Sciencemadness Discussion Board

What if?

Brain&Force - 27-6-2014 at 17:33

Post your what-if questions (that may never be answerable) here.

Mine:

What if all radioactive decay was caused by neutrinos and antineutrinos, and outside the presence of them, no nucleus could decay?

What if tantalum-180m wasn't the only "stable" metastable isomer, and there were more of them, just not abundant enough for us to detect? What if they were isomers of rare, unstable isotopes, like actinium and americium?

TheChemiKid - 28-6-2014 at 05:42

What if countries didn't focus all of their energy on making new technology for war, but for fixing HUGE PROBLEMS such as global warming, or energy production.
Solar Frickin Roadways (stay with it, the intro is a bit painful)

Scr0t - 28-6-2014 at 06:13

You wont be solving any frickin problems with "solar fricken roadways".
Youtube user thunderf00t has a few videos highlighting the fricken infeasibility of the idea.

TheChemiKid - 28-6-2014 at 12:52

I know, I've seen the videos. My point was that more ideas like this could end up making feasible ideas.

Baffled - 28-6-2014 at 13:02

http://www.thelocal.de/20140619/germany-produces-half-of-ele...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=twEpAZ4AqSQ

Texium - 28-6-2014 at 20:00

What if a ton of people were amateur chemists, and it was the most common hobby in the world?

prof_genius - 29-6-2014 at 01:16

Well, then we would have retail chemistry stores, and maybe Aldrich would give up trying to stop private persons from ordering.

Zephyr - 29-6-2014 at 14:19

What if our bodies were silicon based?

[Edited on 6-29-2014 by Pinkhippo11]

aga - 29-6-2014 at 14:56

What if our Sense of Time was disproportionally influencing our senses ?
It is but One of the Dimensions in which we exist, but all is pegged to it.

Rate of Change. Why is it pegged to Time ?
'Rate' is a term invented to peg calculations to Time only.

Re-evaluate taking XYZT, plus E and M all into account.
I feel that modern math can handle it.
T=time
XYZ=position as we understand it
E=electronic charge
M=magnetic 'effect'

[Edited on 29-6-2014 by aga]

The Volatile Chemist - 29-6-2014 at 19:35

Sorry, one of the few things I don't believe in is the ozone hole. I know you'll all laugh, but...
If someone offered me $100,000 to get on board with the ozone hole gig, I'd do it.

Zephyr - 29-6-2014 at 21:48

Quote: Originally posted by The Volatile Chemist  
Sorry, one of the few things I don't believe in is the ozone hole. I know you'll all laugh, but...
If someone offered me $100,000 to get on board with the ozone hole gig, I'd do it.


Really?! I would stop believing in global warming for $20,000, just think of all the glassware and reagents...

Gearhead_Shem_Tov - 30-6-2014 at 00:31

Quote: Originally posted by Pinkhippo11  
What if our bodies were silicon based?

[Edited on 6-29-2014 by Pinkhippo11]


Hmm. CO2 is gaseous at STP, but SiO2 most definitely is not. Such life forms would have to literally shit a brick just to exhale. Unless they live in a more exotic atmosphere of, I dunno, silanes? It'd be a pretty weird geochemical cycle involved, that's for sure.

-Bobby

CHRIS25 - 30-6-2014 at 03:18

Quote: Originally posted by TheChemiKid  
What if countries didn't focus all of their energy on making new technology for war, but for fixing HUGE PROBLEMS such as global warming, or energy production.
Solar Frickin Roadways (stay with it, the intro is a bit painful)

What if the truth about Global warming was told? such as the hidden agendas behind it, the fact that man can not produce enough carbon to affect a warming of the world, the fact that it is proven beyond question, that the carbon levels Follow the cooling and the warming of the planet, not the other way around and this by between 50 to 150 years. That the earth has been warming and cooling since the dawn of time, historically and geologically proven, this list is endless....

The Volatile Chemist - 30-6-2014 at 06:48

IKR guys! Global warming and the ozone hole could happen, but we couldn't bring about them. Actually..... Those theoretical problems could be the basis for a great sci-fi alien or human weapon... :P

Texium - 30-6-2014 at 06:56

Alright alright, we can't have this turning into another global warming debate thread! There's more than enough already. Arguing about it again here is just asking for it to be detritus'd. This thread's supposed to just be fun.

MrHomeScientist - 30-6-2014 at 07:15

Bringing up global warming or political "what-ifs" is the fastest way to get this thread trashed. Stick to science, and maybe move over to Whimsy.

arkoma - 30-6-2014 at 08:50

Quote: Originally posted by zts16  
Alright alright, we can't have this turning into another global warming debate thread! There's more than enough already. Arguing about it again here is just asking for it to be detritus'd. This thread's supposed to just be fun.

*emphasis ^^^ mine*

What if.........one of you bright young "kids" figured out a cheap home-rolled PV cell that doesn't need iodine?

The Volatile Chemist - 30-6-2014 at 10:55

SOWWY...
What if communism worked.... (Does that fit the bill?)
What if elements like Ubh (Unbihexum, 126) just got more stable, it's just that they never initially existed?

Texium - 30-6-2014 at 13:51

Quote: Originally posted by The Volatile Chemist  

What if communism worked.... (Does that fit the bill?)

That would be awesome. The world could have eternal peace and be happy.
Quote: Originally posted by The Volatile Chemist  

What if elements like Ubh (Unbihexum, 126) just got more stable, it's just that they never initially existed?

That would also be awesome, because element collectors would have a lot of unfinished business!
Also, they might have ridiculously strange properties that have never been seen before.

Pyrovus - 1-7-2014 at 03:05

One outside possibility on that front is strangelets; effectively atoms where the nucleus has up down and strange quarks instead of just up and down. If stable strangelets exist it may be possible to have elements of atomic number of a thousand or so; though even if they do, it's likely going to be pretty hard to make them in bulk, as they'd require very improbable collisions. So it's possible that there exist a whole bunch of stable elements out there, but it would take thousands of years just to make a single atom.

Zyklon-A - 1-7-2014 at 06:16

Quote: Originally posted by The Volatile Chemist  
SOWWY...
What if communism worked....

That would suck, I hate the idea of communism. Although its a nice thought (everyone is equal, everything is shared), but life would freaking suck.
I don't want to be equal, being equal is lame. I want to be on top, a "1%er".
And it would obviously never work, cause there will always be people like me to screw things up by not being content with sharing all belongings and will find ways to capitalize and make more money then the average person.:cool:

Metacelsus - 1-7-2014 at 06:30

Off to the gulag with you!

The Volatile Chemist - 1-7-2014 at 06:32

But this is a what if... post :(
Yea, I actually prefer fascism, but that's just another form of communism :P
You should know, zyklonb :)

Texium - 1-7-2014 at 07:12

Quote: Originally posted by The Volatile Chemist  

Yea, I actually prefer fascism, but that's just another form of communism :P
You should know, zyklonb :)

How is fascism in anyway related to communism, ideologically speaking?

Metacelsus - 1-7-2014 at 07:44

It's not (fascists hated communists), except that they are similar in practice.

Texium - 1-7-2014 at 07:48

Well, throughout history, yes, for example Stalin. He called himself a communist even though he was a fascist dictator whose rule didn't resemble communism at all. It shouldn't be something that taints communism as an ideology, just as there are plenty of examples of countries that call themselves democratic but are not in any way, such as the DPRK or the DRC.

Praxichys - 1-7-2014 at 08:42

What if religion was widely accepted to be an obsolete way of thinking?

SirViking - 1-7-2014 at 09:02

What if the light spectrum within which humans can see was greatly expanded?

Texium - 1-7-2014 at 09:39

Quote: Originally posted by SirViking  
What if the light spectrum within which humans can see was greatly expanded?

That's something I've always wondered about. It would be weird to see things in infrared and ultraviolet as well as everything we can already see. Or if you could see the entire spectrum, and just choose what part you want to see whenever you want! Literal x-ray vision!

The Volatile Chemist - 1-7-2014 at 09:50

Quote: Originally posted by Praxichys  
What if religion was widely accepted to be an obsolete way of thinking?

What if your mom was widely accepted to be an obsolete way of thinking? C'mon, this is misc., not whimsey. You're just asking for trouble when you say things like that.

Brain&Force - 1-7-2014 at 09:56

I really should have put this in Whimsy. Personally, I favor the Nordic model.

What if the strong force was a lot stronger than it is now? Would we have a MASSIVE periodic table? What about technetium and promethium - would they exist as stable isotopes? Would stars still be the way they are? Would the diproton be stable with respect to electron capture? Would life exist?

SirViking - 1-7-2014 at 10:03

Quote: Originally posted by zts16  
Quote: Originally posted by SirViking  
What if the light spectrum within which humans can see was greatly expanded?

That's something I've always wondered about. It would be weird to see things in infrared and ultraviolet as well as everything we can already see. Or if you could see the entire spectrum, and just choose what part you want to see whenever you want! Literal x-ray vision!


Some animals can see outside of the visible spectrum, infrared or ultraviolet, but I don't believe that there are any species that can see past those?

arkoma - 1-7-2014 at 14:45

amazon parrots see in the UV, in fact thats how a boy parrot can tell a female by sight alone. "Tetrachromatic"

neptunium - 4-8-2014 at 19:39

Quote: Originally posted by Brain&Force  

What if the strong force was a lot stronger than it is now? Would we have a MASSIVE periodic table? What about technetium and promethium - would they exist as stable isotopes? Would stars still be the way they are? Would the diproton be stable with respect to electron capture? Would life exist?


any changes to the fundamental forces of the universe would have a dramatic impact on it.

a stronger nuclear force would increase the energy released by the stars during thermonuclear fusion, creating extremly large and hotter brighter stars that wouldnt live much longer than a few million years .
making life (as we know it) impossible to evolve.
the periodic table would indeed be much smaller and may not even make it to iron.
radioactive decay is trigger in large part by weak nuclear force . for lighter element a proton decay would be common amongst heavier element (like sodium in this case)
however i cannot imagine a diproton system stable without a neutron the interactions of these hadron is the source of the strong force ... it seems to contredict its own meaning.

Zyklon-A - 5-8-2014 at 06:02

What if Dark matter is what the earth is made of?



[Edited on 5-8-2014 by Zyklon-A]

Brain&Force - 5-8-2014 at 08:44

Quote: Originally posted by neptunium  
any changes to the fundamental forces of the universe would have a dramatic impact on it.

a stronger nuclear force would increase the energy released by the stars during thermonuclear fusion, creating extremly large and hotter brighter stars that wouldnt live much longer than a few million years .
making life (as we know it) impossible to evolve.
the periodic table would indeed be much smaller and may not even make it to iron.
radioactive decay is trigger in large part by weak nuclear force . for lighter element a proton decay would be common amongst heavier element (like sodium in this case)
however i cannot imagine a diproton system stable without a neutron the interactions of these hadron is the source of the strong force ... it seems to contredict its own meaning.


The periodic table would be larger - not smaller. If anything, the dead zone for nuclear fusion would be farther away because each nucleon would pull on the other more strongly, thus keeping it bound.

arkoma - 5-8-2014 at 09:32

What if.............

There was no such thing as potable ethanol :o

Zyklon-A - 5-8-2014 at 10:02

Then they'd make potable pot!

Fenir - 5-8-2014 at 10:40

What if humans suddenly gained the ability to see more colours?

neptunium - 6-8-2014 at 08:51

Quote: Originally posted by Brain&Force  


The periodic table would be larger - not smaller. If anything, the dead zone for nuclear fusion would be farther away because each nucleon would pull on the other more strongly, thus keeping it bound.


all element are born in stars , if the strong force is greater then it would be harder for stars to generate heavy elements.
fission would release more energy but fusion would consume more...
Iron signify the end of a star life and the fusion stops ..
in an hypotical universe where strong nuclear force is greater this would happen sooner , hence a smaller periodic table.

if the rules are changed today.. then yes some trans uranium elements might have stable isotopes.

Texium - 6-8-2014 at 09:22

So basically the periodic table would have the potential to be larger, but the amount of naturally occurring elements would be much smaller and even more heavily skewed towards lighter elements, and life as we know it wouldn't exist since some heavy elements are essential to life.

neptunium - 7-8-2014 at 06:52

thats exactly right! in physics there is no free ride... you get back what you put in minus some loses.
also life would not have time to develope in this hypothetical universe with giant hot stars and few planets.
the life cycle of these stars would also be very fast too fast for life to have time to start and evolve.

Brain&Force - 7-8-2014 at 14:33

I still have to disagree.

A stronger nuclear force would increase the amount of energy needed to split apart nuclei (binding energy would increase). Thus, fusion would net much more energy than fission (if fission could net energy at all). The attraction between distant nucleons would be stronger, and larger nuclei would therefore be more stable. The peak stability would be a higher nuclear mass.

For reference, the Yukawa potential is defined as follows:

\[V_{Yukawa}=-g^{2}\tfrac{e^{-kmr}}{r}\]

where g is a scaling constant, k is another scaling constant, m is the mass of the mediating field, and r is the distance from the particle.

The electric potential is defined as follows:

\[V_{E}=k\tfrac{q}{r}\]

where k is Coulomb's constant, q is the electric charge, and r is the distance from the particle.

Of note, hydrogen would probably have been consumed too fast for organic chemistry as we know it to develop sufficiently. The main problem would be the lack of light isotopes. Stars, of course, would not last through their hydrogen-fusing stage very long, and stars would most likely fuse their heavier elements. Alpha decay would be a really weird process which would spit out relatively heavy nuclei.

Also, the r-process and s-process would produce larger amounts of heavy elements if nuclear fusion couldn't.

aga - 7-8-2014 at 14:48

it's obvious.

if the nuclear force were stronger, everything would *appear* to be the same.

Just that i'd be even more Dense than i am now.

arkoma - 7-8-2014 at 15:04

What if......

Aga and I simultaneously sobered up?

neptunium - 7-8-2014 at 21:21

Quote: Originally posted by aga  
it's obvious.

if the nuclear force were stronger, everything would *appear* to be the same.

Just that i'd be even more Dense than i am now.



why ? no you wouldn't

neptunium - 7-8-2014 at 21:37

A stronger nuclear force would increase the amount of energy needed to split apart nuclei (binding energy would increase). Thus, fusion would net much more energy than fission (if fission could net energy at all).


again there is no free ride in physics, if fission free more energy this energy has to come frome somewhere.
where ? the massive stars that gave it birth by spending massive amount of energy to fuse it together





The attraction between distant nucleons would be stronger, and larger nuclei would therefore be more stable..[/rquote]

the strong nuclear force ONLY kicks in when nucleons are increadibly close to one another.... the stronger the bond does not mean a longer action at a distance.

The peak stability would be a higher nuclear mass


why ? it would be reach much sooner than now! thats just common sense! right ?


neptunium - 7-8-2014 at 21:51

Quote: Originally posted by Brain&Force  


For reference, the Yukawa potential is defined as follows:

\[V_{Yukawa}=-g^{2}\tfrac{e^{-kmr}}{r}\]

where g is a scaling constant, k is another scaling constant, m is the mass of the mediating field, and r is the distance from the particle.


looking at g in our scenario, it is a multiplying factor that has no interactions with m or k the result is a stronger bond (V)
the field of action does not change neither does the mass


increasing G increases V but is fully indepandent from m and k

[Edited on 8-8-2014 by neptunium]

Velzee - 2-11-2017 at 19:52

What if elements >118 were stable and non-toxic to life?

j_sum1 - 2-11-2017 at 21:02

Quote: Originally posted by Velzee  
What if elements >118 were stable and non-toxic to life?

We'd have very effective fishing sinkers.

SWIM - 2-11-2017 at 21:04

Then the body of Glenn Seaborg, even though it's cold and stiff, would crack a smile.

Man, that guy was really a big booster for islands of stability back in the 1970s.

TheMrbunGee - 3-11-2017 at 12:34

What if time moves only because we move trough space (and along with space). the faster we move - the slower time goes, and if we would stop - time would run infinitely fast.

WangleSpong5000 - 1-12-2017 at 17:13

What if I had a giant fleet of space helicopters and I could send all the people I don't like to my gulag on the moon within the month instead of the estimated year and a half?