CPC General discussion thread (5 Viewers)

Well, you do have a lot of really cool chips?
You Cant See Me Saints And Sinners GIF by Bounce
 
One barrier is to confirm the 1852 recipe cotton proportions you would need break down a 1852 chip. Recipe could have changed since then.
So it’s people like you that decided it should be photosystem II first, and *then* photosystem I

*shakes fist*
 
Possible. But do I get to play with your chips or not?
Being less silly, I am dismayed at how uncommon clays are in my country, land of injection molded chips.
I mean. I'm no @ovo
 
40% is right in line with most other fiber filled composites.

I've pointed this out numerous times already, but you haven't addressed it. So, I'll ask you point blank. Do you acknowledge that "10-oz cotton" refers to sheets of woven cotton fabric as opposed to raw fluffy cotton?
 
I've pointed this out numerous times already, but you haven't addressed it. So, I'll ask you point blank. Do you acknowledge that "10-oz cotton" refers to sheets of woven cotton fabric as opposed to raw fluffy cotton?
It’s composed of high quality, uniform, short fibers. Who said anything about “raw fluffy cotton”?

Your imagination must be overwhelmed.
image.jpg
 
It’s composed of high quality, uniform, short fibers. Who said anything about “raw fluffy cotton”?

Your imagination must be overwhelmed.

I'll ask you again. Do you acknowledge that "10-oz cotton" refers to the fabric weight of sheets of woven cotton fabric, and not a type (or quality) of cotton that was picked from a plant?

Do you acknowledge that "10-oz cotton", "5-oz cotton", and "8-oz cotton" are not different types of cotton and that they all come from the same plant, and that the only difference is how much cotton was used when weaving the fabric into different thread weights/counts?
 
I'll ask you again. Do you acknowledge that "10-oz cotton" refers to the fabric weight of sheets of woven cotton fabric, and not a type (or quality) of cotton that was picked from a plant?

Do you acknowledge that "10-oz cotton", "5-oz cotton", and "8-oz cotton" are not different types of cotton and that they all come from the same plant, and that the only difference is how much cotton was used when weaving the fabric into different thread weights/counts?
Are clay chips made of clay?
 
Are clay chips made of clay?

Why do you keep dodging this question about cotton weights referring to woven fabrics? You said you're not trolling, yet here you are, doing precisely that.

Do you acknowledge what I said about cotton weights referring to woven fabrics, and not to raw cotton picked from a plant, or not? It's a simple question. Yes, or no.
 
Why do you keep dodging this question about cotton weights referring to woven fabrics? You said you're not trolling, yet here you are, doing precisely that.

Do you acknowledge what I said about cotton weights referring to woven fabrics, and not to raw cotton picked from a plant, or not? It's a simple question. Yes, or no.
You are hilarious. Of course 10oz refers to a fabric weight (or fiber weight). It is constructed from a high quality, uniformly, short fiber. Maybe they bought this dense high quality fabric and processed it to be added to the composite matrix? Point is…who cares?

Now…stop deflecting.

The reason we all started this debate.

Do you acknowledge you are 100% wrong about your initial assertion?

Do you even remember?

Will you pay the people that took your bet?

Probably not, I guess…
 
Last edited:
You are hilarious. Of course 10oz refers to a fabric weight (or fiber weight). It is constructed from a high quality, uniformly, short fiber. Maybe they bought this dense high quality fabric and processed it to be added to the composite matrix? Point is…who cares?

Now…stop deflecting.

The reason we all started this debate.

Do you acknowledge you are 100% wrong about your initial assertion?

Do you even remember?

Will you pay the people that took your bet?

Probably not, I guess…

Your confirmation bias is mind blowing. So now you think they bought 10 oz cotton fabric only to grind it down into not 10 oz cotton fabric, as opposed to sell, you know, just buying cotton instead lol.

This shit is just hilarious at this point.

And yes, I will be collecting from those who placed bets against me.

I'm not guessing here. I already know what's in TRK chips.
 
Found this…interesting. Notice is references fiber weight. Hmmm.

What’s a geopolymer?

View attachment 1266516
https://www.researchgate.net/public...ced_polymer_composites_and_their_applications

Ya, no shit Sherlock. People make all sorts of shit out of woven fabric and epoxy. I saw a guy make a nice table the other day from 50 sheets of denim and 20 gallons of epoxy. But you know what they don't make out of that? Poker chips!

You still haven't addressed the issue of the lack of lead content in your interpretation of the formula though. Honestly, this should have immediately told you that you had it wrong just by looking at the lead silicate weight alone. There is a significant difference between the chip weights of leaded and unleaded chips (about 22-25%). Yet your formula says that a mere 3 ounces of lead is used across the entire batch, accounting for a mere 1.4% of the chip weight? Explain that one Einstein. I'll wait...

Also, where's the polymers in your formula that are going to keep your chip together? Oh, that's right, you said they left that part out lol. My interpretation of the formula has plenty of plastic in it though (plastic is a polymer, did you know that?).

Also, baryte is commonly mixed with plastic in compression molding. What the fuck do you think it's doing in your formula?
 
Last edited:
Ya, no shit Sherlock. People make all sorts of shit out of woven fabric and epoxy. I saw a guy make a nice table the other day from 50 sheets of denim and 20 gallons of epoxy. But you know what they don't make out of that? Poker chips!

You still haven't addressed the issue of the lack of lead content in your interpretation of the formula though. Honestly, this should have immediately told you that you had it wrong just by looking at the lead silicate weight alone. There is a significant difference between the chip weights of leaded and unleaded chips (about 22-25%). Yet your formula says that a mere 3 ounces of lead is used across the entire batch, accounting for a mere 1.4% of the chip weight? Explain that one Einstein. I'll wait...
Nevermind…the density of lead is no match for the density of @RainmanTrail.

Your understanding of basic chemistry, composites, etc is laughable.

I was enjoying this discussion…you win.

Birds aren’t real…dig deeper Watson.
 
Nevermind…the density of lead is no match for the density of @RainmanTrail.

Your understanding of basic chemistry, composites, etc is laughable.

I was enjoying this discussion…you win.

Birds aren’t real…dig deeper Watson.

Explain the lack of lead in your leaded chips formula.
 
Nevermind…the density of lead is no match for the density of @RainmanTrail.

Your understanding of basic chemistry, composites, etc is laughable.

I was enjoying this discussion…you win.

Birds aren’t real…dig deeper Watson.

I'll raise my offer. 100 to 1 for you. Take my money if you think I'm such an idiot.
 
They are “weighted”…with TiO2 and PbO-SiO2.

You’ll have to ask the TRK chef…

Ah yes, that perfectly explains why the chips lose 25% of their weight after removing the lead (which makes up a mere 1.4% of your formula).
 
don’t you numberwang boffins know how to calculate the mass of a poker chip?

Should be easy to figure out if lead is 50% or 3% of that volume?
 
There. I did the hard part for you guys.

IMG_1031.jpeg
 
don’t you numberwang boffins know how to calculate the mass of a poker chip?

Should be easy to figure out if lead is 50% or 3% of that volume?

Yes, I've posted it multiple times already. You need to use the specific gravity of lead silicate (not lead) to convert it to volume, which I did in the tables I posted. Lead silicate is ~6.5g/cm^3. In the correct interpretation, it makes up 22.1% of the volume. In the laughable interpretation, it makes up a mere 0.7% of the volume.

You really don't need to know anything more than that to know which interpretation is correct.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account and join our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Back
Top Bottom