Text 6623, 75 rader
Skriven 2006-10-16 20:51:13 av Barbara McNay (1:382/48)
   Kommentar till text 6620 av JOAN MACDIARMID (1:123/140)
Ärende: Vinegar
===============
 >  Hi, Barbara,

 >  BM> The idea of igniting acetic acid sounds like something I wouldn't want
 >  BM> to do.  I imagine the fumes would be obnoxious.

 >  Actually, probably not! It should burn quite cleanly
 > to
 >  carbon dioxide and water. However, the unburned
 > vapors
 >  might be irritating. Acetic acid is the more-oxidised
 >  form of ethanol, remember, and burning ethanol
 > doesn't
 >  give off noxious fumes as your cherries jubilee is
 > flambeed!

Oh.  I kept forgetting.  Wondering what ethanol had to do with acetic acid, but
your remark about cherries jubilee flambees reminded me of wine turning to
vinegar.

 >>  in air if ignited. It doesn't go off spontaneously.
 >>  Freezing isn't a problem, after all. You warm it
 >>  up, it melts into the same liquid it was before
 >>  it crystallized.

 >  BM> What kind of consistency does it have when crystallized? Hard?
 >  BM> Buttery?

 >  I never froze any, so I don't know, but I expect it
 > would
 >  form hard, crystalline "ice" because it is a simple
 > molecule
 >  without much "oily" nature.

OK

 >>  Too simple! Taking the 98% seriously (no, I don't
 >>  know what the other 2% is, arguing against using
 >>  reagent acetic acid!), 1 unit x 0.05=V units x 0.98,
 >>  This reduces to V units = 0.05/0.98 x 1 unit, or
 >>  0.51 units per unit of finished volume of 5%
 >>  acetic acid! So you would want 5.1 parts of Glacial
 >>  to 94.9 parts water to get it exact. Still, it's
 >>  close to your idea of taking 5 parts one, 95 parts
 >>  of another, and good enough for cooking.

 >  BM> Thanks for explaining this more clearly.  I had this in junior high, I
 >  BM> think, and this is the first time I have ever wanted to try to use the
 >  BM> formula.

 >  My going into the math was overkill, of course. The
 > basic idea is that
 >  {1 unit x desired concentration = "units of
 > concentrate" x
 >  "concentration of the concentrate"} with  all
 > concentrations expressed
 >  in the same forms, of course. I used percentages

I wouldn't call it overkill, myself.  I actually tried it on a calculator, and
was off by a factor of ten, so I Googled and on their example, I was off by a
factor of 100.  I finally realized that I wasn't using the same form of
expression for all the units, fixed it, and got the answer correct. My math is
*very* rusty!

 > expessed in decimal
 >  form, could have used 5% and 98% directly (the %
 > units cancel anyway)
 >  and as long as "unit" is the same on both sides, it
 > works. But I don't
 >  do teaspoons to gallons!

Google "teaspoons per gallon" and you will be shown a page that says in bold
type at the top: "1 US gallon = 768 US teaspoons." ;)

---
 * Origin: T E X A S ! (1:382/48)