this post was submitted on 16 May 2025
265 points (99.6% liked)

chapotraphouse

13920 readers
798 users here now

Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.

No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer

Slop posts go in c/slop. Don't post low-hanging fruit here.

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] miz@hexbear.net 39 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (17 children)
[–] Lussy@hexbear.net 33 points 1 month ago (15 children)

Phlogiston

This is the sort of arcane bullshit i come to this site for

[–] RNAi@hexbear.net 19 points 1 month ago (13 children)

Meh they tell you about phlogiston when teaching the history of chemistry in highschool

[–] CupcakeOfSpice@hexbear.net 6 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Is that the shit where they thought they could spontaneously create life e.g. by putting straw in a cellar and miraculously rats will spring from nothing? Or was that the lumeniferous ether or something? My biology class talked about some weird shit in historical theories.

[–] Abracadaniel@hexbear.net 8 points 1 month ago

you're thinking of spontaneous generation.

phlogiston was a theorized substance related to combustion and luminiferous aether was a theorized medium for the propagation of light waves.

[–] SteamedHamberder@hexbear.net 6 points 1 month ago

Phlogiston was a substance of negative oxidation. Combustibles lost their phlogiston as they burned, it was assumed, because the ash was much lighter than the original wood for instance. But this was all because the CO2 just dissipated. When measurements improved, it could be demonstrated that iron oxide weighed more than the original iron that rusted which disproved the phlogiston theory.

load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)
load more comments (12 replies)