# Formatting Sandbox III: please test stuff here

Spoiler warning: Be aware that this page contains a lot of MathJax, so it will probably need quite a while to load completely.

Sandbox II has become as clogged as Sandbox I was (and is), especially for users with 10,000 reputation or above. So, here is a new new post...

Before you delete a post here, please reduce it to one line without MathJax.

Old formatting sandboxes:

• Excellent! Many thanks for this new Sandbox!
– Ed V
Jun 2 '20 at 15:39
• Why do we have to reduce it to one line without MathJax? Jun 19 '20 at 14:53
• @Micelle deleted posts are viewable by users with >10,000 reputation, so it's just a courtesy thing. Long mathjax posts make the page load slowly.
– orthocresol Mod
Jun 19 '20 at 14:55
• I totally forgot to thank you for making a new one. :D Jul 9 '20 at 16:21

These screenshots I did might be used in an answer to this question over at the Physics Stack Exchange. Posting right here is temporary.

Mueller optical calculus simulation model using a pair of synchronously rotating (fixed 90 degree offset) polarizers:

Corrected results:

Conclusion: If the light is a mixture of elliptically polarized light plus unpolarized light, then the quarter wave plate makes a difference. But if the light is a mixture of linearly polarized light plus unpolarized light, then the quarter wave plate makes no difference.

### Common misspellings

This table is indexed alphabetically in the first column. Please feel free to add to it.

Wrong Correct Remarks
Breddts Bredt’s [rule] Julius Bredt.
carbonation carbocation Carbonation is what you do to make fizzy drinks.
Clemenson Clemmensen [reduction] Erik Christian Clemmensen.
die dye “Die” is only for “die Farbstoffe”.
Diel's Adler Diels–Alder [reaction] Otto Paul Hermann Diels; Kurt Alder.
fajan's Fajans’ [rules] Kazimierz Fajans
flourine fluorine
Friedel–Craft's Friedel–Crafts The guy's name was James Crafts, not James Craft.
gasses gases One outgasses gases.
Gibb's Gibbs [energy] Josiah Willard Gibbs.
Henderson–Hasselbach Henderson–Hasselbalch [equation] Lawrence Joseph Henderson; Karl Albert Hasselbalch.
iconic ionic [bond]
morality molarity The moral of this story is that only people can be moral or amoral.
Nerst Nernst [equation] Walther Hermann Nernst.
phosphorus acid phosphorous acid This refers to the acid $$\ce{H3PO3}$$. See also previous entry.
pie pi/π [bond] Pie bonding is for SeasonedAdvice.SE.
seperation separation [process] “Seperate” is not even an English word.
stigma sigma/σ [bond] Stigma bonding is for Christianity.SE or MedicalSciences.SE.
Tollen's Tollens’ [reagent] Bernhard Tollens.
Vander-Wal's, Van der walls van der Waals [force] Johannes Diderik van der Waals. Note it's lowercase “v”.
Vant-hoff van 't Hoff [equation] Jacobus Henricus van 't Hoff.

### Somebody complained that the reaction I asked about doesn't exist. Why is this a problem?

Chemistry is an experimental science first and foremost, and this is especially true of synthetic chemistry, whether organic or inorganic.

What this means is that: we don't come up with theories from first principles, then use them to predict reactions. [We're getting better at doing this using quantum mechanics, but it's still very early days.] Instead, we find out that a reaction happens, and then we work backwards to come up with a model that explains it.

The ultimate source of "truth" in chemistry is not defined by our theories, but rather by our experimental observations. The theories only exist because they can explain experimental evidence.

[Incidentally, that's why there are so many exceptions to the theories. Many of them have a limited range of validity, in that they can only explain a certain subset of the experimental observations we have. A simple example is the octet rule. It works for quite a lot of organic molecules, but can completely fall apart in other contexts.]

So, asking "why does this reaction occur?" is only sensible if that reaction has actually occurred!

If nobody has done it before in real life, then we have no way of knowing whether it would actually occur. And secondly, if it doesn't actually occur and we come up with a theory to explain it, then there is no guarantee that that theory would be correct.

$$h=\frac{I_{\text{const}}\cdot R_{\text{ref}}(1+\alpha\Delta T)}{A_{\text{filament}}(T-T_{\text{flow}})}$$

$\require{begingroup}\begingroup$ $\def\pi{\neq 3.14}$

$$\require{begingroup}\begingroup$$ $$\def\pi{\neq 3.14}$$

The ratio of a circle's circumference to its diameter is $\pi$.

The ratio of a circle's circumference to its diameter is $$\pi$$.

$\endgroup$

$$\endgroup$$

• $\pi here doesn't leak through:$\pi\$
– orthocresol Mod
Jan 30 at 15:15