Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #596638 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Alan Folmsbee <omnilobe@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-09-11 17:49 -0700 |
| Last post | 2016-09-17 21:55 +0200 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 64 — 11 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
3 Hydrogen gas variants Alan Folmsbee <omnilobe@gmail.com> - 2016-09-11 17:49 -0700
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-09-12 01:18 +0000
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-09-11 18:40 -0700
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-12 08:14 +0200
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-12 08:28 +0200
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-12 07:26 -0700
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-12 17:38 +0200
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-12 09:21 -0700
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-12 19:01 +0200
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-12 10:17 -0700
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-12 19:19 +0200
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-12 19:24 +0200
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-12 10:50 -0700
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-12 20:00 +0200
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-12 18:29 +0000
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-12 15:10 -0500
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-09-13 09:07 +0200
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-13 09:22 +0200
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-13 09:25 +0200
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-09-13 10:37 +0200
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-13 18:27 +0200
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-09-13 18:56 +0200
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-13 21:03 +0200
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-09-13 23:49 +0200
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-14 07:16 +0200
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-14 09:15 +0200
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-09-19 12:10 +0200
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-09-19 12:13 -0700
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-20 09:06 +0200
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-14 07:33 +0200
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-14 07:35 +0200
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-09-19 12:23 +0200
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants "Tim BandTech.com" <timgolden@bandtechnology.com> - 2016-09-19 08:05 -0700
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-09-19 18:41 +0200
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants "Tim BandTech.com" <timgolden@bandtechnology.com> - 2016-09-21 21:47 -0700
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-20 09:25 +0200
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-09-20 21:38 +0200
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-14 07:41 +0200
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-13 14:35 +0000
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-13 08:09 -0700
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-13 15:50 +0000
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-13 09:05 -0700
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-09-13 13:24 -0700
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-14 10:59 +0200
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-09-14 14:28 -0700
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-15 07:08 +0200
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-09-15 09:55 -0700
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-15 19:12 +0200
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-09-15 10:18 -0700
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-15 19:29 +0200
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-09-15 18:31 -0700
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-12 18:05 +0000
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants "nuny@bid.nes" <Alien8752@gmail.com> - 2016-09-12 18:41 -0700
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-09-12 17:59 +0000
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-12 20:15 +0200
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-09-12 21:15 +0000
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants Alan Folmsbee <omnilobe@gmail.com> - 2016-09-12 20:41 -0700
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-13 07:34 +0200
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-13 07:46 +0200
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-13 07:53 +0200
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-13 07:57 +0200
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-13 08:35 +0200
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants "Tim BandTech.com" <timgolden@bandtechnology.com> - 2016-09-17 11:07 -0700
Re: 3 Hydrogen gas variants Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-17 21:55 +0200
Page 1 of 4 [1] 2 3 4 Next page →
| From | Alan Folmsbee <omnilobe@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-11 17:49 -0700 |
| Subject | 3 Hydrogen gas variants |
| Message-ID | <5631398f-3fa3-4903-9ab6-75eb447c13cb@googlegroups.com> |
The three kinds for this essay are the hydrogen diatomic gas H2, the hydrogen monatomic gas H, and the deuterium monatomic gas D. I expect the deuterium to have a different chemistry than H because D has a neutron. The physics are more detailed than the chemistry science for this expectation. The deuterium has a neutron taking up one dimension of the proton's charge of three dimensions. I expect the D to have only two dimensions for repelling other charges, but H has all three dimensions to repel other protons. H gas is rare. H2 gas is common. D gas is beyond rare. H gas is unstable. Why? Beyond chemistry, why do we seldom get a bare naked proton gas, H, with electrons near by? Would D gas be less stable than H has?
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-12 01:18 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <tcchad-paj.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #596638 |
Alan Folmsbee <omnilobe@gmail.com> wrote: > The three kinds for this essay are the hydrogen diatomic gas H2, the hydrogen monatomic gas H, and the deuterium monatomic gas D. I expect the deuterium to have a different chemistry than H because D has a neutron. The physics are more detailed than the chemistry science for this expectation. > > The deuterium has a neutron taking up one dimension of the proton's charge of three dimensions. I expect the D to have only two dimensions for repelling other charges, but H has all three dimensions to repel other protons. > > H gas is rare. H2 gas is common. D gas is beyond rare. H gas is unstable. Why? Beyond chemistry, why do we seldom get a bare naked proton gas, H, with electrons near by? Would D gas be less stable than H has? Not all that rare; 156 atoms of deuterium per million hydrogens in the Earth's oceans, which means there is a shitload of it on Earth. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-11 18:40 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <6f3d1c39-d52c-4998-a741-3de762bfc9cb@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #596645 |
On Sunday, September 11, 2016 at 6:31:05 PM UTC-7, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > Alan Folmsbee <omnilobe@gmail.com> wrote: > > The three kinds for this essay are the hydrogen diatomic gas H2, the hydrogen monatomic gas H, and the deuterium monatomic gas D. I expect the deuterium to have a different chemistry than H because D has a neutron. The physics are more detailed than the chemistry science for this expectation. > > > > The deuterium has a neutron taking up one dimension of the proton's charge of three dimensions. I expect the D to have only two dimensions for repelling other charges, but H has all three dimensions to repel other protons. > > > > H gas is rare. H2 gas is common. D gas is beyond rare. H gas is unstable. Why? Beyond chemistry, why do we seldom get a bare naked proton gas, H, with electrons near by? Would D gas be less stable than H has? > > Not all that rare; 156 atoms of deuterium per million hydrogens in the > Earth's oceans, which means there is a shitload of it on Earth. > > > -- > Jim Pennino Jeez you are such an inane twit.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-12 08:14 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <nr5h4s$sqs$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #596638 |
Dne 12/09/2016 v 02:49 Alan Folmsbee napsal(a): > The three kinds for this essay are the hydrogen diatomic gas > H2, the hydrogen monatomic gas H, and the deuterium monatomic > gas D. I expect the deuterium to have a different chemistry than > H because D has a neutron. The physics are more detailed than > the chemistry science for this expectation. Why not HD as well ? Deuterium does not have different chemistry, as the behaviour of the electrons is the same. Just particular physical chemistry constants are shifted due its different mass. The differences involving nuclear reactions are much bigger. > > The deuterium has a neutron taking up one dimension of the proton's > charge of three dimensions. I expect the D to have only two dimensions > for repelling other charges, but H has all three > dimensions to repel other protons. This is unjustified speculation. > > H gas is rare. H2 gas is common. D gas is beyond rare. H gas > is unstable. Why? Because H has is unstable as well. > .......Beyond chemistry, why do we seldom get a bare > naked proton gas, H, with electrons near by? Would > D gas be less stable than H has? > Because H gas has much higher energy than H2 gas and reaction 2 H --> H2 is highly exothermic. AFAIK. it could be used even for welding, without ever burning hydrogen. Difference between H and D here is negligible, as it is the most observable at low energy chnages. -- Poutnik ( The Pilgrim, Der Wanderer ) Knowledge makes great men humble, but small men arrogant.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-12 08:28 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <nr5hv3$usu$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #596654 |
Dne 12/09/2016 v 08:14 Poutnik napsal(a): > Dne 12/09/2016 v 02:49 Alan Folmsbee napsal(a): > > > Deuterium does not have different chemistry, as the behaviour > of the electrons is the same. Just particular > physical chemistry constants are shifted due its different mass. > Neither have different chemistry isotopes of helium, lithium, bor or carbon. Hydrogen a and deuterium are special, just because of dedicated names and because the mass ratio is the most different from 1. In chemistry and isotope context, all effects not related to just different masses are negligible. -- Poutnik ( The Pilgrim, Der Wanderer ) Knowledge makes great men humble, but small men arrogant.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-12 07:26 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <bd13218b-32aa-4634-8273-aa286818c8ca@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #596655 |
There are TWO different electrons- the "up" and the "down", and they want very much to share the same pathway, whether it be molecular or atomic. This is what drives chemistry. You'll find one of each in a Cooper pair, a Hydrogen molecule, and an atomic bond. They are intrinsically opposite
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-12 17:38 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <nr6i5d$9o6$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #596667 |
On 09/12/2016 04:26 PM, john wrote: > There are TWO different electrons- > the "up" and the "down", Rather 2 electrons with different spin angular momenta. Different electrons would imply their nature is different.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-12 09:21 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <c868d6b7-13b1-4d68-a850-9e848ac97abc@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #596668 |
The difference is permanent. Is a red car different from a blue car? Yes.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-12 19:01 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <nr6n0b$s3e$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #596670 |
On 09/12/2016 06:21 PM, john wrote:
> The difference is permanent.
> Is a red car different from a blue car?
> Yes.
>
In case of electrons, it is not permanent.
There is rule their quantum numbers must not be the same,
but is does not mean their quantum numbers are constant.
Electron can under specific conditions change
each of their 4 quantum numbers:
energy
(the principal quantum number n=1,2,3,....)
orbital angular momentum
(the angular quantum number l=0 .. n-1)
projection of orbital angular momentum
( the magnetic quantum number m=-l .. +1 )
projection of spin angular momentum
( the spin quantum number s= -1/2 or +1/2 )
If the H2 molecule is excited e.g. by UV radiation,
so the electrons differ in one of the first 3 quantum numbers,
they can have both the parallel and antiparallel spin.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-12 10:17 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <5211ec6c-538d-41e0-8eee-a38e4f30f287@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #596672 |
No. Electrons can't change whether they slot in as "up" or "down". If they could, all reactions would go to 100%.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-12 19:19 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <nr6o25$vm8$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #596675 |
On 09/12/2016 07:17 PM, john wrote: > No. > Electrons can't change whether > they slot in as "up" or "down". > If they could, all reactions > would go to 100%. > Then you have a lot to learn about quantum mechanics and quantum chemistry.....
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-12 19:24 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <nr6ocq$1os$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #596675 |
On 09/12/2016 07:17 PM, john wrote: > No. > Electrons can't change whether > they slot in as "up" or "down". > If they could, all reactions > would go to 100%. > As they do not know they cannot, they do so, what is used in EPR or ESR spectroscopy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron_paramagnetic_resonance
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-12 10:50 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <0ae7d09b-6a6a-4b6a-b647-642e28613ab0@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #596677 |
Poutnik Okay, now you want to bring energetic magnetic fields into it? Can electron/positron pairs be PRODUCED by energy? Why, then, don't some reactions go to 100% on their own?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-12 20:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <nr6qfq$999$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #596679 |
On 09/12/2016 07:50 PM, john wrote: > Poutnik > Okay, now you want to bring energetic > magnetic fields into it? No, I do not. Electrons did so billions years ago. > Can electron/positron pairs be > PRODUCED by energy? Sure they can. And that is the reason of several subtle effects, like electron magnetic momentum anomaly, that was with famous accuracy predicted by QED. > Why, then, don't some reactions > go to 100% on their own? Why should they ? Get some essential knowledge before speaking about the topic.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-12 18:29 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nr6s5o$5be$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #596679 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes: >Why, then, don't some reactions >go to 100% on their own? Because the reverse or a competing reaction also takes place, often at a very low rate. For example, in a fire, there is a small amount of CO2 + energy -> C + O2 going on.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-12 15:10 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nr723v$fe3$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #596675 |
On 9/12/2016 12:17 PM, john wrote: > No. > Electrons can't change whether > they slot in as "up" or "down". Yes, they can. If an electron is kicked out from the "up" position, then the "down" electron that remains can get into the "up" position. Happens all the time. > If they could, all reactions > would go to 100%. > -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-13 09:07 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <5195850.lOV4Wx5bFT@PointedEars.de> |
| In reply to | #596701 |
Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 9/12/2016 12:17 PM, john wrote: >> No. >> Electrons can't change whether >> they slot in as "up" or "down". > > Yes, they can. If an electron is kicked out from the "up" position, then > the "down" electron that remains can get into the "up" position. Happens > all the time. Cite evidence. ISTM that you have not read John’s statement (no matter the false premise it is based on) carefully enough. -- PointedEars Twitter: @PointedEars2 Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-13 09:22 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <nr89f6$5nl$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #596782 |
Dne 13/09/2016 v 09:07 Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn napsal(a): > Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> On 9/12/2016 12:17 PM, john wrote: >>> No. >>> Electrons can't change whether >>> they slot in as "up" or "down". >> >> Yes, they can. If an electron is kicked out from the "up" position, then >> the "down" electron that remains can get into the "up" position. Happens >> all the time. > > Cite evidence. > > ISTM that you have not read John’s statement (no matter the false premise it > is based on) carefully enough. > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron_paramagnetic_resonance -- Poutnik ( The Pilgrim, Der Wanderer ) Knowledge makes great men humble, but small men arrogant.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-13 09:25 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <nr89l6$67k$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #596783 |
Dne 13/09/2016 v 09:22 Poutnik napsal(a): > Dne 13/09/2016 v 09:07 Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn napsal(a): >> Odd Bodkin wrote: >> >>> On 9/12/2016 12:17 PM, john wrote: >>>> No. >>>> Electrons can't change whether >>>> they slot in as "up" or "down". >>> >>> Yes, they can. If an electron is kicked out from the "up" position, then >>> the "down" electron that remains can get into the "up" position. Happens >>> all the time. >> >> Cite evidence. >> >> ISTM that you have not read John’s statement (no matter the false premise it >> is based on) carefully enough. >> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron_paramagnetic_resonance > The similar effect, but for atomic kernel spin, based on hyperfine transition, is used in caesium clocks. -- Poutnik ( The Pilgrim, Der Wanderer ) Knowledge makes great men humble, but small men arrogant.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-13 10:37 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <3926157.LvFx2qVVIh@PointedEars.de> |
| In reply to | #596783 |
Poutnik wrote: > Dne 13/09/2016 v 09:07 Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn napsal(a): >> Odd Bodkin wrote: >>> On 9/12/2016 12:17 PM, john wrote: >>>> No. >>>> Electrons can't change whether >>>> they slot in as "up" or "down". >>> Yes, they can. If an electron is kicked out from the "up" position, then >>> the "down" electron that remains can get into the "up" position. Happens >>> all the time. >> Cite evidence. >> >> ISTM that you have not read John’s statement (no matter the false premise >> it is based on) carefully enough. > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron_paramagnetic_resonance Where exactly in that Wikipedia article do you see "john"’s statement refuted or "Odd Bodkin"’s statement confirmed? -- PointedEars Twitter: @PointedEars2 Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 1 of 4 [1] 2 3 4 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web