Well mix it with KNO3. That should give it a lift.
There is an ozone hole at the north pole. Like the southern hole it
If true, it certainly wouldn't make it an ideal gas.I read in sci.electronics.design that Keith Williams <krw@att.bizzzz
wrote (in <MPG.1c924529347a287298995c@news.individual.net>about 'led &
eye safety', on Fri, 4 Mar 2005:
In article <4C$7GsBBlAKCFwEA@jmwa.demon.co.uk>,
jmw@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk says...
I read in sci.electronics.design that Clive Mitchell
clive1@emanator.demon.co.uk> wrote (in <4IoF77AOg6JCFwc1@emanator.demon
.co.uk>
In message <pan.2005.03.03.23.30.29.732163@example.net>, Rich Grise
richgrise@example.net> writes
And the other thing is, that whole ozone hysteria is a crock of
propaganda.
If you really think there's a shortage of ozone, then my website has a
few details on making some more using nothing more than an old neon
transformer, some stainless steel fly screen and a bit of glass out of a
cheap picture frame. Of course, how you get the ozone up there once
you've made it is up to you.
Just make He6O3; the helium will make it float up to the stratosphere,
where it will conveniently decompose.
Hmm, He6O3 has a molecular weight of 72. Me thinks this idea won't
float.
But it has anomalously low density, due to the huge size of the
molecules.
about 'led & eye safety',exists as a polymer.On Fri, 04 Mar 2005 17:21:19 +0000, John Woodgate wrote:
I read in sci.electronics.design that Keith Williams <krw@att.bizzzz
wrote (in <MPG.1c924529347a287298995c@news.individual.net>
eye safety', on Fri, 4 Mar 2005:
In article <4C$7GsBBlAKCFwEA@jmwa.demon.co.uk>,
jmw@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk says...
I read in sci.electronics.design that Clive Mitchell
clive1@emanator.demon.co.uk> wrote (in <4IoF77AOg6JCFwc1@emanator.demon
.co.uk>
In message <pan.2005.03.03.23.30.29.732163@example.net>, Rich Grise
richgrise@example.net> writes
And the other thing is, that whole ozone hysteria is a crock of
propaganda.
If you really think there's a shortage of ozone, then my website has a
few details on making some more using nothing more than an old neon
transformer, some stainless steel fly screen and a bit of glass out of a
cheap picture frame. Of course, how you get the ozone up there once
you've made it is up to you.
Just make He6O3; the helium will make it float up to the stratosphere,
where it will conveniently decompose.
Hmm, He6O3 has a molecular weight of 72. Me thinks this idea won't
float.
But it has anomalously low density, due to the huge size of the
molecules.
If true, it certainly wouldn't make it an ideal gas.
The molecules are big because of the long bond-lengths, not because it
But if the bonds are long enough (to be relevant compared toI read in sci.electronics.design that keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote (in
pan.2005.03.05.18.13.30.388804@att.bizzzz>
on Sat, 5 Mar 2005:
On Fri, 04 Mar 2005 17:21:19 +0000, John Woodgate wrote:
I read in sci.electronics.design that Keith Williams <krw@att.bizzzz
wrote (in <MPG.1c924529347a287298995c@news.individual.net>
eye safety', on Fri, 4 Mar 2005:
In article <4C$7GsBBlAKCFwEA@jmwa.demon.co.uk>,
jmw@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk says...
I read in sci.electronics.design that Clive Mitchell
clive1@emanator.demon.co.uk> wrote (in <4IoF77AOg6JCFwc1@emanator.demon
.co.uk>
In message <pan.2005.03.03.23.30.29.732163@example.net>, Rich Grise
richgrise@example.net> writes
And the other thing is, that whole ozone hysteria is a crock of
propaganda.
If you really think there's a shortage of ozone, then my website has a
few details on making some more using nothing more than an old neon
transformer, some stainless steel fly screen and a bit of glass out of a
cheap picture frame. Of course, how you get the ozone up there once
you've made it is up to you.
Just make He6O3; the helium will make it float up to the stratosphere,
where it will conveniently decompose.
Hmm, He6O3 has a molecular weight of 72. Me thinks this idea won't
float.
But it has anomalously low density, due to the huge size of the
molecules.
If true, it certainly wouldn't make it an ideal gas.
The molecules are big because of the long bond-lengths, not because it
exists as a polymer.
about 'led & eye safety',--On Sat, 05 Mar 2005 18:40:59 +0000, John Woodgate wrote:
I read in sci.electronics.design that keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote (in
pan.2005.03.05.18.13.30.388804@att.bizzzz>
on Sat, 5 Mar 2005:
On Fri, 04 Mar 2005 17:21:19 +0000, John Woodgate wrote:
I read in sci.electronics.design that Keith Williams <krw@att.bizzzz
wrote (in <MPG.1c924529347a287298995c@news.individual.net>
eye safety', on Fri, 4 Mar 2005:
In article <4C$7GsBBlAKCFwEA@jmwa.demon.co.uk>,
jmw@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk says...
I read in sci.electronics.design that Clive Mitchell
clive1@emanator.demon.co.uk> wrote (in <4IoF77AOg6JCFwc1@emanator.demon
.co.uk>
In message <pan.2005.03.03.23.30.29.732163@example.net>, Rich Grise
richgrise@example.net> writes
And the other thing is, that whole ozone hysteria is a crock of
propaganda.
If you really think there's a shortage of ozone, then my website has a
few details on making some more using nothing more than an old neon
transformer, some stainless steel fly screen and a bit of glass out of a
cheap picture frame. Of course, how you get the ozone up there once
you've made it is up to you.
Just make He6O3; the helium will make it float up to the stratosphere,
where it will conveniently decompose.
Hmm, He6O3 has a molecular weight of 72. Me thinks this idea won't
float.
But it has anomalously low density, due to the huge size of the
molecules.
If true, it certainly wouldn't make it an ideal gas.
The molecules are big because of the long bond-lengths, not because it
exists as a polymer.
But if the bonds are long enough (to be relevant compared to
the space between) to make a molecule with a molecular mass of 72 float in
a "sea" of MM 32 stuff, then things aren't even close to ideal. ...'r'
must be half of what it's "supposed" to be, because of the shape of the
molecule? Paint me incredulous.
Not quite the right word, IMHO. How about 'gullible'?(;-)
But let's not all forget the difference between coherent light and
That's not even a real word. No standard dictionary has an entry for theI read in sci.electronics.design that keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote (in
pan.2005.03.06.04.17.45.630090@att.bizzzz>
on Sat, 5 Mar 2005:
On Sat, 05 Mar 2005 18:40:59 +0000, John Woodgate wrote:
I read in sci.electronics.design that keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote (in
pan.2005.03.05.18.13.30.388804@att.bizzzz>
on Sat, 5 Mar 2005:
On Fri, 04 Mar 2005 17:21:19 +0000, John Woodgate wrote:
I read in sci.electronics.design that Keith Williams <krw@att.bizzzz
wrote (in <MPG.1c924529347a287298995c@news.individual.net>
eye safety', on Fri, 4 Mar 2005:
In article <4C$7GsBBlAKCFwEA@jmwa.demon.co.uk>,
jmw@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk says...
I read in sci.electronics.design that Clive Mitchell
clive1@emanator.demon.co.uk> wrote (in <4IoF77AOg6JCFwc1@emanator.demon
.co.uk>
In message <pan.2005.03.03.23.30.29.732163@example.net>, Rich Grise
richgrise@example.net> writes
And the other thing is, that whole ozone hysteria is a crock of
propaganda.
If you really think there's a shortage of ozone, then my website has a
few details on making some more using nothing more than an old neon
transformer, some stainless steel fly screen and a bit of glass out of a
cheap picture frame. Of course, how you get the ozone up there once
you've made it is up to you.
Just make He6O3; the helium will make it float up to the stratosphere,
where it will conveniently decompose.
Hmm, He6O3 has a molecular weight of 72. Me thinks this idea won't
float.
But it has anomalously low density, due to the huge size of the
molecules.
If true, it certainly wouldn't make it an ideal gas.
The molecules are big because of the long bond-lengths, not because it
exists as a polymer.
But if the bonds are long enough (to be relevant compared to
the space between) to make a molecule with a molecular mass of 72 float in
a "sea" of MM 32 stuff, then things aren't even close to ideal. ...'r'
must be half of what it's "supposed" to be, because of the shape of the
molecule? Paint me incredulous.
Not quite the right word, IMHO. How about 'gullible'?(;-)
Nope, I'm not buying. ;-)On Sun, 06 Mar 2005 07:06:20 +0000, John Woodgate wrote:
I read in sci.electronics.design that keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote (in
pan.2005.03.06.04.17.45.630090@att.bizzzz>
on Sat, 5 Mar 2005:
On Sat, 05 Mar 2005 18:40:59 +0000, John Woodgate wrote:
I read in sci.electronics.design that keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote (in
pan.2005.03.05.18.13.30.388804@att.bizzzz>
on Sat, 5 Mar 2005:
On Fri, 04 Mar 2005 17:21:19 +0000, John Woodgate wrote:
I read in sci.electronics.design that Keith Williams <krw@att.bizzzz
wrote (in <MPG.1c924529347a287298995c@news.individual.net>
eye safety', on Fri, 4 Mar 2005:
In article <4C$7GsBBlAKCFwEA@jmwa.demon.co.uk>,
jmw@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk says...
I read in sci.electronics.design that Clive Mitchell
clive1@emanator.demon.co.uk> wrote (in <4IoF77AOg6JCFwc1@emanator.demon
.co.uk>
In message <pan.2005.03.03.23.30.29.732163@example.net>, Rich Grise
richgrise@example.net> writes
And the other thing is, that whole ozone hysteria is a crock of
propaganda.
If you really think there's a shortage of ozone, then my website has a
few details on making some more using nothing more than an old neon
transformer, some stainless steel fly screen and a bit of glass out of a
cheap picture frame. Of course, how you get the ozone up there once
you've made it is up to you.
Just make He6O3; the helium will make it float up to the stratosphere,
where it will conveniently decompose.
Hmm, He6O3 has a molecular weight of 72. Me thinks this idea won't
float.
But it has anomalously low density, due to the huge size of the
molecules.
If true, it certainly wouldn't make it an ideal gas.
The molecules are big because of the long bond-lengths, not because it
exists as a polymer.
But if the bonds are long enough (to be relevant compared to
the space between) to make a molecule with a molecular mass of 72 float in
a "sea" of MM 32 stuff, then things aren't even close to ideal. ...'r'
must be half of what it's "supposed" to be, because of the shape of the
molecule? Paint me incredulous.
Not quite the right word, IMHO. How about 'gullible'?(;-)
....not buying that one either:
Such as? Actually all light is partially coherent - it is only the
And one should note that it isn't the fact that laser light is coherent
Aren't you guys talking about Helium 6 Oxygen 3, not Helium six-zero-three?I read in sci.electronics.design that Simon Waldman
swaldman@firecloud.org.uk> wrote (in <ihkof2-v79.ln1@blue.firecloud.org
.uk>
Keith Williams wrote:
Hmm, He6O3 has a molecular weight of 72. Me thinks this idea won't
float.
Probably due to my screen font, I read He6O3 as He603. My first thought
was "my, that's an impressive isotope..."!
603He (with the '603' as a subscript) would be an isotope (atom with two
protons to make it helium and 601 neutrons to make it exceedingly
unstable, as well as heavy). He603 (again, subscript) would be an
allotrope, like C60 (buckminsterfullerene) is an allotrope of carbon, as
are graphite and diamond.
an.2005.03.06.16.07.10.948864@example.net: You need to get a 'real' dictionary then.
Brian
Sure, but our monitors (or eyes) are better than Simon's, hence myJohn Woodgate <jmw@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk> wrote in
news:Jir3OlBQWwKCFwgg@jmwa.demon.co.uk:
I read in sci.electronics.design that Simon Waldman
swaldman@firecloud.org.uk> wrote (in <ihkof2-v79.ln1@blue.firecloud.org
.uk>
Keith Williams wrote:
Hmm, He6O3 has a molecular weight of 72. Me thinks this idea won't
float.
Probably due to my screen font, I read He6O3 as He603. My first thought
was "my, that's an impressive isotope..."!
603He (with the '603' as a subscript) would be an isotope (atom with two
protons to make it helium and 601 neutrons to make it exceedingly
unstable, as well as heavy). He603 (again, subscript) would be an
allotrope, like C60 (buckminsterfullerene) is an allotrope of carbon, as
are graphite and diamond.
Aren't you guys talking about Helium 6 Oxygen 3, not Helium six-zero-three?
(O3 as in ozone which is what lead to this sub-thread?)
Rich Grise <richgrise@example.net> wrote in
news
Snipola
Not quite the right word, IMHO. How about 'gullible'?(;-)
That's not even a real word. No standard dictionary has an entry for the
word "gullible".
You need to get a 'real' dictionary then.
My 1969 Webster's 7th New Collegiate has that word.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAaaaaaa!!!!
an.2005.03.07.03.49.26.590510@example.net:Yeah? So? I had trouble believing that it would NOT be in there
about 'led & eye safety',The actual MW is 72j, of course.
Of course. Just to be sure I put it into a search engine and came upI read in sci.electronics.design that keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote (in
pan.2005.03.07.03.35.41.943130@att.bizzzz>
on Sun, 6 Mar 2005:
Sure, but our monitors (or eyes) are better than Simon's, hence my
complicated RPN calculator's (CADET here) version of its molecular
weight being 72, rather than 603. I don't think the idea would float,
even with a MW of 603. ;-)
The actual MW is 72j, of course.
an.2005.03.07.07.43.48.950989@example.net...Technology is a wonderful thing.On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 04:14:38 +0000, Skywise wrote:
Rich Grise <richgrise@example.net> wrote in
news
Snipola
Made you look!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Yeah? So? I had trouble believing that it would NOT be in there
and wanted to confirm that suspicion.
Brian
OK, Ok. You have permission to retain your dignity.
Just to make you feel better if possible, I fell for it the first time,
too.
Here's one for parties:
"Hey! I heard that you can get the latest [$TOPICAL] joke on the
phone! Just dial 1-800-INQUIRE! It's really great!/humourous!/deep!/
insulting!/true! ..." and watch the roob look for the Q. ;-)
Also similar to "Let me show you the [$ETHNIC] trailer!" and lead
the roob around until s/he clues up. ;-)
_Two_ for parties. Thank GAWD for Vodka!
and m***h***a! - Stoned Rich
Cheers!
Rich
about 'led &In article <Uy2waWBiHALCFwKq@jmwa.demon.co.uk>,
jmw@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk says...
I read in sci.electronics.design that keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote (in
pan.2005.03.07.03.35.41.943130@att.bizzzz>
on Sun, 6 Mar 2005:
Sure, but our monitors (or eyes) are better than Simon's, hence my
complicated RPN calculator's (CADET here) version of its molecular
weight being 72, rather than 603. I don't think the idea would float,
even with a MW of 603. ;-)
The actual MW is 72j, of course.
Of course. Just to be sure I put it into a search engine and came up
with...
this thread. ;-)
Immortality at last!