« first day (1525 days earlier)      last day (2872 days later) » 

10:35 AM
0
Q: Can we have an electrophoresis tag?

PolisettyThere seem to be around only 15 questions now but I guess they'd steadily increase. Somehow I don't know which tag to fit such questions under

 
11:15 AM
@NotNicolaou And why are stubborn people hated? #Double_Standards
 
11:42 AM
 
12:25 PM
> “Good-morning, good-morning!” the General said
When we met him last week on our way to the line.
Now the soldiers he smiled at are most of 'em dead,
And we're cursing his staff for incompetent swine.
“He's a cheery old card,” grunted Harry to Jack
As they slogged up to Arras with rifle and pack.

But he did for them both by his plan of attack.
 
user116211
@CowperKettle: \o/
 
user116211
@TIPS: o/
 
Good evening, good evening, @MAFIA36790!
 
@MAFIA36790 Hey
 
user116211
@CowperKettle Who wrote it? Some Red Army official?
 
12:31 PM
@MAFIA36790 Siegfried Sassoon.
One of the finest war poets.
 
user116211
!!wiki/Siegfried Sassoon
 
Siegfried Loraine Sassoon, CBE, MC (8 September 1886 – 1 September 1967) was an English poet, writer, and soldier. Decorated for bravery on the Western Front, he became one of the leading poets of the First World War. His poetry both described the horrors of the trenches, and satirised the patriotic pretensions of those who, in Sassoon's view, were responsible for a jingoism-fuelled war. Sassoon became a focal point for dissent within the armed forces when he made a lone protest against the continuation of the war in his "Soldier's Declaration" of 1917, culminating in his admission to a military...
 
user116211
WW1!
 
@MAFIA36790 There is, however, a similarly scathing poem by Leo Tolstoy, from the time when he was an officer in the Crimean War
@MAFIA36790 Sassoon's friend was Wilfred Owen, who wrote even better war poetry
 
user116211
Coincidentally, I was reading the last offensive lines of Wehrmacht at Battle of Berlin.
 
12:33 PM
@MAFIA36790 Reading a book about the Battle of Berlin?
 
user116211
No... just wikipedia and other stuffs.
 
user116211
They never intended to win against the marching Red Army but they never lost heart.
 
Judging by what they did with civilian population, many of them had no heart to start with
But of course they fought professionaly
 
user116211
And, a nice fact is that, most of the generals of the Wehrmacht participating in the last battle never got severe charge and most got released without serving any major time.
 
user116211
Attacking Soviet Union in winter is the greatest idiotic blunder of Hitler and co.
 
12:42 PM
Hitler had slim chances even without that.
 
user116211
@CowperKettle nods
 
user116211
!!wiki/Walther Wenck
 
Walther Wenck (18 September 1900 – 1 May 1982) was the youngest general in the German Army and a highly experienced staff officer during World War II. At the end of the war, he commanded the German Twelfth Army that took part in the Battle of Berlin. He was known during the war as "The Boy General". == Early life == Wenck was born in Wittenberg, Germany. Prior to joining the Army (Reichswehr) of the Weimar Republic in 1920, he was a member of the Free Corps (Freikorps) in 1919. == World War II == From 1939 to 1942, Wenck was Chief of Operations for the 1st Panzer Division. In 1942, he w...
 
Napoleon at least declared end to serfdom when he invaded, and did not intend to wipe out Slavic peoples. Hitler was just a loon.
 
user116211
I liked this guy and his prompt decisions he made at the field.
 
user116211
12:45 PM
The Boy General
 
user116211
To Hitler, he was the last hope.....
 
user116211
But it was really over-demanding to face the Red Army with such a small troop surrounded all by the Allied forces with hardly any ammunitions left.
 
user116211
He decided to surrender but not to Soviets.... even at the last moments, he had such type of pride ;P
 
The best chance for Germany not to fall under Soviet yoke was this:
On 20 July 1944, an attempt was made to assassinate Adolf Hitler, Führer of Nazi Germany, perpetrated by Claus von Stauffenberg and other conspirators, inside his Wolf's Lair field headquarters near Rastenburg, East Prussia. The name Operation Valkyrie, originally referring to a component part of the conspirators' overall plot, has become associated with the event. The apparent purpose of the assassination attempt was to seize political control of Germany and its armed forces from the Nazi Party (including the SS) in order to obtain peace with the western Allies as soon as possible. The underlying...
But old Alolf proved to be too sturdy. (0:
 
user116211
12:49 PM
Well, there was always a clash between the old school military of Prussia and the Nazi Party.
 
user116211
They never could go well with each other.
 
user116211
I still doubt whether Rommel was involved in it.
 
user116211
@cowper, you would like this:
 
user116211
 
Maybe, but I should be reading some other stuff now.
See you later!
 
user116211
12:53 PM
@CowperKettle o/
 
2:03 PM
( φ_<)r┬ ━━━━━━…=>
 
!!gun
I haven't been doing that in a long time.
 
user116211
2:51 PM
@TIPS what? Chem did this before the command?
 
Huh
 
@MAFIA36790 He's a wizard
 
user116211
hmm.
 
@MAFIA36790 I did
 
pew pew
 
user116211
2:53 PM
So, @Hippa, did you get your Chinese Fairy Tale or sort of that?
 
user116211
@Chemobot o.O
 
@MAFIA36790 No :( I realized i'm broke, I have about 6€ right now ;_;
 
@Hippa how many years of exams remaining?
 
@TIPS 0.02142857142857142857142857142857 (=1.2 weeks)
 
@Hippalectryon Convert it to pounds and go have fun in England.
 
2:54 PM
@TIPS haha :D (=1.2 weeks)
 
user116211
@Hippalectryon converting to INR
 
@Hippalectryon Prepare to be flooded by FR's on bot.
 
on bot ?
 
user116211
WTH... only Rs.500?
 
user116211
Damn....
 
2:57 PM
I want your bot to make me real ice cream without sprinkles, bake pizza, make sandwiches with baguettes, drive me to the airport, insert article info in my brain, communicate with a bot-to-brain interface, write code in vim, be sentient, and troll trolls.
 
user116211
I can't buy even the cheapest comics with that ;(
 
@TIPS uh sure your order will be ready in 1337 years :D
 
@TIPS O_o
error : request too cool to be processed
 
Hello!
In my textbook it is given that
*lowering of vapour pressure of the solvent is directly proportional to mole fraction of solute*
But I am wondering why mole fraction why not *molality*, when I asked this to my teacher he told that I am intensionally diverting class :(
So any reason?
 
3:14 PM
@DeNiSkA How is it any different ? All that changes it a numerical factor. It's still proportional
 
user116211
@DeNiSkA: o/
 
@all o/
@hippa but that thing is getting me some weird answers
I don't even know what constant of proportionality is should take
 
Why do you need the constant ?
 
@DeNiSkA That'd depend on other stuff.
 
I think i need because it seems absurd to write *lowering of vapour pressure=molality*
Their units doesn't match @hippa
 
3:26 PM
It's also absurd to write *lowering of vapour pressure=mole fraction
 
Obviously, you're looking for a formula, and that's not the formula.
So why not try Google? There are many equations on this with different approximations.
Have you read about Raoult's law?
Also I forgot how the spelling was.
 
Yeah i have!
 
you got it right @TIPS
 
Tips got it but i didn't get it :P
 
@DeNiSkA Aaand they haven't given you any formulas?
I think the correct keyboard would be such that useless letters like Z, Q and J be besides the "Enter" key so I WOULDN'T MISTYPE THE FRIGGING ENTER SO MUCH.
 
3:30 PM
Yes they have given.
 
z,q are very far from enter on my azerty O_o
 
But why raoult's law has constant of proportionality as $P_{solvent}$
 
@Hippalectryon So are on my QWERTY, but I'm just saying.
In my keyboard, ' is besides Enter, so rash apostrophes cause truncated messages.
 
@DeNiSkA I don't get your question
 
Raoult's law :
$$P_{solution} \alpha mole\,\,fraction\,\,of\,\,solute$$
$$\implies P_{solution}=P_{solvent}mole fraction $$
But why constant of proportionality is $P_{solvent}$
 
3:38 PM
Raoult's law is just that $\textrm{pressure}=\textrm{partial vapor pressure}*\textrm{number of moles}$ for an ideal mixture
 
??????????????????????
 
!!wiki/Raoult's law
 
@hippa Chemobot
 
Raoult's law is a law of thermodynamics established by French chemist François-Marie Raoult in 1882. It states that the partial vapor pressure of each component of an ideal mixture of liquids is equal to the vapor pressure of the pure component multiplied by its mole fraction in the mixture. Mathematically, Raoult's law for a single component in an ideal solution is stated as p i = p i ⋆ x ...
 
@DeNiSkA wat did I just write ._.
of course it's mole fraction not number of moles
Anyhow, that's all Raoult's law is
 
3:45 PM
Hmm! BEAUTIFUL :D
@thanks hippa
:p
 
 
2 hours later…
5:52 PM
 
6:32 PM
 
@TIPS Please romaine calm and turnip this beet ._.
 
user image
2
user image
2
 
7:21 PM
 
 
._. 9gag is leaking
 
@Hippalectryon They look like badly drawn troll faces.
 
7:45 PM
Now I wonder what a newcomer looking for a chemistry chatroom will think of this ._.
 
Then I'll kick you.
But @NotN isn't that much of a newb.
 
Wasn't thinking about him in particular :-)
 
Oh, then you must've been thinking about @Loong.
On a serious note, I hope we didn't scare @Linear away.
 
@TIPS no one is thinking about me
 
@Loong (╯T□T)╯︵ ┻━┻
 
7:51 PM
@TIPS Not only didn't you scare me away, but I have already shared most of these ;)
 
@LinearChristmas Thank God then
Back to s***posting @Hipp
 
yaaaay
 
@TIPS go ahead :) (I might have a question later on, but also feel free to answer with pictures)
 
Actually I'm about to hit the bed, so I might miss your question, whether I know it or not.
 
7:56 PM
Poor bed :(
allo I'd like to report a case of bed beating
 
@Hippalectryon No you won't
Or I'll have to get rid of the witnesses.
 
flee pillow, quick !!
 
I should visit this chatroom more often
 
8:00 PM
And if thou gaze long into the chatroom, the chatroom will also gaze into thee
 
@TIPS You summoned me?
 
@NotNicolaou You were already there
 
@TIPS that muzzle flash looks wrong
 
@Loong I know, someone's shooting the minigun.
 
8:12 PM
Actually, each barrel fires only once per cycle.
when it reaches a certain point in the cycle
 
Now you're making a mistake.
 
8:30 PM
@TIPS o/
 
8:55 PM
@LinearChristmas Why yes, yes you should. :-)
@Loong When it's lined up with the chamber, in the main body of the gun, yep.
 
Er, this might sound stupid, but if both temperature and sound are caused by the movement of molecules, how are they different?
 
So, SDBS is back online; should I update the community ad with a little banner saying "It's back online!"?
@SirCumference Sound comes from the propagation of waves of localized pressure increase/decrease
So, large quantities of air molecules "bunching and unbunching" relative to one another.
 
@SirCumference sound is caused by molecules moving around but it's not an equivalence
 
Temperature is a measure of the amount of overall kinetic energy possessed by some large number of molecules.
At a high level, it's unrelated to any local bunching/unbunching of the pressure waves of sound.
 
Ah, I was told that one was chaotic, while one was ordered
Guess that doesn't hold up
 
8:59 PM
Though if you pump a LOT of acoustic energy into a system, you definitely can heat it up.
 
Okay, so if I heat something up enough, it will make a sound?
 
@SirCumference Not necessarily
 
Heating it will produce rather disordered movements, which doesn't in the general case create a sound
 
But making sound will heat it?
 
9:01 PM
At least locally yes
 
All right thanks
So...next question. I'm sure you've heard people say "You can never really touch anything; your atoms will always repel other atoms."
 
@SirCumference From a certain point of view, it's reasonable to say that temperature is disordered while sound is ordered.
 
While "touch" isn't really defined at all, that raises the question — if I ever push on a door, is it just the electromagnetic force that makes the door move? Because my atoms are repelling those atoms.
 
@SirCumference I've read conflicting things about this.
I always assumed it was electrostatic repulsion
 
Eh, close enough, it's still caused by photons right?
 
9:02 PM
But I read an argument somewhere that it's actually one of the nuclear forces... weak force, maybe?
 
Okay what?
The weak force causes decay
 
!!wiki/weak force
 
In particle physics, the weak interaction, the weak force or weak nuclear force, is one of the four known fundamental interactions of nature, alongside the strong interaction, electromagnetism, and gravitation. The weak interaction is responsible for radioactive decay, which plays an essential role in nuclear fission. The theory of the weak interaction is sometimes called quantum flavordynamics (QFD), in analogy with the terms QCD and QED, but the term is rarely used because the weak force is best understood in terms of electro-weak theory (EWT). In the Standard Model of particle physics, the weak...
 
Ah, so not that, then
 
I've read about the four fundamental forces
 
9:03 PM
Yeah, I'm no nuclear physicist.
It really boils down to how you define 'touch'
 
Well, if I punch something, I'm using the electromagnetic force to repel it, right?
 
The nuclei of your hand absolutely will never overlap with the nuclei of the door
 
@hBy2Py Well, the quarks have a probability of being where the other quarks are, so...
 
I think it's either EM force, or quantum exchange-repulsion, or a combination of the two.
 
!!wiki/quantum exchange repulsion
 
The hell?
 
sorry, used the wrong term
!!wiki/pauli repulsion
 
In physics, the exchange interaction (with an exchange energy, and exchange term) is a quantum mechanical effect that only occurs between identical particles. Despite sometimes being called an exchange force in analogy to classical force, it is not a true force, as it lacks a force carrier. The effect is due to the wave function of indistinguishable particles being subject to exchange symmetry, that is, either remaining unchanged (symmetric) or changing its sign (antisymmetric) when two particles are exchanged. Both bosons and fermions can experience the exchange interaction. For fermions, it is...
 
Ooooh
 
@SirCumference Yeah, but I think that probability is really small, except at high energies. Otherwise nuclear fusion wouldn't be so hard to achieve.
 
9:06 PM
This is reminding me of degenerate gases...why would the Pauli exclusion principle repel?
 
Best qualitative argument I can think of is: imagine two helium atoms
 
Yeah okay
 
consider them far apart
now push them together
what happens to their orbital energies?
 
I guess they increase?
 
Yeah... I actually don't know if this is a good demonstration system or not, but... it's the first thing I could think of
!!wiki/antibonding orbital
 
9:10 PM
In chemical bonding theory, an antibonding orbital is a type of molecular orbital that, if occupied by electrons, weakens the bond between two atoms and helps to raise the energy of the molecule relative to the separated atoms. Such an orbital has one or more nodes in the bonding region between the nuclei. The density of the electrons in the orbital is concentrated outside the bonding region and acts to pull one nucleus away from the other and tends to cause mutual repulsion between the two atoms. == Diatomic molecules == Antibonding molecular orbitals (MOs) are normally higher in energy ...
 
Goddammit, I'm back to reading about that
I've forgotten about antibonding orbitals a long time ago
 
I'm still coming to grips with the concept myself, actually.
One crazy, ~recently-discovered thing that Pauli repulsion plays heavily into is "charge-shift bonding"
!!wiki/charge shift bonding
 
Bah, !!wiki/charge-shift bond
 
The charge-shift bond has been proposed as a new class of chemical bond that sits alongside the two familiar families of covalent and ionic bonds where electrons are shared or transferred respectively. The charge shift bond derives its stability from the resonance of ionic forms rather than the covalent sharing of electrons which are often depicted as having electron density between the bonded atoms. A feature of the charge shift bond is that the predicted electron density between the bonded atoms is low. It has long been known from experiment that the accumulation of electronic charge between...
 
9:12 PM
Huh
I know that the PEP comes into play when you deal with degenerate gases
!!wiki/degenerate gas
 
Degenerate matter in physics is a collection of free, non-interacting particles with a pressure and other physical characteristics determined by quantum mechanical effects. It is the analogue of an ideal gas in classical mechanics. The degenerate state of matter, insofar as it deviates from an ideal gas, arises at extraordinarily high density (in compact stars) or at extremely low temperatures in laboratories. It occurs for matter particles such as electrons, neutrons, protons, and fermions in general and is referred to as electron-degenerate matter, neutron-degenerate matter, etc. In a mixture...
 
Aka degenerate matter
 
Apparently if you do a valence bond calculation for, e.g., the fluorine molecule, if you force it to behave as a covalent bond the molecule is energetically un-bound
@SirCumference Mm, <nod>, you need a lot of pressure to overcome Pauli repulsion
Finding paper....
 
@hBy2Py Say, you know about degenerate gases?
Because I have a lot of questions
 
@SirCumference Unfortunately, no.
 
9:14 PM
;-;
It's basically when there is so much density, all the fermions of the same type will occupy the lowest possible energy states
Two for each energy state (both fermions have opposite spins)
The result is a bunch of matter that does not expand due to thermal energy, and is an excellent conductor of heat
Hence, white dwarfs and neutron stars
 
<nod>, the general idea makes sense... but that's all the further I really grasp it.
 
Anyway, could you explain antibonding electrons to me again?
 
It's maybe not actually the best model system.
 
Oh, no, it actually is.
sorry!
I'm crystallizing my understanding as I'm trying to explain it.
So, apologies!
So, each He atom is a closed-shell system, right?
Two electrons in each 1s shell
As you try to push the two atoms together, there are no free quantum states on nucleus B with n = 1, for the electrons from nucleus A to "spread into".
(They could jump to the n = 2 shell, but that's a huge energy cost.)
And likewise, no free quantum states on nucleus A, for the electrons on B to spread into
 
9:24 PM
Oh, so they actually repel?
 
Yep
Both atoms have full 1s shells
As you push them together and their electron clouds start to overlap, due to Pauli, up-spin electron A can't be where up-spin electron B is
Same for the two down-spins
Hm. So, one way to think about what actually happens, I guess, is that, say, an A up electron and a B down electron "gravitate" to the interatomic region and become the bonding orbital
(though this is NOT accurate, due to violating indistinguishability)
While the A down electron and the B up electron are pushed away from the interatomic region and become the antibonding orbital
(Again, this is NOT how it actually works -- is just a way to get a qualitative sense of it)
The more I think about it, though -- in this specific example, I don't think the exchange actually causes the nuclei to repel from each other.
Because the decrease in the energy of the bonding orbital should be equal to the increase in energy of the antibonding orbital.
<helpless shrug>
Still working to understand it.
 
 
2 hours later…
11:40 PM
Darn. @hBy2Py is here when I'm not. :/
Hullo @Mith. Sorry, today/last night I slept more like a human so I couldn't respond to you "o/"
 

« first day (1525 days earlier)      last day (2872 days later) »