I remember reading in my high school chemistry textbook that if you had Avogadro's number of marshmallows, you'd be able to cover the entire landmass of Australia 700kms deep in marshmallows.
Love these videos. I'm a computer programmer but I have become hooked on sixty symbols, the periodic table of videos and the numberphile channels. Thank you to everyone that is involved in this program, it is fantastic.
Racoon in the closet Actually, it does, in some sense. Depending on how you approach the problem, zero divided by zero can be anything you want it to be.
I once got a calculator to divide by zero. I wanted to show everyone how amazing it was that it actually worked. But I got greedy and thought maybe this calculator could find the square root of -1 as well. It broke. I was never able to show anyone my division by zero.
Iconic slogan: "Chemistry is more fun than you think... and has bigger explosions." This should be over the entrance to some school somewhere. This should be the sub-title of your chemistry channel. This should be on a keychain and given to all high-school science club members!
Having taken chemistry last year in high school, I can confirm that there were many puns made about Avocados and guacamole during the units on Avagadro's number and moles.
All my teachers and professors and textbooks overcomplicated this, but it is really quite simple. It can be explained in one sentence: Avogadro's number is the number of atomic mass units equal to one gram. So since titanium has an atomic mass of 47.867, that means 6.02x10^23 atoms of titanium weigh 47.867 grams.
That makes no sense to me for some reason. When you say avagadros number is equal to the number of AMU's that equal one gram, im assuming 1 gram of titanium is equal to 47 AMU's of titanium which has nothing to do with avagondros number. Could you elaborate on this explanation you gave?
@@PR0X3R Yeah it was worded a bit weirdly. When you look into a specific periodic table you will find the atomic mass units AMU. Hydrogen has 1 u. Relative to that Oxygen is 16 times heavier so it has 16 u. And one mol of any element, which are 6.022 x 10^23 atoms, weigh the same number of its AMU in grams. Oxygen has 16u => One mol of Oxygen has a mass of 16 grams. Imagine how 1000 meters make a kilometer. 6.022 x 10^23 makes one mol.
Great video! I remembered that my general chemistry professor once said in my class that if we had a mole of dollars (or whatever other currency you want to think about) and spent them at a rate of one million per second, we would need more than 19000 million years to spend them all. That's 5200 million more years that the estimated age of the universe!
I have read various articles about the new definition of the kilogram standard but the explanation in this video is by far more understandable. Thanks.
YES!! this is my favorite number, Brady. I'm not kidding. My alarm clock is set to 6:02, and the first thing I do when I wake up is recite the number, to make sure my brain is awake.
Going to note that it's generally agreed upon that definition of SI units by actual objects rather than fundamental constants and properties is outdated, so it's currently being considered that the kilogram is to be "redefined" in terms of the Planck constant. Such a change would be incredibly interesting, I think.
I would've preferred that the method of defining the kilogram based on the ideal sphere of Silicon 28 atoms, were the standard instead. I could've understood that definition in middle school, when I was first introduced to the periodic table. The definition we have based on Planck's constant, takes a college degree to understand.
@@carultch Wow. This comment is so old that half a decade of deliberation by the CIPM went by and the definition was accepted, adopted, and has been canonical for several years. This comment is so old that I finished my Bachelor’s and Master’s and have taught university courses. This comment is so old that kids who were just learning to manipulate units in grade school are now in university. Really though, the precise and rigorous definition of a kilogram is not something that’s important for understanding physics at all. It isn’t like that’s the way we’re to teach people, so it’s pretty irrelevant. Especially in the sciences disseminating knowledge about a thing happens incrementally with increasing accuracy or precision or abstractness. When learning about motion you learn Newtonian mechanics, and when learning about atoms you learn Bohr-Rutherford, because they’re still the best models at a certain level of knowledge. Using a reference kilogram is crucial history and in terms of accuracy is still essentially totally correct, so it’s kind of a no-brainer that it can and should still be taught this way.
I was thinking the opposite. This professor is taking the result of hard work upside down. The only useful purpose he finds is to measure mass more precisely. The reality is much more fascinating. The avogadro number represent the exact number of atom. How small the wires can be in a micro-processor? There is an actual limit that is impossible to exceed. How sensitive a detector can ever be, if we reach the point where a single atom or molecule is used? It is important to know the mass and size of this absolute limit. It help to know how close we approach to the limit of physics. Many people dream of the marvelous invention that alien living on a planet from a different star, galaxy. Did they find a way to counteract gravity, did they create vehicle flying faster than light? Avogadro is such an amazing value, it tell us that nobody, not even these hypothetical aliens, will ever make anything smaller than the invention "x", when we know how many atom/molecule are required to perform a task "y". Sometime, we wander how some scientists using computers less powerful than a smart phone could land a vehicle on the moon. However, the equation to compute all the data, such as the thrust (power) needed to lift thousands of tons to orbit, were developed before any computer existed, when the trig and log functions were printed in long list. A number such as Avogadro give human of the present age the confidence to predict what is possible and what is not, century before any civilization ever reach the technical ability to make anything that approach such limit of physics. Avogadro is a real value, based of actual physics. It is not some arbitrary constant that somebody invented just to create a difficult question in an exam. I like the comment of the professor about the enthusiasm of students. And he didn't say anything false.
The gram is an arbitrary unit of mass. Avogadro's number defines the (scalar) relationship between molecular mass and this arbitrary unit of mass called the gram. Hence the number is inherently arbitrary.
that's something I've always wanted to know. Just how did they figure out this number so long ago? Without the help of electron microscopes or modern material science or anything. EDIT: Oh wait wait wait, no, I remember seeing the answer to this inquiry before. Avogadro didn't actually discover the number, he thought up the idea. Much later on, when that number was actually calculated, they named it after him in his honor.
AFAIR, it all begun since they determined that the (later to be called) molar volume of different gases (22.4 ltrs) are the same, like, different masses of different gases (which correspond to their molar masses) appeared to occupy the same volume. Avogadro scratched his head and said 'well, maybe that's why...' :))
If you had 6.02214e23 protons, which have an atomic mass of 1, it would weigh 1g. If you had 6.02214e23 atoms of Deuterium, with atomic mass of 2, you would have 2g. Having one mol of a substance is equal to saying you have this many atoms of it.
***** But there's no point in defining Avogadro's number as some factor of Avogadro's number. +DailyFrankPeter is right - I wish all my teachers had explained it this way. Avogadro's number is the number of atomic mass units in a gram.
No an atom contains Protons and Neutrons along with binding energy so an atom consisting of just n protons (impossible) would be lighter than n atoms containing protons and neutrons.
It doesn't sound right. The number of collected grains of sand from the UK beaches calculated by his friend Johnson is the Na. (6*10 to 23). He says 197 grammes of gold (atomic mass 197) has the same number of atoms as the atoms in the huge pile of sand. I think he should say there are as many atoms in 197 grams of gold as there are grains of sand in the pile.. Also he talks about silica and not sand (silica dioxide (SiO2)) which has a molecular weight of about 28+16+16=60, That's a ratio of 197/60. That feels right to me. I'm an accountant not a chemist so maybe I don't get it.
What he meant was the number of atoms of 197 grams of gold would be equal to the number of grains of sand on all the beaches. I understand your confusion though it was worded in a strange way.
+Jan Abellana who care about classes? just be you and have fun (but safe and be careful), playing, exploring with stuff in the backyard can learn a lot more than school, just yolo bro
+Cory The Creeper Plays MC No, it is not more fun when you learn about atoms. (I am a university graduate). It gets more and more confusing and makes less and less sense. Be happy for the intuitive subjects you are expected to study when you are young.
If you have 1 cube of iron with 1kg and a sphere of gold with 13 kg but live in a world where 1 kg is just a small mass to measure, you could say: Let's take a lot of stuff until their mass will be roughly 10 kg. So you take 10 cubes and spheres. 10 kg of Fe and 130 of Au, right? The same amount of "stuff". The cube is 13 times less massive than the sphere, so it'll be always 13 times lighter. It's the same for the mole. You have a big number of atoms just to make reasonable to measure it (in g)
@ Captain Obvious and Zoe Boughton: If the _"Maybe it was a joke. Maybe not."_ comment was inspired by Schrödinger, then it would (or should) have been "It was a joke. And it wasn't a joke." :-) (Unless it was actually inspired by Heisenberg instead!)
so wonderfull to hear even from a chemist the addition "... and i haven't checked his calculation..." to a statement which he is quoting. This attitude is at the essence of scientific approach and so often forgotten.
+Pedro Puglia Carbonic gas? Are you nuts? Dissolved carbon dioxide is not stable enough to be a gas after decomposing again in carbon dioxide, that is why soda is fuzzy.
Is no one going to comment on his amaaaaaazing periodic table tie? Guess it's up to me then.
I was but I saw your comment
same here 😂😉
WearingMajorasMask
Watch some videos of PERIODIC VIDEOS and you’ll get to know how many different ties he have
I was gonna comment that...
ig it ties it all together
this guy looks like science
...DONT....EVEN....TRY IT
I know right! The stereotypical looks of science
How original.
Neal!
This guy IS science
Imagine if Avogadro were living in the days of the telephone and you wanted to call him... "Excuse me, do you happen to have Avogadro's number?"
will u b here all week?
😂😂😂
Chaplain Dave Sparks his number would be 602-1023
hahahaha.....
why'd you put that????!?!?!!1!/!?!?!?!?1!?!?!!?!!11!1?1!?!!!?!1!!?!!1?1!one?!
It's his birthday tomorrow!!! It would be a crime not to wish him and thank him for his contribution to popularizing chemistry. Thank you Professor!
Avocado's Number: 6.02*10^23 guacas = 1 guacamole.
+Ratstail91 Jeb's favorite number.
del tacos fav number
That gave me a mol of lol
Seriously? Bad pun.
no pun intended? more like no fun intended.
I put it on my calendar.
Hello
Hi Justin, Really loved your reverse bicycle video
I swear Destin turns up everywhere in the YT comment section
lol hi
im sure his hair is very unstable and it emits all alpha beta(e/p) gamma rays with a half life of 2 days.
*****
yeah sort of, just fire a single neutron at him and he will blow up the entire countryside.
*****
or we could just throw him in it :D
***** im sheldon cooper vote me for president.
I remember reading in my high school chemistry textbook that if you had Avogadro's number of marshmallows, you'd be able to cover the entire landmass of Australia 700kms deep in marshmallows.
Sounds like a dream come true!
surely it's not that big?
Agent S It is :)
The top layer would reach deep into space, freezing them. And thus we'd be able to get tasty frozen snacks.
PTNLemay
Marshmallowsicles!!!
Finding it strange to see these commented on - they're such a staple of films on periodicvideos that I forget new people are not used to them! :)
I would love to have professors like him. The tie alone says alot, :)
Love these videos. I'm a computer programmer but I have become hooked on sixty symbols, the periodic table of videos and the numberphile channels. Thank you to everyone that is involved in this program, it is fantastic.
You don't need to tell us you're a chemist. You already look like science itself o.o
This is a maths channel. In maths you always define your terms first :)
Sweet tie
This man has such a nice voice. I could listen to him explain things to me all day.
"Chemistry has bigger explosions than maths". - You haven't seen us dividing through zero!
DarthChrisB You're right, because that doesn't work.
Racoon in the closet Actually, it does, in some sense. Depending on how you approach the problem, zero divided by zero can be anything you want it to be.
Racoon in the closet Ya, that's true. But it's much more fun to say that 0/0 is anything you want it to be :D
Thanks, you just exploded my phone... I appreciate it.
I once got a calculator to divide by zero. I wanted to show everyone how amazing it was that it actually worked. But I got greedy and thought maybe this calculator could find the square root of -1 as well. It broke. I was never able to show anyone my division by zero.
Love the periodic 'tie-ble"
You're profile picture makes your comment seem somewhat sarcastic.
I know I should be commenting on the subject of the video, but, damn, I gotta say your tie is awesome, sir.
Sai Impossible! This tie is THE tie!
Moliakoff made me crack up like nothing before! Great job Melinda!
This guy's hair just screams "CHEMIST"
this is the crossover episode i was hoping for and up to this day didn't know existed already
Our next video will be about division by zero.
I was about to upload it today, then realised it was Mole Day.
His tie --- PERODIC TABLE!!
Honestly, the camera man asks the best questions. Its almost like he knows exactly what I am thinking
On 16th of December I'm going to gift the professor a like once and for all
*opens video*
"I'm a chemist."
Me: Yes. Yes, you are.
Iconic slogan: "Chemistry is more fun than you think... and has bigger explosions." This should be over the entrance to some school somewhere. This should be the sub-title of your chemistry channel. This should be on a keychain and given to all high-school science club members!
Good on you for subbing both! ;)
A very enjoyable video!
I learned of Avogadro's number in 1968 and it's been in my mind ever since: 6.02241 x 10^23. Pleasant memories.
Having taken chemistry last year in high school, I can confirm that there were many puns made about Avocados and guacamole during the units on Avagadro's number and moles.
- "I'm a chemist"
There was never a doubt in my mind
You should be watching periodicvideos every week!
We should watch them periodically
This is an EPIC video, i've never understood what anyone has ever told me about avogadro's constant, THANKS NUMBERPHILE!!
Interesting!
I loved his periodic table tie :D
Sabarinath Chelichery Is a periodic tie ble
I love that tie man. Love that tie.
That's a glorious tie.
the professor is the epitome of 'no nonsense' and I love it
8:18 NATIONAL MOL DAY! October 23rd. My chemistry teacher in high school used to talk about this every year.
All my teachers and professors and textbooks overcomplicated this, but it is really quite simple. It can be explained in one sentence: Avogadro's number is the number of atomic mass units equal to one gram.
So since titanium has an atomic mass of 47.867, that means 6.02x10^23 atoms of titanium weigh 47.867 grams.
I love you for this
Harclerodeable you deserve a metal.
preferably Cobalt.
Harclerodeable you have a bad teacher
That makes no sense to me for some reason. When you say avagadros number is equal to the number of AMU's that equal one gram, im assuming 1 gram of titanium is equal to 47 AMU's of titanium which has nothing to do with avagondros number. Could you elaborate on this explanation you gave?
@@PR0X3R Yeah it was worded a bit weirdly. When you look into a specific periodic table you will find the atomic mass units AMU. Hydrogen has 1 u. Relative to that Oxygen is 16 times heavier so it has 16 u. And one mol of any element, which are 6.022 x 10^23 atoms, weigh the same number of its AMU in grams. Oxygen has 16u => One mol of Oxygen has a mass of 16 grams.
Imagine how 1000 meters make a kilometer.
6.022 x 10^23 makes one mol.
Still loving your videos Brady and I've loved watching Prof. Poliakoff talk about chemistry for years.
did anyone see the double monitor show ?
couldn't keep my eyes off it
googled it up to setup same at my desk.
i cant believe its been 8 years since i first watched this video
And I am writing this on December the 17th... happy birthday Professor
+Dylan Jones nothing gets past you, does it?
KusKusPL No, he said his birthday was December 16th
Great video! I remembered that my general chemistry professor once said in my class that if we had a mole of dollars (or whatever other currency you want to think about) and spent them at a rate of one million per second, we would need more than 19000 million years to spend them all. That's 5200 million more years that the estimated age of the universe!
#hairgoals
I have read various articles about the new definition of the kilogram standard but the explanation in this video is by far more understandable. Thanks.
im in love with the tie
The most ambitious crossover in history
Avagadro... What a looker
Tycho Yum
Jeepers Creepers yourself, buddy. :D
YES!! this is my favorite number, Brady. I'm not kidding. My alarm clock is set to 6:02, and the first thing I do when I wake up is recite the number, to make sure my brain is awake.
Avogadro's discovery of the mole is nice, but I much prefer Avocado's discovery of (guaca)mole
Funny joke, but he didn't discover it, he defined it. Or you could say he conceptualized it. He didn't discover a number.
Michael Thomas He invented it
Bad pun.
Mid december huh? Happy B-day Mr. Dr. Prof! Love your work.
I am so jealous of this guy's hair...
Going to note that it's generally agreed upon that definition of SI units by actual objects rather than fundamental constants and properties is outdated, so it's currently being considered that the kilogram is to be "redefined" in terms of the Planck constant. Such a change would be incredibly interesting, I think.
I would've preferred that the method of defining the kilogram based on the ideal sphere of Silicon 28 atoms, were the standard instead. I could've understood that definition in middle school, when I was first introduced to the periodic table.
The definition we have based on Planck's constant, takes a college degree to understand.
@@carultch Wow. This comment is so old that half a decade of deliberation by the CIPM went by and the definition was accepted, adopted, and has been canonical for several years. This comment is so old that I finished my Bachelor’s and Master’s and have taught university courses. This comment is so old that kids who were just learning to manipulate units in grade school are now in university.
Really though, the precise and rigorous definition of a kilogram is not something that’s important for understanding physics at all. It isn’t like that’s the way we’re to teach people, so it’s pretty irrelevant. Especially in the sciences disseminating knowledge about a thing happens incrementally with increasing accuracy or precision or abstractness.
When learning about motion you learn Newtonian mechanics, and when learning about atoms you learn Bohr-Rutherford, because they’re still the best models at a certain level of knowledge. Using a reference kilogram is crucial history and in terms of accuracy is still essentially totally correct, so it’s kind of a no-brainer that it can and should still be taught this way.
I like how he uses all these dog toys to represent atoms and molecules.
The tie is priceless!
Thank you! You helped a lot! I had this for a class project. I got an A+ :D
His screensaver is so mesmerizing. It looks like the text exits one screen and enters the other!
This professor is the reason I like chemistry so much
my chemistry teacher makes me sleepy. boring af
I was thinking the opposite. This professor is taking the result of hard work upside down. The only useful purpose he finds is to measure mass more precisely.
The reality is much more fascinating. The avogadro number represent the exact number of atom.
How small the wires can be in a micro-processor? There is an actual limit that is impossible to exceed.
How sensitive a detector can ever be, if we reach the point where a single atom or molecule is used? It is important to know the mass and size of this absolute limit. It help to know how close we approach to the limit of physics.
Many people dream of the marvelous invention that alien living on a planet from a different star, galaxy. Did they find a way to counteract gravity, did they create vehicle flying faster than light? Avogadro is such an amazing value, it tell us that nobody, not even these hypothetical aliens, will ever make anything smaller than the invention "x", when we know how many atom/molecule are required to perform a task "y".
Sometime, we wander how some scientists using computers less powerful than a smart phone could land a vehicle on the moon. However, the equation to compute all the data, such as the thrust (power) needed to lift thousands of tons to orbit, were developed before any computer existed, when the trig and log functions were printed in long list.
A number such as Avogadro give human of the present age the confidence to predict what is possible and what is not, century before any civilization ever reach the technical ability to make anything that approach such limit of physics.
Avogadro is a real value, based of actual physics. It is not some arbitrary constant that somebody invented just to create a difficult question in an exam.
I like the comment of the professor about the enthusiasm of students. And he didn't say anything false.
The gram is an arbitrary unit of mass. Avogadro's number defines the (scalar) relationship between molecular mass and this arbitrary unit of mass called the gram. Hence the number is inherently arbitrary.
wow! interesting ... pity he did not talk about everything you mention. Thanks for the info. (:
Amazing explanation. All answered!
I like how Pi seems to sit calmly in the bottom right corner, listening about Avogadro's number...
If you started talking about Pi instead you could go on forever
Martin Poliakoff and Cliff Stoll are the most science-looking guys I have ever seen.
MOLTYN MOLIAKOFF AWH GUYS WHY AREN'T WE TALKING ABOUT THIS
My hero.
It's December 15, 2017. Tomorrow is the good professor's birthday. Sir, happy birthday! :-)
I like to put Avogadros in my salads.
Thank you, I'll be here all week.
+Joel Carli And still no comments after a month.
+Fematika So sad...
Huh? Numbers? Scientists?
Nah, he means his salads contains MOLES of lettuce.
Nah, he means avocados
I hear that Avogadro's number used to be the opening number all the time. It was huge!
This guy just looks like a scientist. I mean the hair the glasses the face, everything.
Sometimes, I forget what channel I'm on. They are awesome and all of my favorite RUclipsrs work together to make amazing videos. (:
This guy looks like science.
I need that periodic table tie
The Professor's birthday is the mass of oxygen?! Mind = blown.
Well, every day in a month resembles the mass of one atom :D
Just realized I was watching this on your birthday! Happy birthday professor!!!!!
all the number i remember so far 6.0221415... x 10^23
i just remember "6.022" and "x10^23"
"1415..." i relate it to the same thing in pi: 3.141592...
+Khang Chau Thats actually pretty dope :)
there still about 15 digit more to remember :))
Professor Martyn Poliakoff is my hero from now on
Chemistry explosions > Maths explosions
Great job with this video Professor. Thanks for sharing
they could do all that in the 18 hundreds. MY ARSE!!!!
that's something I've always wanted to know. Just how did they figure out this number so long ago?
Without the help of electron microscopes or modern material science or anything.
EDIT:
Oh wait wait wait, no, I remember seeing the answer to this inquiry before. Avogadro didn't actually discover the number, he thought up the idea. Much later on, when that number was actually calculated, they named it after him in his honor.
+PTNLemay thank you
AFAIR, it all begun since they determined that the (later to be called) molar volume of different gases (22.4 ltrs) are the same, like, different masses of different gases (which correspond to their molar masses) appeared to occupy the same volume. Avogadro scratched his head and said 'well, maybe that's why...' :))
His tie is made from all molecules
"I'm a chemist"
Audience: Noooooooo, really?
Why is it so?
Hey, people might not realise? xD I guess? xD
never seen such an awesome tie..
So the Avogadro's number is just the (inverse of the) mass of a proton in grams, huh? 6.02214e-23 grams?
its actually unicorn x gnome, but your way is acceptible
Not quite.
It's the charge in Coulombs of a mole of electrons (a Faraday) divided by the charge in Coulombs of a single electron (e).
If you had 6.02214e23 protons, which have an atomic mass of 1, it would weigh 1g. If you had 6.02214e23 atoms of Deuterium, with atomic mass of 2, you would have 2g. Having one mol of a substance is equal to saying you have this many atoms of it.
***** But there's no point in defining Avogadro's number as some factor of Avogadro's number. +DailyFrankPeter is right - I wish all my teachers had explained it this way. Avogadro's number is the number of atomic mass units in a gram.
No an atom contains Protons and Neutrons along with binding energy so an atom consisting of just n protons (impossible) would be lighter than n atoms containing protons and neutrons.
They have now changed the definition of 1 kg using avagadro's number
Bruh he may not be the next albert einstein but his hair is
This guy is so crazy, hes amazing!
Love your videos!
It doesn't sound right. The number of collected grains of sand from the UK beaches calculated by his friend Johnson is the Na. (6*10 to 23). He says 197 grammes of gold (atomic mass 197) has the same number of atoms as the atoms in the huge pile of sand. I think he should say there are as many atoms in 197 grams of gold as there are grains of sand in the pile.. Also he talks about silica and not sand (silica dioxide (SiO2)) which has a molecular weight of about 28+16+16=60, That's a ratio of 197/60. That feels right to me. I'm an accountant not a chemist so maybe I don't get it.
What he meant was the number of atoms of 197 grams of gold would be equal to the number of grains of sand on all the beaches. I understand your confusion though it was worded in a strange way.
Science: Who are you?
Prof. Poliakoff: You
masha Allah thanx profe..
So, it started by considering few gram of an element to find the Avagadro's number and then we use it to calculate the exact value of 1 kilogram. Wow
0:45 clearly he was an alien
I am gonna love chemistry from now
Chemisty would be so much more fun if i didnt have goofs in my class :(
+Jan Abellana I feel your pain...
+Jan Abellana who care about classes? just be you and have fun (but safe and be careful), playing, exploring with stuff in the backyard can learn a lot more than school, just yolo bro
MeagleEmpire thanks, i'm trying to
+Jan Abellana
It would be so much fun if I learn about atoms (I'm at grade 7).
+Cory The Creeper Plays MC No, it is not more fun when you learn about atoms. (I am a university graduate). It gets more and more confusing and makes less and less sense. Be happy for the intuitive subjects you are expected to study when you are young.
If you have 1 cube of iron with 1kg and a sphere of gold with 13 kg but live in a world where 1 kg is just a small mass to measure, you could say: Let's take a lot of stuff until their mass will be roughly 10 kg. So you take 10 cubes and spheres. 10 kg of Fe and 130 of Au, right? The same amount of "stuff". The cube is 13 times less massive than the sphere, so it'll be always 13 times lighter. It's the same for the mole. You have a big number of atoms just to make reasonable to measure it (in g)
+1 for the geek necktie.
You spell it Avocado*
can't tell if serious
Ping Pong Cup Shots what do you think? Maybe it was a joke. Maybe not.
+Lobster with Mustard and Rice Joke inspired by Schrödinger
+Captain Obvious Thank you, Captain Obvious.
@ Captain Obvious and Zoe Boughton: If the _"Maybe it was a joke. Maybe not."_ comment was inspired by Schrödinger, then it would (or should) have been "It was a joke. And it wasn't a joke." :-)
(Unless it was actually inspired by Heisenberg instead!)
Fall in love with that tie.
NICE TIE
HAPPY BIRTHDAY Prof. Poliakoff!
Speaking of coincidences, I am watching this on December 16th and he says his birthday is December 16.
his 'flask' looks like a bong
so wonderfull to hear even from a chemist the addition "... and i haven't checked his calculation..." to a statement which he is quoting. This attitude is at the essence of scientific approach and so often forgotten.
wait, Carbon has 6 protons, 6 neutrons and 6 electrons, 666, that's a very weird coincidence.
Alwin Priven that's why carbonic gas is toxic
+Alwin Priven And flesh is made primarily of carbon
+spaghetti out of organic molecules, witch are carbon-hydrogen bonds.
It's nature. It happens
+Pedro Puglia Carbonic gas? Are you nuts? Dissolved carbon dioxide is not stable enough to be a gas after decomposing again in carbon dioxide, that is why soda is fuzzy.