Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> (Although presumably it *does* make it significantly more expensive than 
> if it could by synthesized by a machine...)

Hard to say. It's cheaper than ink-jet printer ink.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Forget "focus follows mouse." When do
   I get "focus follows gaze"?

Post a reply to this message

On 2/6/2010 1:36 AM, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>> When it stops making heat, you boil/microwave it again
>
> The instructions specifically tell you to *not* microwave them. There's
> a metal strip in there, remember?
>
Actually, you don't want to leave one in too long, since it will 
overheat and puncture, but you can do it. And, most of the problems from 
small amounts of metal in microwaves are not an issue any more. Large 
amounts, or for a really long time however... In this case, the metal is 
inside, so any discharge/heat just goes into the medium itself (you just 
don't want to drop it in there for longer than say 30 seconds, or it 
could possibly cause a problem. The one we have allowed for it.

-- 
void main () {

     if version = "Vista" {
       call slow_by_half();
       call DRM_everything();
     }
     call functional_code();
   }
   else
     call crash_windows();
}

<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models, 
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>

Post a reply to this message

On 2/6/2010 3:27 AM, Fredrik Eriksson wrote:
> Indeed:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glow_stick
>
> Given the toxicity of the chemicals, I am sure the manufacturers would
> love to use bioluminescence instead if it was feasible.
>
What that doesn't say is "concentration". Toxicity is all about "how 
much". Other than the one ingredient, which contains some metals which 
you want to get a lot of internally, most of them are small amounts of 
stuff that is, maybe, for some people, irritants. In fact, a number of 
them are found in common soap products, and probably in larger doses.

For the most part, its not *that* dangerous, in the levels contained in 
a stick. The thin glass used to keep it from mixing, until needed, is 
probably a much bigger danger.

-- 
void main () {

     if version = "Vista" {
       call slow_by_half();
       call DRM_everything();
     }
     call functional_code();
   }
   else
     call crash_windows();
}

<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models, 
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> The instructions specifically tell you to *not* microwave them. 

Some do, some don't. The main problem with metal in the microwave is not 
that it's metal, but that it gets currents in it. Having someting the right 
shape to not arc with a current is probably safe when properly designed.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Forget "focus follows mouse." When do
   I get "focus follows gaze"?

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> It's cheaper than ink-jet printer ink.

What isn't? Apart from antimatter?

Post a reply to this message

>> So there are effecient processes for turning external energy into 
>> electricity, and turning electricity into energy such as muscle 
>> contraction.
> 
> Muscle contractions are powered by chemical reactions.

True - although muscle contraction is a cascade of chemical reactions 
triggered by electricity. Perhaps a better example would be the human 
brain, which kicks out enough power to be measurable from outside the 
human body. (Or those electric eels...)

>> I'm guessing bioluminescense is usually driven either by the stored 
>> energy of the reactants themselves [which probably requires some huge 
>> long enzyme chain to resynthesize], or by a carrier molecule like AMP 
>> [which can't be directly synthesized from electricity in any obvious 
>> way].
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luciferase#Chemical_reaction

Right. So oxidation of a molecule causes it to glow, and an engyme 
catalyses this reaction. Presumably if you wanted to perpetuate this 
reaction indefinitely you'd need a way to un-oxidise the product...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>> The instructions specifically tell you to *not* microwave them.
> 
> Some do, some don't. The main problem with metal in the microwave is not
> that it's metal, but that it gets currents in it. Having someting the
> right shape to not arc with a current is probably safe when properly
> designed.

Yep. That's why a metal fork in a microwave has more problems than a metal 
spoon...

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> True - although muscle contraction is a cascade of chemical reactions 
> triggered by electricity.

Not really. Nerve activity is a chemical process that dumps charged 
particles out of one end to start the chemical reaction at the other end of 
the next nerve cell. But it's primarily chemical as it travels thru the 
nerve, unlike electricity in wires.

Novocain, for example, works by suppressing the chemical reaction in the nerve.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Forget "focus follows mouse." When do
   I get "focus follows gaze"?

Post a reply to this message

>> True - although muscle contraction is a cascade of chemical reactions 
>> triggered by electricity.
> 
> Not really. Nerve activity is a chemical process that dumps charged 
> particles out of one end to start the chemical reaction at the other end 
> of the next nerve cell. But it's primarily chemical as it travels thru 
> the nerve, unlike electricity in wires.
> 
> Novocain, for example, works by suppressing the chemical reaction in the 
> nerve.

The way I read it, nerve conduction works primarily electronically 
(i.e., along the length of the nerve cell body) and uses a chemical 
stage to traverse adjacent nerve cells (i.e., the synaptic junction). 
Electricity is the primary reason why nerves conduct fast - to the point 
that mylinated nerves conduct faster due to the extra insulation.

(The part where the nerve connects to the muscle fiber is also chemical, 
as is the process by which the muscle contracts.)

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

On 7-2-2010 22:06, Darren New wrote:
> Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>> True - although muscle contraction is a cascade of chemical reactions 
>> triggered by electricity.
> 
> Not really. Nerve activity is a chemical process that dumps charged 
> particles out of one end to start the chemical reaction at the other end 
> of the next nerve cell. But it's primarily chemical as it travels thru 
> the nerve, unlike electricity in wires.

No. It travels within a cell as an electrical signal. Although ions are 
involved it is not a chemical process, except at the nerve endings. 
Muscle is activated by cells originating in the backbone or even the 
brain. Nerve cells axons can be a meter in length in human, in blue 
whale slightly larger.

> Novocain, for example, works by suppressing the chemical reaction in the 
> nerve.

Post a reply to this message