h a l f b a k e r yRight twice a day.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
So, it seems that the Chinese emperor who created the
Terracotta Army also had a tomb build for him. It's a vast
earth pyramid, and ground-penetrating radar has revealed
that it has an inner structure - a vast buried palace.
It's also alleged that this tomb contains unspeakable
wealth,
which
is why the Emperor had an army of 8,000 lifesize
terracotta guards built to protect it.
As yet, there are no plans to excavate this tomb.
Howevertheless, it would seem a worthwhile proposition to
start digging a surreptitious tunnel from some innocuous
shack a mile or two away from the buried palace. Given
the
prize which can reasonably be expected to lie beneath the
earth pyramid, the investment of a few man-years of labour
and a couple of wheelbarrows would seem justified.
Obviously, a politely apologetic note would be left for
future archeologists.
Hg-Au phase diagram
https://books.googl...4CQ&ved=0CEQQ6AEwDw
looks like even small quantities of gold in mercury form a solid compound, floating around in the liquid. [Ling, Feb 03 2015]
Excavation of Qin Shi Huang Mausoleum
http://www.travelch...rmy/mausoleum_2.htm
China Travel page on the subject. [DrBob, Feb 03 2015]
Raiders dig tunnel into First Emperor's Tomb.
http://worldnewsdai...sumed-looters-dead/
Haven't seen this mentioned anywhere else & there are no links to source, so not sure how true this report is (the rest of the site all looks a bit Fortean Times to me), but it looks as though someone has already put this plan into action, Max. Always the bridesmaid! [DrBob, Feb 03 2015]
Mercury submersion
http://theodoregray...ents/080/index.html
Picture of a man sitting on mercury and description of submerging an arm in mercury. [scad mientist, Feb 03 2015]
Mission Improbable - the gold-melting episode.
http://www.imdb.com...is?ref_=ttpl_pl_syn
[MaxwellBuchanan, Feb 04 2015]
[link]
|
| |
I believe so. Hopefully, the plumbing failed and the
mercury drained away a long time ago, otherwise
you'll just find a huge mess of gold amalgam. |
|
| |
I'm sure it's been done, or at least attempted. |
|
| |
// surreptitious tunnel // |
|
| |
What will you do with all the spoil you dig from the tunnel ? Will a
vaulting horse be involved ? Is this going to mean groups of tourists
wandering round with red dust trailing from their trouser legs ? |
|
| |
We fear we detect the signs of yet another ill-concieved and worse-
implemented scheme for which the Buchanan family are so rightly
notorious, along the lines of Sturton's "Carboniferous Park" me-too
visitor attraction, or your Great-grandfather's prototype coal-fired,
steam-powered tank, which might have been well received in 1915
but was decidedly anachronistic by the time he revealed it in 1965. |
|
| |
Besides, what if it turns out to be the tomb of Ming the Merciless, who
isn't really dead, just waiting for some idiot to come and release him
from suspended animation ? |
|
| |
[bigs], that was in a Terry Pratchett book, "Interesting Times". |
|
| |
So, I can't seem to find out in a simple web search:
when gold dissolves in mercury, can it remain a
liquid if the gold concentration is low enough, or
does the amalgam always solidify? Are there other
practical ways to dissolve gold so that it can be
easily recovered afterwards? |
|
| |
For this, or other situations where the need arises
to surreptitiously "recover" gold from a closed
room, if a small hole could be drilled, and one tube
inserted that sprays mercury and a second that
vacuums it up, large gold objects could be
dissolved and extracted through a very small hole.
Assuming that the activity could go unnoticed for
quite some time, the slow extraction speed might
not be an issue. |
|
| |
//I can't seem to find out in a simple web search:
when gold dissolves in mercury, can it remain a liquid
if the gold concentration is low enough, or does the
amalgam always solidify? // |
|
| |
As a [scad mientist], you should have done the
thought experiment first. Take an ocean of mercury,
and add an atom of gold. |
|
| |
//Sturton's "Carboniferous Park"// It wasn't
technically his. It was jointly owned by Sturtech
Enterprises and Intercalary Trading, Inc. And it was a
great success while it lasted. In retrospect, having a
cigar bar was a mistake, and perhaps the torchlit
parade was not well thought through, but hindsight is
is always 20:20. |
|
| |
//coal-fired, steam-powered tank// You wait. When
the oil runs out, it'll be the Anthracenturion pitched
against solar-powered Soviet tanks - then you'll be
laughing out of the boot on the other foot. |
|
| |
// large gold objects could be dissolved and
extracted through a very small hole. Assuming that
the activity could go unnoticed for quite some time,
the slow extraction speed might not be an issue//
Now, if that isn't a movie plot waiting to happen, I
don't know what is. |
|
| |
// can it remain a liquid if the gold concentration is low enough, // |
|
| |
// or does the amalgam always solidify? // |
|
| |
// Are there other practical ways to dissolve gold so that it can be
easily recovered afterwards? // |
|
| |
For more information, send an envelope containing $10 in stamps or
an equivalent money order, and enclose a letter giving your name,
address, and saying "YES ! I want to learn how to dissolve gold in my
spare time for fun and profit ! I hereby waive any and all claims that
may arise from dissolving or attempting to dissolve gold and that my
$10 is non-refundable. I confirm that I am over 18 and not currently
receiving any formal treatment for a mental health disorder of any
kind". Post it to: |
|
| |
BorgCo Metal Recovery Inc.
Behind the right-hand corner of the luggage lockers, next to the
Gentleman's Washroom,
Main Concourse,
Grand Central Station,
89 East 42nd Street,
New York, NY 10017,
United States. |
|
| |
// movie plot // I thought of that too, but then
couldn't figure out how to make it not as boring as
watching gold dissolve. I guess it might be
interesting if the thieves set up to acquire half
the world gold supply all at once, assuming that
once once crime was discovered, the method
could never work again. I'm sure an actual movie
script would just ignore reality and make the
system dissolve an entire gold brick and suck it
through a straw in 5 seconds, emptying the safe in
an hour between inspection by the guards...
Then they'd title it "Ocean's 14". |
|
| |
And speaking of oceans...
// Take an ocean of mercury, and add an atom of
gold // Well, of course, but I don't want to have
to evaporate an ocean's worth of mercury for
every atom of gold recovered. Even in moderately
low concentrations, it seems possible that the
gold amalgam might precipitate out of the solution
and accumulate along the bottom of the tube,
eventually forming clumps that could clog the
system. Or a bit of mercury that stayed in contact
with the gold too long might form a large chunk
that could get stuck. On the other hand, if it
stays liquid until a reasonable concentration is
reached (say 10 or 20%), then the system might
fairly reliable run at half that concentration with
little chance of clogging. I found one interesting
article on dental amalgams, but of course those
are designed to be workable for a short time after
mixing then quickly harden and involve a lot of
different metals (silver, tin, copper, and zinc).
There are pictures online of 3rd world gold miners
using mercury and picking chunks of amalgam out
of a bucket, but does that mean that the amalgam
always forms into clumps, or if the miner
accidentally adds too much mercury, do they need
to dump in more gold ore before they will be able
to get the amalgam to solidify? Curious minds
want to know, and searching the web is hard
when 99% of the hits are debating the safety of
dental amalgams. |
|
| |
[8th of 7] Thanks. How do you ensure that no one
is watching when you retrieve the envelopes? I'd
rather someone didn't follow you and steal my
envelope, making it harder to put this plan into
action. |
|
| |
// How do you ensure that no one is watching when you retrieve
the envelopes? // |
|
| |
To find out, send an envelope containing $10 in stamps or an
equivalent money order, and enclose a letter giving your name,
address, and saying "YES ! I want you to teach me how to
discretely
retrieve envelopes in my spare time for fun and profit ! I hereby
waive any and all claims that may arise from retreving or faling
to retrieve envelopes and that my $10 is non-refundable. I
confirm that I am over 18 and am not currently receiving any
formal treatment for a mental health disorder of any kind". |
|
| |
BorgCo Envelope Recovery Inc.
Behind the left-hand corner of the
luggage lockers, next to the Gentleman's Washroom,
Main
Concourse,
Grand Central Station,
89 East 42nd Street,
New York, NY 10017,
United States. |
|
| |
Please allow 28 years for delivery. |
|
| |
You're confusing us with our UK subsidiary, Postal Blackmail (Python)
Ltd., franchised to Messrs. D. & D. Piranha & partners. |
|
| |
But remember, and this is important, we don't morally censure , we
just want the money. |
|
| |
//Take an ocean of mercury, and add an atom of gold.// |
|
| |
You could also surreptitiously heat gold to liquefy it before
extracting it through a small aperture. Sort of like siphoning
gasoline but just remember to stop sucking at the right
moment. |
|
| |
//just remember to stop sucking at the right moment// [marked-for...] |
|
| |
Now that you say that, I'm sure there was a film (or
program) where they did that. I've got a feeling it
was Mission Impossible (the series, not the modern
movies). Anyone? |
|
| |
This sounds like the premise of one of those Preston and Child thrillers. Exotic; unknown, based in fact. Lots of potential for teams of expendible competitors (eg: ruthless gold hunters, Chinese mafia) to be used up by ancient spooky weirdness. River of mercury: yes, yes - with Apocalypse Now type scene man rising out of mercury. Terracotta soliders - both on exhibit and the less... handsome ones not on exhibit. The Shaanzi Normal University. Good stuff! |
|
| |
// man rising out of mercury // |
|
| |
Mercury has a density of 13.5. Humans have an average density
of about 1. |
|
| |
Therefore a human would be fully supported when 7.5% of their
volume was submerged in mercury. |
|
| |
If 15% of the human is submerged, the buoyancy will be equal to
twice their weight - gravity in reverse. |
|
| |
When released from the hawser and clamps, a fully submerged
human is going to rise … quite high. |
|
| |
You might pull this off if you flooded the mound
with nitro-hydrochloric acid. |
|
| |
However, it's not the easiest stuff to work with. |
|
| |
// a fully submerged human is going to rise … quite
high // How much will that be slowed by the
viscosity of mercury? Or is the surface tension going
to be the more prevalent effect? Based on <link> it
looks like the latter. |
|
| |
/When released from the hawser and clamps, a fully submerged human is going to rise … quite high./ |
|
| |
That would be so awesome! They would pop out in a silver spray and promptly start with the kung fu! You could still use the super slomo for the Apocalypse Now effect. |
|
| |
Hmm... if you took a breath at the surface before winching yourself under, it might be hard to hold your breath for long under the mercury. The weight would collapse down the airspace in your lungs to a minimum. But if you had a submerged air reservoir it should be equally pressurized and so that would work out. |
|
| |
WorldDailyNewsReport of raiders beating Max to the
punch: From their FAQ: "WNDR assumes however all
responsibility for the satirical nature of its articles
and for the fictional nature of their content. All
characters appearing in the articles in this website –
even those based on real people – are entirely
fictional and any resemblance between them and
any persons, living, dead, or undead is purely a
miracle." |
|
| |
// and so that would work out // You first. I'm
going to do a little more research on explosive
decompression. |
|
| |
Your planet's atmosphere is equivalent to 760mm of mercury
(approx). |
|
| |
Initial height of human test subject: 2000mm (this value will no
doubt be different after the experiment). |
|
| |
If the subject is just submerged, the average pressure will be
1000mm of mercury or about 1.3 Bar, equivalent to 13 metres
submergence. |
|
| |
Let us know how that works out for you. |
|
| |
That would be 13 metres of submersion in water.
Mercury is around 13.6x heavier than water, from
memory. |
|
| |
//equivalent to 13 metres submergence. |
|
| |
Let us know how that works out for you
// |
|
| |
No probs, I'm good for about two and a half minutes at that depth, including descent and ascent. Someone who takes their training seriously could easily top 4-5 minutes, assuming moderate natural talent. |
|
| |
...I'd love to see someone sketch up their concept of an aqua-regia based gold extraction system. That stuff's heinous. |
|
| |
// including descent and ascent // Sounds like you
might know what you talking about. If you
ascended from that depth very rapidly (say half a
second) after hanging out at that depth for two
minutes while your unsuspecting victims walked
into the room, would you anticipate any problems?
I remember a story about a free diver having to
equalize pressure in their ears at various times, but
that was in a world record attempt, so maybe not
an issue here. |
|
| |
//WorldDailyNewsReport... of raiders beating Max to the punch: From their FAQ//
Thank you Mr scad for reading further than I did. That'll make this idea already half-baked then, won't it! |
|
| |
//would you anticipate any problems// |
|
| |
Oh, I'm certain there would be problems - just not the ones you're thinking of. I personally don't think the change in pressure would be a big deal internally. Susceptibility to Shallow Water Blackout syndrome would be something to think about, but it's only an issue if you've spent too long down there anyway (you're already dead, you just don't know it yet). Having said that, because you'd surface so quickly, I'm thinking there'd be less risk of SWB, simply because you'd get up and get a breath in, before you could black out - and if/when you did black out, you'd be so buoyant that you'd probably just wake up after a minute or two high and mostly dry on top the mercury, rather than sinking away to your death in water. |
|
| |
You'd have to be on top of your equalisation game, sure, but "up is easier than down" - me personally I just hold the old tubes open and away they go. You certainly wouldn't have any time for reverse frenzel's or anything. Hey, if you fucked it up, at least the blood would be sitting on top of the mercury there for you to see it. I'd hate to think of what the affects would be from mercury injection past a ruptured eardrum if you missed an equalisation on the way down. |
|
| |
...Then there would be the issues from being immersed in mercury. I'm not sure what they would be (especially given the surface tension) - but surely it would permeate areas (and perhaps membranes...) where you would prefer it didn't... |
|
| |
//I remember a story about a free diver having to equalize pressure in their ears at various times, but that was in a world record attempt, so maybe not an issue here.// |
|
| |
Some folks can keep their Eustachian tubes open continuously so equalization becomes a non factor. |
|
| |
That's called VTO or Voluntary Tubal Opening. Not everyone can do it, even with training. I can do it coming up but I'm not strong enough to do it going down. |
|
| |
It's the pressure gradient that matters. Between 1-10 metres, you need to equalise, say 5 times. Between 10-20 metres, that drops to 2-3, and from 20-30 it's 1-2 times, etc etc. |
|
| |
Even duck diving in a decently deep pool or creek you'll notice the pressure. The gap between "ooh, theres pressure on my eardrums" and "oh fuck that hurts" is very narrow. The gap between "oh fuck that hurts" and "oh that pinched for a second but now my ear feels lovely and warm, but I can't tell which way is up anymore" is even narrower. |
|
| |
Equalise early and often. |
|
| |
This shouldn't be in the science category. Otherwise I'm
bunning it for evilness. |
|
| |
// This shouldn't be in the science category // |
|
| |
No ? Ok … how about putting it in "Other:General" ? |
|
| |
"Public: Recycling: Separation"? "Public: World Domination"? |
|
| |
//Now that you say that, I'm sure there was a film (or program) where they did that. I've got a feeling it was Mission Impossible (the series, not the modern movies). Anyone?// |
|
| |
The following may be a spoiler, depending on your memory and powers of deduction, so I have rot13'd the salient part. |
|
| |
Depending on what exactly you were referring to, it might have been a book "Pelcgbavzvpba", ol Arny Fgrcurafba. |
|
| |
Actually, you'd better not equalize at all while
submerged in mercury or you will risk rupturing
your eardrums. |
|
| |
We were treating the whole person as being
submerged at an average depth of 1000mm, but
we're talking about a person oriented vertically
with their head just below the surface. Let's say
the diver's eardrums are 200mm below the surface
(equivalent to 2.6 meters of water), but their
chest/lungs are at 500mm depth (6.5 meter of
water). If the diver opened their Eustachian
tubes, there would be a 3.9 meter of water (~0.39
bar) over pressure inside the ear. A web search
says, snorkeling is only possible down to about half
a meter because the lungs aren't strong enough to
expand, so if the diver tried to expand their lungs
while equalizing, they might be able to reduce the
3.9 meter over pressure by 0.5 meter, probably
more with serious training. Based on a web
search, it looks like eardrums may sometimes
rupture at 0.35 bar (~3.5 meters of water), so I
think equalizing while submerged vertically in
mercury would have a fairly high risk of causing a
rupture. |
|
| |
Maybe the best bet would be to equalize when
the chest was submerged to 100mm, over
pressuring the ears to 1.3 meters of water. When
the ears were submerged to 100mm, the pressure
on the eardrums would be neutralized, and
submersion by another 100mm ought to fully cover
the head and only put 1.3 meters of water
pressure on the eardrum. |
|
| |
I just Googled and found that it was a Mission
Impossible episode from 1968 (linky). |
|
| |
Oh I'm thinking you'd probably have to be horizontal given those numbers. Actually, head down would be even better - you can easily overpressurise your ears using advanced techniques. The Frenzel technique uses your throat muscles to force air into the eustachian tubes. You have to take it easy, because you could easily rupture your eardrums with a little effort. |
|
| |
...So, I'd go head down, or horizontal in mercury. |
|
| |
//That's called VTO or Voluntary Tubal Opening. Not everyone can do it, even with training.// |
|
| |
Yeah, I kind of freaked out my dive instructor a bit the first time we descended. I've always been able to hold my tubes open for as long as I wish with about as much effort as keeping my eyelids open, just like I've always been able to swim an Olympic pool under water on a single breath. <shrugs> Just part fish I guess.
He really freaked out when I taught him how to add a good minute to his free-dive time by gulping in air after hyperventilating and taking in as much air as the diaphragm itself can draw. |
|
| |
I think I'll pass on trying it in a pool of mercury. |
|
| |
// Just part fish I guess // |
|
| |
Errr, which part, exactly ? |
|
| |
Or is this another "Too Much Information" thing ? |
|
| |
//add a good minute to his free-dive time by gulping in air after hyperventilating and taking in as much air as the diaphragm itself can draw// |
|
| |
...Red flag dude. Hyperventillating allows you to go closer to the point of blackout more comfortably. It does not increase dive time to blackout. |
|
| |
The single biggest contributor to Shallow Water Blackout deaths is hyperventillation. The pure fact of the matter is hyperventillating does not increase oxygen saturation by any significant ammount. What it does is removes CO2, which then sets up a delay in your physiological impulse to breathe (breathing is triggered by CO2 level, not Oxygen for like 99% of the population). So hyperventillating retards your ability to know when you need to breathe. Now combine that with the higher availability of O2 at depth (PPO2) what you get is freedivers, 10 or 20 or so metres down, with blood oxygen concentrations so low they will pass out on the way to the surface. Which is called Shallow Water Blackout. |
|
| |
Freediving training is, in addition to increasing lung capacity, and lowering dive metabolism, about acknowledging the requirement to breathe, and being able to live with it within established boundaries (and ultimately, pushing those boundaries under controlled testing). |
|
| |
Note the above is for hyperventillating air. There are reasons for hyperventillating concentrated O2 for extended periods in preparation for certain deep diving disciplines. That's not what we're talking about. |
|
| |
...That said, "packing" or gulping air is very useful for increasing effective lung capacity. Remember to vent on resurfacing - you normally come up with more air than you went down with. Also be very careful of overdoing it - I can't remember the name for it but you can stretch your rib cage too much, a bit like a muscle strain, but it fucks you for weeks. I don't pack anymore because of it. |
|
| |
Interesting. Thanks for the info.
I wasn't taught, I just learned that hyperventilating while slowing my heart before hand let me stay down longer than if I didn't. I never came close to or even considered that I might black out from it, but I've also never used weights or gone very deep either. |
|
| |
I just got here...how did we get to here? Not diving these days, but the exchange is entertaining. |
|
| |
My personal best is forty feet for forty seconds, so no serious competitor, but the reactions of the fish is worth the effort. |
|
| |
Sorry, I just can't not say anything when I read someone espousing hyperventillating for freediving. I've known several people, and known of many many more, who have died of SWB. I've personally had a few sambas while pool training (minor temporary loss of motor control - the precursor to blackout) - but that's why you're training. |
|
| |
I'm no expert, but I went out and did an accredited course so I could know what was going on. |
|
| |
Anyhow, how about all that gold? Can we get it without diving in mercury? I certainly hope so... |
|
| |
It should be in business:crime |
|
| |
Diving into a pool of mercury would be an interesting way of
achieving rapid deceleration … |
|
| |
// Diving into a pool of mercury // |
|
| |
//sp. onto// dunno... you'd sink to probably mid-thigh in a pool of mercury, so even from zero altitude it isn't "onto", unless you're just pancaking in (painful, at least on water you can slow deceleration by displacement). |
|
| |
//Remember to vent on resurfacing - you normally come up with more air than you went down with.// |
|
| |
My naive impression is that metabolism is gas neutral: O2 in, CO2 out.
... calculations using figures gleaned online: |
|
| |
gas, mol wt, density at 0degC and 1 atmosphere (kg/m^3)
CO2, 44.01, 1.977
O2 , 32, 1.4290 |
|
| |
so for CO2 1000*1.977/44.01=44.92 moles/m^3
and O2 1000*1.4290/32=44.66 moles/m^3 |
|
| |
So the volume is going up, by around 0.6% |
|
| |
Is that significant? It doesn't look like much. |
|
| |
// Where does it come from? // |
|
| |
The Little Yellow Pixies bring it in paper bags. |
|
| |
//Where does it come from? // |
|
| |
They spoke about this in the course. I can't remember, but I think it's got to do with solubility and saturation in bodily tissues. ...eh I dunno.. Firsthand, there's no way that if you pack your lungs, and dive down for a couple minutes, that you can get all the way back up to the surface without letting some air out. Feels like your chest is about to explode. It might also have something to do with muscle tension and fatigue for all I know. |
|
| |
Of course in the grand scheme of things, there's a 1:1 exchange of O2 and CO2. But it isn't a swap meet: the brachiolae (or whatever) will still pump out CO2 for awhile even if no O2 is entering.... no ? So you could end up with more gas in your lungs than you started with. |
|
| |
No, China. Do try to keep up, [008]. |
|
| |
//But it isn't a swap meet: the brachiolae (or whatever) will still pump out CO2 for awhile even if no O2 is entering.... no ? // |
|
| |
No - no pumping; it's passive diffusion. |
|
| |
It could be a secondary effect of increasing CO2 or decreasing O2 I suppose.
Dissolved carbon dioxide is slightly acid, so the blood pH will go down slightly - maybe that affects the solubility of other gasses as Custardguts suggests. |
|
| |