EPTAsk and answer stupid questions here! - Page 673
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Artisreal
Germany9235 Posts
| ||
|
FiWiFaKi
Canada9859 Posts
The Chem lab I worked in had like $30k scales that do about what I need. However a lot of that goes to certification and stuff which I don't need explicitly, just confirmation. | ||
|
Artisreal
Germany9235 Posts
 oh and I'd love to hear your experience if you do so. | ||
|
Yurie
12175 Posts
| ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
On October 14 2017 00:07 FiWiFaKi wrote: What's the best 200-500g scale under $5000? I want accuracy to 1mg, and like a real 1mg. Too many scales will have readability at 0.001g, and in reality a be +/- 3-5mg for repeatability. So probably 100 microgram readability. There's all too many scales out there with not enough reviews, so verifying their claims is difficult. Are analytical grade glassware and scales not illegal for joe shmoe to buy in Canada? You can't even buy the glassware to do proper formulations in the US without being licensed and regulated etc. Super expensive scales are expensive for a reason. You're not likely to achieve 1 mg repeatability with something that isn't highly regulated. What are you using this for, anyway? I can't think of any applications where you'd need mg precision other than actual analytical/synthetic chemistry. | ||
|
Aveng3r
United States2411 Posts
asking for a friend who needs new windshield wipers | ||
|
Artisreal
Germany9235 Posts
| ||
|
FiWiFaKi
Canada9859 Posts
On October 14 2017 05:24 Mohdoo wrote: Are analytical grade glassware and scales not illegal for joe shmoe to buy in Canada? You can't even buy the glassware to do proper formulations in the US without being licensed and regulated etc. Super expensive scales are expensive for a reason. You're not likely to achieve 1 mg repeatability with something that isn't highly regulated. What are you using this for, anyway? I can't think of any applications where you'd need mg precision other than actual analytical/synthetic chemistry. Is this all in the name of the war on drugs? It's not like making TNT is difficult, you don't need precision equipment, two O-Chem courses and reading online makes it an easy task imo (though the precursors are regulated). I am playing around with making ecigarette flavoring from natural and artificial extracts, and my LD501 scale that has 0.01g readability and 0.02-0.03 accuracy is not sufficient. I need to make small batches to experiment, and when dissolved in alcohols certain extracts can be plenty strong at even 10ppm concentrations. Seems silly to regulate 10x the accuracy of what I have now. | ||
|
Artisreal
Germany9235 Posts
| ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
On October 14 2017 06:20 Artisreal wrote: Well, try homeopathy. Dilute by 10. Or is that not feasible (cause you mentioned small batches). Error would propagate and mixing efficacy becomes a bigger deal if he was to just be accurate to 10 mg and then serial dilute. Also fikifaki: drugs and explosives are the reason to regulate it as I understand. There's also the fact that synthetic chemistry is really just something people without background shouldn't be doing. Adding barriers to random dumbfucks playing with chemistry is always a good thing. | ||
|
urmomdresslikafloozy
191 Posts
| ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
urmomdresslikafloozy
191 Posts
On October 14 2017 08:44 JimmiC wrote: In general i think that hardship breeds greatness. So in that way they ate doing well. But to know forsure we would have to take all the greats and see if more had deadbeat dads or boring reg one s It would be an interesting dichotomy too study. I would be inclined to wager a large sum of money that if someone like Lebron James had a father involved in life he would have had a greater chance to become a regional manager at Staples than taking over the world in and outside of the basketball court. | ||
|
Simberto
Germany12033 Posts
On October 14 2017 08:56 urmomdresslikafloozy wrote: It would be an interesting dichotomy too study. I would be inclined to wager a large sum of money that if someone like Lebron James had a father involved in life he would have had a greater chance to become a regional manager at Staples than taking over the world in and outside of the basketball court. But you have a hell of a selection bias there. Because you don't talk about al the Lebron James that don't play basketball. It is definitively something that you can study, but i think it is reasonable to assume that on average, involved parents improve their childrens outcome. (Too lazy to look something up right now.) So for your thesis to work, that would mean that an uninvolved father not only decreases the average outcome, but also increases the variance. That would mean that you may have at the very top end, you might have an increased amount of people with shitty dads, but you also have a lot more people on the very low end. This would be something to prove in an actual empirical study, however, not something to be based on biased as hell anecdotal evidence. | ||
Liquid`Drone
Norway28911 Posts
It's a bit like looking at money. Coming from a wealthy family sure as hell increases the likelihood that you yourself will be wealthy. Coming from 'old money' virtually ensures that you will die a millionaire. But if you look at the very richest people in the world, I think a fair amount of them are actually self-made, to a large degree. Like not deadbeat dad self-made, but not parents had 30 million dollar rich either. I think this relates to how reaching the very top requires both risk and sacrifice that people with a lot of options and comfort are likely to be unwilling to undertake. Like, people aren't gonna invest the family dynasty company and property on trying to chase some pipe dream with 3% chance of moving you from multi-millionaire to billionaire status, but they might take a 0.1% chance at moving from semi-broke to billionaire. So for people from stable upper middle class households, you get way more doctors and lawyers, jobs that requires competence, but which are also attainable for smart people who apply themselves. You might get more successful athletes and musicians also tbh, but 'successful' in this regard is like, playing football for a mid-tier premier league club, or playing in a band that released one record, not 'best in the world' type of success. That requires a type of sacrifice and drive that people who live comfortable lives are less willing to endure. It's a plausible theory, anyway. Not saying it's really the case, but if some empirical study proved that for people at the top 0.0000001% had a tendency to come from harsher upbringings (and also that this was most definitely the case for the bottom 25%) then hey, I'd buy it. | ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
| ||
|
urmomdresslikafloozy
191 Posts
| ||
|
Liquid`Drone
Norway28911 Posts
| ||
|
ZigguratOfUr
Iraq16955 Posts
How much legal trouble would they get in once caught out? Let's assume that they update the fine text of the Terms of Service to include this. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States24391 Posts
On October 17 2017 09:30 ZigguratOfUr wrote: If Microsoft rolled out a Windows 10 update that used idle processors on a user's computer for distributed computing (e.g bitcoin mining, protein folding calculations, breaking RSA-1024) how much money could they make? How much legal trouble would they get in once caught out? Let's assume that they update the fine text of the Terms of Service to include this. None, maybe they pay a fine/settlement for a fraction of what they make. At least in the US, other countries might try to do something. The bigger concern would reputation, but they could mitigate that with making it opt-in afterwards and sharing a small fraction of the wealth generated with the system users through some fancy points system. | ||
| ||
