Silicate

On 1 May 1997 21:39:10 -0400, [email] (David Danzig) wrote:

Off topic! FYI, David, sand is quartz, i.e., silicon dioxide while the dessicant is sodium silicate, Tony

Roz & Tony Cundell wrote:

(Art commentary follows the chemistry part of this post.) Nope. The dessicant is silica gel, which is orthosilicic acid. (Add a dilute acid, such as dilute HCl, to sodium silicate solution, then dry the resulting gel; this description is NOT a "how-to", and important instructions have been omitted.)

The "Do not eat" label appears on the package because silica gel sometimes is packed with certain foodstuffs to prevent caking or deterioration. It's also packed frequently in capsule form and placed in vitamin pill bottles, where it could easily be mistaken for a vitamin capsule --- the "do not eat" warning on the capsule doesn't seem so silly in that case.

Of course, when taken out of that context, the "do not eat" label seems bizarre when those packets are found packed with clothing, home electronics, etc. It's the job of "Seinfeld" and the stand-up comics of the world to ridicule such absurdities; the alternative is to wait until some over-the-edge artist creates an "installation" exploring the social significance of little packets labelled "do not eat" being packed into our products by starving third-world workers. "Seinfeld" spares us from this by beating them to the punch and presenting the subject first in the show's inimitable, low-brow way :-) .

---Alvin H. Nichter

Plus, what if little kids saw the packages and thought it was something they could eat. Probably one of the main reasons those labels are used.

Or, without the warning, a dog or cat might eat it.

Speaking of....

Why is there braile on drive-thru ATM machines when there's no braile on any of the driver controls of a car?

Dusty http://acs.tamu.edu/~dcm0027

In article , [email] says...

Whoa. Why are you even questioning if there is braille on the driver controls?? Why would there be? The joke should be:

Why is there braille on drive-thru ATM machines when blind people don't drive?

...and the answer is (my guess):

1. It's there for people riding in the back seat who want to use the ATM. 2. There was a law passed requiring ALL ATMs to have braille, but no one made a distinction for drive-up machines. Hence, drive-up ATMs have braille also because it's the law.

Quoth Alvin Nichter : :

Back in the '50s (yes, older guys enjoy Seinfeld, too), there was one brand of potato chips that included a packet of silica gel - which they called the "Magic Pack" - in each bag, claiming that it kept the chips from going stale as quickly. Thus, the "Do Not Eat" warning. And it's probably cheaper to print it on all the packets, rather than having one style for food, and another for non-food products. And I'm sure that there are plenty of people who, if their child did eat the stuff, would sue because "they didn't say not to eat it". But that's another topic entirely, better suited for alt. idiots.blameeveryone.else

Personally, I think they should have a variety of warnings, like
cigarette packs. "Do Not  Eat".    "Do Not Insert In Bodily Orifices".
"Do Not Substitute Contents Of This Packet For Your Grandmother's
Medication."   ;-)

To reply by email, delete the *NO_SPAM* from my email address.

Ever looked at all the warning labels on a new ladder recently??? "Do not eat" is the only one missing...for now. Anti-Spam! Remove * from Email address to reply.

In article , Roz & Tony Cundell wrote:

Not to get too philosophical here, but isn't sand just anything that has the essential qualities of sand? Couldn't I make sand out of plastic or cement or whatever I wanted, as long as it was made of little granules? Just because all the sand we find at the beach is made of a certain kind of thing, why does that mean that anything we find in the future has to be made of the same thing to count as sand?

Let me put this another way-- Imagine a more pretechnological time when the word sand was first being used. Suppose someone came up with some stuff that was seemingly identical to sand at that time. However, unknown to anyone in the world, all previously discovered sand had been made of silicon dioxide, while this new stuff was made of something else. The pre-scientific English speakers would have, of course, held their word "sand" to include this newly discovered stuff. Why should the later discovery of some property of sand which is inessential to our understanding and use of the word, specifically that it has always been made of silicon dioxide in the past, change the way we are allowed to use the word? I can't think of any reason.

Accordingly, I think it proper to say that science has developed a new kind of sand which is made of sodium silicate.

Quoth [email] (David Danzig): :

What if there was something that appeared to be philosophy, at first, and only later was it examined more closely and found not to be philosophy?

Try making concrete with silica gel sand, and then we'll talk.

   ;-)

To reply by email, delete the *NO_SPAM* from my email address.

Yeah, but without that warning, some boob would eat it and then sue saying "You never said I couldn't eat the little bag of sand! I thought it was like a complimentary mint that came with the shoes!" (You know I can hear George Costanza delivering this line.) -John