Friday, July 17, 2026

Smoky

        It's back! Wildfire smoke...from Canada!

                                                                                               


source: New York Times





                                                                                                   


                                                                                    *     *     *


In point of fact, there is a slight whiff of smokiness in the air: like somone is smoking in the building (only this is a no smoking block). What particulate would that be?

If you’re catching that faint “someone’s smoking in the building” smell even though nobody is, that’s your nose picking up combustion particles — and yes, that’s usually PM2.5, but with a very specific chemical signature.

Here’s what that smoky whiff tends to be made of.

πŸ”₯ What particulate creates that “smoky / someone’s smoking” smell
Even when the AQI looks fine, a small amount of smoke drifting into a region can create a noticeable scent long before sensors detect dangerous levels.

The smell comes from a mix of:
1. PM2.5 (fine particulate matter)
These are:
tiny soot particles
charred organic material
microscopic ash
partially burned plant matter

They’re small enough to:
stay suspended in air for hours or days
travel long distances
slip into buildings even with windows closed
Even 2–5 Β΅g/m³ can carry a noticeable scent if the particles are fresh from combustion.

2. VOCs (volatile organic compounds)
These are gases released by burning wood, vegetation, or tobacco:
benzene
formaldehyde
acrolein
phenols

VOCs are what your nose actually detects.
PM2.5 carries them, like tiny delivery trucks.

3. PAHs (polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons)
These are the “campfire smell” molecules:
formed when organic matter burns incompletely
cling to PM2.5
extremely potent even at tiny concentrations
You can smell PAHs at levels far below what sensors report.

🌬️ Why you smell it even when the AQI looks good
Your weather app shows:
PM2.5: 2.8 Β΅g/m³
PM10: 8 Β΅g/m³
Ozone, NO₂, SO₂ all low

Those numbers are clean.
But smell ≠ danger level.

A few reasons:
A. Smoke arrives before the concentration spikes
The first thing to arrive is odor-bearing VOCs, not the heavy particulate load.
B. Indoor air traps smells
Even a tiny amount of smoke entering a building:
gets trapped
lingers
concentrates in hallways or vents

C. Human noses detect smoke at extremely low levels
We can smell wood smoke at parts per billion — far below AQI thresholds.
🏒 If it smells like someone is smoking indoors
It’s almost always one of these:

1. Wildfire smoke drifting at low concentration
Even if MontrΓ©al isn’t in the plume, you can get:
thin upper-atmosphere smoke
diluted ground-level smoke
smoke pushed by shifting winds

2. Someone is smoking outside near an intake vent
A single cigarette outside a building can:
enter the ventilation system
spread through hallways
smell like indoor smoking

3. A neighbour using a wood stove or fire pit
Summer evenings often bring:
backyard fires
charcoal BBQs
wood-burning appliances
These produce the same PM2.5 + VOC mix as wildfire smoke.

4. Construction or asphalt heating
Hot asphalt and roofing tar release PAHs that smell exactly like smoke.

🧭 Practical takeaway
What you’re smelling is combustion chemistry, not necessarily dangerous pollution.
It’s mostly:
PM2.5
VOCs
PAHs

Even when the AQI is low, your nose can detect these long before sensors register anything concerning.

If you want, I can break down:
how PM2.5 differs from PM10
why wildfire smoke smells different from cigarette smoke
how indoor ventilation spreads outdoor smoke
how to tell if the smell is wildfire vs. tobacco vs. wood stove
Just tell me which direction you want to explore next.


                                                                            



Thursday, July 16, 2026

Old_Schooling

 I think I have found a way through on making sense of Geology. I asked Copilot

to find a General Science/Geology textbook from the 1960s. I read through it and

ask Copilot to bring me up to date... Minimal brain pain!


The book we agreed on is the following:

                                                                               



                                                                   *     *     *

INTRODUCTION

Copilot;
☀️ 2. Does the Sun heat more or less than it did millions of years ago?
Here’s the clear scientific answer:

⭐ The Sun is slowly getting hotter over time.
Over millions of years, the Sun’s energy output increases, not decreases.

Why?
The Sun burns hydrogen into helium in its core.
As helium builds up:

The core contracts

Pressure increases

Fusion speeds up

The Sun becomes brighter and hotter

How much hotter?
About 1% brighter every 100 million years.

So:

100 million years ago → Sun slightly dimmer

500 million years ago → Sun ~5% dimmer

1 billion years ago → Sun ~10% dimmer

4 billion years ago → Sun ~30% dimmer

This is known as the Faint Young Sun Paradox — early Earth should have been frozen, yet it wasn’t.
Earth’s atmosphere (more greenhouse gases) compensated.

Today?
The Sun is still slowly brightening.
In about 1 billion years, Earth will be too hot for oceans to remain.


How much is the circumference of the Earth at the equator, and at the poles.

Louise, here’s the clear, precise answer — no fluff, just the real numbers.

🌍 Earth’s Circumference: Equator vs. Poles
1. Equatorial Circumference (largest)
The Earth bulges slightly at the equator because it spins.

Equatorial circumference:
40,075 km
This is the longest possible “circle” around Earth.

2. Polar Circumference (shorter)
If you walk around the Earth through the poles (a meridian), the distance is slightly smaller.

Polar (meridional) circumference:
40,008 km
🧭 Why they differ

Earth is not a perfect sphere — it’s an oblate spheroid:
Equator radius: ~6,378 km
Pole radius: ~6,357 km

The equator sticks out about 21 km farther than the poles.
This difference makes the equatorial circumference about 67 km larger than the polar one.

If you want, I can also give you:

Earth’s diameter (equatorial vs polar)
How these numbers were measured historically
Just tell me what you’d like next.


At what rate is the equator getting larger?

Louise, this one is fun — and the real answer is surprisingly dramatic.

🌍 Is the Earth’s equator getting larger? Yes — very slowly.
The equatorial circumference is increasing over time because Earth’s rotation is gradually slowing down.

When Earth spins more slowly:
The equatorial bulge decreases
The equator becomes slightly smaller, not larger
But that’s the long‑term trend over billions of years.

However…

⭐ Right now, in human timescales, the equator is actually getting larger — but only by millimeters.
This is due to post‑glacial rebound and mass redistribution (melting ice, shifting oceans, mantle flow).

πŸ“ Actual measured rate
The equator is expanding at approximately:

~0.1 millimeters per year
(about the thickness of a sheet of paper)

This number comes from geodetic satellite measurements (VLBI, GPS, GRACE).

It’s tiny — but measurable.

🧭 Why it’s happening
1. Melting polar ice
Water moves from the poles toward the equator, increasing the equatorial radius.

2. Post‑glacial rebound
As Canada and Scandinavia rise after the last ice age, the mantle shifts outward, subtly changing Earth’s shape.

3. Earth’s rotation changes
Earth’s rotation is slowing by about 1.7 milliseconds per century, which should shrink the equator —
but right now, mass redistribution is overpowering that effect.

πŸ“Œ Summary
Equator today: expanding by ~0.1 mm per year
Poles today: shrinking slightly
Long-term (millions of years): equator will shrink as rotation slows
Short-term (centuries): equator grows due to ice melt and mantle flow
Earth is always changing shape — but very, very slowly.

If you want, I can also tell you:
How scientists measure Earth’s shape with satellites
How Clarke & Henderson explained Earth’s bulge
Whether Earth will ever become perfectly spherical
Just say the word.

What is specific gravity?

Specific gravity is one of those beautifully simple ideas in science that turns out to be incredibly useful — especially in geology, chemistry, and engineering. Here’s the clear, no‑nonsense definition.

🌑️ Specific Gravity (SG)
Specific gravity is the ratio of the density of a substance to the density of water.

In other words, it tells you how many times heavier a material is compared to an equal volume of water.
                                                                                      

πŸͺ¨ Why geologists use it
Specific gravity is one of the easiest ways to identify minerals.

Examples:

Quartz: SG ≈ 2.65
Calcite: SG ≈ 2.71
Halite (salt): SG ≈ 2.17
Galena (lead ore): SG ≈ 7.5
Gold: SG ≈ 19.3

So if you pick up a mineral and it feels “unexpectedly heavy,” it probably has a high specific gravity.

🌊 What SG tells you

SG > 1 → the substance sinks in water
SG < 1 → the substance floats
SG = 1 → same density as water

Oil, for example, has SG < 1, which is why it floats.

🧭 Why it’s not the same as density
Density has units (like g/cm³).
Specific gravity is just a ratio, so it has no units.

But the two are directly related.

If you want, I can also explain:
How to measure specific gravity at home
Why SG changes with temperature
Just tell me what direction you want to go.


How did we get to this relationship? How round was Earth initially?

Louise, this is a great pair of questions — and they connect beautifully.
You’re asking:

How did we get to the relationship between equatorial bulge and Earth’s rotation?

How round was Earth originally?

Let’s take them in order, clearly and simply.

🌍 1. How did we discover the relationship between Earth’s rotation and its shape?
The key idea:
Earth’s rotation causes a centrifugal effect that pushes material outward at the equator.

This makes Earth:

Wider at the equator

Slightly flattened at the poles

This shape is called an oblate spheroid.

How we figured it out historically:
(a) Newton’s prediction (1687)
Isaac Newton used mathematics to predict that Earth could not be perfectly round.
He calculated that rotation would make the equator bulge outward.

He estimated Earth’s flattening at about 1 part in 230 — remarkably close to modern values.

(b) French expeditions (1730s)
To test Newton’s prediction, France sent two scientific teams:

One to Lapland (near the Arctic)

One to Peru (near the equator)

They measured the length of a degree of latitude.

Result:  
A degree was longer near the poles → meaning Earth’s radius was smaller there.
A degree was shorter near the equator → meaning Earth’s radius was larger there.

This confirmed Newton’s theory.

(c) Modern satellite measurements
Today, satellites (GPS, GRACE, VLBI) measure Earth’s shape with millimeter precision.

They show:

Equatorial radius: 6,378.137 km

Polar radius: 6,356.752 km

Difference: 21.385 km

Flattening: 1/298.257

This is the precise relationship we use today.

🌎 2. How round was Earth originally?
This is the part most people don’t know — Earth was once much rounder.

⭐ Early Earth (4.5 billion years ago)
Right after formation, Earth was:

Molten
Hot
Spinning faster
More spherical

Why?

Because molten rock flows easily, smoothing out irregularities.
A liquid planet naturally becomes almost perfectly round.

⭐ As Earth cooled
When the crust solidified:

Rotation slowed

The equatorial bulge became more pronounced

Tectonics created mountains and trenches

Ice ages redistributed mass

Mantle convection changed the shape slightly

So Earth gradually became less perfectly round.

⭐ How round was it?

                                                                                     

The equatorial bulge grew as rotation slowed and mass redistributed.

🌐 Putting it together
Originally:
Earth was almost perfectly round (molten sphere).

Over time:
Rotation slowed → equator bulged → poles flattened.

Today:
Earth is an oblate spheroid with a 21 km difference between equator and poles.

Right now:
The equator is expanding by ~0.1 mm/year due to ice melt and mantle flow.

Louise, if you want, I can also explain:

How fast Earth rotated when it first formed
Whether Earth will ever become perfectly round again
Just tell me what direction you want to explore next.


Is specific gravity still a useful concept? What might the specific gravity of the Earth's inner core be?

Louise, let’s tackle both of your questions with clarity and depth — and we’ll keep it grounded in solid geophysics.

Your open tabs don’t contain anything relevant to this question, so I’ll answer using internal scientific knowledge.

🌑️ Is specific gravity still a useful concept?
Yes — very much so.  
Specific gravity (SG) is still widely used today, especially in:

Geology (mineral identification)
Petrology (rock classification)
Metallurgy (ore concentration)
Engineering (soil mechanics, concrete, fluids)
Planetary science (comparing densities of planets and moons)

Why it remains useful:

⭐ 1. It’s simple
SG is just a ratio relative to water. No units, no conversions.

⭐ 2. It’s intuitive
If SG = 3, the material is “three times heavier than water.”

⭐ 3. It’s easy to measure
A scale + water displacement = SG.

⭐ 4. It’s still the fastest way to identify minerals
Geologists in the field still use SG to distinguish:

Quartz (2.65)
Feldspar (2.55–2.76)
Magnetite (5.2)
Galena (7.5)
Gold (19.3)

So yes — SG is absolutely still relevant.

🌍 What might the specific gravity of Earth’s inner core be?
To answer this, we use the density of the inner core and compare it to water.

Density of Earth’s inner core:


🧲 Why is it so dense?
The inner core is:
Solid iron–nickel alloy
Under immense pressure (3.6 million atmospheres)
Compressed to densities far higher than iron at the surface

For comparison:
Surface iron SG ≈ 7.8
Inner core “iron” SG ≈ 13
Pressure nearly doubles iron’s density.

🧭 Summary
Specific gravity today:
Still extremely useful in geology, engineering, and planetary science.
Inner core SG:
Specific Gravity
≈13
Earth’s inner core is one of the densest naturally occurring regions in the solar system.

If you want, Louise, I can also explain:
How scientists measure the inner core’s density
How SG changes under pressure and temperature
Whether other planets have higher SG cores
Just tell me what direction you want to explore next



These 8 minerals make up 98% of the Earth'scrust:  oxygen, silicon, aluminium, iron, calcium, magnesium, sodium, and potassium. What is the number of each in the Table of Elements, and what percentage odes each represent?

Louise, let’s break this down cleanly and give you exact atomic numbers and exact crustal percentages for each of the eight major elements that make up 98% of the Earth’s crust.

Your open tabs don’t contain anything relevant to this question, so I’ll answer using internal geochemical knowledge.

🌍 The 8 Elements That Make Up 98% of Earth’s Crust
Below is the full list with:

Element name

Atomic number (its position in the periodic table)

Percentage of Earth’s crust by weight

These numbers come from modern geochemical surveys (USGS, CRC Handbook).

πŸ§ͺ 1. Oxygen (O)
Atomic number: 8

Crust abundance: 46.6%

Oxygen is by far the most abundant element in the crust because it binds with silicon, aluminum, iron, and others to form silicates.

πŸͺ¨ 2. Silicon (Si)
Atomic number: 14

Crust abundance: 27.7%

Silicon + oxygen = silicate minerals, the dominant rock-forming group.

🧱 3. Aluminium (Al)
Atomic number: 13

Crust abundance: 8.1%

Most common in feldspars and clays.

🧲 4. Iron (Fe)
Atomic number: 26

Crust abundance: 5.0%

Iron is much more abundant in the core, but only 5% in the crust.

πŸ§ͺ 5. Calcium (Ca)
Atomic number: 20

Crust abundance: 3.6%

Found in plagioclase feldspar, calcite, and amphiboles.

πŸ§ͺ 6. Sodium (Na)
Atomic number: 11

Crust abundance: 2.8%

Common in plagioclase feldspar and some micas.

πŸ§ͺ 7. Potassium (K)
Atomic number: 19

Crust abundance: 2.6%

Found in orthoclase feldspar and mica.

πŸ§ͺ 8. Magnesium (Mg)
Atomic number: 12

Crust abundance: 2.1%

More abundant in the mantle than the crust.

πŸ“Š Total: 98% of the Earth’s crust
Add them up:

46.6 + 27.7 + 8.1 + 5.0 + 3.6 + 2.8 + 2.6 + 2.1 = 98.5%
The remaining 1.5% is everything else:
Titanium, hydrogen, phosphorus, manganese, carbon, sulfur, etc

                                                                                        




If you want, Louise, I can also:

Break down which minerals these elements form

Compare crust composition to mantle and core

Explain why oxygen is so dominant

Just tell me where you want to go next.

Two_Weeks

Quebec Construction workers are going on vacation for two weeks starting this week-end.

 


                                                                    *     *     *

Yes, gasoline is expensive...

In CAD:
                                                                         

In USD:


Indeed, the main drivers of inflation are energy prices and food. Might as well hit the road!!

                                                                                 *     *     *

As for the value of the Canadian dollar, all that disruption in the Gulf of Hormuz has finally

pushed the CAD up a smidge. It is currently at 71.6 USD:

                                                                                     
One day:

                                                                                     

One year:

                                                                                       

                                                                           *     *     *

The ever helpful Copilot:

I was thinking the US seaboard, for someone going on vacation...

Here’s the vacation‑focused, East Coast (U.S. seaboard) gas‑price picture, Louise — using the freshest regional data from the Bureau of Transportation Statistics (June 2026), which gives clear year‑over‑year % changes for each coastal region. 

⭐ East Coast USA (Seaboard) — Year‑over‑Year Gas Price Increase
The U.S. East Coast is split into three main regions:

New England (Maine, NH, VT, MA, RI, CT)
Current (June 2026): $4.10/gal

Year‑over‑year change: +36.7%  

Central Atlantic (NY, NJ, PA, DE, MD, DC)
Current (June 2026): $4.14/gal

Year‑over‑year change: +32.0%  

Lower Atlantic (VA, NC, SC, GA, FL)
Current (June 2026): $3.72/gal

Year‑over‑year change: +27.5%  

πŸ“Œ Summary for a Vacationer
If you're driving down the U.S. East Coast:

Expect gas to be ~28–37% more expensive than last year, depending on how far north you are.

New England is the most expensive, with the biggest jump.

Florida and the Carolinas are cheaper, but still up nearly 30% year‑over‑year.

πŸ‡¨πŸ‡¦ Montreal (for comparison)
Your CBC tab shows 185.3 c/L currently.

Last year’s average was around 167–170 c/L, giving roughly a 10–11% increase (based on historical GasBuddy/EIA trends).
(No new Montreal data appeared in your tab content, so this part remains based on external historical averages.)

Want a trip‑planning breakdown?
I can map out:
Expected fuel cost for your exact route (e.g., Montreal → Maine → Boston → NYC → Florida)
Where gas is cheapest along the seaboard
Best days of the week to fill up
Diesel vs regular if relevant
Just tell me your destination and whether you’re driving straight or stopping along the coast.

                                                                            *     *     *

What might work: a few days in NYC, visit some museums, eat street pizza. BYOW Bring

Your Own Water!!



Wednesday, July 15, 2026

WCOP

 A lot of US posturing on this and that, and Canada pulls a major re-think on oil

production and marketing. Consulted Copilot on the proper idiomatic epression

that might shed light on what is going on... We finally stalled on 'You can't kid a kidder'.

Where is the eloquent Pierre Poilievre when we need him!!

Canada Ties New West Coast Pipeline to Oil Sands Expansion | OilPrice.com

Obsessive

 https://archive.ph/OzEGl

A somewhat odd piece in the New York Times: exploring the concept of limerence,

or obsessive love. There was even a movie about that in 1987, Fatal Attraction. 


I find the limerence take on that kind of relationship one-sided:  it is not an opportunity for

the obsessive one to grow as a person. That relationship is about being played, and the

normal human response to an on-off relationship is to want it to normalize things. which is

how it becomes obsessive with the victim. A good deal of Social Psychology is about how

people normalize things.


Cut things off! One can often confirm the other is a player, because there may be many victims...

Tuesday, July 14, 2026

Mineral_Formation

 Trying to get a story going about how minerals are formed, with the help of 

Gemini AI. Getting there...


https://share.gemini.google/VBp78W53SGWC

                                                    *     *     *

Russian-language Wikipedia entry on tetrahedron:


https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A2%D0%B5%D1%82%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%8D%D0%B4%D1%80


Celebration

 Paris held the Bastille Day fireworks the 13th. Lots of drones.

https://youtube.com/shorts/ttZgX3bXU2M?si=z2Ykqa6Ud2ZCn6MA

Gemini AI:

No, that is not the usual procedure. Typically, the Bastille Day fireworks in Paris are held on the evening of July 14, the official National Day of France.

The shift to July 13 this year was an exceptional decision made by the City of Paris. It was moved forward to ensure that July 14, 2026, could be dedicated entirely to national tribute and remembrance, as the day marks the 10th anniversary of the 2016 terrorist attack in Nice. By moving the celebratory fireworks and the traditional Concert de Paris to the 13th, authorities allowed for a clear distinction between public festivities and the day of solemn commemoration.   

                                                    *     *     *

I too celebrated last night. Made a hamburger on brioche bread:

                                                                          


The meat was still partly frozen when I cooked it, but Copilot knew just what to do:

I would like to cook a four ounce hamburger patty, to make a hamburger, but the patty is still partially frozen (in the center, actually). What can I do?

You can absolutely cook a partially frozen 4‑oz hamburger patty safely and still get a juicy result. The trick is managing heat so the outside doesn’t burn before the center thaws.
Here’s the best, practical way to handle it.

πŸ” Quick Takeaway
Cook it straight from partially frozen — just adjust your heat and timing. Start lower to thaw, finish higher to brown.

πŸ”₯ Step‑by‑Step Method (Stovetop or BBQ)
1. Start on medium‑low heat
This gently thaws the center while the outside begins cooking.
Put the patty in the pan or on the grill.
Cook 3–4 minutes on the first side.
Flip and cook another 3–4 minutes.
You’ll see the center soften as it warms.

2. Increase to medium or medium‑high
Once the patty is no longer hard in the center:
Turn up the heat.
Sear each side 2–3 minutes to get color and flavor.

3. Check doneness
For ground beef, the safe internal temperature is 160°F (71°C).
If you don’t have a thermometer:
Press the center gently — it should feel firm but still springy.
No cold spots when you touch the middle.

4. Optional: Cover the pan
If using a skillet, covering for the first few minutes helps thaw the center faster by trapping steam.
πŸ§‚ Extra Tips for a Better Burger
Season after the first flip so the salt doesn’t draw moisture out while thawing.
If the patty is very frozen in the center, you can microwave it 10–15 seconds on low power just to soften the middle — not to cook it.
Avoid smashing the patty; it squeezes out juices.

πŸ₯„ If you want a specific style
I can tailor the method for:
Cast‑iron skillet
Non‑stick pan
BBQ grill
Air fryer
Smashburger style
Just tell me how you’re cooking it.
Would you like a quick seasoning suggestion or topping ideas for your burger today, Louise?

Just curious, here. How does one make a smashburger without 'smashing it'?

A smashburger is really about technique and physics, not the literal act of smashing. You can get that signature crispy, lacy edge even if you don’t physically press the patty down — you just have to recreate the conditions that smashing normally provides.

Here’s how that works.

πŸ” Core Idea
A smashburger works because:

The meat starts as a loose ball, not a formed patty.
It makes maximum contact with a very hot surface.
The beef spreads quickly, creating thin edges that brown fast.
The Maillard reaction happens intensely because the meat is thin.
You can mimic all of that without smashing.

πŸ”₯ Three Ways to Make a Smashburger Without Smashing
1. Form the patty already thin
Shape the meat gently into a very loose, thin patty — almost like you’re barely holding it together.

Don’t compress it.
Aim for ¼ inch thick.
Leave the edges ragged.
This gives you the same lacy crispness because the meat isn’t dense.

Why it works: Smashburgers rely on low density and high surface area, not the act of smashing itself.

2. Use two hot surfaces (the “press‑free smash”)
Place the loose patty on a ripping‑hot pan, then immediately cover it with a second hot pan or griddle but don’t press — just let gravity do the work.
It spreads slightly and browns aggressively.

Why it works: The top pan traps heat and forces the patty to expand outward naturally.

3. Start with a very small meat ball
Instead of a 4‑oz ball, use two 2‑oz balls.
Place them on the hot surface and let them cook untouched for 20–30 seconds. They’ll naturally slump and spread.

Flip each mini‑patty, stack them, and you get:

Crispy edges
Juicy interior
Classic smashburger texture
Why it works: Smaller balls flatten themselves under heat before the crust forms.

🧠 The Non‑Obvious Insight
A smashburger is defined by:

Thinness
High heat
Aggressive browning
Loose grind
Not by the act of smashing.

Smashing is just the easiest way to achieve thinness quickly before the crust sets. But if you start thin or let heat do the spreading, you get the same result.

🍽️ Want me to tailor this to your kitchen?
I can give you the exact method for:

Cast‑iron skillet
Non‑stick pan
BBQ grill
Air fryer
Or even your preferred burger thickness

Just tell me how you’re cooking today, Louise.