DHMO Controversy

Journal Prompt #4:
12/2/2011
Write a full paragraph response in your blog in which either (1) you support the viewpoint that the USA should ban dihydrogen monoxide or (2) you support the viewpoint that the USA should NOT ban dihydrogen monoxide.

Persuade the reader of your response to accept your position. Defend your opinion with specific reasons and examples from the information below AND your own background knowledge.

Be sure to write formally with complete sentences, correct grammar and appropriate punctuation.

My opinion:

I think the USA and other places around the world should ban the use of dihydrogen monoxide because it is destructive to the world around us and human beings as a whole. It has already been found in almost all rivers, lakes, and reservoirs around the US and this has a massive effect of the wildlife that live in those waters. Lakes and rivers always lead to the ocean, so it doesn’t only affect the wildlife in and around lakes and rivers but also affects everything in the ocean. This includes seagulls, seals, fish, sharks, octopus, turtles, ect. This also means that you can find it all over the world including the ice in Antarctica. This shows that it is a worldwide endemic and it's destroying the wildlife and our water sources thus hurting the world around us. It also affects humans in more than one way. DHMO is the main component in acid rain and is destroying marble buildings in the Middle East and California, and it is eroding our natural landscapes which shows that it is not only effecting our structures but is ruining the natural ones around us that, without us, would still be standing strong. Acid rain can also cause severe burns and DHMO is also found in excised tumors of terminal cancer patients. It kills thousands of people every year and most of these deaths are caused by accidental inhalation of dihydrogen monoxide. This shows that we don't know what we are doing and don't know how to properly contain it so that it is safe. Also, for people who have become dependent on it, withdrawal would mean certain death. In conclusion, the USA should ban the use of dihydrogen monoxide because it not only does it sicken and kill human beings but it also destroys natural structure, kills wildlife, and pollutes all of our water and we are clearly incapable of containing it and caring for it so that it is used safely.

Chemistry

Atoms story: Lise Meitner
You must not blame us scientists for the use which war technicians have put our discoveries (Lise Meitner.) The three most valuable sources of this essay are the Nuclear Files Project of The Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, Atomic Archive, and The Naked Scientists by Nicola Davis. This essay will be broken into two parts. The first part will discuss who Lise Meitner is and what made her famous. The second part will discuss what it means to be a successful scientist, how that has changed throughout history, and how our understanding of matter, science, and humanity has changed. This essay will attempt to add insight to who the key players were in the
development of the current atomic model.

Who is Lise Meitner and what made her famous?
Lise Meitner was born in Vienna, Austria on November 7, 1878 and she died in Cambridge, England on October 27th, 1968. She was the third of eight children and was born a Jew (Atomic Archive.) This means that she was a Jewish woman during the time of the Holocaust. Because of Hitler’s power in Euprope she sought refuge in other countries in fear that her research would reach a stand still. In 1938 she moved to Stockholm, Sweden to work at Manne Siegbahn’s Institute where she established contact with her nephew, Otto Frinsch, who was living in exile (Nuclear Files.) She worked with Otto Hanh for 30 years and together they produced the first nuclear fission. This was critical to the creation of the Atomic Bomb but she refused to take part in the creation of it. Even though she had nothing to do with the making of the bomb, she was still considered the “mother of the atomic bomb” (Nuclear Files.) She was refused association to the discovery that gave Otto the Noble Prize in 1945 because she was Jewish. Later, she received some credit when she was awarded the United States Enrico Fermi Prize for her contributions to physics in 1966 (Nuclear Files.)

What does it mean to be a successful scientist? How has that definition changed throughout history? How has our understanding of science, matter, and humanity changed?
Chemistry is a science about the invisible and it all started with fire. This is because when you heat up wood, at first all you have is hot wood, but then it spontaneously bursts into flame. This helped us realize that there are hidden substances that surround us and cause certain things to happen like fire and this is where our understanding of matter and science begins. This small understanding helped us control other reactions such as cooking food. From there, early humans began cooking other substances such as rocks. At first, all they could conclude was that when you heated up rocks, you got hot rocks until one of those rocks melted into copper. This influenced the scientists to melt red rocks into iron, and bake mud into bricks, etc (Cartoon Guide to Chemistry, pg. 4.) This created civilization. From here you can see how our understanding of science and humanity has changed. From beginning of time scientists have found the basics of chemistry and with that knowledge have created the basic structure for humanity to grow and with that, humans begin to understand matter. Heraclitus first suggested that everything was made of fire but Aristotle then suggested that everything consisted of four main elements, air, earth, fire, and water. This caused some scientists aggravation because if this was true then you could turn anything into gold by just reordering the elements in the substance. Jabir created many different lab resources to prove this idea. In turn, he created something else entirely, Phosphorus (pg. 5.) This means that a successful scientist is one that doesn’t give up and with their experiments, they find many new things. Some of today’s most successful discoveries were lead by silly ideas which also shows that most scientists aren’t always rational. As you can see, we have gone from a small understanding of fire to a periodic table complete with 118 elements. We also started as lone humans roaming the earth and with our newfound discoveries; we have grown closer together thus creating humanity. To be a successful scientist you can’t give up and you have to give something to the society. There are many scientists but only a few are considered successful because they contributed something to support the growth of society.

In conclusion, Lise Meitner was a successful scientist because she contributed to the collective understanding of science and the invention of the nuclear bomb. With this said, she also played a huge role in the creation of today’s atomic model because without her discoveries we wouldn’t have as much of an understanding of how atoms work.

Journal Prompt #3 Reflection:

How can atoms influence the properties we can easily observe? What role do
electrons play in different types of chemical bonds?


Atoms influence the properties we can observe by living those properties.
Based on the type of atom, you can see/ observe different things. An example of
this is when metals are placed in water; you can clearly see that metals are
insoluble therefore the atom influenced the property we could see (insolubility) by showing us that it didn't dissovle! In conclusion, atoms influence the properties we can see by living and
preforming those properties. Electrons determine the type of bonding an atom has
and how malleable or ductile an atom is. In metalic bonds, the electrons are
contained in an electron "sea" where they are free to move around. This makes
the atom ductile and malleable because the atoms can move/ roll around with the
electrons and the only atoms that fit this type of bonding are metals.

Journal Prompt #3- Ionic Compounds

How can atoms influence the properties we can easily observe? What role do electrons play in different types of chemical bonds?

Atoms influence the properties we can abserve by living those properties. Based on the type of atom, you can see/ observe different things. An example of this is when metals are placed in water; you can clearly see that metals are insoluble. Therefore, atoms influence the properties we can see by living and preforming those properties. Electrons determine the type of bonding an atom has and how malleable or ductile an atom is. In metalic bonds, the electrons are contained in an electron "sea" where they are free to move around. This makes the atom ductile and malleable because the atoms can move/ roll around with the electrons and the only atoms that fit this type of bonding are metals.

Unknown Density Lab Reflection

Blog entry title: Unknown Density Lab Reflection


Please answer EACH of the following questions using ONE paragraph per question.


This means you will have a total of TWO paragraphs- each paragraph must have a topic sentence, supporting details, and a conclusion sentence.


Your FORMATIVE grade for your lab report is dependent upon the quality of this reflection!
1.What are at least 5 specific reasons that the exemplar lab reports are strong? Cite the examples in this paragraph. You must use at least one example from each of the following sections: procedure, data tables, calculations, and conclusion.
■Example: In the data table, all of the measurements were estimated to the correct digit.
2. In YOUR lab report, what did you do well? What would you do in the future to improve your unknown density lab? Cite specific examples from your lab report.
■Example: One area that I can show growth is in the quality of my calculations. In the calculations section, I forgot to use the sig. fig rules in all of my calculations. I need to use sig. figs in the future so my data stays true to the precision of the device I used to measure my data.

In the conclusion, we did an exrta experiment to test what material it was. That experiment was seeing if the object "stuck" to Clifford's computer which would make it magnetic and that narrowed down the amount of materials it could be. In the procedure, it was very precise and straight forward to the point that a first grader could accomplish the lab fairly well. An example of this is, "Weigh the mass of the unknown solid using the electronic balance (make sure it is zeroed out before you measure.) (And write the mass in the data table.)" This is precise and straightforward because most people don't need specific instructions on where to measure the mass of something or a reminder to write the mass in the data table. In the table, all the data has the units to go along with it to make sure you don't get confused. In the calculations, I found the percent error for all the materials close to the one we decided on to show that it was the most plausable and correct one. Lastly, in the conclusion, I went into detail about the possible errors and how they would effect your data thus messing up the lab as a whole.

In my lab, I did well on being specific and explaining everything I did. This is good because if a lab isn't specific and doesn't explain how it got its data then you can't trust the data it collected. One place I can show growth in is makiin sure I read the whole explaination of the lab we are doing so I can be certain of what I am doing. This would be really helpful because this time around we didn't do that and we ended up being really pressed on time and making silly mistakes. An example of this is in the table: we were so rushed me ended up having a huge variation in our measurements for the diameter of the cylinder. That wouldn't have happened if we have been certain and clear on what we were supposed to be doing. In the future I need to make sure I fully understand all the expectations and what is supposed to be included so I can make sure I'm not pressed for time and making stupid mistakes.

Journal Prompt #1:

Journal Prompt #1:
Please answer EACH of the following questions. Write as much information as you need to explain your answer. Use evidence and examples from class to support your explanation. In addition to class examples, you may bring in prior knowledge into your discussion.

You should write about one paragraph (~5 sentences each) per bullet point.
 How has our understanding of the atom changed since Aristotle and Democritus's time?
 What sort of evidence did scientists collect to make their models of the atom? Discuss Rutherford and Thomson.
 Think back to the beginning of the school year… how was your construction of the Enigma Machine similar to what Rutherford and his colleagues did to infer the existence of the nucleus? How were the processes different?

Well, in the beginning, Aristotle and Democritus thought the atom was the lowest you could go. In other words, they thought that there was nothing smaller than an atom and you couldn't break it down any more. They also thought that an atom was a solid sphere whereas we know it to be an undefined shape. We also know that atoms can be broken down even farther into electrons, protons, and neutrons. This shows that since Aristotle and Democritus we have learned that there are even smaller things than atoms and in fact, they are inside atoms. Also, atoms are really an undefined shape because the electrons are bouncing all over the place making it impossible to determine the shape of an atom.

Scientists collected evidence that supported their theories. They collected evidence on the charge of an atom/ electron/ proton/ neutron. They did this by doing experiments such as shooting positively charged alpha particles and finding that some were reflected. This showed that there is a nucleus that is positively charged. Thomson used a Cathode Ray to prove that there are electrons in atoms. Scientist use solid evidence that can be proved through experiments.

Well, we saw the outside of the model but not the inside. That was a mystery to us like the atom's inside was a mystery to early scientists. As we made our models, we had to go through lots of different tests/ experiments. This is also what scientists did as they tried to figure out the inside of an atom. This is shown from Rutherford because he first found that protons were in the nucleus then he collected more data and came up with a second model of an atom. In the end, we used multiple experiments to come to our conclusions just like early scientists did when figuring out an atom.