When the boss is away.......(CONTEST)

Status
Not open for further replies.
lamuscleman said:
so satire earlier you said it was .375 bc it was a trick, maybe thats one of the trick questions he was saying.
Click to expand...

Well if you were tricked you'd say 0.375. The real deal is that each molecule has a different density, thus it's overall contribution to pressure is different. The molar fraction is just a molecular density calculation.
 
satire, valero is the number one best company to work for in usa. good benefits, wage, and the plant in my state is safe and they are a good company i beent old
 
A chemist walks into a pharmacy and asks the pharmacist,
"Do you have any acetylsalicylic acid?"

"You mean aspirin?" asked the pharmacist.

"That's it, I can never remember that word."
 
ok this is a hard one i believe. the 3.5 l is what trips me up

10. How many moles of oxygen gas (O2) are there in a 3.5 L container under 1.2 atm of pressure and at 37 degree c? how many grams of O2 is this?
 
my teacher is pretty smart chemist, so im sure somewhere he got trickery struff, he is doing alot of projects, one i know he is doing is testing honey to get ride of allergies, and goes to all these technology meetings, he said in 20 years we wont plug our computers up because they will be to fast and to smart
 
bitterplacebo said:
Just make sure you use right units and stuff...

Another value for R is 0.082057 L·atm·mol−1·K−1

and temperature should be converted to kelvin
Click to expand...

I gave him a pv=nrt calculator that does the units :) But yeah, always convert to kelvin like I put in the definition for pv=nrt a few pages ago. In chemistry, always convert to kelvin, unless otherwise specified. They don't use celcius for much of anything other than thermometers.
 
lamuscleman said:
my teacher is pretty smart chemist, so im sure somewhere he got trickery struff, he is doing alot of projects, one i know he is doing is testing honey to get ride of allergies, and goes to all these technology meetings, he said in 20 years we wont plug our computers up because they will be to fast and to smart
Click to expand...

Apparently he hasn't studied the first law of engineering. The more plumbing you put in the blasted thing, the easier it is to plug it up.
 
and he knows we are going to ask help from other students, and he lol and said some chemist will miss somethings, just basically sticking his chest out, errr
 
and plus this is his last year teaching at this school so he doesnt give a crap about students its why he is taking a long vacation, err X 2
 
lamuscleman said:
my teacher is pretty smart chemist, so im sure somewhere he got trickery struff, he is doing alot of projects, one i know he is doing is testing honey to get ride of allergies, and goes to all these technology meetings, he said in 20 years we wont plug our computers up because they will be to fast and to smart
Click to expand...

I don't know about the 20 years figure, but I wouldn't be surprised at how relatively close we are to creating soft artificial life in computers.
 
lmao at zombie, pftttttt dont pis off people smart inchemistry they will tell you to take this and that and will poisin your ass,and there helping me out, go into ur corner and sit on rice ur punished
 
bitter he said that he went to a convention, and they are dont quote me i will get it wrong but doing soemthing with electrons, or neutrons, in pc and found way to smash it and computers in 20 years will be 1 billion times faster, he said they can already do it, it just cost to much and it will take 20 years to find way to do it to be cheaper, he said before we finish what we type the pc will know what we are thinking, i think he is full of it
 
bitterplacebo said:
I don't know about the 20 years figure, but I wouldn't be surprised at how relatively close we are to creating soft artificial life in computers.
Click to expand...

We've already reached the computational mechanical equivalent of a mouse brain. We're encroaching on other smaller mamals now.

My only issue is while we may be able to get there in comptutational power, I'm not sure the interconnect/computing fabric has enough bandwidth to do real time parallel neural network processing in real time. Not to mention the fact that parallel processing is in infintile stages, equivalent to where the XT/286 was with the first IBM PS2.

We may get there in computing power, but I'm not sure we'll be able to efficiently program the darned things in 20 years.
 
but hey yal can help me do the test, he said we wont make a 100, and we get a 5 point bonus, so help me shut him up,lol i will give yal rep points isnt that a fair trade or what
 
lamuscleman said:
bitter he said that he went to a convention, and they are dont quote me i will get it wrong but doing soemthing with electrons, or neutrons, in pc and found way to smash it and computers in 20 years will be 1 billion times faster, he said they can already do it, it just cost to much and it will take 20 years to find way to do it to be cheaper, he said before we finish what we type the pc will know what we are thinking, i think he is full of it
Click to expand...

It's called quantum computing, and they're not smashing atoms. They're simply using quantum mathematics and spintronics to do more advanced calculations. Basically it allows you to do things like the traveling salesman problem in 1 computational step as opposed to billions.
 
satire i duno, he told us about the supercomputers that they have already and are not plugged into anything, its pretty scary, but sucks usa is dropping out of science, chemistry, phyisics, like china and other countires are, they are killing us
 
SatireWolf said:
It's called quantum computing, and they're not smashing atoms. They're simply using quantum mathematics and spintronics to do more advanced calculations. Basically it allows you to do things like the traveling salesman problem in 1 computational step as opposed to billions.
Click to expand...

Basically it makes statistical bound problems a couple orders of magnitude easier or more.

Like an bound # combinations problem could be done in just a few computational steps as opposed to hundreds or millions per combination.
 
lamuscleman said:
satire i duno, he told us about the supercomputers that they have already and are not plugged into anything, its pretty scary, but sucks usa is dropping out of science, chemistry, phyisics, like china and other countires are, they are killing us
Click to expand...

All of the quantum computers are in the US silly.

IBM has some in house, so does Cray. The problem is that out of all graduate students in physics / chemistry, we have like 10-15 percent US, the rest are foreign. It's pathetic, but it's because they treat you like a god damned slave, and the pay is she1t compared to the private sector. Thus we get our degrees and go do something useful. Research isn't she1t for money these days unless it's private sector.
 
SatireWolf said:
Zombie's manhood is just threatened because he has no frappin' clue what we're talking about.

Haven't you seen the music video's about the nerds inheriting the earth and all the fine women?
Click to expand...

no i havent.

and no my manhood is not threatened buy nerd like you guys. guys like you are the ones that want to know whats on our supps and figure out id it makes sence and/or what we are taking in our bodies and ask questions regarding weird looking nomenclatures and stuff like that... im just been a d1ck like always but much respect to you guys ;) yall know i love you and in a really freaky way :toofunny:
 
we use to be technology advanced, but we investing to much money into war and other things and not into technology, he said he was on a board of 7 students, and went to china to do some internship and was talking about how china is the top dog
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top