Le dimanche 18 août 2013 01:30:14 UTC+2, Gregory Ewing a écrit :
> wxjmfa...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > Na + Cl --> NaCl
>
> >
>
> > the chemist combines *one mole* of sodium and *one
>
> > mole* of chlorine to get *one mole* of sodium chloride
>
> >
>
> > It's independent of the number of
wxjmfa...@gmail.com wrote:
Na + Cl --> NaCl
the chemist combines *one mole* of sodium and *one
mole* of chlorine to get *one mole* of sodium chloride
It's independent of the number of "particles" in a mole.
The actual number chosen for the unit is arbitrary, but
number of particles is st
I wrote:
>> The recipe says, "Add one mole of carbon atoms". So, does the
>> chemist follow the recipe and count out 6.022 x 10^23 atoms like
>> he's supposed to? No. He says, "I don't have time for that. I'll
>> just weigh out 12 grams. Good enough for government work." Sheesh.
In articl
Le vendredi 16 août 2013 15:23:37 UTC+2, Roy Smith a écrit :
> In article <2d88bc0f-fdcb-4685-87ed-c17998dd3...@googlegroups.com>,
>
> wxjmfa...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
> > A chemist has to work and is always working in mole; as his
>
> > balance can only measure a mass, the calculation mole <
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On Sat, Aug 17, 2013 at 3:38 AM, Steven D'Aprano
wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Aug 2013 05:27:49 +, Dave Angel wrote:
>
>> I figure it just under a foot. I once attended a lecture by Grace
>> Hopper where she handed out "nanoseconds," pieces of wire about a foot
>> long.
>
> Is that based on the speed
On Fri, 16 Aug 2013 05:27:49 +, Dave Angel wrote:
> I figure it just under a foot. I once attended a lecture by Grace
> Hopper where she handed out "nanoseconds," pieces of wire about a foot
> long.
Is that based on the speed of light in a vacuum, speed of light in
copper, speed of electr
Gene Heskett wrote:
Where a 1 degree shift, may or may not have been noticeable, was
the cable equivalent of 7.7601420788892939683e-10 seconds, which was for
the small foam cored cables used for such, with a Propagation Velocity of
0.78*C, only a very short length of cable. I'd have figured ho
On Friday 16 August 2013 10:27:36 Dave Angel did opine:
> Roy Smith wrote:
> > In article <520da6d1$0$3$c3e8da3$54964...@news.astraweb.com>,
> >
> > Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> >> On Thu, 15 Aug 2013 16:43:41 +0100, Chris Angelico wrote:
> >> > A mole is as much a number (6e23) as the light ye
On Friday 16 August 2013 10:07:12 Roy Smith did opine:
> In article <520da6d1$0$3$c3e8da3$54964...@news.astraweb.com>,
>
> Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> > On Thu, 15 Aug 2013 16:43:41 +0100, Chris Angelico wrote:
> > > A mole is as much a number (6e23) as the light year is a number
> > > (9.5e15
On 2013-08-16, Roy Smith wrote:
> In article ,
> Ben Finney wrote:
>
>> Avogadro's Number is worth remembering, for mocking the pseudo-science
>> of homeopathy http://www.1023.org.uk/what-is-homeopathy.php>.
>
> You have obviously never argued science with a homeopath if you believe
> that know
In article <2d88bc0f-fdcb-4685-87ed-c17998dd3...@googlegroups.com>,
wxjmfa...@gmail.com wrote:
> A chemist has to work and is always working in mole; as his
> balance can only measure a mass, the calculation mole <-> mass
> is always mandatory.
That's because chemists are lazy.
The recipe says,
-
A mole is an amount of matter measured in [kg] .
The Avogadro's number can only be a dimensionless number, [1] .
The Avogadro's constant is the Avogadro's number (of "pieces" or
"objects") per mol, [1 / mol].
A chemist has to work and is always working in mole; as his
balance can only measu
In article ,
Ben Finney wrote:
> Avogadro's Number is worth remembering, for mocking the pseudo-science
> of homeopathy http://www.1023.org.uk/what-is-homeopathy.php>.
You have obviously never argued science with a homeopath if you believe
that knowing Avogadro's number will in any way shake t
Steven D'Aprano writes:
> Not quite. A mole (abbreviation: mol) is a name for a specific number,
> like couple (2) or dozen (12) or gross (144), only much bigger: 6.02e23.
> And I can't believe I still remember that value :-)
Avogadro's Number is worth remembering, for mocking the pseudo-scien
Roy Smith wrote:
> In article <520da6d1$0$3$c3e8da3$54964...@news.astraweb.com>,
> Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 15 Aug 2013 16:43:41 +0100, Chris Angelico wrote:
>>
>> > A mole is as much a number (6e23) as the light year is a number
>> > (9.5e15).
>>
>> Not quite. A mole (abbreviat
On Fri, 16 Aug 2013 04:39:16 +, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Aug 2013 22:56:57 +, Dave Angel wrote:
>
>> To expand a little on that, the unit of "amount of something" is a
>> "gram mole", which is 6.2 **23 grams times the molecular (or atomic)
>> weight.
>
> The unit of amount of
On Thu, 15 Aug 2013 22:56:57 +, Dave Angel wrote:
> To expand a little on that, the unit of "amount of something" is a "gram
> mole", which is 6.2 **23 grams times the molecular (or atomic) weight.
The unit of amount of substance is mole. Gram-mole is an unfortunate
synonym for mole. Unfortu
In article <520da6d1$0$3$c3e8da3$54964...@news.astraweb.com>,
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Aug 2013 16:43:41 +0100, Chris Angelico wrote:
>
> > A mole is as much a number (6e23) as the light year is a number
> > (9.5e15).
>
> Not quite. A mole (abbreviation: mol) is a name for a spe
On Thu, 15 Aug 2013 17:40:43 -0400, Terry Reedy wrote:
> On 8/15/2013 2:28 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 5:54 PM, Joshua Landau
>> wrote:
>>> On 15 August 2013 16:43, Chris Angelico wrote:
A mole is as much a number (6e23) as the light year is a number
(9.5e15).
On Thu, 15 Aug 2013 19:28:46 +0100, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 5:54 PM, Joshua Landau wrote:
>> On 15 August 2013 16:43, Chris Angelico wrote:
>>> A mole is as much a number (6e23) as the light year is a number
>>> (9.5e15).
>>
>> A mole is a number. A light year is a unit.
On Thu, 15 Aug 2013 16:43:41 +0100, Chris Angelico wrote:
> A mole is as much a number (6e23) as the light year is a number
> (9.5e15).
Not quite. A mole (abbreviation: mol) is a name for a specific number,
like couple (2) or dozen (12) or gross (144), only much bigger: 6.02e23.
And I can't bel
Terry Reedy wrote:
> On 8/15/2013 2:28 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 5:54 PM, Joshua Landau wrote:
>>> On 15 August 2013 16:43, Chris Angelico wrote:
A mole is as much a number (6e23) as the light year is a number (9.5e15).
>>>
>>> A mole is a number. A light year is
On 8/15/2013 2:28 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 5:54 PM, Joshua Landau wrote:
On 15 August 2013 16:43, Chris Angelico wrote:
A mole is as much a number (6e23) as the light year is a number (9.5e15).
A mole is a number. A light year is a unit.
A mole is an amount of som
On 15 August 2013 19:28, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 5:54 PM, Joshua Landau wrote:
>> On 15 August 2013 16:43, Chris Angelico wrote:
>>> A mole is as much a number (6e23) as the light year is a number (9.5e15).
>>
>> A mole is a number. A light year is a unit.
>
> A mole is a
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 5:54 PM, Joshua Landau wrote:
> On 15 August 2013 16:43, Chris Angelico wrote:
>> A mole is as much a number (6e23) as the light year is a number (9.5e15).
>
> A mole is a number. A light year is a unit.
A mole is an amount of something. Avogadro's Number is a number, whi
On 15 August 2013 16:43, Chris Angelico wrote:
> A mole is as much a number (6e23) as the light year is a number (9.5e15).
A mole is a number. A light year is a unit.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 4:30 PM, Lele Gaifax wrote:
> MRAB writes:
>
>> On 15/08/2013 15:38, Lele Gaifax wrote:
>>> wxjmfa...@gmail.com writes:
PS A "mole" is not a number.
>>>
>>> Oh, nice to know. And OOC, what is a "mole" in your stupid science?
>>> OTOH, WTF does that matter in current t
MRAB writes:
> On 15/08/2013 15:38, Lele Gaifax wrote:
>> wxjmfa...@gmail.com writes:
>>> PS A "mole" is not a number.
>>
>> Oh, nice to know. And OOC, what is a "mole" in your stupid science?
>> OTOH, WTF does that matter in current thread and with Python in general?
>>
> A "mole" is a term from
On 15/08/2013 15:38, Lele Gaifax wrote:
wxjmfa...@gmail.com writes:
As a stupid scientist, I have the habbit to compare
things of the same nature with the same units.
This *string* containing one *character*
sys.getsizeof('a')
26
consumes 26 *bytes*.
I'm not an expert in stupid science,
wxjmfa...@gmail.com writes:
> As a stupid scientist, I have the habbit to compare
> things of the same nature with the same units.
>
> This *string* containing one *character*
>
sys.getsizeof('a')
> 26
>
> consumes 26 *bytes*.
I'm not an expert in stupid science, and I fail to see the "commo
I perfectly knows what Python does.
I missinterpreting nothing.
I opened my example in binary mode just to show the real
endings.
It still remains the """...""" has its owns EOL and one
has to be aware of it.
No more, no less.
("""...""" and tokenize.py is funny)
jmf
--
http://mail.p
On Thu, 15 Aug 2013 02:46:20 -0700, wxjmfauth wrote:
> A technical ascpect of triple quoted strings is that the "end of lines"
> are not respected.
>
import zzz
zzz.__doc__
> 'abc\ndef\n'
You are misinterpreting what you are seeing. You are not reading lines of
text from a file. You
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 10:46 AM, wrote:
> A technical ascpect of triple quoted strings is
> that the "end of lines" are not respected.
>
import zzz
zzz.__doc__
> 'abc\ndef\n'
with open('zzz.py', 'rb') as fo:
> ... r = fo.read()
> ...
r
> b'"""abc\r\ndef\r\n"""\r\n'
>
> No
A technical ascpect of triple quoted strings is
that the "end of lines" are not respected.
>>> import zzz
>>> zzz.__doc__
'abc\ndef\n'
>>> with open('zzz.py', 'rb') as fo:
... r = fo.read()
...
>>> r
b'"""abc\r\ndef\r\n"""\r\n'
Now, one can argue...
jmf
--
http://mail.python.org/mailma
Joshua Landau wrote:
> That's true with this example, but is:
>
> lines = [
> "Developments in high-speed rail, and high-speed",
> "transport more generally, have historically been",
> "impeded by the difficulties in managing friction",
> "and air resistance, both of which become
Le mercredi 14 août 2013 19:14:59 UTC+2, Chris Angelico a écrit :
> On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 6:05 PM, wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Aug 14, 2013, at 10:32, wxjmfa...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >> I'm always and still be suprised by the number of hard coded
>
> >> '\n' one can find in Python code when the port
On Wed, 14 Aug 2013 13:05:50 -0400, random832 wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 14, 2013, at 10:32, wxjmfa...@gmail.com wrote:
>> I'm always and still be suprised by the number of hard coded '\n' one
>> can find in Python code when the portable (here win)
>>
>> >>> os.linesep
>> '\r\n'
>>
>> exists.
>
> Bec
On 8/14/2013 1:05 PM, random...@fastmail.us wrote:
On Wed, Aug 14, 2013, at 10:32, wxjmfa...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm always and still be suprised by the number of hard coded
'\n' one can find in Python code when the portable (here
win)
os.linesep
'\r\n'
exists.
Because high-level code isn't
On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 6:29 PM, Tim Chase
wrote:
> On 2013-08-14 18:14, Chris Angelico wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 6:05 PM, wrote:
>> > On Wed, Aug 14, 2013, at 10:32, wxjmfa...@gmail.com wrote:
>> >> I'm always and still be suprised by the number of hard coded
>> >> '\n' one can find in
On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 12:05 PM, wrote:
> Because high-level code isn't supposed to use the os module directly.
That seems a bit extreme. One would hope that Guido and the rest of
the crew created the os module so people would use it instead of
resorting to other lower level hacks. A quick fi
On 2013-08-14 18:14, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 6:05 PM, wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 14, 2013, at 10:32, wxjmfa...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> I'm always and still be suprised by the number of hard coded
> >> '\n' one can find in Python code when the portable (here
> >> win)
> >>
> >> >
On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 6:05 PM, wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 14, 2013, at 10:32, wxjmfa...@gmail.com wrote:
>> I'm always and still be suprised by the number of hard coded
>> '\n' one can find in Python code when the portable (here
>> win)
>>
>> >>> os.linesep
>> '\r\n'
>>
>> exists.
>
> Because high-le
On Wed, Aug 14, 2013, at 10:32, wxjmfa...@gmail.com wrote:
> I'm always and still be suprised by the number of hard coded
> '\n' one can find in Python code when the portable (here
> win)
>
> >>> os.linesep
> '\r\n'
>
> exists.
Because high-level code isn't supposed to use the os module directly
Le mercredi 14 août 2013 13:55:23 UTC+2, Joshua Landau a écrit :
> On 14 August 2013 12:45, Peter Otten <__pete...@web.de> wrote:
>
> > Joshua Landau wrote:
>
> >> On 14 August 2013 09:30, Alister wrote:
>
> >>> I would agree with the last statement.
>
> >>> Please write list definitions as li
On Wed, 14 Aug 2013 11:31:01 +0100, Joshua Landau wrote:
> On 14 August 2013 09:30, Alister wrote:
>> On Tue, 13 Aug 2013 22:12:56 -0700, Gary Herron wrote:
>>
>>> On 08/13/2013 09:51 PM, eschneide...@comcast.net wrote:
How can I use the '.split()' method (am I right in calling it a
met
On 14 August 2013 12:45, Peter Otten <__pete...@web.de> wrote:
> Joshua Landau wrote:
>> On 14 August 2013 09:30, Alister wrote:
>>> I would agree with the last statement.
>>> Please write list definitions as lists rather than taking a short-cut to
>>> save a few key presses
>>
>> That's true with
Joshua Landau wrote:
> On 14 August 2013 09:30, Alister wrote:
>> On Tue, 13 Aug 2013 22:12:56 -0700, Gary Herron wrote:
>>
>>> On 08/13/2013 09:51 PM, eschneide...@comcast.net wrote:
How can I use the '.split()' method (am I right in calling it a
method?) without instead of writing eac
On 14 August 2013 09:30, Alister wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Aug 2013 22:12:56 -0700, Gary Herron wrote:
>
>> On 08/13/2013 09:51 PM, eschneide...@comcast.net wrote:
>>> How can I use the '.split()' method (am I right in calling it a
>>> method?) without instead of writing each comma between words in the
On Tue, 13 Aug 2013 22:12:56 -0700, Gary Herron wrote:
> On 08/13/2013 09:51 PM, eschneide...@comcast.net wrote:
>> How can I use the '.split()' method (am I right in calling it a
>> method?) without instead of writing each comma between words in the pie
>> list in the following code? Also, is the
It's obvious that the word 'without' in my first sentence was meant to be
ommited, and it's a simple question. Thank Gary!
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Hi,
>How can I use the '.split()' method (am I right in calling it a method?)
The .split() is a method in Python which comes as in built method for
String objects in Python. Any string defined in python will have the
ability to call this function.
>>> var = 'Hello how r u?'
>>> dir(var)
['__add_
eschneide...@comcast.net wrote:
> How can I use the '.split()' method (am I right in calling it a method?)
> without instead of writing each comma between words in the pie list in the
> following code? Also, is there a way to use .split instead of typing the
> apostrophes? Thank you.
>
> import
On 08/13/2013 09:51 PM, eschneide...@comcast.net wrote:
How can I use the '.split()' method (am I right in calling it a method?)
without instead of writing each comma between words in the pie list in the
following code? Also, is there a way to use .split instead of typing the
apostrophes? Than
How can I use the '.split()' method (am I right in calling it a method?)
without instead of writing each comma between words in the pie list in the
following code? Also, is there a way to use .split instead of typing the
apostrophes? Thank you.
import random
pie=['keylime', 'peach', 'apple', 'c
55 matches
Mail list logo
