This is a classic example of a single replacement chemical reaction, wherein copper ions precipitate out from solution onto the iron rod as iron atoms leave the rod and enter solution.
The blue color of the liquid is due to the copper ions in solution. You’ll notice that as the reaction proceeds and the copper precipitates out, the solution loses it’s blue color. The iron atoms in the rod give up their electrons to the copper ions in solution, so that the iron becomes oxidized while the copper becomes reduced.
Crystallization (natural or artificial)
is the process of formation of solid crystals precipitating from a solution, melt or more rarely deposited directly from a gas. Crystallization is also a chemical solid–liquid separation technique, in which mass transfer of a solute from the liquid solution to a pure solid crystalline phase occurs. Crystallization is therefore an aspect of precipitation, obtained through a variation of the solubility conditions of the solute in the solvent, as compared to precipitation due to chemical reaction.
Hi. I’m a 10 year Army combat veteran. I spent quite a bit of my life in foreign countries fighting for my country. I’ve lost a few friends over the past decade. Some came back and weren’t the same. Many lost limbs. I, myself, suffer from PTSD. Explosions like fireworks, gunshots… these things can cause an episode of intense fear and flashbacks. It’s so crippling that it makes me unable to function. Two days ago a neighbor’s 4th of July celebration triggered an episode and left me on the floor. When I got back from deployment, my family didn’t understand. I tried to seek someone in my family who would, but they all told me to just “man up.” I live alone now, with just my dog, who’s trained to help those with PTSD. I’m too afraid to try dating, because I know that most women could never deal with my disorder. The ridicule for it has gotten so bad, that the PTSD is often triggered by people using the words “trigger warning” to refer to things that make them uncomfortable, instead of things that actually cause a severe, crippling episode of horror and helplessness. Because of people using it like that, a lot of people I meet think that “triggers” aren’t actually harmful, that they’re just something that induces mild discomfort, and it adds to the abuse I get for not “being a man” and “dealing with it.”
So, as a veteran who has to deal with this reality day in and day out, please reconsider using the term “trigger warning.” I might understand “questionable/offensive content warning” or something like that, but triggers are far more severe. They call them “triggers” because they’re like a gun, and the fallout is just as severe.
Please reconsider it.
I’m very sorry about what has happened to you, but I’m going to respectfully disagree.
The very definition of the word “trigger” includes “anything that serves as a stimulus and initiates or precipitates a reaction or series of reactions”. In this context, I and many others use it to refer to words, phrases, and actions that have the potential to “trigger” physical, mental, or emotional distress or harm.
People suffering from PTSD are not the only people who can be triggered, and I’m uncomfortable with your assumption that others who use the term “trigger” do not suffer as much as you do. That is a harmful and unfortunately widespread misconception.
I ask you to please consider placing the blame for your mistreatment on the people who have mistreated you, and not on the (often young) people who are only trying to avoid suffering.
PAIRING: Steve Rogers x Reader, featuring Bucky & Natasha
WARNINGS: Language, desolation (sorry!)
WORD COUNT: 1,052
“I love you.” He says, peppering kisses to your forehead, your nose, your cheeks and a final one on your lips, slow and sweet.
“I love you more, Captain Rogers.” He smiles against your hair, savoring the last few moments together before his month long mission. “Come back to me in one piece, please.”
“I’ll be back to you before you know it, Doll.” He vows. “And I promise I won’t put off wedding cake tasting anymore.”
You laugh, holding on to him for just another minute. “Good.”
You finally let go, arms falling to your sides heavily. It didn’t matter how many times he left or how low he’d be gone; you still had the same hollow feeling in your chest until he was home.
“Go save the world. I’ll be right here when you get back,”
After one more lingering kiss, he was gone.
He was gone. Two years; seven hundred and thirty days; seventeen thousand, five hundred and thirty hours; one million fifty-one thousand, two hundred minutes without the love of your life. Two years of waking up to cold sheets, cooking dinner for one and going for runs alone. Two entire years with the same hollow feeling in your chest that never goes away. He died in battle, that’s what they had said. His body wasn’t recovered and you had to bury an empty casket.
Neodymium sulfate octahydrate, Nd2(SO4)3·8 H2O. This one’s been a wild ride from start to finish. I originally started this actually back in January or February, and used a procedure based on a 1993 Department of the Interior paper (Recycling of Neodymium Iron Boron Magnet Scrap by Lyman and Palmer). Long chemistry procedure ahead.
This is post number three in today’s series “sodium hydroxide + things”.
The molarity of the NaOH here could be anything between 0.1 M - 2M, and the reaction would still work well. It would not be necessary to use a stronger concentration. The same stands for the silver nitrate solution, where 0-1M- 1M would probably suffice.
Product of the bromination: perfectly pure crystalline solid with an adorable color, but sadly it not what was planned.
Sadly instead of the brominated product a perbromide (HBr3) salt precipitated from the reaction mixture. Good thing: this compound is not yet described in the scientific literature and it can be used as a bromine source for brominations since perbromides are quite reactive compounds. A related article for bromination with perbromides: http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/ja01181a508
“The vibrant and euphoric yes movement, which, during the debate, evolved from a small base to come within a whisker of a sensational victory, will be massively disappointed that they didn’t manage to get it done.
They will have to cool their ardour a while longer, although anybody believing they’ll stop now is indulging in wishful thinking. Why would they? The process and the subsequent debate, which they won handsomely, took support for independence from around 30% to 45% and heading north. It’s now established as the compelling narrative of the post-devolution generation, while no dominates only in a declining constituency of elderly voters. Yes may have lost this battle, but the war is being won.
Going negative was the only option.
The referendum was a disaster for Cameron personally, who almost lost the union. The Tories, with enough self-awareness to realise how detested they are in Scotland, stood aside to let Labour run the show on the basis they could deliver a convincing no vote. But for Labour, the outcome was at least as bad; when the dust settles they will be seen, probably on both sides of the border, to have used their power and influence against the aspiration towards democracy. Labour voters caught this ugly whiff, the number of them supporting independence doubling in a month from 17% to 35%. In the mid-term, the leadership may have simply acted as recruiting sergeants for the SNP.
As Cameron was at first absent and uninterested, then finally fearful, so Miliband looked just as ineffective and totally lost during this campaign. He became a figure of contempt in Scotland: Labour leaders have generally needed a period in office in order to achieve that distinction.
The referendum galvanised and excited Scots in a way that no UK-wide election has done. Like it or not, unless they come up with a winning devo max settlement, every general election in Scotland will now be dominated by the independence issue.
The yes movement hit such heights because the UK state was seen as failed; antiquated, hierarchical, centralist, discriminatory, out of touch and acting against the people. This election will have done nothing to diminish that impression. Against this shabbiness the Scots struck a blow for democracy, with an unprecedented 97% voter registration for an election the establishment wearily declared nobody wanted. It turns out that it was the only one people wanted. Whether this Scottish assertiveness kickstarts an unlikely UK-wide reform (unwanted in most of the English regions); or wearies southerners and precipitates a reaction to get rid of them; or the Scots, through the ballot box at general elections, decide to go the whole hog of their own accord; the old imperialist-based union is bust.
This country, when it was ever known on the global stage under the union, was associated with tragedy, in terrible events like Lockerbie and Dunblane; it’s now synonymous with real people power. Forget Bannockburn or the Scottish Enlightenment, the Scots have just reinvented and re-established the idea of true democracy.This – one more – glorious failure might also, paradoxically, be their finest hour.”
So how do we get another referendum? We don’t give up. We don’t let them forget about us. We keep the pressure on. We stay united on this cause. We won’t forget that the Labour party betrayed us on this issue and sided with the Tories. Same goes for the Lib Dems, who in my eyes, are royally fucked in England now.