ability to pass the energy from one electron to the next. My physics book says "In general, electrification occurs through the transfer of electrons" I think it is saying that the electrons transfer energy, I dont think it is saying there is actual electron flow. I am under the impression after a few days of mulling and researching that no one really KNOWS what electricity actually IS.
Mumbles Posted April 27, 2006 Posted April 27, 2006 We actually learned about this in inorganic chem. I will give a brief less chemistry related overview. Well, you know how there are electron clouds? Well will bulk metals, bulk in a molecular sense. If you can see it, it is bulk. The chemical formula is say Cun. There are just so many electrons that instead of having discrete energy levels, there is more or less a spectrum where the electrons can be found. There is a spectra where it is found in the ground state, and there is a spectra where it can be excited too. Thermal energy of being is enough energy to excite electrons to the excited spectra. When electrons are pumped in one side of the wire, they want to spill out the other side to keep the overall neutral charge. If there is no where for the electrons to spill out, no new ones come in. Think of it like a garden hose. It is always hooked up to the nozzle, but water doesn't build up behind the nozzle and burst your pipes. It will only come out when you open the nozzle and allow the water to come out. Random side fact, semiconductors have the same spectra electron distribution. However there is a gap between the ground state spectra and the excited spectra. This is why they don't conduct electricity as well as metals. The thermal energy can excite less electrons.
mr.pyro Posted April 27, 2006 Posted April 27, 2006 Thermal energy excites more electrons across the band gap in a semiconductor. Finally some application of MSE. BTW, capacators use perovskite ceramics, similar to peizoeletrics. Pretty much an encased atom that can rattle inside a cage of bigger atoms, build up a charge by sticking to one side of the cage, and then when enough current is applied, all the caged atoms shift and cause electrons to jump the gap of the ceramic and cap to discharge.
RUUUUUN Posted April 27, 2006 Posted April 27, 2006 So a charged capacitor masses in greater than a discharged one?
Swany Posted April 27, 2006 Posted April 27, 2006 We've been over this, no? According to your theory, where energy doesn't have mass-no. According to the conventional theory, yes. Electrons have mass. Mash some into a space, the change will be there, but it would be practically non-detectable for anyone outside of a university, I would guess.
RUUUUUN Posted April 27, 2006 Posted April 27, 2006 Heat energy doesn't have mass does it? Light energy does have mass. Kenetic energy doesn't have mass does it? I am out of time I will be back
Rooster Posted April 27, 2006 Author Posted April 27, 2006 Heat, or infrared radiation, does have mass. I am guessing it will emit photons, at least when something is red-hot. If light energy has mass, heat energy has mass. They are very close in the radiation spectrum. I do not think kinetic energy has mass. A potato falling out of a plane is not any heavier when it leaves the plane than on the ground or halfway down.
Zeppelin Posted April 27, 2006 Posted April 27, 2006 I may be wrong on this, but when one side of the capacitor has an excess of electrons, the other side has an absence, balencing it out. Purely speculation though.
Frozentech Posted April 27, 2006 Posted April 27, 2006 I may be wrong on this, but when one side of the capacitor has an excess of electrons, the other side has an absence, balencing it out. Purely speculation though. The energy stored in a capacitor is in the form of an electrostatic field / difference of potential between the plates. In a perfect 'Q' capacitor, no electrons would travel from one plate to the other.
RUUUUUN Posted April 27, 2006 Posted April 27, 2006 Are you sure HEAT has mass, I know the photons emitted by the object flourescing(SP?) have mass, but does the actual heat have mass? If you heat up a chunk of Iron will it mass more at 100*c then -100* C? How much energy does it take to make an electron jump completely out of its atomic shell, and is there any energy generated in the proccess? What would happen if you completely removed the electrons off of an atom, and there are only protons and neutrons left.
Mumbles Posted April 27, 2006 Posted April 27, 2006 The mass indeed does change with temperature. I don't know if I would go as far to say, heat has mass specifically, but the mass of the object does vary somewhat based upon temperature. The energy to make the atom jump completly out of the shell depends on the atom. You can look it up, it is called Ionisation energy. There is first ionisation energy, second ionization energy, ect. First is the first electron, second is the second electron, and so on. There is definatly no energy generated from the electron being lost, in fact is is highly endothermic meaning it requires energy. If you took all the electrons off of an atom, it doesn't do shit. I would hope you are familiar with acids. Guess what H+ is? He++ is also fairly common too. I want to say it is alpha radiation. Rooster: If heat has mass, so does kinetic energy. Heat, or rather temperature, is the average kinetic energy of a material. Actually, if you want to get technical, a potato in a plane actually has a lower mass than on earth. It will be less effected by gravity. For all of this, we must take into account where quantum physics comes into play. As I mentioned earlier bulk materials, are different than molecular materials. Things behave differently on the molecular scale. Even on the nanoscale things can be different. Materials have different melting points, and different properties on the nanoscale.
d4j0n Posted April 28, 2006 Posted April 28, 2006 damn, that 99 cent kno3 is gone. Shipping was calculated, I had no ideas chemicals come and go so fast on ebay. Bunch of cheap thermite (used fine aluminum, but coated) is gone too. Anyway, I made a trip down to the dollar store. Bought a super soaker type watergun, long-necked lighters, & a bottle of rubbing alcohol. Took out the butane tank and the long gas pipe from the lighters and fashioned a sort of flame thrower by strapping the tank to the super soaker and attatching the pipeline to a stiff bendable wire in front of the gun nozzle. Basically I'm just looking for cheaper fuel alternatives. Any ideas?
RUUUUUN Posted April 28, 2006 Posted April 28, 2006 H+ is just a proton and is used to make Adenosine Triphosphate in your body. Oh, I'm getting ya, acids are H+ donors and bases are H+ recievers, maybe its the other way around, I think its that way. No a potatoe wont mass less in a plane it might WEIGH less but not mass less, weight and mass are not the same, (Mumbles yer slipping!!!)
Swany Posted April 28, 2006 Posted April 28, 2006 Run: You think too conventionally, trying to use real-world analogies for something that tends to be totally different than you can ever imagine. I agree with the potato thing, but until one has actually proved a potato does indeed have the same mass in an airplane, I reserve the right to remain skeptical. You are questioning the essence of physics without truely understanding the theory at hand. Which is ok, it makes for good discussion.
Mumbles Posted April 28, 2006 Posted April 28, 2006 Ok, I admit, I did screw up the potato thing from a mass/weight standpoint. The kinetic energy thing still stands though. I myself am unsure if kinetic energy has mass, but if temperature has mass, by definition, kinetic energy has mass. My only point about the H+ is that it is a particle with all it's electrons removed, all one of them. In a sense H+ doesn't exist outside of perhaps plasmas. It's always bound as H3O+. The helium nucleus in alpha radiation still stands valid though. Not sure if H+ is used to make ATP either. Well, not directly at least. It's involved in the electron transport chain of course, which yields ATP, but I don't know if I would go as far as to say it is specifically used to make ATP. Well, the hydrogen rush back across the membrane, through the wheel protein I think it's called, is the final, and actual ATP producing step, so I guess it could be a valid statement. I also suggest you start using the Lewis Acid-Base theory. It is much more all encompassing, and helps explain a lot more interactions.
Chris Posted April 28, 2006 Posted April 28, 2006 After NADH transports the H ion from the tricarboxylic acid cycle to the e- transport chain, the H is moved from one integral protein to another phosporylating AMPs or ADPs to their energy-rich equivalent, ATP. At the end of the chain, H is bound to molecular oxygen producing water. I think it's more appropraite to say that Hydrogen has an important part in the cellular catabolism, but it porbably has no direct reaction with ATP. Umm, sorry, I havn't followed the discussion actually. Just wanted tosound important
Recommended Posts