User talk:Cwkmail

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Hello, Cwkmail, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! -Razorflame (talk) 20:06, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Who held unequal weights free-fall with the same speed before Galileo ?[edit]

Please see the discussion of this title in Talk: Galileo Galilei. Can you possibly help by providing clarifying quotations from the list of references you gave in March of those who allegedly held speed of free-fall is the same for same materials. But the question now is whether any of them held like Galileo in 1638 that ALL unequal weights would fall with the same speed in a vacuum. --Logicus (talk) 16:00, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

PLate OPtimizer[edit]

Hello, I'd like to ask you and a couple of other editors who might be interested in amateur astronomy technology to look at this article and tell me if I've achieved general notability guidelines WP:N as it is presently written. If it interests you I'd appreciate if you'd take a moment to look at it and if not, thanks for taking the time to read this note.Trilobitealive (talk) 01:59, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Jordan L. Mott of the Bronx[edit]

Hi, see Talk:the Bronx#Jordan L. Mott for some partial references I dug up to support your recently-deleted footnote at The Bronx. Best wishes —— Shakescene (talk) 18:44, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome; see my further remarks on my talk page. —— Shakescene (talk) 03:21, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Phase-locked loop[edit]

Thanks for all the additional Bellescize material at Phase-locked loop! --Wtshymanski (talk) 16:48, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation[edit]

William Hampson, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you are more than welcome to continue submitting work to Articles for Creation.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:43, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Wire Wheels[edit]

Thank you for getting started on this article. I have been wishing for a long time I had the knowledge to do it myself. Regards, Eddaido (talk) 08:30, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Oxirane physical properties[edit]


In The Chemistry of Heterocyclic Compounds, Small Ring Heterocycles edited by Alfred Hassner page 7-8, heat of formation is given as 117.2 kJ/mol derived from heat of combustion 114.4 kJ/mol and importantly, the ring-strain is quoted as 54.4 kJ/mol. These are at odds with the values on the page by a HUGE amount. I presume 'angular stress' means ring-strain but maybe my terminology is out of date? Since its main use is in thermobaric weapons, I presume that it packs a lot of energy in a small (by spacial volume) 'package'. Note that heptanitrocubane is preferred over octanitrocubane because its concentration of energy (due to crystal structure) is higher.

I could be miles out but I noted you last edited the page and so came to you first.

Regards, DVW

Hi, DVWynn,

Actually I spend most of my time on Wikipedia making edits about the history of science and technology, although I do have a degree in chemistry.

The values that you cite do indeed differ significantly from those cited in the article. I'll re-post your comments to the oxirane Talk page and then I'll check the figures myself. It may be that there is some unstated assumption or other subtlety that accounts for the difference in the figures. Cwkmail (talk) 16:41, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

I did some very quick checking and confirmed that Hassner's book The Chemistry of Heterocyclic Compounds … does indeed list the heat of formation of ethylene oxide as 117.2 kJ/ mol. (See: Heterocyclic Compounds ... by A. Hassner ) However, a couple of other sources may explain the difference in the figures for the compound's heat of formation. The Wikipedia article lists the heat of formation for the compound in its GAS state, whereas the heat of formation is higher for the compound in its LIQUID state. Hassner may have listed the heat of formation for the compound in its LIQUID state.

For example, on page 12 of this pdf file -- American -- the heat of formation of the GASEOUS form is listed as
-1,194.8 kJ/kg = -52.6 kJ/mol ;
however, the heat of formation of the LIQUID form is listed as
-1,766.5 kJ/kg = -77.8 kJ/mol .
The National Institute of Standards and Technology lists the compound's heat of formation in the GASEOUS state as
-52.6 kJ/mol
However, in the "Comment" section, the heat of formation in the LIQUID state is listed as
-95.7 kJ/mol

So it seems likely that the difference in the heats of formation are the result of using different states (liquid vs. gas) as references for the measurements. However, in order to confirm this, it would be necessary to view Hassner's sources (which he does list). Cwkmail (talk) 17:48, 9 July 2013 (UTC)