Welcome to the Wikipedia Science Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.
Related on what level? I ask, because EI involves psychophysiological expression and perception, whereas the other involves the (mis)application of logic, i.e. reasoning. Plasmic Physics (talk) 01:10, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Possibly, it could be a symptom of someone on the autism spectrum. Reading subtext and non-verbal communication, understanding the emotional state of others, etc. could all possibly be seen as "detection of implication" of one's actions on other people, which is a common symptom of autism. --Jayron3211:48, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Plasmic Physics—at the article you link to, pragmatic language impairment, I find mention of "Hyperlexia", described as "a similar but different disorder where main characteristics are an above-average ability to read with a below-average ability to understand spoken and/or written language." But I'm not sure of its relevance. Bus stop (talk) 11:55, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Big Sodium chloride crystals are transparent. If I melt and mould handful of table salt will I get a transparent piece or will it go opaque? Is there any way I can get a transparent salt piece of a very specific shape? 85.141.204.79 (talk) 14:32, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Carving this while retaining clarity will be difficult.Here's some instructions on how to make large NaCl crystals: [1], [2], [3]. If you melt and mold it, it will likely crystallize into many small crystals, and be functionally opaque at the macroscopic level. Even if you managed to cool it slowly enough to get larger crystals, the resulting shape would not be well fitted to the mold. Carving/shaping a large crystal might work as a way to preserve translucence, but if you just hack at it with a knife or something you will initiate fracture mechanics and make crystal defect which will diminish translucence. SemanticMantis (talk) 16:29, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sodium chloride ingots for optical applications are made with the Kyropulos growth method: a seed crystal in a cooled holder is lowered until it touches the melt, the melt starts crystallizing, the crystal holder is slowly raised with the crystal growing underneath. See this supplier of optical materials, and this page for a short description of the process. It cleaves easily but I assume it can be machined with some care. Used mainly for infrared applications, people who build their own co2 laser sometimes use a salt crystal for the window through which the laser beam exits. Ssscienccce (talk) 14:02, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I was through a minor surgery 2 years ago that permanently affected my nervous-system, mainly in a good way, but I also got the strangest symptom ever..
Immediately after the surgery, -and ever since- whenever I eat chocolate, my forhead, temples and to a lesser degree my scalp immediately start sweating. This seems to be especially the case with very dark chocolate and my forehead gets literally soaking wet in a matter of seconds. But once I stop eating chocolate, I stop sweating again and dry up... as dry as ever. I had never experienced this before the surgery.
I can't really say that this affect my life-quality, (Maybe it's even a blessing in disguise which makes me stop eating choc :P), but I'm just very puzzled as to why this happens..
Is there something in chocolate that potentially could bring out symptoms like these in some people?
I realize this must be one of the weirdest questions asked on Wikipedia... ;)
If you are asking us why you are having a biological reaction to something, perhaps you should ask your doctor instead. I am sure someone immediately below will try to provide you with some medical advice. They shouldn't, per Wikipedia's own rules. So, ask your doctor why you do this. They can tell you. --Jayron3218:03, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I wasn't really asking for 'advice', I was wondering if chocolate might contain something that could cause such symptoms in some people. So just checking for possible explanations. A longshot perhaps, but a simple question anyhow. Not asking advice as to what to do or anything. It's not like it's the end of the world, although it is a minor nuisance. I could of course approach the clinic where I was... if I really want to find out. 2A02:FE0:C711:5C41:D960:1821:2C23:C009 (talk) 18:50, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
To be picky, just because I can, the stimulant more specifically associated with chocolate is theobromine, which is closely related to caffeine but has one fewer methyl group. The name comes from "food of the gods". Chocolate also has some theophylline, which like theobromine is a dimethylxanthine, but with the methyl groups in different spots. --Trovatore (talk) 20:40, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
How long would a 12mm short link stainless steel chain have to be before an average Caucasian woman would be unable to pull the chain along an even concrete surface due to its overall weight along its length? — Preceding unsigned comment added by IkarosMyAngel (talk • contribs) 18:17, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
There will be so many variables that an experiment would be the best way to find out. Some of the variables:
1) Is chain well lubricated, dry, or rusty ?
2) What angle is it being pulled ?
3) Temperature ? (will affect viscosity of oil on chain)
This page [4] says that such a chain would weigh ~3.4 kg/m. For a rough estimate, consider that 50 m of this chain would weigh ~375 lbs (and cost about US$ 571). I suspect some people could drag that, some couldn't. If you want to look up figures for average strength, find this book: Boff, K.R., et al (Editors) Handbook of Perception and Human Performance Wiley-Interscience, 1986. SemanticMantis (talk) 19:31, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The coefficient of friction of steel on smooth concrete is just under 0.5, so the 50m chain suggested by SemanticMantis would require a pulling force of around 180 pounds. Most women would struggle with this. Dbfirs00:46, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You don't have to pull the entire chain uniformly. You put it on the ground in a coiled up way, move part of it forward, go back, move another part etc. etc. That way you can make the required force arbitrarily small, at the price of having to move back and forth a lot more (the total amount of work performed against the friction force stays the same). Count Iblis (talk) 03:32, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
See [5]. This claims it cleans laundry by oxidizing clothes without using bleach or heat. It says it uses 25 watts. So what exactly is it doing, creating ozone and bubbling that through the laundry ? Do we have a general article on this method ? StuRat (talk) 18:18, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I suspected it was ozone, as that would explain why they wouldn't mention it, since it's a respiratory irritant (but then, so is bleach). I wonder if the system just doesn't have enough ozone to work, or if no amount would clean clothes well. StuRat (talk) 21:43, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That being said, washing one's clothes without detergent is effective if they're not too dirty, and does give the benefits listed in the advert. One can save $297 straight off! See Laundry ball and this 1997 article from SDMB. Tevildo (talk) 08:51, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
1) It's a convenient starting point to make molded glass parts.
2) You might coat something with glass powder to increase friction. I think sand is used for this in roads, at times. And quartz sand is essentially the same as glass powder, just larger grains.
