What does it mean for somthing to become ionized?

and that energy is what in every case?

forceman, you are complacent not scientific

in both fission and fusion.... you simply reflect what others believe but fail to combine the knowledge of many to comprehend that half of what is observed contradicts what is defined.

ie.... split an atom and energy is released...not an electrical 'potential difference' .............. so what is energy?

nicest thing you could have said to me.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

and hot coffee is different than cold

to smell 'heat'

touch hot

see colors

or even hear a wisper

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

do you have forceman on ignor?

 

thst is your defense debating batteries when reality already shares the system is a unit and the sides of potential are a part of the single system

it was forcemans commnet on Einstein that i pointed out the simple reality of what energy is at its core

and to better understand ionizations perhaps try london force

in each case the polarity (ionizations) is created by another portion of the system in which the 2 parts makes the whole

kind of basic :shrug:

 

now you are fishing.

I used the idea of batteries to share ionization. It is what the thread is about.

In ancient time they use batteries for plating. You are sharing nothing new about how elements of mass become ionized.

now we on target again..... so where does the 'extra' electrons come from if not still associated to the system (battery- oxidation/reduction). {sorry to see you did not put that together over this last week?}

you are fishing to put me in my place and i have been sharing comprehension that offers reality to phenomena

you just shared what a battery was and described VDW's in the same frame and didn't even know it.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

(Late reply, I know) My reference to Einstein was out of replying to what you posted about his theory.

P.s. I think you're confused about the concept, Bishadi. In other words, you have no idea what you're talking about!

 

such that the Big E also had no idea what an electron was.

People fail to remember, Einstein was not a bohr atom kind of guy

perhaps that is what you meant?




as for the trippy appeal; not comprehending that to ionize one side means another side is proportionally affected, just like the system of a battery, is becoming redundant


as for electrochemistry; i have only one question, what is the symbol for the resonant occillations of molecules as defined in the chemical descriptions of mass?

share that in 'electrochemistry' oh trippy one........

 

apparently you don't do experiment nor comprehend how 'any' ionization takes energy and system to create the potential difference

so from ionizations to 'how the senses works?'

r u bipolar?


does hot coffee taste different than cold coffee?

or to be a wee bit clearer; is every atom to atom combination creating a molecule, combined and held together by energy?

what is that energy?

 

where did it come from?

that means for one side to be ionized then a system is created in which another atom will be associated to the ionized specimen for it to become ionized.

you are showing us right here that a system whether of electrical potential thru to an impact or even if i add, the photoelectric affect; something causes the potential change and if you drill it down to the atom to atom interraction (atomic scale) the cause will be the same in every case

nope not really... i shared how the battery offers the observance of how EC is a 'system' between mass to create a potential difference. You just spout off Wrong. I have already explained how Ionization takes place - An electron is removed from, or added to an atom

nope you were asked a question and you said "Sure, just as soon as you explain how the flavour of pink affects the smell of yellow."

you were fishing and unable to keep focused and by that a medical description came to mind on symptons often observed in the same diagnosis

asking for the symbol of what a man with all your depth uses to define the resonance upon a molecule or structure as to try and understand what you concider a chemical description is 'nonsensical'?

We all know a hot molecule has greater resonance than a cold one, you would think that with all your educational background and experimental prowness you could just state how you address such an important property of energy upon mass that can apply to one atom at a time

so then a hot cup does taste different than a cold cup of coffee?

such that, it is all the same mass, just with 'kinetic energy' as you stated

and since we know that the 'kinetic energy' of the molecules in the cup are not moving in an unobstructed direction could it be suggested that within the cup the liquid has a bunch of molecule occilating and then sharing that kinetic energy into a coherent resonate state? (Brownian motion)

is the NaCl you are using the same NaCl of salt? Or perhaps you have another chemical example you wish to present? Perhaps van der waals/london force....?

i do not believe salt 'crystals' are what you are talking about nor understood the question

Perhaps i should ask the question in a clearer fashion; is every atom to atom that does combine, (creating a molecule), is it held together by energy?

we all, already know, that no atoms even associate to interact without energy

Electrostatic potential could be another thread if you like. Because even in your rendition it seems that you offered the idea that atoms can associate without energy but with EP ..... and it seems you forgot that it takes juice for the potential difference to create the EP in the first place. Think of rubbing a balloon upon your head.

 

so when when a battery negative terminal is all juiced upon with electrons we can simply cap the positive or the side that gives up the electron because you say it is irrelevant?

Let me see if we are on the same page before you start proving, are you suggesting an electron can be taken from other mass and that there is no relation to continue existing between the mass accepting the electron and the mass releasing the electron?

Wouldn't that just go completely against conservation?

Why is that?

It is like saying you cannot combine water and dirt.

Do you realize you came to the experiment with an ionized sulfate, to the system which is like putting a battery in a radio and stating the radio works without electricity?

how is the fishing? Have you caught anything yet?

Seems like you fishing in the wrong pond.

awe so the rolls are truly opposite of what you shared; it is you who just stands up and says 'your wrong' ............. have i spoken (written) like that without any explanation of a method of observing the phenomenon?

perhaps, you are just baiting for another argument?

are you in heat? Seems you like u's so much i am beginning to think you are in season searching for more u's. Try using an I once in a while.

but they use the evil word you fail to comprehend

researchers discovered that all of the carbon-carbon bonds in benzene are of the same length of 140 picometres (pm). The C–C bond lengths are greater than a double bond (135pm) but shorter than a single bond (147pm). This intermediate distance is explained by electron delocalization: the electrons for C–C bonding are distributed equally between each of the six carbon atoms. One representation is that the structure exists as a superposition of so-called resonance structures, rather than either form individually

if you wish to play with benzene we can open a thread on that too

That is your 'because'?

you are sharing equilibrium and for some reason lost your focus on the mass and energy within the cup

Not a nuclear engineer unless designing a simple atomic device at 15, with all the math, yeild and schematics while within my own bedroom as a nuclear engineer, then could you send me some toilet paper to put on my wall and frame? That was almost 30 years ago...... but then again, i guess i could still use that old math and perhaps steal your job. I am sure i have an old peechee some where with that old junk.

OK so basic table salt has no bonds? as you stated There is no 'molecule' of NaCl, just a conglomeration of Na+ and Cl- ions held together by mutual electrostatic attraction

when you are ready, as i am still staring at salt to see how the mass is held together without bonds

Does that mean as a gas or crystal, there is no bonds between the atoms and molecules too?

cool dude

i was thinking maybe i was the only one nuts around here

 

sorry charlie as you idea means there is no system between taking an electron from one atom and placing it upon another.

you make it seem as if an electron is an universal particle of mass interchangable with any other mass.

that would mean i should be able to take the electrons of any negative battery terminal and use them with any other positive terminal of any other battery not even in series or parallel to the circuit

can you not see what your interpretation means?

i spelled it out quite clearly with hopes you could think it thru but i was wrong

this is incorrect and you really do not see it

as to share the scenario to show the error for some reason you can't put the 2 together.

just like when i suggest ionized mass is like a battery itself, you fail to comprehend the potential upon mass based on the ionization

for example we eat food, the mass is not what we need, it is the energy upon the mass that is used and the mass is simply used to carry the energy


ionization are energy upon mass associated to other mass. Meaning 2 bodies are entangled by the energy between them, even if separated.

For example; people talk and can be bound by the energy captured creating a bias.....

but crossing that line of combining knowledge with reality is the toughest part of science