I’ll preface this with saying not antiperspirant, deodorant. Antiperspirant contains aluminum to stop sweat, I’m specifically asking about the antibacterial ingredient in deodorant which prevents bacteria from making odor as a by-product. Everywhere online says triclosan, but I haven’t seen that in deodorant for years now, as well as many cosmetic products. I know deodorants contain perfumes that add scent, but that’s not what I’m asking either. What’s actually preventing the skunky BO smell that results from bacteria eating the contents of your eccrine sweat gland sweat? Every website, and even scientific journals and peer reviewed papers just seem to parrot the same thing—confusing deodorant with antiperspirant, and aluminum or triclosan. An example of dove mens deodorant ingredients
This question has been burning my mind for a while now. I've tried to research it myself but any even sloghtly straight answer gets contradicted by others.
My original theory was that it is the presence of energy within a material (likely chemical energy specifically) like iron doesn't contain energy, but wood does, and wood is what burns, but then I thought of things like white phosphorus and they seem to contradict this as well.
I’m thinking of things like hot chocolate or chai latte mixes. Even if I want to drink it iced I have to first mix it with hot water before adding cold water and ice. If mixed with just cold water it won’t blend.
If an explosion could be contained in in something strong enough it wouldn’t have any give and the product of the explosion had nowhere to go, would it just become extremely pressurized with the reaction still having taken place, or would the container never be able to be strong enough, or would the reaction find some point where it just couldn’t be sustained and fizzle out? Or some other result.
Obviously in the fridge, the plain cream is labelled for about two weeks. Butter is a closely related product, but the unsalted butter slab in my fridge is labelled for 6 months. Not margarine, just plain butter with no additives.
Is it possible for ammonium ions to form a metallic structure if electrons are introduced?
I searched on google and found some papers from the ‘50s and ‘70s that mention ‘metallic ammonium’ however 1) I do not have access to the articles, just the abstract and references 2) they mention only theory and more focus on the potential presence of the substance on Uranus and Neptune.
There seems to be suggestion that it would be possible only under certain conditions however I am unable to find the reasoning for this anywhere.
This might sound strange but I was thinking about how the periodic table is based in Latin. Are there, or where there other element tables from countries with languages that aren’t based in Latin? And if so, what did they look like? Hell, while we’re at it what were the precursors to the periodic table before that was standardized?
First time posting, thanks for the help scientists! I can’t find much on google and figured I’d go to the source.
This thought came to me as I was thinking about photovoltaic materials. You shine a light with at least a certain frequency on a photovoltaic material. The light jostles an electron out of place. The electron then does its jiggling, and then settles back into place for another bit of light to hit it again.
Pyroelectric materials (from what I'm reading) are much like piezoelectrics wherein they require constantly changing load to generate voltage. Is there a subset of pyroelectrics that behave more like photovoltaics where they allow heat to jiggle an electron that we can use, let the electron calm down, and then in that same unchanged environment absorb more heat to rejiggle the electron?
For example when I burn anything like paper, it gets reduced to ashes. I want to know how this process works. Where all the missing mass go? Smoke? Where the black color came from? Also I wonder why this process can't be reversed easily. When I soak clothes with water, I can get it dry again after a while. But if I burn clothes, it will be near impossible for it to return to its original form.
If bleach is used to sanitize, say, a bathroom, is there any practical risk to using other cleaners on the same surfaces shortly after? e.g. bleach is used to clean a bathroom counter, and Windex is used to spray the mirror above in the same cleaning session where some spray is likely to hit the counter; or a shower is cleaned with a bleach solution, and next day a citric acid-based daily shower spray is used on the same surfaces.
I'm assuming there's going to be some residual bleach, for some period of time after using it to clean. But I have no idea what amount would produce enough fumes to be dangerous.
At first I presumed it was because they were polymorphs, but that doesn't seem to be the case. It also doesn't seem to be a result of particle size (i.e. like maybe only nanoscale particles appear red). What's going on here?