420chan now has a web-based IRC client available, right here
Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
You can leave this blank to post anonymously, or you can create a Tripcode by using the float Name#Password
A subject is required when posting a new thread
[*]Italic Text[/*]
[**]Bold Text[/**]
[~]Taimapedia Article[/~]
[%]Spoiler Text[/%]
>Highlight/Quote Text
[pre]Preformatted & Monospace text[/pre]
1. Numbered lists become ordered lists
* Bulleted lists become unordered lists


Community Updates

420chan now supports HTTPS! If you find any issues, you may report them in this thread
sniffin chems for science by Fuck Gemmlewell - Sun, 15 Nov 2015 15:43:47 EST ID:xTJQV3vy No.77368 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1447620227000.jpg -(7833B / 7.65KB, 304x166) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 7833
>It is described as having a slightly sweet smell, although inhaling enough vapor to detect its odor would be hazardous.

Then how does anyone know what it smells like? Was somebody's last words "Hey that smells slightly sweet!" and a guy within earshot had his gas mask on?
Bombastus !lnkYxlAbaw - Sun, 15 Nov 2015 18:39:36 EST ID:ElYFdcKO No.77369 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>The toxicity of dimethylmercury was highlighted with the death of the inorganic chemist Karen Wetterhahn of Dartmouth College in 1997. After spilling no more than a few drops of this compound on her latex-glove, the barrier was immediately compromised and within seconds it was absorbed into the back of her hand, quickly circulating and resulting in her death ten months later.
We were all taught this in undergrad and all our supervisors told us that all organo-mercuric research stopped and were disposed of after her death. It was actually applied worldwide so that the compounds (which were thought safe at the time) can be further studied and everything.
Smells are, more often than not, easier to detect because of lax rules or non-attention to them. It's really not that hard to accidentally catch a waft of a toxic compound, especially if you remove it from the fume hood or un-link a Schlenk flask too quickly.

Wilhelm Scheele was very well known to smell and taste everything he made.
Vehk !7HYGxe5v5c - Thu, 19 Nov 2015 13:26:19 EST ID:a+AOCmE5 No.77380 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1447957579368.png -(91631B / 89.48KB, 195x189) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.

It should be noted that this didn't end well for Scheele.

Cyclamate, the artificial sweetener which paved the way for aspartame, was discovered in 1937 when a chemist in Illinois University was synthesizing anti-fever meds and cyclamate was an intermediary. He was smoking a cigarette in the lab, and put it down on the table while he went to do something. While he was gone, cyclamate that had spilled soaked into the cigarette, when he returned, picked it up and relit it, he discovered that the cigarette now tasted sweet and this is how the property was discovered.

Personally I think it's a damn disgrace that you can't smoke in the lab anymore. Smoking while you work is great, and you'd be a fool to do in the presence of flammable gases or volatile chemicals anyway. As long as it's done in a well-ventilated area and away from the aforementioned compounds I don't see why it shouldn't be allowed, and cyclamate never would have been discovered if it wasn't for the noble institution of the in-lab smoking lost to us during the 60's and 70's.

Robert Woodward was probably one of the greatest organic chemists of all time and codified the discipline of total synthesis - he chainsmoked in the laboratory throughout his entire career without ever suffering adverse consequences.

ling by Polly Puddletack - Sat, 17 Oct 2015 23:13:52 EST ID:i+LQ7VHe No.77305 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1445138032706.png -(2786733B / 2.66MB, 1242x2208) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 2786733
Any recommended books on the biology/neurology behind linguistics? Any books on the relationship between language ability and cognitive ability?
Shitting Grimville - Sun, 18 Oct 2015 13:15:04 EST ID:uGD5aNS6 No.77307 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I recommend this book all the time on here. Oliver Sack's "The Man Who mistook his Wife for a Hat."

It is not language specific but there are quite a few parts about language in it. Neurology based book that covers brain function through studying what happens to a person that loses certain parts of the brain.

I remember one part about language talks about 2 areas of the brain, the Broca's area and the Wernicke's area. The book talks about patients who suffer strokes and lose either of these parts of the brain, and how language for them is totally messed up in different ways. It is pretty interesting.
Emma Murdwater - Wed, 18 Nov 2015 06:56:34 EST ID:WAEp68FT No.77375 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Cognitive Psychology: A Student's Handbook

Great textbook, should be available online in the usual places.

seperating meth from isopropylbenzylamine by billyboy - Wed, 11 Nov 2015 02:22:56 EST ID:CL5Eq4tG No.77360 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1447226576983.jpg -(3914B / 3.82KB, 256x197) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 3914
Can anyone recommend a solvent (or solvent mix) that will work to separate the two? Or, does anyone know what the solubility of iso is in different solvents? Help please.. I'm tired of this cut!!
Bombastus !lnkYxlAbaw - Sun, 15 Nov 2015 18:42:40 EST ID:ElYFdcKO No.77370 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I can't think of anything besides a full laboratory column that would be able to help you out. You can't even react it and change it away. You'll have to experiment with yourself since simply looking at the molecules imply they should be soluble in the same solvent systems.

Tired of the cut? Quit meth! Or more realistically, switch dealers/ grow your own.
Beatrice Blengerstone - Tue, 17 Nov 2015 13:46:22 EST ID:L5+Uc7hP No.77373 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I'm just an idiot procrastinating on his orgo midterm, but is there some reaction that could remove the primary methyl groups from isopropylbenzylamine to form dextroamphetamine?
press !QUHukXEvkY - Tue, 01 Dec 2015 16:08:27 EST ID:Izj+Mobm No.77395 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1449004107550.png -(28793B / 28.12KB, 300x171) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
the what?
did you even bother to open wikipedia and take a long hard look at the structures of those two chemicals?

boy i hope you improved your skills before taking your midterm

I need help understanding titer values by Alan Greenspan - Wed, 11 Nov 2015 05:50:41 EST ID:hzBEY7Kl No.77361 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1447239041003.jpg -(13231B / 12.92KB, 383x250) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 13231
I need some help understanding what the value of a titer means.

I did an ELISA in class. I coated the microtiter wells with 100ul of a solution containing 0.005 ug/ul of protein (so that's 0.5 ug of protein on the well).

I then added 200ul of an antiserum into the first well which was the only well that had no diluent added.

then I took 100ul from that and added it to the next well that also had 100ul of diluent (so it was a 1:2 dilution).

I took another 100ul from that well and added it to the third well that also had 100ul of diluent (so it is now a 1:4 dilution).

And on I went until I had a 1:2048 dilution.

The antiserum that was used was of an unknown concentration but I don't think that matters. Only that there is enough to bind to any antigen in the well.

the titre value I got was 16 (1/16). That is, I got a positive reading for all dilutions up to 1:16.
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
Sir Gould - Fri, 13 Nov 2015 10:12:56 EST ID:IhyDJ92Q No.77363 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Stopped reading at
>Pic related but not mine

hahaha nerdddd
Sidney Sugglenatch - Fri, 13 Nov 2015 15:43:33 EST ID:RqYTKHM0 No.77364 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Your problem isn't that you don't understand titer values. You do. Your problem is that you're asking us about applications when you should be looking in your book for ELISA protocols.

Quantitative analysis of nicotine and nicotine related alkaloids in tobacco by Esther Trotford - Wed, 14 Oct 2015 14:26:14 EST ID:Gh37WM22 No.77289 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1444847174393.jpg -(70796B / 69.14KB, 490x712) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 70796
Hi chem!
How would one go about determining the nicotine content of dry/wet tobacco leafs, without HPLC ? I need this for a school project, any help would be greatly apreciated!
6 posts and 2 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
Bombastus !!HToBa9dh - Thu, 05 Nov 2015 16:33:42 EST ID:ElYFdcKO No.77353 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>oxidize to nicotinic acid
>oxidation prior to analytical methods
ooooh. my analytical undergrad professors would be piiiiiiiiissed.

I haven't touched Anal Chem in a while but oxidation is rarely 100%. You wouldn't be able to account for the loss and re-distribution of other chemicals in the whole system (especially since you're doing a natural source full of contaminants). When working with this kind of analysis, you would try to prevent oxidation as much as possible so that you can analyze X readily and accurately.

I wouldn't try a small scale column with a Pasteur Pipette since the solvent system would be incredibly sensitive. Rather, try a 5 or 10 ml burette or a small separatory funnel. Remember to put a piece of cotton on the bottom!

Anyway, the easiest method to anaylze all this stuff would unfortunately be HPLC. But since you specifically told us that you couldn't do that, maybe a column would be easier, unfortunately. What I have done in the past with natural substances of the compound was to add 1.000g of the substance (in your case, nicotine) to the natural compound and then run a column. I would be analyzing 10g of natural plant matter so when it was to be re-weighed, I would get something on the lines of 1.100g of analyte back. This made spotting the column SIGNIFICANTLY easier.
My only quarrel with this is you may not have a high vacuum to fully dry the substance. Perhaps put it on a low vacuum for 72 hours so you can fully know how much of x, y, and z are in it.
Angus Suddleford - Sat, 07 Nov 2015 06:35:30 EST ID:D6W9PxnV No.77354 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Why not use tobacco extracts with 80% ethanol and putting it in a shaker for a week? If you need pure nicotine you can just buy it.
Phineas Worthinglock - Sat, 07 Nov 2015 12:31:29 EST ID:wqWKalkS No.77355 Ignore Report Quick Reply
well learning from this it's gonna be: 10.00g dried plant matter, extracted with acidic EtOAc/haxane(A-B step included), run a TLC to see where the nicotine will be at, run a column with the (not too) acidic EtOAc(would 5% be too much?), Flush the nicotine conatining phase out with (a pre-determined amount of, for the sake of convinience) EtOAc, Put it in the UV-spec, or do i need to do more columns, or any aditional steps? This would be so much easier if muh' country had a proper education budget[SPOILER] Also the results don't have to be (and can't be with the half-assed provisons at my disposal) accurate, i just need a general idea of how much nicotine there is in the samples, because if the precursors i aded to the soil made any differance it would be at least a whole %. Aaaaand, thanx again for your input, it helped a lot!
Bombastus !lnkYxlAbaw - Sat, 07 Nov 2015 14:33:06 EST ID:vbS8CtHn No.77356 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1M hydrochloric acid in methanol is the standard. GAA / CH3OH is a last resort and not as exact.
Otherwise, it looks well and good. Where are you that you're having such trouble with chemistry funding??
Augustus Hottingsere - Wed, 11 Nov 2015 15:15:29 EST ID:l00HNas1 No.77362 Ignore Report Quick Reply
The otherwise lovely country of Slovenia, south of austria. We have to make a project by ourselfs in the 4th year of HS, and well, it gets a bit expensive when you try to do something like this. By comparison, other plebeans have stuff like Malanchie green synthesis and seperaton of leaf colourings xD

What is the worst popular anti-science notion by Shitting Cridgenatch - Fri, 28 Aug 2015 17:50:08 EST ID:fcVdNVgq No.77045 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1440798608310.png -(426685B / 416.68KB, 956x851) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 426685
and why is it race is just a social construct?
61 posts and 9 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
Matilda Gorrymut - Fri, 23 Oct 2015 21:33:14 EST ID:ejCB2MFI No.77319 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Phyllis Buzzway - Sat, 24 Oct 2015 14:56:54 EST ID:uGD5aNS6 No.77320 Ignore Report Quick Reply
of course. You do realize that both "Lewtonin's fallacy" and "Continuum fallacy" are both just counter arguments, right? Not end-alls. And they are not fallacies. For instance, "Lewtonin's fallacy" as a concept has its own flaws.
What this is is a debate. I for one never invoked accusastions of race. But the same debate we are having over the science is the very same debate had by evolutionary biologists all over academia.

So I once again ask you, do you have a legitimate counter argument to Lewtonin's theories without simply invoking Edward's counterarguments? Christ even your own interpretation of the counterarguments instead of just name-dropping like you've been doing? I at least have attempted to provide some of my own interpretation, your camp just resorts to name drops and shitty one line responses.
Eliza Fettingbat - Sat, 24 Oct 2015 16:43:40 EST ID:4+FsPM8d No.77321 Ignore Report Quick Reply

Just because Black people have a lower IQ on average doesn't mean they have a lower IQ because they are black. If you account socio-economic factors when measuring the IQ's of Black and white people, they are pretty much the same.

Also studies can be purposely made to indicate a relationship that doesn't really exist.
Here is a bad example but you will get the picture. Numbers are sort of based on real data.

>People Who regularly eat fruit loops were found have less than .001% chance of having cancer.
>People who regularly eat Raisin Bran were found to Have a 20% chance of having cancer.

So does eating fruit loops cure cancer or does eating Raisin Bran cause cancer? no because i didn't tell you the age of the participants. Little kids eat fruit loops and old people eat Raisin Bran. The chance of being a little kid and having cancer is very low, while the chance of an old person having cancer is much higher. The main thing to take from this is that correlation does not equal causation and that its very easy to make a study seem convincing.

Also No one thinks everyone is equal. There is always someone who will be smarter than you, stronger than you, better looking than you, have more money than you, or have more friends than you. But Racist people seem to think that because they belong to a more statistically successful race, that they should be proud of themselves for being born to a successful group. But just because YOU as an individual are born to a successful group of people, doesn't somehow make you smart or talented or better than others. Many advancements of western civilization can be attributed to the hard work of just a few people. Like Issac newton who invented Calculus and developed a law of gravity by himself in his early twenties. But just because Issac newton was white and smart doesn't mean that you are smart.

And statistics are just that. Statistics. They don't define individuals. Just because someone was born to a group of people with lower IQ on average doesn't mean they have a low IQ. No one deserves to be judged just because of the circumstances of their birth. They should be judged as individuals. If you are racist a…
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
Graham Buzzford - Sat, 24 Oct 2015 23:33:37 EST ID:uGD5aNS6 No.77322 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I agree man, too many people toss stats around with absolutely no understanding of the difference between causation and correlation. In your example, one might conclude genetics lead to a difference, but it is just as you said, socioeconomic factors are a hidden variable at play.

Another example, have seen anti-marijuana people use it, something along the lines of 60% of all high school drop outs smoke weed, or high school drop outs are 60% more likely to smoke weed. Something like that.

So one might conclude that weed causes people to drop out, yet ignore the fact that way more people smoke weed and do not drop out than those that do. The correct statistics would be to compare the rate of people who smoke weed to the number of them who drop out, and do the same for those that don't and drop out, and see if there is a difference between the rates.
But none-the-less, to stay on topic, raw stats like that are almost useless unless they are normalized in some way.
Esther Murdlock - Mon, 02 Nov 2015 00:00:00 EST ID:5WJ2hczX No.77347 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1446440400996.jpg -(96433B / 94.17KB, 506x634) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>And statistics are just that. Statistics. They don't define individuals. Just because someone was born to a group of people with lower IQ on average doesn't mean they have a low IQ. No one deserves to be judged just because of the circumstances of their birth. They should be judged as individuals. If you are racist and whenever you meet a black person, you will judge them based on your preconceived notions rather than giving them a chance to prove themselves.

True, but we subconsciously judge people in all sorts of ways, it's an autonomous mental mechanism and race is a significant part in such judgement. Some people are just less irrational in how they interact with people they are naturally judgmental about by virtue of understanding what I quoted.

Absolute beginners guide to organic chemistry by Jarvis Tillingman - Thu, 15 Oct 2015 17:59:53 EST ID:y93cr0TU No.77294 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1444946393811.jpg -(24875B / 24.29KB, 500x383) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 24875
I've been watching some youtube videos that have been quite helpful, but many of them start in different places and use terms I don't really understand yet. I'm sure there exists some perfect beginners guide that assumes I know nothing and explains everything easily, but I can't find one. Can any of you help?
1 posts and 1 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
Nell Wissleforth - Fri, 16 Oct 2015 11:42:17 EST ID:cM6rhCgJ No.77300 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Just focus on three things:

The first two rows of the periodic table (especially the trends)
Electron transfers in reaction mechanisms

And you'll be better than most undergrads
A Wizard - Fri, 16 Oct 2015 12:17:00 EST ID:PtGx5SYm No.77301 Ignore Report Quick Reply

Don't rely on memorization like the university retards tell you. If they were smart enough to offer good advice on learning on their own, they wouldn't pay to go to college.

Learn how the processes work, and keep watching and listening regardless of if you understand it. The brain will process the language on it's own, and you will make the connections yourself as you get enough data to make them.

And focus on the aspects you have use for. Need is the biggest factor in learning speeds.
Shitting Grimville - Sun, 18 Oct 2015 13:18:21 EST ID:uGD5aNS6 No.77308 Ignore Report Quick Reply
What about the university retards that get paid to teach college?
Vehk !7HYGxe5v5c - Wed, 28 Oct 2015 23:47:17 EST ID:Z6dpkQIE No.77336 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1446090437731.png -(151598B / 148.04KB, 800x800) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.

All of this is covered beautifully and with an elegantly approachable tone in the introductory chapters of Clayden's Organic Chemistry.

My chemistry module is after shifting to solely Org Chem at this point and the GenChem book we have (Central Science) is abysmal for Org, especially the stereochemistry, so I dusted off Clayden and haven't looked back since. If you have even a rough understanding of GenChem I think the introductory chapters of Clayden learned correctly would bring you up to scratch to tackle most of the later content.

What I'm trying to say is that Clayden is the bible, get it, read it. *shilling intensifies*
Cedric Drushpedging - Sun, 01 Nov 2015 02:35:47 EST ID:XkxPUBT2 No.77345 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1446363347312.jpg -(515707B / 503.62KB, 1920x1200) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.

>your brain magically puts it together
Maybe that works for you, I know I don't learn like that.

The trick is to get as many different resources possible to reference. One might work better for you than it others, so buy/download as many organic chemistry books as you can. Then it comes down to a matter of hard work and practice. If you do not do practice problems, and/or have a recitation session with a good TA to ask questions and get immediate feedback, you will just spin your wheels trying to master the material.

You will not pick this material up and master it by casual browsing.>>77301

General experience thread by Whitey Billingshaw - Fri, 23 Oct 2015 11:02:55 EST ID:BHjCWchr No.77318 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1445612575887.jpg -(6264B / 6.12KB, 120x120) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 6264
Wondering what everyone's experience is /chem/
Contrast chemE and ch degrees, usefulness in terms of thesight, and what classes/electives to be particular about

Ask a Wizard by A Wizard - Wed, 12 Aug 2015 02:28:59 EST ID:lqfCRKYj No.76899 Locked Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1439360939557.jpg -(169559B / 165.58KB, 774x1032) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 169559
I had proposed this in another thread, but then figured it would make a decent thread.

I offer conversation in hopes of bridging the needless divide between the various schools of thought that we as a species have divided the truth into. Put bluntly, the fields labeled as Science, Religion, and Mysticism/Magick/Metaphysics and whatever else happens to get rambled into the mix. If this isn't a gig for a wizard, then you're fucked 'cause that's what's offered.

All I care to state for background is this. I am a polymath who makes a comfortable living by applying various skills and schools of thought to problems to find their solutions, profit from them, learn in the process and move on. I have actively been practicing various traditions of the occult for about a decade now, despite having always had an interest. I routinely drop lsd for of all purposes, to question myself and my beliefs of myself and reality, in a mental state in which i am incapable of lying to myself. I'm the guy always suggesting racetams in /other and my only goal (to the best of my own knowledge, I am a devious one sometimes.) here is to find the truth in whatever I am asked to, regardless of it it aligns with my own current theories or not. The truth should remain, whether we believe it or not.

So, anyone up for conversation? I'm not like the others.
Thread has been locked
Thread was locked by: Quetzalcoatl
Reason: ...yeah try to keep this in /pss/ or whatever one thread you were told to across all the boards...
75 posts and 10 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
Albert Sishbeck - Tue, 13 Oct 2015 15:41:23 EST ID:mEgh7QsF No.77287 Ignore Report Quick Reply

can we have this faggot banned from the science board?

>I honestly don't believe in the category that we call matter..

get the fuck out of here with your borderline retardation and definite lack of any substantial education.
A Wizard - Wed, 14 Oct 2015 01:40:40 EST ID:PtGx5SYm No.77288 Ignore Report Quick Reply

lol, no. I hate Islam and anyone who wants to spread it. Also hate the Israeli government and those involved in most things it does. Damn, if I wasn't 'bout to pass out, I'd just write another list of things that irritate me. Hmm... might be a list of that in another thread on here somewhere. I know hipsters will be near the top... should add Pakistani College kid Hipster to the list too, though I suspect that if we get enough of them together with some other hipster types, it would wind up entertaining. Though, I would rather strip a hundred saudi "princes" naked, duct-tape pvc pipes to their chests, and air drop them on israel from just high enough that they'll break a leg if they don't tuck and roll. That would amuse me.

Passing the fuck out now.
Vehk !7HYGxe5v5c - Thu, 15 Oct 2015 19:51:06 EST ID:TJAcMo0I No.77296 Ignore Report Quick Reply

The only interesting scientific thing in this thread is some weak evidence connecting racetams to psychosis in at least one individual.
A Wizard - Sun, 18 Oct 2015 13:42:56 EST ID:PtGx5SYm No.77310 Ignore Report Quick Reply

Nah. I was like this before I ever even smoked weed. I never believed the status quo for reality.
A Wizard - Sun, 18 Oct 2015 15:40:04 EST ID:PtGx5SYm No.77311 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1445197204062.jpg -(12910B / 12.61KB, 266x202) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.

Ack, forgot to mention. I do have a study going on my old apprentice. Started that when I realized he had ingested over a gram of noopept and he STILL wanted more

Iodine as a substitutent in benzodiazepines by William Drommlesutch - Thu, 15 Oct 2015 01:17:23 EST ID:RVCuK1Cm No.77292 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1444886243551.jpg -(155264B / 151.62KB, 836x1166) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 155264
Basically I was wondering, there are many benzos with halogens within the compound eg clonazepam and bromazepam

However I have never heard of a benzodiazepines with iodine as one of the constituents

Why would this be so?
Lillian Smallhood - Thu, 15 Oct 2015 19:31:43 EST ID:TJAcMo0I No.77295 Ignore Report Quick Reply

I presume because it's relatively low reactivity and electronegativity would contribute to a weaker bond strength and as such a less stable compound for no pay off.

War on Science by Lydia Secklefudge - Fri, 09 Oct 2015 16:05:35 EST ID:FfJ1Vebk No.77270 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1444421135679.gif -(1168732B / 1.11MB, 140x140) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 1168732

Decent vid
A Wizard - Fri, 09 Oct 2015 18:34:44 EST ID:PtGx5SYm No.77271 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1444430084476.png -(24397B / 23.83KB, 300x250) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.

I'm not clicking until I have some details...

One requested detail. Am I in it? Am I at least competently represented? xD
Hamilton Dandleway - Sat, 10 Oct 2015 09:05:40 EST ID:YhREOUdy No.77273 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Do you have unwavering faith in Al Gore when he says we need to buy into his carbon credit scheme or we're all gonna die? Or do you think it's all about money?

Science war.
A Wizard - Sat, 10 Oct 2015 13:11:08 EST ID:PtGx5SYm No.77275 Ignore Report Quick Reply

All about the money. The whole carbon issue is a bad joke. It's easy to strip carbon from the atmosphere and from the oceans, and the more we use carbon as a building material, the easier it will be.

It's also a political game. "too many" underdeveloped nations are playing catchup.
Doris Gegglemet - Wed, 14 Oct 2015 20:55:05 EST ID:dkMoIz4p No.77290 Ignore Report Quick Reply
It's focused on Canada.

Any of you guys have a ph meter or ph strips? by Nell Nobberpore - Tue, 29 Sep 2015 02:19:25 EST ID:+P3OcrX6 No.77208 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1443507565455.jpg -(25624B / 25.02KB, 450x450) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 25624
Can one of you guys test the ph of a glass of salt water using 1 cup (or 250ml) tap water and 1 tbsp (or 15ml) of common table salt (sodium chloride). All I can find is the ph of seawater which is much different. I know tap water will vary slightly but it's still better than going by seawater measurements. I ask because I damaged a tooth recently and I have no money for a cap or crown, so I have been rinsing/gargling with saltwater several times a day until I can afford the dentist visit to insure I don't wind up with an abscess from the pulp of the tooth being exposed. Using Listerine hurt like hell and I can't use it. I know salt water is very effective at controlling bacteria but this dentist claims salt water is acidic and will weaken teeth after prolonged use. http://www.todaysdentistry.com.au/mouthwash-or-salt-water-rinse/ Until I read that I thought it was neutral as long as the water it was mixed with was relatively pure and therefore perfectly safe for prolonged use as a mouth rinse.
4 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
lil' shit !!vVWR8L52 - Sat, 03 Oct 2015 04:34:15 EST ID:+TLZHL9G No.77223 Ignore Report Quick Reply
saliva is alkaline to protect your teeth dude, wtf. nb

OP: I use neither altho I have both, but a solution works better and more precise IME.
Hedda Bebberstick - Sat, 03 Oct 2015 05:01:21 EST ID:+P3OcrX6 No.77224 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>altho I have both
Well that's good news, I was actually hoping to get someone to test for me, since I have neither. I have a feeling that dentist was full of shit and has no idea what he's talking about, but better safe than sorry I figure.
Bombastus !!HToBa9dh - Sat, 03 Oct 2015 18:18:49 EST ID:4ppVjZXo No.77228 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>this thread
if you use tap water, it's already slighly basic due to the hardness of your water. any salt you add will not change the pH by anything.

do this. it does not do anything to salt water's effectiveness. the salt's still there.

saliva is basic. close to 7 is correct. but it is also basic (4x more basic than regular water)

yes, he should be full of shit. unless YOUR specific tap water is just weird like that. sure, your dentist had to sit through a few years of chemistry. but i doubt he would've retained much if he literally thinks NaCl is acidic.
Phyllis Nobblewater - Wed, 07 Oct 2015 02:56:29 EST ID:PtGx5SYm No.77252 Ignore Report Quick Reply

Wait what? Really?! Dude... my saliva makes baking soda fizz... I have acidic saliva then? Should I go get this tested?
Hamilton Suttinghall - Wed, 07 Oct 2015 09:33:46 EST ID:+P3OcrX6 No.77254 Ignore Report Quick Reply
If you're being serious, then yeah. I would think your body ph would have to be pretty far out of whack for that to happen though.

<<Last Pages Next>>
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Report Post
Please be descriptive with report notes,
this helps staff resolve issues quicker.