🎓 Dr. Freemo 🇳🇱 @freemo@social.cleverlibre.org

@lucifargundam

By the way to make some limited attempt at actually giving you a useful answer. The only site I know that comes close to listing common decompositions consistently and in a sorta data formated way rather than wikipedia which is more of a teaching tool then I only know of one.

That would be PubChem, which basically lists almost every chemical imaginable, and all of its technical properties in a consistent and well laid out way. It almost always has a section on composition that lists several of the most common (though s we discussed not all) decomposition routes.|

I use PubChem almost every day when im doing chemistry and its really the only place that has anywhere near or approach an exhaustive list. I usually use it for figuring out what something is soluble in and what class of reactions it works well in.

Here is the PubChem page for hydrogen peroxide linking directly to its decomposition section as an example. The cool thing is I've found information on chemicals that google barely returns hits on and for which wikipedia pages dont even exist:

https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/Hydrogen-peroxide#section=Decomposition

#chemistry #stem #science

@trinsec

@lucifargundam I know of no such site, not the way you want it, and im not sure such thing could really exist. Bear in mind, however, I'm far from an expert in chemistry, at best its a hobby for me..

So the issue I see here is that "decomposition" just means a chemical breaks down into constuent parts in some way and tends to imply there is no rearrangement of its parts with some reaction with another chemical. This is all fine and good however the results of decomposition depend greatly on the circumstances.

For example consider there are really several routes to decomposition: catalytic, UV break down, heat, electrolysis. Each one of these routes will usually produce entierly different decomposition products. Even then within a specific route the decomposition product can be almost anything as you tweak parameters, the temperature, frequency of UV, the catalyst chosen, as well as the pressure and even concentration of the reaction vessel will all have a huge effect. If any solvents are involved to facilitate the reaction (as would be the case with catalytic reactions usually) would also have a huge effect.

Take a really simple example, hydrogen peroxide which is just four atoms, two hydrogen, two oxygen. heat it up a little bit or use a catalyst and youll wind up with water and oxygen. Heat it up a great deal (as would also be the case with water alone) and it will decompose down to H2 and O2 separately (which is why if firemen try to put out extremely hot fires like magnesium fires with water it will cause explosions). Heat it up even more and you get elemental H and O separately rather than their diatomic form.

Now in the case of H2O2 there really arent too many break down options simply because you only have 2 different atoms so they can only combine in a limited number of ways. But we have literally just covered every single combination of H and O that can exist by describing all the decomposition routes of H2O2 via heating alone. Doable for such a simple molecule but for more complex molecules describing every route exhaustively becomes impossible.

The best you could hope for from such a database/site would be for it to describe a very limited set of common decompositions. For example it might just limit decomposition to various temperatures and what the most predominate results are and leave off the small % decomposition by products. But the cut off would be arbitrary in both the choice of temperature and the choice of % needed to list it as a decomposition.

For example pure water at room temperature will instantly "decompose" (we dont call this decomposition really) into H+ and OH- ions in very small concentrations. Most of the time its so small we ignore this even though some H+ ions will randomly neutralize and form H2, but the rate and concentration at which that happens is so small as to be pointless to think of it as existing at all. So in any reasonable % cut off we would lnot describe that as a natural decomposition at room temperature. But none the less it is there.

So yea long story short I dont think you will find what you are after. Best you might fine is sources like wikipedia that describe some very common decompositions and is no where near comprehensive.

#Chemistry #STEM #Science @trinsec

Fun fact: the fall of rome wasnt nearly has bad a time as many historians suggest. In fact it was quite relaxing and beautiful, especially once the weather cooled a bit and the leaves started to change color.

#history #joke #humor @funny@funny@groups.qoto.org

@torresjrjr

While nil/null isnt really quite so horrible as the author makes it sound I do agree that the Option/Maybe approach as done by Haskell is much nicer. Null still exists but it isnt universal, we get to decide when its allowed and when its not without explicitly guarding for it (defined in the type)... All this really does is move null from a runtime check/guard to a compile time check. But generally the more you can move to compile time the less errors that can crop up at runtime. So it does add value getting rid of null IMO.

@Science

@icedquinn I suppose that somewhat surprising at first. But given its ability to rapidly permeate cells, even the skin including a barrier of dead skin cells I guess it kinda makes sense. With dead skin cells it probably diffuses and slows it down slightly so by the time it reaches live skin cells it isnt doing much harm. But with concentrated DMSO directly in contact with live cells my guess is it absorbing into the cells to the point of destroying them as they do, atleast the top layer.

All just speculation. But I do suspect its related to its unique permiability.

@trebach@mstdn.social

I stand corrected, thanks.

@stux

@trebach@mstdn.social

Interesting. Link please

@stux

@mur2501 YAY Happy anniversary of the last time your face touched your mothers vagina... how will you be celebrating?

@mur2501 Sailing ahead on this ocean of sewage.

You?

@icedquinn Sounds like one of those things that was a great idea but with poor execution.. poor enough not to draw a large user base anyway

@icedquinn No one who uses a windows machine has ever felt the urge to refactor code a day in their life!

@stux It is almost certainly CGI and not real. I've seen variants that look just like this that are known to be CGI

Welcome to shit club, the first rule of shit club is you never talk about shit club.. the second rule of shit club is its fucking shitty

#joke #funny #humour #humor @funny

@trinsec I'd be reluctant to generalize for **all** languages. But for all the ones I can think of you either need to explicitly set qa stating value, in which case people use nil to represent not-set as it is the only allowed value (this doesnt count things like haskell where they dont use a nil).... Or all variables implicitly and by default start as nil even if you didnt set it as such or at all (like in java)

Interesting thing about boolean in most languages is that it is often a trinary/tri-state variable, not a dual state true or false variable, reason being you often have nil/null you can set a boolean too as well and in many languages, particularly those where all variables are by reference, you cant change this.

Ruby is particularly interesting because it makes a distinct separation between a variable being not-set and null/nil. Therefore a boolean in Ruby is a quad-state variable that can be either not-set, nil/nill, true, or false.

NOTE: My comment about Ruby is actually misleading since its a dynamic language. If you have a variable intending to act like a boolean, strictly speaking, before you set it with a boolean variable it doesnt have a boolean type. So the boolean **type** is not quad-value. Its just any variable that the variable you intend to use exclusively for boolean can have any of 4 states, and likely does in most implementations.

#Ruby #programming @Science