If you had to swallow one gram of an element on the periodic table, what is the chance of you dying?

Well, let’s start at the top of the periodic table and work our way down. We’ll assume that solids will be in the form of a fine powder.

1 gram of hydrogen - the density of hydrogen is .08988 g/L, so you’ll have to swallow (not inhale) 11 liters of gas. This will take you some time, and will need to be spread out over a good deal of time to avoid damaging your GI tract. You’re going to feel very bloated for a while, and you’ll be belching and farting like a champion. Otherwise, no problem.

1 gram of helium - the density of helium is .179 g/L, so you’ll need to swallow 5.6 liters. Same issues as hydrogen, just not as bad. Oh, and immediately after belching you may sound like Donald Duck if you inhale the helium.

1 gram of lithium - the lithium is very reactive, and will cause severe chemical burns going down and in your stomach, so you’ll have to heal up before you can do the next element. Lithium will presumably react primarily with water to produce lithium hydroxide, and then with hydrochloric acid in the stomach to produce about 6 grams of lithium chloride. Lethal dose for LiCl has been reported to be about 8 grams, so you may or may not survive to continue.

1 gram of beryllium - no particular issue.

EDIT - I’m not sure of this on further reflection. If the metal forms a compound which is soluble in water, then you’re in big trouble, since beryllium can replace magnesium in enzymes (you don’t want that) and can target the nuclei of cells (you don’t want that, either) and can be extremely toxic. However, my organic chemistry is far too rusty for me to guess what the products of digestion would be.

END EDIT

1 gram of boron - no problem.

1 gram of carbon - no problem.

1 gram of nitrogen - density is 1.25 g/L, so you’ll need to swallow 0.8 liters of gas. After the hydrogen and helium, this should be a piece of cake.

1 gram of oxygen - like nitrogen, but about 0.7 liters.

1 gram of fluorine - Oh boy, now you’re in for it. You’ll need to swallow about 0.6 liters of gas, and you’ll get fluorine burns (as in, your throat will literally catch fire) going down, but then the trouble begins. Your one gram of fluorine will mostly react with water to form hydrofluoric acid, and produce a bit over one gram of HF. This will react with the calcium in your body and the results will be unpleasant. Here is a link Lethal intoxication with hydrofluoric acid to a case of a woman who swallowed 30 mL of HF. With a density of 1.69 g/ml, you’ll probably recover from a dose 1/50 of this, but I suspect you’ll have lost your enthusiasm for the project. Which is just as well. Actually, there doesn’t seem to be much information about the effects of swallowing fluorine - it’s just so bizarre that it doesn’t happen. The medical community will follow your progress avidly.

1 gram of neon - just like nitrogen or oxygen, but a bit more volume.

1 gram of sodium - you thought the fluorine was bad? The moisture in your throat will cause the sodium to evolve hydrogen and hot enough to ignite it. Plus, the byproduct of the reaction is sodium hydroxide (lye) which won’t do you much good either. The rest of your experiment will require the elements to be introduced via a direct tube to your stomach, since your esophagus will be badly damaged. If it wasn’t by the fluorine. Or the lithium. Which seems unlikely.

1 gram of magnesium, aluminum, silicon - no immediate effects.

1 gram of phosphorus - Elemental phosphorus is a deadly poison (despite the fact that we are typically 1% phosphorus), with lethal doses of 50 - 60 mg being reported. A summary web page PHOSPHORUS, ELEMENTAL includes the following:

“The human lethal oral dose of phosphorus (white) is about 1 mg/kg body weight”.

You’ll start vomiting at about the 12-hour mark, and you may die within 12 hours. Or it may take 2 or 3 days for your liver and kidneys to go TU, and the experiment will end here.

Just as well. Swallowing a gram of liquid bromine probably won’t kill you, but it won’t be whole lot of fun and the immediate tissue damage to your stomach will be severe.

Chlorine will react to form hydrochloric acid, but only about a gram, and your stomach already contains hydrochloric acid, so that ought to mitigate effects. Won’t help your throat, though.

A gram of radium won’t kill you immediately, but it will kill you.

A gram of mercury, oddly enough, will simply go through you like grease through a goose. It’s a tiny globule, and unless it gets stuck somewhere in a crevice will pass quickly.

Potassium, rubidium and cesium will have much the same effect as sodium although their higher atomic numbers mean that they will have less chemical effect.

What are the 5 things that contain 2 times more protein and calcium than meat?

How are you guys, it is said that most people in India are vegetarian and there is not much protein in vegetarian diet, so you should only eat non-vegetarian food to build a body, but this is completely wrong because today we will tell about five things in which 2 times more protein and other nutritious substances are found than meat, so definitely read this article till the end.

1) Peanuts - It is a good source of protein, you will be surprised to know that 100 grams of peanuts contain 24 grams of protein whereas 100 grams of chicken contains only 15 to 16 grams of protein.

2) Paneer - Paneer is very much liked in India and especially people who are vegetarian you will be happy to know that 35 grams of protein is found in 100 grams of cheese and it is 2 times more than chicken.

3) Almonds - Almonds are full of protein and other nutritious substances. If there is a deficiency of protein in your body, then you start eating only 5 almonds. The deficiency of protein in your body will start to go away.

4) Gram - You probably do not know that horses eat most of the gram because it is the highest calcium found in gram because of which the bones of the horse remain strong. If you also start consuming gram, then you do not have any problem related to bones.

5) Rajma - You may have eaten Rajma rice many times, but you are unknowingly eating protein, you would not be knowing that about 40 grams of protein is found in 100 gram of Rajma

What chemical do scientists fear the most?

I think a strong argument can be made for my least favorite chemical: dimethylmercury.

There are other things that are highly reactive. Dioxygen difluoride, FOOF, is probably among the most unstable, reactive chemicals allowed by the laws of physics. But nobody’s really afraid of it. It’s so unstable you can never make more than a handful of molecules at a time. It’s a curiosity, but not something that’s feared.

Chlorine trifluoride is legit terrifying stuff. It burns violently on contact with nearly anything, there is no known way to control a chlorine trifluoride fire, and the combustion byproducts are hot hydrofluoric acid and chlorine gas. The MSDS for chlorine trifluoride reads like the plot of a horror movie.

But Silicon Valley uses it by the ton in the production of semiconductors. You can buy it in bulk from chemical supply houses.

Speaking of hydrofluoric acid, that’s also legit terrifying stuff. The things it does on contact with flesh would frighten Quentin Tarantino. But it, too, is sold in bulk. It’s used to make etched glass.

There are some exotic nitrogen compounds that are so vigorously explosive they go bang if you look at them funny. And that makes them, perhaps paradoxically, less scary; you can’t manufacture them in large enough quantities to kill you, though they do tend to damage sensitive lab equipment.

But dimethylmercury?

This shit is easy to make, totally stable, and so toxic that one drop spilled on a glove in a laboratory glove box will kill you. Slowly, in agony, over a period of months.

Nobody will work with it any more. You can’t buy it from any chemical supply house. Every chemist knows what happened to Karen Wetterhahn, the scientist who spilled some drops on her glove.

As far as I know, no lab on earth will use it any more. No research facility will have anything to do with it. It’s simply too toxic, even to folks for whom chlorine trifluoride might be an “okay, I suppose I have to be a bit careful.” Dimethylmercury is the thing that goes bump in the night, the chemical that chemists who joke about using FOOF to light the candles on a colleague’s birthday cake speak of only in hushed whispers with the doors and windows bolted. Dimethylmercury is manifestly incompatible with the hypothesis of a benevolent creator who loves his creation.

Edited to add: You can find out more about this and other unlovely compounds here: Things I Won’t Work With. Among other horrors, you’ll find things like this:

And let me just say, I am gobsmacked that’s a real molecule someone really made (a synthesis pathway which, I can’t help thinking, must involve a crowbar).

Warning: this chemical may cause acid indigestion, watery eyes, shortness of breath, seizures, cardiac arrest, convulsions, hallucinations, lung damage, liver failure, brain damage, weakness, blindness, loss of balance and coordination, short and long term memory loss, kidney failure, digestive and reproductive system damage, nausea, vomiting, pulmonary collapse, brittle bones, deafness, slurred speech, aphasia, alexia, loss of motor control, muscle weakness, and irritability. Use only as directed.

s it true that a little pellet of uranium hexafluoride generates as much energy as a tonne of coal?

Yes, it’s roughly true. It’s true to within about a factor of 2.

But uranium hexafluoride, called hex for short, is not what is used in nuclear reactors.

Certainly it is not used in the most common light water and heavy water commercial power reactors. It is a solid at standard pressure and temperature, but at 56°C it sublimes into a very unpleasant gas, and it also reacts very violently with water, forming clouds of corrosive and extremely deadly HF. So hex is only used, and it must be used very carefully even then, during uranium enrichment. These days enrichment is almost universally done in ultracentrifuges, cascades of which gradually increase the abundance of U-235 in the product uranium hexafluoride, from the natural uranium abundance of U-235 present initially, which is about 0.7%, to the approximately 3-5% U-235 content that is usable in light water reactors.

After enrichment, the uranium is stripped chemically of the six fluorine atoms, and is usually made into uranyl nitrate, which is mixed with a base, such as ammonia, to form ammonium uranate, which is a solid. This solid is heated in air, calcinated, to form U₃O₈, an oxide of uranium. This oxide is then further heated to high temperature in a hydrogen/argon atmosphere to form UO₂, another oxide of uranium with a higher oxidation state.

UO₂ is a black solid and a semiconductor at standard temperatures and pressures, and it has a very high melting point, well above 2000°C. It is a ceramic and it is quite unreactive, so it is suitable for use as fuel in a reactor.

The UO₂ is finely powdered, mixed with an organic binder, and then pressed into small cylindrical pellets. The pellets are then heated to very high temperature, again in a hydrogen/argon atmosphere, to sinter the oxide powder, thus forming a solid pellet with very few pores in it. Fuel pellet manufacture is a complicated process. It is highly desirable to have as few pores as possible in the pellets, or else they will shrink inside the reactor.

Fuel Pellet - an overview

Here’s a photo of such a pellet to give an idea of the scale.

These cylindrical fuel pellets are typically about 1 cm in diameter by 1 cm long, though that varies a bit. Larger pellets are used in BWRs than in PWRs I believe, and I’m sure that heavy water reactors like CANDU do this slightly differently too.

The fuel pellets typically mass about 10 grams - due to the high atomic weight of the uranium in comparison to the two oxygens, that mass is mostly coming from the uranium.

https://www.ne.anl.gov/pdfs/nuclear/nuclear_fuel_yacout.pdf

The pellets are formed into fuel rods, by stacking them in zircalloy tubes which act as cladding, and then bundles of the fuel rods are made into fuel assemblies, and the fuel assemblies are put into a reactor. The energy that is produced per pellet depends on how exactly the reactor is operated, so the original question is somewhat complicated to answer. But a typical achievable number, in modern reactors with the best fuel management, for what is called the burn up rate in the reactor is that 50,000 megawatt-days of power can be produced per ton of initial 3–5% enriched uranium in the fuel.

At that burnup fraction, just one such fuel pellet would produce energy that is equivalent to about 425 cubic meters of natural gas. At 37 megajoule per cubic meter of natural gas that is 15725 MJ, or 15.7 GJ.

One tonne of coal can be burned to release about 29 GJ.

So it’s a correct statement to within an order of magnitude, that one fuel pellet produces as much energy as a tonne of coal.

But that is deceptive. Better burnup can be achieved by better fuel management. It is ultimately the buildup of fission products in the fuel pellets that require they be removed from the reactor, and this happens long before all of the available energy has been extracted from the fuel.

In addition there is a large quantity of unused U-238 remaining, which, remember, is about 95–97% of the uranium in the fuel pellet initially.

That U-238 can be, and some of it is, bred by neutron absorption in the reactor, to heavier and also fissionable or fissile actinides, plutonium-239 and still heavier, which are partly but not completely fissioned while the pellet stays in the reactor. So chemical reprocessing of the fuel could be done to extract the fissile materials, mainly plutonium, and then one could make new fuel pellets of plutonium oxide or better, mixed oxide, and burn those up in turn, though not necessarily in exactly the same type of reactors operated in exactly the same way. There are some significant differences between plutonium and uranium as fuel, as it turns out.

Finally, fast breeder reactors could be built, so that pretty close to all of the initial uranium could be ultimately burned up, yielding a tenfold or more increase in the total energy released from such an initial fuel pellet.

This is why the term high level nuclear waste, often applied to spent fuel assemblies, is actually highly misleading. It is not waste in the sense that the millions of tons of coal ash that coal plants produce on a daily basis is waste. It still contains plenty of usable energy.

You have to eat three countries’ cuisine for the rest of your life. What are they?

Easy peasy!

Number 3 would be India. Simply because I love vegetarian food, starters and some added spice. Let’s be honest here, who does these things better than the Indians?

Number 2 is Italian. I do love healthy food, but I also love takeaways. And carbs. And presentation also matters. Sounds like something Italians specialise in, is it not?

But of course, my number one by a clear 100000 miles remains: AFGHAN FOOD!

From the tastiest rice mixed with lamb meat, carrots, raisins and almonds.. I present to you our special Qabeli Pilaw!

To the mouthwatering minced dumpling, Mantu. Doesn’t look great? The amazing taste does make up for it!

Did someone ask for stuffed bread? With pumpkin, spinach, potato or leek? Bolani calling!

For the vegetarian lovers who like to be on the healthier side, this dried aubergine soaked in tomato curry will not disappoint you! Banjan Borani, it is!

Now, one thing we always eat is naan bread. We even eat the naan bread.. with naan bread! Loads of them!

So why am I not a vegetarian if I’m not a meat lover? Because we do the best shish kabab and kofta which will be a crime to ignore. Facts!

I am bit of a sweet tooth and love cold desserts. So what am I missing.. Oh, Sheeryakh, my baby!

One thing Afghans absolutely CANNOT live without (and you’ll be disappointing the nation if you’re an exception) is our delicious green chai!

Like it a bit more milky or creamy? No problem! I present to you our Qaimaq chai, which is green tea blended with double cream and ginger:

But of course, can you even have these without sweets, cakes and savouries? Hell na!

Sheerpera (frozen milk with almond on top)

Firni (creamy pudding with nuts on top)

Cream roll (stuff cream roll, that’s all!)

Fresh homemade biscuits (Root and Gooshi Fil)

Dried fruits (classic)

You’re welcome everyone and yeah, of I were you I would also run to the nearest Afghan shop/restaurant after quarantine

What are the coolest photos of international borders?

I don't own anything. Be clear that I have mentioned the sources before you smash the report button. #1. Belgium – Netherlands

Photo: gunnsteinlye

Photo: harry_nl

#2. Austria – Slovakia – Hungary

Tripoint: Austria – Slovakia – Hungary

#3. Sweden – Norway

photo courtesy Wikimedia Commons

#4. Belgium – Netherlands – Germany

photo via the front page of the internet

#5. Poland – Ukraine border

Photo: hern42

Polish-Ukrainian border

#6. US – Canada

Photo: Mark Stevens

Photo: davidmartinpro

#7. Portugal – Spain

Portugal/Spain Border

#8. Norway – Russia

photo courtesy Wikimedia Commons

#9. Czechoslovakia – Germany – Poland

photo courtesy Wikimedia Commons

#10. India – Pakistan

photo courtesy Wikimedia Commons

Why did the United States lose the Vietnam War?

The United States did not lose any war. The United States did not win the "Vietnam War" instead of losing.

The "Vietnam War" is the two great powers of China and the Soviet Union. It is a war quagmire set up for the United States, which is to trap the United States deeply, so that the United States cannot extricate itself and consume American national power. Behind little Vietnam, there is the superpower "Soviet Union" and China that can compete with the "US-Soviet Union." The supplies of the Soviet Union and China have continuously supported Vietnam, and China has even sent hundreds of thousands of troops into Vietnam. The United States cannot do its best to win the "Vietnam War".

The "Vietnam War" is basically a huge quagmire. France spent more than ten years in Vietnam. The failure of the Battle of Dien Bien Fong made the French sober and France withdrew from Vietnam. In 1965, the United States took over this mess and jumped into the "Vietnam War Mire." The United States has been fighting in Vietnam for ten years, and 58,000 people have died in the war. Of course, millions of people have died in Vietnam, but there is no hope of winning. How to end the "Vietnam War" is what the United States has to consider.

At the top of the U.S. military and political administration, there are two factions. The main warfare believes that it will continue to increase troops, and the armistice believes that the war will end at an appropriate time. The anti-war sentiment of the people is high. Dr. Kissinger gave President Nixon an analogy with the Korean War: "After three years of the Korean War, President Truman suddenly found that the U.S. military was deeply trapped in North Korea and had no hope of winning. If the United States is fighting for its national strength, it is possible to fight Win the Korean War, but the "Soviet Union" has not used one soldier and one soldier. "

If China and the United States were defeated and defeated in North Korea, the Soviet Union, which did not lay down a single soldier, stood up and attacked the United States and the West with full force. The outcome can be imagined. Ending the Korean War is the best result of the United States. After the 1960s, although China and the Soviet Union also turned their backs, the three great powers of China, the United States, and the Soviet Union formed a triumph, and each major power had to deal with the other two. However, on the issue of "Vietnam War", the two great powers of China and the Soviet Union confronted the United States. Kissinger said: "How to end the Vietnam War and improve relations with China, and China and the United States to deal with the Soviet Union together, this is the US strategy. Where. "

Due to the anti-war sentiment of the American people, the US president is weak in front of the votes. President Nixon began to think about how to end the "Vietnam War", table tennis diplomacy was born, Nixon visited China, and the Vietnam War was over. In 1978, China and Vietnam turned over; in 1979, China “counter-attacked against Vietnam”, President Carter visited China, and China and the United States established diplomatic relations; China reformed and opened up, no need to guard against the United States; In 1991, the US military launched the Gulf War. In the same year, the Soviet Union disintegrated.

The United States did not win the "Vietnam War" and withdrew its troops from Vietnam. From a tactical level, the United States lost the "Vietnam War"; from a strategic level, the United States won the entire world. The democratic system in the United States has a super error correction ability, and the United States can end the undefeated war. The Soviet Union, which lacked the ability to correct errors, was stuck in Afghanistan and could not help itself. Under the pressure of the United States, it collapsed suddenly

What are some interesting facts about tigers?

• Unlike most members of the cat family, tigers like water. They are good swimmers and often cool off in pools or streams.
• When a tiger wants to be heard, you’ll know about it, gang – because their roar can be heard as far as three kilometres away.

• They may be big and heavy, but tigers are by no means slow movers. In fact, at full speed they can reach up to 65km/h!
• These fierce felines have walked the earth for a long time. Fossil remains of tigers found in parts of China are believed to be 2 million years old.
• . Tigers have eyes with round pupils, unlike domestic cats, which have slitted pupils. This is because domestic cats are nocturnal whereas tigers are crepuscular – they hunt primarily in the morning and evening.
• Despite not being strongly adapted to the dark, tigers’ night vision is about six times better than humans’.
• Most tigers have yellow eyes, but white tigers usually have blue eyes, due to the gene for blue eyes being linked to the gene for white fur. The gene for being cross-eyed, or boss-eyed, is also linked, so many white tigers have crossed blue eyes.

• Tigers scratch trees and use their urine to mark their territories. Their urine smells strongly of buttered popcorn.
• Tigers prefer to hunt by ambush, so by looking a tiger in the eyes you are showing him you know he is there. Now he has lost the element of surprise, and will most likely go find something else to feast on. Because of this, men in India often wear masks on the back of their head with a second face.
• They are powerful nocturnal hunters that travel many miles to find buffalo, deer, wild pigs, and other large mammals. A Bengal tiger can eat 21kg of meat in a night and can kill the equivalent of 30 buffaloes a year.
• The roar of a Bengal tiger can carry for over 2km at night.

• Although tigers are powerful and fast over short distances, the Bengal tiger cannot outrun fleet footed prey such as deer. Instead it uses stealth to catch its victims; attacking from the side or the rear.
• Tigers use their distinctive coats as camouflage (no two have exactly the same stripes).
• If the kill is large, the tiger may drag the remains to a thicket and loosely bury it with leaves, then return to it later.

Which laptop is most innovative?

Here are my top 10 most innovative/coolest mobile computers. Note: I define mobile computers as anything that is portable or can fit in a luggage bag - and runs on a desktop OS. No iPads or mobile phones here.

10. Dell Adamo XPS (2010)

Dell came up with the thinnest laptop on the market in 2010 and one of the thinnest all time - only 10mm thin. They accomplished this by having the keyboard recess into the lid, the lid acting as a kind of ‘storage’ for the keyboard. And also a heat strip where the laptop opens with the swipe of a finger. pretty cool.

9. Dell XPS M2010 (2006)

The father of the desktop replacement, this massive 20 incher weighed 20lbs! but folded into a briefcase so technically it was ‘portable’ and thus qualifies for this list. Still the fact that Dell thought up such a beastly machine over 13 years ago, is why it belongs on this list.

8. Asus ROG Mothership (2019)

One of the coolest laptops unveiled at this year’s CES, the Asus ROG mothership is basically a battery powered all-in-one PC with high end specs. Core i9, 144hz display, RTX 2080, its all there - and the keyboard is detachable so that gamers can use their own keyboard/mouse without the built in one taking up space like in most gaming laptops.

7. Porsche Design Book One (2017)

Yes its similar to the Microsoft SurfaceBook - but it has one key difference which is a 360 degree Yoga hinge. This means the Book One combines the Lenovo Yoga’s convertible form factor with the Surface Book’s detachable hinge. It’s the only computer with this design.

6. Acer Aspire R7 (2013)

A laptop that looks like the Starship Enterprise - this laptop has a screen that can be lifted upwards and moved closer much like an easel - this is geared towards artists and creators, but the screen can also flip backwards as well - and the touchpad above the keyboard. Very unique.

5. Acer Iconia 6120 (2010) / Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Fold (2020)

A dual touchscreen notebook where you can use pretty much anything on the bottom screen, including a custom keyboard. This predates the Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Fold by several years and is still an interesting design today. Speaking of the Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Fold, 10 years after the Iconia, Lenovo made a similar design except instead of having a hinge, they made a foldable OLED laptop instead!

I put this in the same spot as the Iconia because I felt like I had to give credit to Acer's Iconia 6120 and Toshiba's Libretto W700 for being so ahead of their time with their dual touch screens - but this is definitely the cooler laptop out of all of them since it has a foldable OLED display - the world's first on a laptop, which makes it extremely versatile for use as both a tablet and a mini-netbook type computer.

4. Sony Vaio UX (2006)

The ultimate UMPC, the Vaio UX is still a marvel of design and engineering. It ran Windows XP (can be upgraded all the way to Windows 10) and can fit in your pocket! It was the first computer to have an SSD and had a fingerprint scanner over a decade before it was commonplace on notebooks. Truly an amazing piece of tech.

3. Razer Edge Pro (2013)

Razer Edge Pro was a gaming tablet that ran a Core i7 with a GTX 640LE and paired it with a console grade gaming controller. This idea was very unique and allowed users to play Windows games on the go in a form factor much smaller than gaming laptops - and way before the Nintendo Switch as well. I also have to mention the 2020 Alienware UFO concept here as well which *might* be the successor to the Edge Pro but only if they actually decide to put it into production.

2. Asus ROG Zephryus Duo 15 (2020)

This iterates on the previous 2019 Asus Zenbook Pro Duo and makes it even cooler by making it for gamers and making the secondary display lift up so that it's easier to view. dual 4K displays, one touch one non-touch, this is definitely one of the coolest and most innovative laptops I've ever seen.

1. Onkyo DX (2010)

Technically this would belong to Razer’s Project Valerie if they ever made that laptop, but since they didn’t - this netbook gets it. It has a dual display - one display slides out from under the other - and its also a convertible display on top of that! I have no idea why this design idea was not adopted by other makers but out of all PC makers - Onkyo - an audio equipment maker was the one to come up with this. Surprising.

Note the lack of any Macbooks in my answer.

<iframe width="568" height="320" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/-bb8tGgC99g" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>