The Clockwork Mansion

Village Square => The Lost Lake Inn => Topic started by: Ignuus66 on May 28, 2012, 07:52:45 AM

Title: 28/05/2012 [DMFA# 1312] Fool me twice, shame on me.
Post by: Ignuus66 on May 28, 2012, 07:52:45 AM
Dan really didn't learn from Abel, did he?  Well at the very least he learned it the hard way... Again  :rolleyes
Title: Re: 28/05/2012 [DMFA# 1312] Fool me twice, shame on me.
Post by: SuaveIV on May 28, 2012, 10:35:59 AM
*delurks* This (http://amzn.to/Ky8N3K) might end your jar-opening woes. I know it did mine.... And now, back to the shadows... *relurks*
Title: Re: 28/05/2012 [DMFA# 1312] Fool me twice, shame on me.
Post by: joshofspam on May 28, 2012, 11:05:28 AM
Hmmmmmmm...her eyes are practically white in that last panel.

She wouldn't happen to rely more on the emotions around her to perceive her surroundings, you think?

Still, it seems like a lot of these teachers like to have a little fun with their lessons.
Title: Re: 28/05/2012 [DMFA# 1312] Fool me twice, shame on me.
Post by: TacticalError on May 28, 2012, 12:43:53 PM
Dan's expression 4th panel was just what I needed on a Monday. Although I would have thought fear would be black/dark grey. I'm probably just matching the clan leader colors with the trademark emotions too much.

On the subject of the salsa jar, I tend to hit things that aren't opening with heavy objects. This method seems to work quite well, although you have to remember just to tap with glass containers. Hitting them doesn't end happily, for self-evident reasons.
Title: Re: 28/05/2012 [DMFA# 1312] Fool me twice, shame on me.
Post by: Viking ZX on May 28, 2012, 01:02:20 PM
I see an Enigma!
Title: Re: 28/05/2012 [DMFA# 1312] Fool me twice, shame on me.
Post by: Ignuus66 on May 28, 2012, 01:28:59 PM
Making a small hole in the top of the can with something sharp helps a lot too.
Title: Re: 28/05/2012 [DMFA# 1312] Fool me twice, shame on me.
Post by: Viking ZX on May 28, 2012, 02:01:50 PM
Jar related suggestion: Run the lid of the jar under hot (or boiling) water for a few moments, then put a washcloth over it to help with grip. The size change is usually enough to make it nice and lose.
Title: Re: 28/05/2012 [DMFA# 1312] Fool me twice, shame on me.
Post by: Nino on May 28, 2012, 03:27:03 PM
Quote from: TacticalError on May 28, 2012, 12:43:53 PM
Dan's expression 4th panel was just what I needed on a Monday. Although I would have thought fear would be black/dark grey. I'm probably just matching the clan leader colors with the trademark emotions too much.

Fear and terror might be considered significantly different emotions though. Kind of like how bad horror flicks rely on sudden, startling loud noises can seem terrifying, but that's different than, say, having a phobia, or having a lingering fear you'll sleep in during finals, for instance.

I love the cow's design. It reminds me of something out of Hindu mythology because of the multiple arms. And I guess a cow would tie right into that too.
Title: Re: 28/05/2012 [DMFA# 1312] Fool me twice, shame on me.
Post by: MT Hazard on May 28, 2012, 03:49:11 PM
Just as well Fa'lina (and Destania ) would approve of this 'school of hard knocks' approach to learning, others would be a bit annoyed that their student/son is being taught using traumatising methods.
Title: Re: 28/05/2012 [DMFA# 1312] Fool me twice, shame on me.
Post by: Beeks on May 28, 2012, 06:15:14 PM
I'd so debate on the topic of "forceful teaching methods vs standard fare", but that's probably not a good idea here, lol.

Suffice it to say, the more forceful technique used in this comic is probably more well-suited to areas where people still quest to kill demons and stuff, and prey on sentient species for food. It's hard to use "Now, that's not very nice." in a situation where you're teaching someone a skill that could prevent them from being killed.
Title: Re: 28/05/2012 [DMFA# 1312] Fool me twice, shame on me.
Post by: MT Hazard on May 28, 2012, 09:26:42 PM
Improbable script for next strip

Dan: That was mean

Bluecow: Come on! You should know this stuff by now!

Dan: I've only known I'm a incubi for a few months, even my own mother didn't tell me, she ran off  a year ago.

Bluecow....
Title: Re: 28/05/2012 [DMFA# 1312] Fool me twice, shame on me.
Post by: Attic Rat on May 28, 2012, 10:47:58 PM
I can't add anything to the storyline, so I'll toss in yet another way to loosen lids on salsa jars. The vacuum inside the jar is helping hold it shut, so (gently!) pry an edge of the lid out at various points with a spoon until you hear the air hiss in and the center of the lid pop up. After that, the lid comes off easier. There are many weapons in the war against glass packaging, but it is still often a jarring experience indeed.
Title: Re: 28/05/2012 [DMFA# 1312] Fool me twice, shame on me.
Post by: AmigaDragon on May 28, 2012, 11:48:43 PM
Quote from: Ignuus66 on May 28, 2012, 01:28:59 PM
Making a small hole in the top of the can with something sharp helps a lot too.
That might be fine if you don't plan to seal it again.

Quote from: Attic Rat on May 28, 2012, 10:47:58 PM
I can't add anything to the storyline, so I'll toss in yet another way to loosen lids on salsa jars. The vacuum inside the jar is helping hold it shut, so (gently!) pry an edge of the lid out at various points with a spoon until you hear the air hiss in and the center of the lid pop up. After that, the lid comes off easier.
Will it reseal again or just sit loosely on the jar?
Title: Re: 28/05/2012 [DMFA# 1312] Fool me twice, shame on me.
Post by: TacticalError on May 29, 2012, 12:35:48 AM
Quote from: Attic Rat on May 28, 2012, 10:47:58 PM
There are many weapons in the war against glass packaging, but it is still often a jarring experience indeed.

I see what you did there.
Title: Re: 28/05/2012 [DMFA# 1312] Fool me twice, shame on me.
Post by: Slipdance on May 29, 2012, 01:07:36 AM
Ah, the emotional version of a screamer video.
Title: Re: 28/05/2012 [DMFA# 1312] Fool me twice, shame on me.
Post by: TacticalError on May 29, 2012, 01:17:57 AM
Quote from: AmigaDragon on May 28, 2012, 11:48:43 PM

Quote from: Attic Rat on May 28, 2012, 10:47:58 PM
I can't add anything to the storyline, so I'll toss in yet another way to loosen lids on salsa jars. The vacuum inside the jar is helping hold it shut, so (gently!) pry an edge of the lid out at various points with a spoon until you hear the air hiss in and the center of the lid pop up. After that, the lid comes off easier.
Will it reseal again or just sit loosely on the jar?

Sit loosely on the jar. Since the jar had air pumped out of it when it was filled with salsa (or whatever) and then shipped, the air pressure was higher outside and... God, I've had too many exams. I'm answering everything with an over-detailed answer.
Title: Re: 28/05/2012 [DMFA# 1312] Fool me twice, shame on me.
Post by: ishidan on May 29, 2012, 04:18:28 AM
Quote from: TacticalError on May 29, 2012, 01:17:57 AM
Quote from: AmigaDragon on May 28, 2012, 11:48:43 PM

Quote from: Attic Rat on May 28, 2012, 10:47:58 PM
I can't add anything to the storyline, so I'll toss in yet another way to loosen lids on salsa jars. The vacuum inside the jar is helping hold it shut, so (gently!) pry an edge of the lid out at various points with a spoon until you hear the air hiss in and the center of the lid pop up. After that, the lid comes off easier.
Will it reseal again or just sit loosely on the jar?

Sit loosely on the jar. Since the jar had air pumped out of it when it was filled with salsa (or whatever) and then shipped, the air pressure was higher outside and... God, I've had too many exams. I'm answering everything with an over-detailed answer.

And wrong, too.  The vacuum lock is what's making it currently too difficult to open.  Release the vacuum, though, and the friction of the screw top closure will still seal the jar.  It will, however, be considerably easier to open in the future.  As originally designed, as you will only be fighting the friction between the lid and the jar for future opening.  "Loose", it should not be, but it will not be "impossible" either.

This is unless you are too forceful in the attempt to open it, and end off flaring/bending/breaking the edges of the lid.  Then the screw top won't thread, and you'll have a loose lid.
Title: Re: 28/05/2012 [DMFA# 1312] Fool me twice, shame on me.
Post by: TacticalError on May 29, 2012, 06:42:30 AM
Quote from: ishidan on May 29, 2012, 04:18:28 AM
Quote from: TacticalError on May 29, 2012, 01:17:57 AM
Quote from: AmigaDragon on May 28, 2012, 11:48:43 PM

Quote from: Attic Rat on May 28, 2012, 10:47:58 PM
I can't add anything to the storyline, so I'll toss in yet another way to loosen lids on salsa jars. The vacuum inside the jar is helping hold it shut, so (gently!) pry an edge of the lid out at various points with a spoon until you hear the air hiss in and the center of the lid pop up. After that, the lid comes off easier.
Will it reseal again or just sit loosely on the jar?

Sit loosely on the jar. Since the jar had air pumped out of it when it was filled with salsa (or whatever) and then shipped, the air pressure was higher outside and... God, I've had too many exams. I'm answering everything with an over-detailed answer.

And wrong, too.  The vacuum lock is what's making it currently too difficult to open.  Release the vacuum, though, and the friction of the screw top closure will still seal the jar.  It will, however, be considerably easier to open in the future.  As originally designed, as you will only be fighting the friction between the lid and the jar for future opening.  "Loose", it should not be, but it will not be "impossible" either.

Not incorrect. The vaccum is indeed what is currently making it too difficult to open, but the higher air pressure outside compared to the pressure inside the jar is effectively pushing down on the lid (and the rest of the jar as well, but the glass is rigid enough to keep its shape, unlike, say, plastic bottle with a vaccum in it). Also I was referring to the state of the jar right after the initial opening. Of course, assuming no physical harm was done to the jar and the lid during the initial opening, the jar will close properly later.
Title: Re: 28/05/2012 [DMFA# 1312] Fool me twice, shame on me.
Post by: Alondro on May 29, 2012, 11:15:26 AM
*Charline de Lyon feels the heart-stopping terror!  And is overwhelmed!*  Oh dear lord... *pants*  That was incredible!  *wants MORE absolute terror!*  :kruger
Title: Re: 28/05/2012 [DMFA# 1312] Fool me twice, shame on me.
Post by: Attic Rat on May 29, 2012, 04:30:47 PM
Quote from: TacticalError on May 29, 2012, 06:42:30 AM
Quote from: ishidan on May 29, 2012, 04:18:28 AM
Quote from: TacticalError on May 29, 2012, 01:17:57 AM
Quote from: AmigaDragon on May 28, 2012, 11:48:43 PM

Quote from: Attic Rat on May 28, 2012, 10:47:58 PM
I can't add anything to the storyline, so I'll toss in yet another way to loosen lids on salsa jars. The vacuum inside the jar is helping hold it shut, so (gently!) pry an edge of the lid out at various points with a spoon until you hear the air hiss in and the center of the lid pop up. After that, the lid comes off easier.
Will it reseal again or just sit loosely on the jar?

Sit loosely on the jar. Since the jar had air pumped out of it when it was filled with salsa (or whatever) and then shipped, the air pressure was higher outside and... God, I've had too many exams. I'm answering everything with an over-detailed answer.

And wrong, too.  The vacuum lock is what's making it currently too difficult to open.  Release the vacuum, though, and the friction of the screw top closure will still seal the jar.  It will, however, be considerably easier to open in the future.  As originally designed, as you will only be fighting the friction between the lid and the jar for future opening.  "Loose", it should not be, but it will not be "impossible" either.

Not incorrect. The vaccum is indeed what is currently making it too difficult to open, but the higher air pressure outside compared to the pressure inside the jar is effectively pushing down on the lid (and the rest of the jar as well, but the glass is rigid enough to keep its shape, unlike, say, plastic bottle with a vaccum in it). Also I was referring to the state of the jar right after the initial opening. Of course, assuming no physical harm was done to the jar and the lid during the initial opening, the jar will close properly later.

Physics in salsa! If you haven't actually bent or damaged the metal or the glass, the pressure will have equalized, and the jar will reseal. Now... If you heated the glass jar of salsa in a microwave oven for some nefarious reason, and then put the lid back on tightly, and waited for the jar to cool, you will once again have a vacuum-sealed jar!  8) Science!
Title: Re: 28/05/2012 [DMFA# 1312] Fool me twice, shame on me.
Post by: TacticalError on May 30, 2012, 01:52:41 AM
Quote from: Attic Rat on May 29, 2012, 04:30:47 PM
Quote from: TacticalError on May 29, 2012, 06:42:30 AM
Quote from: ishidan on May 29, 2012, 04:18:28 AM
Quote from: TacticalError on May 29, 2012, 01:17:57 AM
Quote from: AmigaDragon on May 28, 2012, 11:48:43 PM

Quote from: Attic Rat on May 28, 2012, 10:47:58 PM
I can't add anything to the storyline, so I'll toss in yet another way to loosen lids on salsa jars. The vacuum inside the jar is helping hold it shut, so (gently!) pry an edge of the lid out at various points with a spoon until you hear the air hiss in and the center of the lid pop up. After that, the lid comes off easier.
Will it reseal again or just sit loosely on the jar?

Sit loosely on the jar. Since the jar had air pumped out of it when it was filled with salsa (or whatever) and then shipped, the air pressure was higher outside and... God, I've had too many exams. I'm answering everything with an over-detailed answer.

And wrong, too.  The vacuum lock is what's making it currently too difficult to open.  Release the vacuum, though, and the friction of the screw top closure will still seal the jar.  It will, however, be considerably easier to open in the future.  As originally designed, as you will only be fighting the friction between the lid and the jar for future opening.  "Loose", it should not be, but it will not be "impossible" either.

Not incorrect. The vaccum is indeed what is currently making it too difficult to open, but the higher air pressure outside compared to the pressure inside the jar is effectively pushing down on the lid (and the rest of the jar as well, but the glass is rigid enough to keep its shape, unlike, say, plastic bottle with a vaccum in it). Also I was referring to the state of the jar right after the initial opening. Of course, assuming no physical harm was done to the jar and the lid during the initial opening, the jar will close properly later.

Physics in salsa! If you haven't actually bent or damaged the metal or the glass, the pressure will have equalized, and the jar will reseal. Now... If you heated the glass jar of salsa in a microwave oven for some nefarious reason, and then put the lid back on tightly, and waited for the jar to cool, you will once again have a vacuum-sealed jar!  8) Science!

Science indeed!
Title: Re: 28/05/2012 [DMFA# 1312] Fool me twice, shame on me.
Post by: Ignuus66 on May 30, 2012, 08:24:31 AM
It's not science... It's Logic :D !

It's simple: The air inside the salsa can heats up and expands, and when you place the lid on (thus sealing it)  and the air cools back down, it contracts, thus making a vaccum (compared to the atmosphere down here, it's still not a real vaccum)
Title: Re: 28/05/2012 [DMFA# 1312] Fool me twice, shame on me.
Post by: Naldru on May 31, 2012, 06:47:57 PM
Quote from: TacticalError on May 29, 2012, 12:35:48 AM
Quote from: Attic Rat on May 28, 2012, 10:47:58 PM
There are many weapons in the war against glass packaging, but it is still often a jarring experience indeed.

I see what you did there.
I find this string of conversation simply smashing.

Now if you close it during a thunderstorm and try to open it on a clear day, you might find the jar a little difficult to open.
Title: Re: 28/05/2012 [DMFA# 1312] Fool me twice, shame on me.
Post by: TacticalError on June 01, 2012, 12:31:21 PM
Quote from: Naldru on May 31, 2012, 06:47:57 PM
Quote from: TacticalError on May 29, 2012, 12:35:48 AM
Quote from: Attic Rat on May 28, 2012, 10:47:58 PM
There are many weapons in the war against glass packaging, but it is still often a jarring experience indeed.

I see what you did there.
I find this string of conversation simply smashing.

Now if you close it during a thunderstorm and try to open it on a clear day, you might find the jar a little difficult to open.

*twitches on floor from bad puns*

On the second point, is that due to the low air pressure during a thunderstorm?
Title: Re: 28/05/2012 [DMFA# 1312] Fool me twice, shame on me.
Post by: Ignuus66 on June 01, 2012, 01:30:21 PM
yeah, but the difference won't be as big.
Title: Re: 28/05/2012 [DMFA# 1312] Fool me twice, shame on me.
Post by: TacticalError on June 01, 2012, 04:03:09 PM
Quote from: Ignuus66 on June 01, 2012, 01:30:21 PM
yeah, but the difference won't be as big.

So, negligible compared to the initial seal.
Title: Re: 28/05/2012 [DMFA# 1312] Fool me twice, shame on me.
Post by: Ignuus66 on June 01, 2012, 06:19:07 PM
yes... Also I've always wondered why they call Vaccum cleaners that... It's not like they use vaccumes to work :P
Title: Re: 28/05/2012 [DMFA# 1312] Fool me twice, shame on me.
Post by: Nocturne of Night on June 01, 2012, 11:06:31 PM
Certainly shorter and easier to remember than "localized reduction of pressure cleaner," that's for sure. Maybe "vacuum" isn't quite accurate, but then again, there is such a term as "partial vacuum" so close enough.
Title: Re: 28/05/2012 [DMFA# 1312] Fool me twice, shame on me.
Post by: MT Hazard on June 02, 2012, 04:01:19 AM
Its like radiators, they actually heat by convection, not radiation.
Title: Re: 28/05/2012 [DMFA# 1312] Fool me twice, shame on me.
Post by: ishidan on June 02, 2012, 01:26:51 PM
Quote from: Ignuus66 on June 01, 2012, 06:19:07 PM
yes... Also I've always wondered why they call Vaccum cleaners that... It's not like they use vaccumes to work :P

Good lord your persistent spelling error has become eye-crossingly annoying.

It's "vacuum".

And yes, it does.  It produces a vacuum (area of zero air pressure) at the air pump.  The work is done by surrounding air rushing in to attempt to fill the vacuum, where it exerts force the offending materials on the way.
Title: Re: 28/05/2012 [DMFA# 1312] Fool me twice, shame on me.
Post by: Nocturne of Night on June 02, 2012, 02:10:10 PM
Quote from: ishidan on June 02, 2012, 01:26:51 PM

It produces a vacuum (area of zero air pressure) at the air pump.  The work is done by surrounding air rushing in to attempt to fill the vacuum, where it exerts force the offending materials on the way.

Now we get into the philosophical debate of whether we can create a total vacuum using conventional objects like a vacuum cleaner. Perhaps for that instant you turn it on the area directly behind the fan, just a sliver thick, has no air but after that it's just moving air through at reduced pressure.

*puts on a 10/6 hat* Tea, anyone?
Title: Re: 28/05/2012 [DMFA# 1312] Fool me twice, shame on me.
Post by: TacticalError on June 02, 2012, 02:25:18 PM
Quote from: Nocturne of Night on June 02, 2012, 02:10:10 PM
Quote from: ishidan on June 02, 2012, 01:26:51 PM

It produces a vacuum (area of zero air pressure) at the air pump.  The work is done by surrounding air rushing in to attempt to fill the vacuum, where it exerts force the offending materials on the way.

Now we get into the philosophical debate of whether we can create a total vacuum using conventional objects like a vacuum cleaner. Perhaps for that instant you turn it on the area directly behind the fan, just a sliver thick, has no air but after that it's just moving air through at reduced pressure.

*puts on a 10/6 hat* Tea, anyone?

Yes, this thread has started to go way off the rails.

I think it's possible to create a total vacuum using conventional appliances, but it depends on whether we can find a container that can withstand the by-comparison crushing air pressure from outside... and how much faith you put in the vacuum cleaner's electric motor. But I suppose a the air is full of tiny vacuums, just with particles rushing to fill the gaps continuously. I guess if a volume of gas didn't have any empty spaces in it at any given time, it would be a liquid or a solid.
Title: Re: 28/05/2012 [DMFA# 1312] Fool me twice, shame on me.
Post by: Nocturne of Night on June 02, 2012, 02:52:07 PM
Quote from: TacticalError on June 02, 2012, 02:25:18 PM
...

I almost don't want to go on at this point because at this scale things get reeeeally weird, like how atoms are 99% vacuum or you begin to feel the repulsive effects of the electrons around the atoms (at our scale the charges are too close and effectively cancel out; btw this is what your sense of touch is). Nothing "rushes in to fill the gaps." There just happens to be more electrons where there's more air and stuff, so an atom or molecule moves toward wherever the density/pressure is less. Solids happen to be really dense and interlocked, which is why you can hold things like water and vacuums in a jar because nothing wants to squeeze through the repelling field that permeates the jar (at the atomic level). :mowdizzy

Wow, I'm a nerd. Comes with the major I guess...
Title: Re: 28/05/2012 [DMFA# 1312] Fool me twice, shame on me.
Post by: TacticalError on June 02, 2012, 03:21:24 PM
Quote from: Nocturne of Night on June 02, 2012, 02:52:07 PM
Quote from: TacticalError on June 02, 2012, 02:25:18 PM
...

I almost don't want to go on at this point because at this scale things get reeeeally weird, like how atoms are 99% vacuum or you begin to feel the repulsive effects of the electrons around the atoms (at our scale the charges are too close and effectively cancel out; btw this is what your sense of touch is). Nothing "rushes in to fill the gaps." There just happens to be more electrons where there's more air and stuff, so an atom or molecule moves toward wherever the density/pressure is less. Solids happen to be really dense and interlocked, which is why you can hold things like water and vacuums in a jar because nothing wants to squeeze through the repelling field that permeates the jar (at the atomic level). :mowdizzy

Wow, I'm a nerd. Comes with the major I guess...

... My brain just broke.
Title: Re: 28/05/2012 [DMFA# 1312] Fool me twice, shame on me.
Post by: Nocturne of Night on June 02, 2012, 03:40:46 PM
Quote from: TacticalError on June 02, 2012, 03:21:24 PM
Quote from: Nocturne of Night on June 02, 2012, 02:52:07 PM
Quote from: TacticalError on June 02, 2012, 02:25:18 PM
...

I almost don't want to go on at this point because at this scale things get reeeeally weird, like how atoms are 99% vacuum or you begin to feel the repulsive effects of the electrons around the atoms (at our scale the charges are too close and effectively cancel out; btw this is what your sense of touch is). Nothing "rushes in to fill the gaps." There just happens to be more electrons where there's more air and stuff, so an atom or molecule moves toward wherever the density/pressure is less. Solids happen to be really dense and interlocked, which is why you can hold things like water and vacuums in a jar because nothing wants to squeeze through the repelling field that permeates the jar (at the atomic level). :mowdizzy

Wow, I'm a nerd. Comes with the major I guess...

... My brain just broke.

At least it didn't disintegrate like most people's do. Need help picking up the pieces?
Title: Re: 28/05/2012 [DMFA# 1312] Fool me twice, shame on me.
Post by: Ignuus66 on June 02, 2012, 03:43:11 PM
Quote from: Nocturne of Night on June 02, 2012, 03:40:46 PM
Quote from: TacticalError on June 02, 2012, 03:21:24 PM
Quote from: Nocturne of Night on June 02, 2012, 02:52:07 PM
Quote from: TacticalError on June 02, 2012, 02:25:18 PM
...

I almost don't want to go on at this point because at this scale things get reeeeally weird, like how atoms are 99% vacuum or you begin to feel the repulsive effects of the electrons around the atoms (at our scale the charges are too close and effectively cancel out; btw this is what your sense of touch is). Nothing "rushes in to fill the gaps." There just happens to be more electrons where there's more air and stuff, so an atom or molecule moves toward wherever the density/pressure is less. Solids happen to be really dense and interlocked, which is why you can hold things like water and vacuums in a jar because nothing wants to squeeze through the repelling field that permeates the jar (at the atomic level). :mowdizzy

Wow, I'm a nerd. Comes with the major I guess...

... My brain just broke.

At least it didn't disintegrate like most people's do. Need help picking up the pieces?
Somehow I think I managed to understand it... But my brain still melted.

:U
But what if you ionize the air in the Jar and the jar itself? Will say the oxygen in the air combine with the possible Carbon of the plastic?  
Title: Re: 28/05/2012 [DMFA# 1312] Fool me twice, shame on me.
Post by: TacticalError on June 02, 2012, 05:28:00 PM
Quote from: Ignuus66 on June 02, 2012, 03:43:11 PM
Quote from: Nocturne of Night on June 02, 2012, 03:40:46 PM
Quote from: TacticalError on June 02, 2012, 03:21:24 PM
Quote from: Nocturne of Night on June 02, 2012, 02:52:07 PM
Quote from: TacticalError on June 02, 2012, 02:25:18 PM
...

I almost don't want to go on at this point because at this scale things get reeeeally weird, like how atoms are 99% vacuum or you begin to feel the repulsive effects of the electrons around the atoms (at our scale the charges are too close and effectively cancel out; btw this is what your sense of touch is). Nothing "rushes in to fill the gaps." There just happens to be more electrons where there's more air and stuff, so an atom or molecule moves toward wherever the density/pressure is less. Solids happen to be really dense and interlocked, which is why you can hold things like water and vacuums in a jar because nothing wants to squeeze through the repelling field that permeates the jar (at the atomic level). :mowdizzy

Wow, I'm a nerd. Comes with the major I guess...

... My brain just broke.

At least it didn't disintegrate like most people's do. Need help picking up the pieces?
Somehow I think I managed to understand it... But my brain still melted.

:U
But what if you ionize the air in the Jar and the jar itself? Will say the oxygen in the air combine with the possible Carbon of the plastic?  

I think it's probably best if I pick up my brain pieces and leave before this goes on an ornate trolley to the tearoom. This is way beyond my GSCE science knowledge. Well, at least at this time of day.
Title: Re: 28/05/2012 [DMFA# 1312] Fool me twice, shame on me.
Post by: Nocturne of Night on June 02, 2012, 07:08:02 PM
Quote from: Ignuus66 on June 02, 2012, 03:43:11 PM
Quote from: Nocturne of Night on June 02, 2012, 03:40:46 PM
Quote from: TacticalError on June 02, 2012, 03:21:24 PM
Quote from: Nocturne of Night on June 02, 2012, 02:52:07 PM
Quote from: TacticalError on June 02, 2012, 02:25:18 PM
...

I almost don't want to go on at this point because at this scale things get reeeeally weird, like how atoms are 99% vacuum or you begin to feel the repulsive effects of the electrons around the atoms (at our scale the charges are too close and effectively cancel out; btw this is what your sense of touch is). Nothing "rushes in to fill the gaps." There just happens to be more electrons where there's more air and stuff, so an atom or molecule moves toward wherever the density/pressure is less. Solids happen to be really dense and interlocked, which is why you can hold things like water and vacuums in a jar because nothing wants to squeeze through the repelling field that permeates the jar (at the atomic level). :mowdizzy

Wow, I'm a nerd. Comes with the major I guess...

... My brain just broke.

At least it didn't disintegrate like most people's do. Need help picking up the pieces?
Somehow I think I managed to understand it... But my brain still melted.

:U
But what if you ionize the air in the Jar and the jar itself? Will say the oxygen in the air combine with the possible Carbon of the plastic? 

Now we're in the quantum! If we weren't on the way before we certainly are now!  :mwaha

The age old question of bonding theory: which force prevails, the repulsion of electrons or the sharing of space to get more room to zip around? Electrons hate each other, but like being in pairs if possible (particles are funny). Inorganic chemistry is all over this. Ionizing breaks bonds and unpairs electrons, so rearranging is certainly possible. Then you'll get a layer of whatever carbon-oxygen substance you just made on the inside, along with the expected reduction of pressure from pulling out and bonding the air. As for the rest of the jar, it will either remain impermeable (bonds with itself) or disintegrate into a bunch of free radicals in the atmosphere (well, fudge), I'd imagine. But oxygen has two bonds and breaking both might be too much to overcome, so nothing may happen. Or you attach peroxide and make explosives! Yay! You never know until you try!

(Feel free to stop whenever. I love thinking about this stuff and could go on and on about it.)
Title: Re: 28/05/2012 [DMFA# 1312] Fool me twice, shame on me.
Post by: Ignuus66 on June 02, 2012, 07:59:59 PM
Let's try that  >:3 >:3

*explosive salsa jar*

To my surprise I understood most of it :P
Title: Re: 28/05/2012 [DMFA# 1312] Fool me twice, shame on me.
Post by: Nocturne of Night on June 02, 2012, 08:59:42 PM
It's fun for me, explaining really strange and interesting things like physics in a way people can understand! That's why I call myself a nerd. :tongue Also tends to make me sit back and think "Huh," and understand it in a new and easier-to-chew way. Glad to see it worked!  :P

I recently realized that the way d-orbitals are populated (vital to making some enzymes like hemoglobin work) can be likened to a problem of renting apartments. It's so nice to not have to share a room (high spin electronics), but if that relatively puts too much of a dent in your wallet you'll bear it grudgingly (low spin electronics). The "relative expense" is all about the metal in the middle and the things bonded to it.

Also how much math goes into chemistry: if done using molecular symmetry (a la group theory), it's a linear algebra problem wearing a cheesy mustache and snickering at you from the shadows.
Title: Re: 28/05/2012 [DMFA# 1312] Fool me twice, shame on me.
Post by: Ignuus66 on June 02, 2012, 09:29:19 PM
To be fair I'm very much interested in chemistry and physics, so I don't midn if I don't understand something :P I try to understand it, and look for an explanation
Title: Re: 28/05/2012 [DMFA# 1312] Fool me twice, shame on me.
Post by: Nocturne of Night on June 02, 2012, 11:48:13 PM
 :U Welp, I think I've done enough damage for one thread. Let us never speak of this again.