quade 4 #1 December 14, 2007 Simple question really.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TrophyHusband 0 #2 December 14, 2007 crap, i accidentally hit yes. i meant no. is this just the second of a series of simple questions that ends up with you showing proof of man-made global warming? "Your scrotum is quite nice" - Skymama www.kjandmegan.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,070 #3 December 14, 2007 Usually the oxygen atom is heavier. Not that there's much monatomic oxygen around. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #4 December 14, 2007 Quoteis this just the second of a series of simple questions that ends up with . . . ? Well, you are on to something, I'm not saying what yet, but if you're observant, you should be able to figure it out.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #5 December 14, 2007 The original question was about Mass. Heavier implies acceleration (due to gravity, doesn't it?)... so Mass is not the same as weight - if I remember my school-bot science stuff correctly. (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
grannyinthesky 0 #6 December 14, 2007 It's beginning to lfeel ike I'm back in the physics class I just finished."safety first... and What the hell..... safety second, Too!!! " ~~jmy POPS #10490 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydiver30960 0 #7 December 14, 2007 Quote Simple question really. Hah! No it's not! It's a trick question, isn't it? Like the "pound of feathers vs. a pound of rocks" trick, right? Right? Right? Elvisio "levity vs. gravity" Rodriguez Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #8 December 14, 2007 > Maybe an English class next, hey? (sorry) (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
grannyinthesky 0 #9 December 14, 2007 Quote<> Maybe an English class next, hey? (sorry) My brain just works faster than my fingers. I went back and fixed it. Thanks, By the way, that's aamong the reasons I'm a math teacher. I can skip steps and still get to the correct answer. Actually, the next class is probably astronomy. I managed to get my master's with almost no science to go with it and I'm trying to correct that."safety first... and What the hell..... safety second, Too!!! " ~~jmy POPS #10490 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BikerBabe 0 #10 December 14, 2007 Quote is this just the second of a series of simple questions that ends up with you showing proof of man-made global warming? Or it's more like he's trying to prove that SC folks will argue about ANYTHING! Never meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ryoder 1,590 #11 December 14, 2007 Quote Quote is this just the second of a series of simple questions that ends up with . . . ? Well, you are on to something, I'm not saying what yet, but if you're observant, you should be able to figure it out. You're taking us step-by-step through your new process for using a laser to split the beer atom?"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
champu 1 #12 December 14, 2007 QuoteUsually the oxygen atom is heavier. Not that there's much monatomic oxygen around. "Usually" is a bit of an understatement. Although I suppose if you had some C-15 and O-14 they would at least last long enough for you to say, "See! Carbon is more massive!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,070 #13 December 14, 2007 >"Usually" is a bit of an understatement. Well, if I didn't say "usually" someone would say "HA! You're wrong! Carbon isotopes CAN be heavier than oxygen isotopes, so THERE!" You know how SC is. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #14 December 14, 2007 Quote Quote is this just the second of a series of simple questions that ends up with . . . ? Well, you are on to something, I'm not saying what yet, but if you're observant, you should be able to figure it out. How long will it take to come to a conclusion do you think? How much popcorn should I have ready? So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kbordson 8 #15 December 14, 2007 Mass is, in theory, an unchanging property of an object, but.... at speeds approaching the speed of light one must consider the increase in the relativistic mass. So... considering your prior question.... how fast is this carbon moving? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #16 December 14, 2007 QuoteYou know how SC is. How can we be worrying about the mass of carbon and oxygen when they are causing the tundra to thaw? At least carbon and oxygen didn't spend a ton of taxpayer dollars on a crappy war or useless social programs? In England, they don't even appreciate Carbon like in free thinking countries. If you don't think carbon weighs more you are a racist. (I said "if", so it doesn't count as a PA) ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #17 December 14, 2007 Quote"Usually" is a bit of an understatement. Although I suppose if you had some C-15 and O-14 they would at least last long enough for you to say, "See! Carbon is more massive!" This question is just about good old fashion C and O. We'll get to isotopes eventually.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #18 December 14, 2007 I made the assumption that you were referring to non-radioactive atoms.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #19 December 14, 2007 <> That's because we like our elements, like we like our food.... a little rarer, not carbonised. I'm partial to Ytterbium (70) myself or even Molybdenum, which is not rare but does hold the meaning of life. (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,106 #20 December 15, 2007 QuoteUsually the oxygen atom is heavier. Not that there's much monatomic oxygen around. How about monatomic carbon?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ypelchat 0 #21 December 15, 2007 http://www.lenntech.com/Periodic-chart-elements/atomic-mass.htm Yves. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #22 December 15, 2007 Quote Quote is this just the second of a series of simple questions that ends up with you showing proof of man-made global warming? Or it's more like he's trying to prove that SC folks will argue about ANYTHING! That's a damnable lie! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KelliJ 0 #23 December 15, 2007 Quote Do you believe 1 carbon atom is has more mass than 1 oxygen atom? I didn't even know they were Catholic. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AKCrash 0 #24 December 15, 2007 Very Interesting.. I remember from the old periodic table of elements that the atomic mass of carbon is 12g/mol while the atomic mass of oxygen is 15.99 g/mol. There are 6.022E23 atom in one mole of matter. Therefore, 1 carbon atom has less mass than one oxygen atom regardless whether oxygen appears in monoatmoic or diatomic form. Yes, Chemistry made more sense to me after I started skydiving!! "Those who would give up Essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety" Franklin Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
