Science desk
< July 29	<< Jun \| July \| Aug >>	July 31 >

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.

July 30[edit]

Product[edit]

What is the product of a reaction of methyl salicylate with ammonia solution? 49.183.255.187 (talk) 00:14, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Salicylamide. Is this homework? InedibleHulk (talk) 00:30, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. How do you figure that out? 131.217.255.208 (talk) 01:02, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Google. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:11, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Or, if you mean "figure it out", like describe the reaction in scientific notation, no clue. But Google also knows a lot about that. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:50, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Species Name[edit]

Can someone please identify the species? I had a hard time searching for the name of the flower on the internet. Nikhil (talk) 02:09, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pelargonium hortorum, commonly called a geranium. Here's a match of the variety, scroll down to "Divas". μηδείς (talk) 03:14, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Complete answer above but I would just warn you that botanically a geranium is a different species — Preceding unsigned comment added by Richard Avery (talk • contribs)

Yes, the "real" ones are a different genus, Geranium. μηδείς (talk) 18:14, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And germanium is yet another species. :-) StuRat (talk) 04:18, 31 July 2014 (UTC) [reply]

Maximum hydrogen[edit]

I understand that λ²-plumbane and thallane(1) are more stable than their typical group hydrides because of a combination of the inert pair and relativistic effects, but I do not know why the reverse is true for the transition metal molecular hydrides. For instance, why is chromane(2) the maximally saturated hydride of chromium, while molybdenum and tungsten's ones are molybdane(6) and tungstane(6), and why such a large jump? It would seem more reasonable, if it increased in steps of two. Plasmic Physics (talk) 08:13, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think you will find that chromane is something else. Our chromium hydride articles say that hydrogen is repelled from chromium dihydride. And what happened wtih Weichselfelder and B. Thiede's claim to have prepared solid chromium trihydride in 1926? Graeme Bartlett (talk) 06:56, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Although unusual, coincidences do occur when it comes to chemical names. Sometimes a single name can be a systematic name for one compound, and a traditional name for another. Example, fluorene can either refer to a hypothetical double-bonded fluorine species, or a tricylic arene.

I know that CrH
₂ repels hydrogen. That is the crux of my question - why? Solid CrH
₃ is a solid solution, not a compound. Plasmic Physics (talk) 07:50, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's a great example of why systematic naming is not always a good way to discuss things with people who might not be familiar with (or at least haven't yet recognized) the specific niche topic at hand:) Evidence of CrH₃ from 1992: doi:10.1021/j100181a024. That same ref also talks about several differences between Cr and Mo hydrides based on the orbital characteristics of each metal. There is lots of evidence for CrH₂(H₂), so it presumably isn't impossible to stuff more hydrogen onto the dihydride, though I guess the reaction to form it from the elements could involve some other 4H precursor rather than successive additions. For example, doi:10.1021/ja951376t mentions it as part of a comparison of this binding motif vs typical tetrahydride CrH₄ among some adjacent metals in the same row. doi:10.1021/jp8099658 presents a large computational study of chromium-group hydrides (many different numbers and combinations of binding modes) to compare the stability of the binding modes and possible electronic reasons. None of this fully answers the original more general question about the large jump. But it also hints that the claimed numbers for "maximally substituted" might not be correct. And that one of the difficulties in knowing what it might be experimentally for the directly bonded ones (which seems to be the focus of the question) is that there wind up being more stable isomers possible (and maybe even known) in many cases. DMacks (talk) 07:57, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. From what I've read, CrH
₄ is particularly unstable. Trying to add two more hydride ligands to CrH
₂, is like trying to fit holiday souvenirs into a already full suitcase, and having it spring open, sending everything into a jumble. The extra ligands find each other's company far more preferable, and only consider CrH
₂ as a friend with benefits, resulting in CrH
₂(H
₂). If I remember correctly, CrH
₄ has no energy barrier to this conformational change. Is there no ligand field splitting theory that can justify the case posed by the question? Plasmic Physics (talk) 08:35, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Insanity test procedure[edit]

Do insanity tests (for court trials purposes or in case I claim that I was abducted by UFO) look like that questionnaire? What's the actual procedure (the most common, if it varies) to determine sanity? I'm just curious, don't treat this like a medical advice 93.174.25.12 (talk) 09:01, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Forensic psychology, Mental status examination and DSM-IV are probably the best articles to start with. In a legal context, the test for "sanity" is made by the court (generally on the basis of medical evidence), and the exact test will depend on jurisdiction and the nature of the trial. See Insanity defense, Mental disorder defence, and M'Naghten rules. Tevildo (talk) 09:56, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That questionnaire looks like nothing that would be used for any practical purpose, legal or scientific. AlexTiefling (talk) 10:36, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Q92 = Yes. 196.214.78.114 (talk) 12:48, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

An early question asks, "Have you ever seeked psychiatric help?" Is that normal British English? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:28, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Having looked through the test, it's fairly clear that it's only pseudo-serious, with some bits that are generally funny, and some that would only make sense to a Brit. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:39, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Seeked" isn't idiomatic. The test is obviously a joke, but it's not a million miles away from the MMPI and similar ~~pseudo-scientific crap~~ systematic methods of psychological evaluation. Tevildo (talk) 17:10, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Q161: yes. But they screw up later, by mistyping "phonographic" in Q168. :P - ¡Ouch! (^{hurt me} / _{more pain}) 06:56, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

See the Wikipedia article on Insanity defense. Courts do not issue crude multiple-choice "insanity test" questionnaires like the OP's example but generally consider an insanity defense if it is supported by expert forensic psychologist evaluation. M'Naghten rules stemming from a British panel of judges in 1843 have been used as a test of criminal liability in relation to mentally disordered defendants, essentially posing the question "did the defendant know what he was doing, or, if so, that it was wrong?". Anders Behring Breivik#Psychiatric evaluation describes a recent prosecution where the sanity of the defendant was the central contested issue. 84.209.89.214 (talk) 00:02, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory is a standard psychiatric test for identifying disorders. --DHeyward (talk) 06:17, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Q110: no. - ¡Ouch! (^{hurt me} / _{more pain}) 06:56, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

17.6%. Very surprised it's not way higher. ... Oh wait, that was my IQ test. :) -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 02:13, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Poorly designed test. Result depends what order you do the questions in. See, e.g, 161 and 167. Maproom (talk) 22:32, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Non-dairy topping[edit]

I would like to be pointed to a specific article regarding 'Non-dairy topping'. I have no idea about its chemical composition and would like to find more information about it. All I've dug up is Cool Whip and Non-dairy creamer (I wonder whether this is the same thing). Sincerely, Ugog Nizdast (talk) 14:05, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ingredients should be on the label. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:25, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've read that, I'm mostly wondering why isn't there any article/redirect on it over here so that I could get more information about it. Anyway thanks, Ugog Nizdast (talk) 15:11, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A non-diary topping can be anything at all, as long as it doesn't contain dairy products. An article would need to be more specific, e.g. a topping for what? I guess you mean a whipped topping, so we're probably talking about some mixture of partially hydrogenated oil, coloring, sweeteners, water, preservatives, stabilizers and emulsifiers.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 15:48, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I just now created a redirect for Non-dairy topping. Red Act (talk) 17:21, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly what I had in mind after the previous reply. Many thanks to both of you. Sincerely, Ugog Nizdast (talk) 17:29, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oil and water don't mix - so add an emulsifier and agitate the mixture vigorously the oil forms a milky/creamy emulsion. Real milk is basically a fatty oil/water emulsion - so this trick works well. That gets you the look and "mouth feel" of cream - all that remains is to make it taste right, and for that they add sweeteners and other flavorings. The details about which oil, sweetener and flavorings vary from one topping to another...but that's the basics. They may also add "stabilizers" and "preservatives" to increase the shelf-life of the product. SteveBaker (talk) 19:07, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Tastes terrific... and just look at that shine!"[1] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:15, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm rather surprised to find that the disgusting Bird's Dream Topping still exists. Just look at the tasty list of ingredients there! And then, Give it, give it. give it a whirl!. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 19:31, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Brought to you by the Bird's Dropping Team. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 00:35, 3 August 2014 (UTC) [reply]

Is that Kenny Everett doing the voice-over? Tevildo (talk) 11:22, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Lol. I came across this topic after finding out that most bakeries (in my country) allegedly use this instead of normal cream, since it's cheaper, and put it on sale as "Chocolate cake--100% Fresh Cream!". Thanks Steve for your informative reply, Ugog Nizdast (talk) 09:56, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I was recalling my highschool chemistry teacher who made stuff that looked like the most delicious ice cream imaginable from washing up detergent, engine oil and water. SteveBaker (talk) 19:04, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

3.5mm audio input switcher?[edit]

I'm looking for a device that allows me to plug two 3.5mm audio inputs into one 3.5mm socket at the same time - and switch between them (so I can switch between my turntable and tape machine without unplugging). Does such a thing exist? If so, what's it called? I've tried searching for it, but I can't find what I'm thinking of. Thanks. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 15:18, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Googling "audio switch" throws up plenty.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 15:51, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Does your turntable produce a high level signal like the tape machine, which feeds directly into the same input as the tape, or is it a magnetic phono output which goes into a "phono" input which amplifies it a lot and "equalizes" the sound? A simple "Y" adapter might damage the 2 devices connected to it, by simply connecting the two outputs of the tape and turntable. You would need a switch at a minimum. It would not be that hard to buy a small metal box and mount a switch in it, which would have inputs for the 2 devices and an output to go to the amplifier. The switch would prevent cross-connection between the two input sources. It could be a double pole, double throw switch, which breaks connections before making connections If you wish to buy a mixer, and your turntable has a high level equalized output which goes to the "line input" of the amplifier, then something like the RadioShack® 4-Channel Stereo Microphone Mixer Model: 3200029 | Catalog #: 32-029 at http://www.radioshack.com/product/index.jsp?productId=13221502#tabsetBasic selling for $17.97 (US) would serve nicely. You could play either the phono or tape, or both together, through the one input on the amplifier. You can buy cables/adapters to connect any jack to any input, such as the 3.5mm putput from the turntable or tape to the RCA audio plug inputs on the mixer. You could add a microphone and be a DJ. Edison (talk) 16:12, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks fellas. I think I've found what I'm looking for - e.g. eBay item no 221281930030 (other sellers are available!). My turntable outputs a high-level signal like the tape machine does. A 3.5mm Y adapter with a switch is exactly what will do the job here, I think. Though from my Googlings earlier on, forum posts would suggest that such a device is not as widely stocked as one might expect it to be. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 16:29, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You probably can get phono/RCA switches for less than that; you'll need 3 sets of photo-to-stero-3.5mm leads, rather than stereo phono-to-phono leads. CS Miller (talk) 17:15, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]