Chris The Great

Probably boils the oil, which condenses as soon as it cools down in the air. I'd be concerned about the fire hazard, oil mist burns extremely well if it ignites, with huge amounts of heat. If that ignited, you'd have a VERY serious problem. But luckily oil is hard to ignite unless it's very hot, so your only fire danger would be very close to the smoker. I can't remember the flash-point of oil off the top of my head (fuels won't ignite below the flash-point), but I think it was over 200 degrees. If the oil ignited/burned, the whole thing would turn into a fireball, most likely exploding but most definatly killing anyone nearby. That farm a llama place is the perfect example of what not to do with explosives. That, and the people there are idiots who I hope blow off a limb or two and maybe get some sense around "explosives", if you can call bursting WD40 cans with naplam an "explosive". And they even think that it's a fuel air explosive! ARRRGG!

From my experience (with methyl nitrate, similar, but much less sensitive to impact, and less powerful per volume because it's density is lower) 1mL would remove a good portion of your arm, should it accidently detonate. As for nitroglycerine, I certainly wouldn't recommend making it and not stabilizing by gelling/adding to porous material. There are other nitric esters (ethylene glycol dinitrate, for example, same synthesis, more powerful, much less sensitive to everything) that would work better. At the moment, I'm looking into a very interesting nitramine explosive, cis-syn-cis-2,6-Dioxo-1,3,4,5,7,8-hexanitrodecahydro-1H,5H-diimidazo[4,6-b:4',5'-e]pyrazine, which is apparently the most powerful explosive in the world. At the moment I'm trying to find another journal that might describe it's explosive properties, right now I only have two describing it's synthesis as well as some physical properties, and the fact that it's the most powerful explosive in the world (morso than CL-20 or even octanitrocubane). It has the highest density of a carbon-hydrogen-nitrogen-oxygen explosive, 2.07g/mL. The formula is C6H4N12O14, giving it a perfect oxygen balance to CO2 and H2O. The synthesis as reported didn't seem to efficient with the nitric acid, so I wrote up my own synthesis, that first nitrates to lower nitrated compounds and then by the addition of N2O5 and strong heating finishes nitration, with an expected yield of 75-85%. This cut down on the nitric acid, but uses lots of acetic anhydride. Luckily it can be regenerated without to much hassle once turned into acetic acid by the water. Here's the journals I have on it: 2,6-Dioxodecahydro-1H,5H-diimidazo[4,5-b:4',5'-e]pyrazine, Vedachalam et al, J. Org. Chem, Vol 56, No. 10, 1991, pg 3413-3419 describes the synthesis of the above and it's nitration A review of energetic materials synthesis, P.F. Pagoria et al, Thermochimica Acta 384 (2002) pg 187-204 mentions it being the most powerful explosive, as well as revealing the density.

I do them all the time, I even have my own lab space :note: Unfortunatly, it seems a large portion of my time is spent cleaning out jars and other assorted reaction vessels etc after an experiment is finished. :note:

I'd think it would be more like 1,2,3-O-nitro-propane or something, though I can't remember the correct name for the ONO2 group. IIRC sulfur only reacted with chlorates (SO2 formation caused a rapid serious of reactions which quickly ignited the mixture, SO2 gas ignited it like a match), though I would think that mixing perchlorates and sulfur is not a great idea. I'll have to check though, I've seen alot of pyrotechnics discussions using sulfur and perchlorate oxidizers, but that was a while ago and I didn't read that closely.

I think that humans will end up being the ones coming out of space and attacking the aliens. We will then either enslave or destroy them. Humans have a several thousand year history of doing this fairly often to ourselves, I'm sure we'd continue doing it over the next few thousand years. After all, look at the way most people respond to anyone physically different than them (for example those who make a living travelling in a circus). Since aliens would most likely not only look completely different but have a completely different way of thinking and culture, well, things would go downhill for them pretty fast. And, we'd probably win, as humans are ingenious at finding new ways to kill things.

I think he means burning. When paper burns, it does not follow the normal melting/boiling type steps. It is a chemical reaction in which a solid is turned into a gas, and so is completely different than melting and boiling. If you mean changed into smoke, smoke is not a gas. It is a suspension of small solid particles in air.

Personally, I think it should go something like this: The government gives out free drugs at safe injection/sniffing/smoking sites. Now, let me explain why this may work. 1- Safe injection sites take the fun out of partying etc. Nobody goes to a safe injection site for a party. 2- The drugs are free, hence nobody is going to BUY drugs for a party, (they might, but it would be a very rare and unusual occurance). 3- The government can finance it because they no longer spend any money at all on the war on drugs 4- Nobody is going to smuggle drugs in to sell, as people can get the drugs for free. They will not buy the drugs. 5- Since the drugs are free, addicts don't need to commit crimes to fund their habits. All drug related crime in my area is done by addicts who need money to fund their habits. 6- The drugs will be extremely pure, hence much less dangerous. Alot of impurities are found in your average street drug, mainly because by diluting it or not purifying it, you get more volume of the stuff to sell, hence more money. As for getting the drugs in a very pure form, make them yourself. The chemistry is (fairly) simple for meth, a little more complex for cocaine and pretty deep for heroin (I think), but there isn't any reason you couldn't do it if you where determined enough or had a few hundred dollars for the lab equipment needed. Then just do alot of washing with solvents etc, and take steps in the synthesis to prevent a buildup of impurities. Alot of work though, probably easier to buy them and purify them then.

Yes, all nitric esters have this medical abilities, many much stronger than nitroglycerin such as methyl nitrate or ethylene glycol dinitrate. These are also more volatile and so you can be effected by breathing the fumes. The famous 'nitro headache' is caused by the effects of nitric esters on blood vessels, they widen in the brain and cause a supposably very painful headache. Immunity to these effects builds up fairly quickly however. If enough nitroglycerine is there the effects can become severe enough that blood pressure will drop to nearly nothing and death will follow. Nitroglycerin is much more stable than portrayed in the movies, if properly cleaned and purified. Also, nitroglycerin requires a very strong initial shock to undergo full detonation, a weak shock will produce a weak (realative to the full potential) explosion. Generally a #8 blasting cap equivalent is required to get a full detonation. Methyl nitrate on the other hand can undergo a near full power detonation from even the weakest detonater. I can live with those rules! I'll not start spouting out stuff on how to make 'kewl bombz' and such. oh, and regarding your link on nitroglycerin as medicine: "Nitroglycerin may also be used for purposes other than those listed in this medication guide." :) Also, I should point out technically nitroglycerin is not a realy compound. Glycerin trinitrate is the proper term. The difference is this: Nitrate O-NO2 Nitro C-NO2 Nitramine N-NO2 If nitroglycerin where made it would have the formula C3H5N3O6 instead of C3H5N3O9. Nonetheless, everyone knows what you mean when you say nitroglycerin, and since everyone calls it that it doesn't really matter.

One of the huge problems in creating an AI seems to be that computers can manipulate symbols such as numbers extremely easily and quickly, however recognizing patterns, such as faces and voices which humans do instantly and subconciously is extremely difficult for our current programming languages. I think that our current hardware can and will work for artificial intelligence. I believe that the programming languages themselves, as well as the computing speed of even the fastest supercomputers being completely inadequite, are what is limiting the developement of AI. It will probably take a big breakthrough to create a new language that will be able to create AI. Also, currently work is being done on making binary more than 1's and 0's, and include different degrees such as 0.1's and such. This is supposed to be possible with our current hardware technology, and would definatly increase speed and probably make an AI much more efficient than a simple on-off binary system. The other option is that computer power will increase so much in the next few decades it doesn't matter what programming code we use, we could create a simulation of a brain and run that, and it would become a concious being. I think something like that would require vast amounts more computing power than an actual intelligent program however. Perhaps this will be an intermediate step, and the AI will write it's own programming language and source code. Of course, once the AI is able to do that, it can rapidly improve it's programming and efficiency. It could then redesign it's hardware with some nifty new nano-tech it onvented, and become even faster. It could then improve itself more, and so on and so forth. Which would be really cool, until it starts to 'kill all humans'. This is definatly an interesting subject, if I wasn't doing a presentation tommorrow on the possible consequences and whatnot of AI I'd say more. But I still have lots of planning to do, because I tend to leave actually work to the very end. Sometimes homework is fun....but then you realize you have to do it and suddenly it's a chore.

Hello, I'm Chris. I've picked up an interest in science about two years ago, first with tesla coils and high voltage, and now have picked up a very strong interest in chemistry, especially chemistry that involves compounds that rapidly break down into gas at an amazing rate as well as releasing a large amount of energy. And those ones that explode even though they don't produce any gas :) such as silver acetylide (Ag2C2 --> 2Ag + 2C + kaboom). I also have a strong interest in all interest of science, such as physics, computers and biology. I found this forum and saw another place to discuss science. And so, I'm here. Hope to have some interesting discussions (though for the next week I may be working my brains out doing all the homework that gets assigned at the end of the year....actually, I'm supposed to be doing that right now :) but science is so much more interesting that homework...)

If you have a copy of the anarchist cookbook, I advise you, as someone fairly knowledgable in this field to NEVER try making any of the bombs and explosives it "tells" you how to make, unless you want to die or lose limbs. There are two options if you have an interest in explosives (there is a very large difference between explosives and bombs, bombs are intended to kill and destroy, explosives are just another extremely interesting group of chemicals). The first is to join a forum discussing explosives and related subjects, such as roguesci.org or to a lesser extent sciencemadness.org . Both these sites have a great deal of information on the subject. The second option (and highly advised even if you do go join some forums) is to find books on the subject. The Chemistry and Technology of Explosives, volume 1 to 4, is a very informative book about the chemistry, properties and synthesis of a vast number of explosives. Chemistry of Powder and Explosives is also supposed to be a good read, although I haven't had time to actually read my digital copy yet. Brassey's World Military Technology, Explosives, Pyrotechnics and Porpellants is also a good source of information on both the chemicals as well as some great information on the processes of burning and detonation. Generally, these books can be found for free in pdf format on the net, rogue science has a vast amount of information assembled by it's members which includes scans of the above books as well as much more. Explosives is a very interesting aspect of chemistry, however, it's also a very dangerous one if you don't know what you are doing, and even when you do know what you are doing. The anarchists cookbook is full of extremely unsafe ideas, that will probably cost you limbs if you try them. The same goes for many websites dealing with the subject. There are a fair amount that deal with the subject in a responsible way, however this are never filled with information on "making bombs". They deal with chemistry, not stupidity. Personally, I'm more interested in the theorectical aspects of explosives than practical aspects, though that does interest me, I'm much more likely to be researching than making some nitric esters (that and I have no nitric acid so I can't anyway). Just a question to the mods- is theorectical discussion of the chemistry of explosive compounds discouraged as well? I understand the "no bombs" policy, but chemistry of explosives, not how to make them is harmless and definatly interesting.