http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodium_silicate

That's the longest list of "uses" I've seen for quite some time. This 
stuff is, apparently, Really Useful.

Post a reply to this message

On 1-12-2009 14:17, Invisible wrote:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodium_silicate
> 
> That's the longest list of "uses" I've seen for quite some time. This 
> stuff is, apparently, Really Useful.

Funnily the only use I knew is not in the list. Making ceramics 
waterproof if you don't fire it high enough to be non-porous. E.g. if 
you fire it Raku style.

Post a reply to this message

> Funnily the only use I knew is not in the list. Making ceramics 
> waterproof if you don't fire it high enough to be non-porous. E.g. if 
> you fire it Raku style.

I'm guessing that's similar to the concrete and masonry treatment they 
talk about. If it makes concrete less porous, chances are it'll work for 
other things as well...

(I wonder if it works for wood?)

Post a reply to this message

On 1-12-2009 16:16, Invisible wrote:
>> Funnily the only use I knew is not in the list. Making ceramics 
>> waterproof if you don't fire it high enough to be non-porous. E.g. if 
>> you fire it Raku style.
> 
> I'm guessing that's similar to the concrete and masonry treatment they 
> talk about. If it makes concrete less porous, chances are it'll work for 
> other things as well...

Yes, it even makes pots that have cracks waterproof again.

> (I wonder if it works for wood?)

AFAIK wood is generally not porous.

Post a reply to this message

>> I'm guessing that's similar to the concrete and masonry treatment they 
>> talk about. If it makes concrete less porous, chances are it'll work 
>> for other things as well...
> 
> Yes, it even makes pots that have cracks waterproof again.

...or fills gaps in gaskets...

>> (I wonder if it works for wood?)
> 
> AFAIK wood is generally not porous.

Yes it is. Wood's entire structure is composed of long tubes designed to 
channel water (from the roots to the leaves). This makes wood quite 
water-absorbant.

Post a reply to this message

> Yes it is. Wood's entire structure is composed of long tubes designed to 
> channel water (from the roots to the leaves). This makes wood quite 
> water-absorbant.

Which is why boats are built with wood exposed along the grain.

I've used water glass to keep eggs when refrigeration isn't
available, after about a month they start tasting odd though.

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 01 Dec 2009 13:22:20 -0800, Tim Attwood wrote:

> I've used water glass to keep eggs when refrigeration isn't available,
> after about a month they start tasting odd though.

The convenient thing is that when they start to go bad, you know very 
quickly.  Good eggs don't float; bad ones do.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson wrote:

> The convenient thing is that when they start to go bad, you know very 
> quickly.  Good eggs don't float; bad ones do.

My cookery teacher told me this. Is it actually true?

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

Post a reply to this message

On 1-12-2009 22:33, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Tue, 01 Dec 2009 13:22:20 -0800, Tim Attwood wrote:
> 
>> I've used water glass to keep eggs when refrigeration isn't available,
>> after about a month they start tasting odd though.
> 
> The convenient thing is that when they start to go bad, you know very 
> quickly.  Good eggs don't float; bad ones do.

Hmm, are you deliberately confusing water glass with a glass of water?

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 01 Dec 2009 22:11:44 +0000, Orchid XP v8 wrote:

> Jim Henderson wrote:
> 
>> The convenient thing is that when they start to go bad, you know very
>> quickly.  Good eggs don't float; bad ones do.
> 
> My cookery teacher told me this. Is it actually true?

Yes.  Have tried it and it works just fine.

Any reason why you'd think it doesn't work? ;-)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 01 Dec 2009 23:28:27 +0100, andrel wrote:

> On 1-12-2009 22:33, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Tue, 01 Dec 2009 13:22:20 -0800, Tim Attwood wrote:
>> 
>>> I've used water glass to keep eggs when refrigeration isn't available,
>>> after about a month they start tasting odd though.
>> 
>> The convenient thing is that when they start to go bad, you know very
>> quickly.  Good eggs don't float; bad ones do.
> 
> Hmm, are you deliberately confusing water glass with a glass of water?

Not deliberately, but I do see that I may have done so. ;-)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

>>> The convenient thing is that when they start to go bad, you know very
>>> quickly.  Good eggs don't float; bad ones do.
>> My cookery teacher told me this. Is it actually true?
> 
> Yes.  Have tried it and it works just fine.
> 
> Any reason why you'd think it doesn't work? ;-)

It just seems suspiciously convinient, that's all. ;-)

Post a reply to this message

Le 02/12/2009 10:04, Invisible nous fit lire :
>>>> The convenient thing is that when they start to go bad, you know very
>>>> quickly.  Good eggs don't float; bad ones do.
>>> My cookery teacher told me this. Is it actually true?
>>
>> Yes.  Have tried it and it works just fine.
>>
>> Any reason why you'd think it doesn't work? ;-)
> 
> It just seems suspiciously convinient, that's all. ;-)

It's all physic: eggs have an air volume inside, at one end.
As the egg get older, the volume of the real-egg matter diminish a bit,
leaving more room for air. Like a submarine, emptying the ballast
(filling them with air) has a clear result: making float.

The interesting fact about the hen's egg is that a fresh egg's density
is a bit above the water, and old one's is below. It does not work for
ostrich's egg.

On the other hand, it is also easy to separate boiled egg from normal
one (before breaking them): if you rotate them on a plane, boiled egg
keep rotating, normal one  slows down more quickly.

Post a reply to this message

Le_Forgeron wrote:
> It's all physic: eggs have an air volume inside, at one end.
> As the egg get older, the volume of the real-egg matter diminish a bit,
> leaving more room for air. Like a submarine, emptying the ballast
> (filling them with air) has a clear result: making float.
> 

The variation of internal volumes in the egg would not change the 
density... In order to change the density, at least one of two things 
must happen:
- matter going in or out
- overall volume changing

It seems to me that the shell of the eggs would prevent both, but then 
there might be some permeability or some room for shrinking/expanding.

-- 
Vincent

Post a reply to this message

> The variation of internal volumes in the egg would not change the 
> density... In order to change the density, at least one of two things 
> must happen:
> - matter going in or out
> - overall volume changing
> 
> It seems to me that the shell of the eggs would prevent both, but then 
> there might be some permeability or some room for shrinking/expanding.

The shell is air-permiable. It has to be; the embrio would suffocate 
otherwise.

(It may or may not be water-permiable as well, I'm not sure...)

Post a reply to this message

> The shell is air-permiable. It has to be; the embrio would suffocate 
> otherwise.

Maybe some of the internal liquid/solid parts of the egg are decomposed into 
gasses which then escape through the shell?

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 02 Dec 2009 09:04:32 +0000, Invisible wrote:

>>>> The convenient thing is that when they start to go bad, you know very
>>>> quickly.  Good eggs don't float; bad ones do.
>>> My cookery teacher told me this. Is it actually true?
>> 
>> Yes.  Have tried it and it works just fine.
>> 
>> Any reason why you'd think it doesn't work? ;-)
> 
> It just seems suspiciously convinient, that's all. ;-)

Sometimes the convenient things are convenient for a reason. ;-)

Jim

Post a reply to this message