User talk:Milton Beychok: Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>David Yamakuchi
imported>David Yamakuchi
Line 61: Line 61:


<pre>Selected Electronegativities:<br />
<pre>Selected Electronegativities:<br />
{{Selected Electronegativities|Hydrogen|Berillium|Iron|Helium|Uranium|Neptunium|Lead}}</pre>
{{Selected Electronegativities|Hydrogen|Beryllium|Iron|Helium|Uranium|Neptunium|Lead}}</pre>
Selected Electronegativities:<br />
Selected Electronegativities:<br />
{{Selected Electronegativities|Hydrogen|Berillium|Iron|Helium|Uranium|Neptunium|Lead}}
{{Selected Electronegativities|Hydrogen|Beryllium|Iron|Helium|Uranium|Neptunium|Lead}}


and...
and...
<pre>Selected Melting Points:<br />
<pre>Selected Melting Points:<br />
{{Selected melting points|Hydrogen|Berillium|Iron|Helium|Uranium|Neptunium|Lead|Cobalt(II) oxide}}</pre>
{{Selected melting points|Hydrogen|Beryllium|Iron|Helium|Uranium|Neptunium|Lead|Cobalt(II) oxide}}</pre>


Selected Melting Points:<br />
Selected Melting Points:<br />
{{Selected melting points|Hydrogen|Berillium|Iron|Helium|Uranium|Neptunium|Lead|Cobalt(II) oxide}}
{{Selected melting points|Hydrogen|Beryllium|Iron|Helium|Uranium|Neptunium|Lead|Cobalt(II) oxide}}





Revision as of 10:46, 25 April 2008

Hourglass drawing.svg Where Milt lives it is approximately: 14:43


Compressibility factor

Milton, I started to read your sandbox article. It looks very good. I tried to enlarge fig 1, but it didn't work. This nice figure deserves at least 50% more space, now it is hard to read for an old man like myself.--Paul Wormer 11:35, 4 April 2008 (CDT)

Paul, I am 85 years old. If I could draw Fig. 1 (as I did), then a youngster like you should certainly be able to read it.(:>) - Milton Beychok 18:12, 4 April 2008 (CDT)

When I read along I place some odd comments here (--Paul Wormer 11:54, 4 April 2008 (CDT)).

  1. I wouldn't call the Van der Waals law of corresponding states a "theorem", i.e., something that can be proved. I see it more as a fitting procedure—suggested by the physics of the problem—that usually (but not always) gives surprisingly good results.
I revised it to the principle of corresponding states as per your Van der Waals equation article. - Milton Beychok 18:12, 4 April 2008 (CDT)
  1. I wouldn't say molecular properties depend on intermolecular forces, rather the properties of the gas depend on these forces. The way I see it, Z is a bulk property of which the value is indirectly determined by the properties of the molecules, namely through the intermolecular forces as intermediary. Thus, molecular properties → intermolecular forces → thermodynamic properties (such as Z). The way backwards (from thermodynamic to molecular properties) is orders of magnitude more difficult.
I revised that sentence per your suggestion. - Milton Beychok 18:12, 4 April 2008 (CDT)
  1. You forgot to define P_c and T_c.
I did indeed forget. They are now defined.
  1. Could you give an indication how the generalized compressibility factor is determined from a number (10) of gases? What kind of averaging is involved and how far do the curves for the individual molecular gases deviate from the average? I'm especially interested in steam, as water is strongly polar and the other 9 molecules are non-polar.
Gouq-Jen Sec's original graph published in 1946 had hundreds of experimental data points plotted on it. I was not capable of presenting it in a smaller size and also including the actual data points, so I elected to draw it in a smaller size without showing the data points. If you are interested in seeing the full size graph including the data points, click on Reference 8 and read Professor Kadem's online lecture. It is also available in many of the books used for the other references. I do not have a copy of his 1946 publication nor do I have precise knowledge of how Gouq-Jen Sen fitted the data points to his graph. However, I suspect that he simply drew his isotherms as the best curves that fitted the data points. That is the sort of thing we engineers did back in the slide rule era before we had computers.
Thanks very much for your review comments. I have moved the material in my sandbox to the Compressibility factor (gases) article. If you have more comments, please let me know via that article's Talk page. - Milton Beychok 18:12, 4 April 2008 (CDT)

Milton, I'm not finished yet, I had to go some place with my wife (we are sort of on holiday). Tomorrow I'll continue reading. All kidding aside (I'm 65), your first figure deserves more space, is it difficult to enlarge it? --Paul Wormer 22:03, 4 April 2008 (CDT)

There is no way that I could enlarge Fig. 1 other than to redraw it. That would take me about 4-5 hours using the only drawing program that I have (Microsoft's Paint program that came with Windows). Personally, I really don't think it needs to be larger ... but if you feel strongly that it should be larger, then I will do it some time in the next week or so. - Milton Beychok 00:37, 5 April 2008 (CDT)
I enlarged your figure 1 by 120%, but that didn't look good. That is the disadvantage of pixel format. So let the picture be as is.
Probably I will continue reading your article later today. Do you want me to approve it? --Paul Wormer 11:24, 5 April 2008 (CDT)
I think it is a bit early to nominate it for approval. I would rather wait a week or more to give other editors a chance to offer comments. Thanks for your offer.
I do think that further dialogue between us on this article should be on the talk page of Compressibility factor (gases) so others can see it. - Milton Beychok 11:32, 5 April 2008 (CDT)

Minor edits

Did you by any chance turn on your 'mark all edits as minor' flag? I ask because this edit to Talk:Mole (unit) was flagged as minor, which might have caused some people who'd be interested in it to miss it. J. Noel Chiappa 09:35, 7 April 2008 (CDT)

FCC image

Milton, I can't get to that for a day or so. Is there anything specific that would like changed? That image seems pretty good to me as it now stands. David E. Volk 10:34, 23 April 2008 (CDT)

David, since it seemed pretty good to you as it was and since my primary goal was to somehow make it smaller without losing legibility, I revised the drawing by enlarging the text. Now I can display it at a reduced width of 300px and it is still quite legible. So I think that I will leave it at that. Thanks anyway, Milton Beychok 11:36, 23 April 2008 (CDT)

Compressibility factor (gases)

You did it again! COngratualtions - and thanks for the reminder once again ;-) Keep them coming, --D. Matt Innis 19:11, 21 April 2008 (CDT)

Physical Properties Templates

Hi Milton,

I posted this on Talk:Cadmium, but wanted to get some feedback from Chem Editors so figured I'd just ask...

I had this kooky idea of trying to store materials physical properties data in templates so we can call it up from multiple locations and keep it current. That way we can do things like this:

Selected Electronegativities:<br />
{{Selected Electronegativities|Hydrogen|Beryllium|Iron|Helium|Uranium|Neptunium|Lead}}

Selected Electronegativities:
Template:Selected Electronegativities

and...

Selected Melting Points:<br />
{{Selected melting points|Hydrogen|Beryllium|Iron|Helium|Uranium|Neptunium|Lead|Cobalt(II) oxide}}

Selected Melting Points:
Template:Selected melting points


and also....

{{Resizable Periodic Table of Elements
|cellWidth=50px
|cellHeight=67px
|colorscheme=Metal
}}
Hydrogen/
H
Helium/
He
Lithium/
Li
Beryllium/
Be
Boron/
B
Carbon/
C
Nitrogen/
N
Oxygen/
O
Fluorine/
F
Neon/
Ne
Sodium/
Na
Magnesium/
Mg
Aluminium/
Al
Silicon/
Si
Phosphorus/
P
Sulphur/
S
Chlorine/
Cl
Argon/
Ar
Potassium/
K
Calcium/
Ca
Scandium/
Sc
Titanium/
Ti
Vanadium/
V
Chromium/
Cr
Manganese/
Mn
Iron/
Fe
Cobalt/
Co
Nickel/
Ni
Copper/
Cu
Zinc/
Zn
Gallium/
Ga
Germanium/
Ge
Arsenic/
As
Selenium/
Se
Bromine/
Br
Krypton/
Kr
Rubidium/
Rb
Strontium/
Sr
Yttrium/
Y
Zirconium/
Zr
Niobium/
Nb
Molybdenum/
Mo
Technetium/
Tc
Ruthenium/
Ru
Rhodium/
Rh
Palladium/
Pd
Silver/
Ag
Cadmium/
Cd
Indium/
In
Tin/
Sn
Antimony/
Sb
Tellurium/
Te
Iodine/
I
Xenon/
Xe
Caesium/
Cs
Barium/
Ba
Hafnium/
Hf
Tantalum/
Ta
Tungsten/
W
Rhenium/
Re
Osmium/
Os
Iridium/
Ir
Platinum/
Pt
Gold/
Au
Mercury (element)/
Hg
Thallium/
Tl
Lead/
Pb
Bismuth/
Bi
Polonium/
Po
Astatine/
At
Radon/
Rn
Francium/
Fr
Radium/
Ra
Rutherfordium/
Rf
Dubnium/
Db
Seaborgium/
Sg
Bohrium/
Bh
Hassium/
Hs
Meitnerium/
Mt
Darmstadtium/
Ds
Roentgenium/
Rg
Copernicium/
Cn
 
Lanthanum/
La
Cerium/
Ce
Praseodymium/
Pr
Neodymium/
Nd
Promethium/
Pm
Samarium/
Sm
Europium/
Eu
Gadolinium/
Gd
Terbium/
Tb
Dysprosium/
Dy
Holmium/
Ho
Erbium/
Er
Thulium/
Tm
Ytterbium/
Yb
Lutetium/
Lu
Actinium/
Ac
Thorium/
Th
Protactinium/
Pa
Uranium/
U
Neptunium/
Np
Plutonium/
Pu
Americium/
Am
Curium/
Cm
Berkelium/
Bk
Californium/
Cf
Einsteinium/
Es
Fermium/
Fm
Mendelevium/
Md
Nobelium/
No
Lawrencium/
Lr

...pretty easily.

Also, I've started the {{Physical properties}} template to display the info in the articles (please see Lead or Cadmium/MSDS for examples). I have (I believe) left open the option of using the system for any material, not just the chemical elements. Any objections? Reasons it won't work? Things I should change? Feedback is welcome....--David Yamakuchi 10:43, 25 April 2008 (CDT)