User talk:Rparson

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! Hope you like it here, and stick around.

Here are some tips to help you get started:

To sign your posts (on talk pages, for example) use the '~' symbol. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes), or, to insert your name and timestamp, use ~~~~ (4 tildes).
Try the Tutorial, and feel free to experiment in the test area.
If you need help, post a question at the Help Desk
Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
Remember Wikipedia:Neutral point of view
Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Good luck!

Meelar (talk) 20:22, Jan 3, 2005 (UTC)

Hello, is that you?

(William M. Connolley 23:01, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)) Hello, and welcome, whichever R Parsons you are. But if you happen to be *the* R Parsons of ozone FAQ fame, you are especially welcome!

As to the ozone page... I see I was watching it, but haven't done much to it (compared to ozone depletion it was relatively uncontroversial, and I think I forgot about it). So... if you want to improve it, please do!

Complete IPCC List of Greenhouse Gases

(William M. Connolley 20:17, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)) Hi. I've just removed (*note: While the IPCC document containing this data (see below) explicitly states that these gases have no effect on ozone depletion, it is generally accepted that they do. However, in order to maintain consistency with the IPCC table, its formatting is retained) from Complete IPCC List of Greenhouse Gases. The note refers to HFC-23, 134a and 152a. I thought these were CFC replacements designed to break down so as not to cause ozone depletion. Do you know? Ozone depletion and Montreal Protocol don't seem to mention this, and perhaps they should?

Rparson 02:49, 10 May 2005 (UTC) Hello William - sorry for the late response, it's been ages since I logged into Wikipedia. HFC's are hydrofluorocarbons. They contain no chlorine and have zero potential for ozone depletion. You were probably thinking of HCFCs (hydrochlorofluorocarbons) - these do release chlorine, but have much lower ozone depletion potentials than CFC's because the hydrogen atoms make them reactive in the troposphere so much less of the Cl is released in the stratosphere. I'll take a look at Ozone Depletion when Iget a chance.[reply]

ozone depletion

Next time you revert make sure your net equation actually reflects what the other equations say. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.250.178.74 (talk) 07:11, 13 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Melting and quantum transitions

Regarding your recent deletion of text in the Thermodynamic temperature article, if melting does not involve quantum transitions of electron bonds while a material transitions from more ordered state to a less ordered state, what do you believe occurs during melting? It seems that if a certain quantity of heat energy is liberated as a certain quantity of atoms freeze (join) into a crystal lattice, that is a quantum phenomenon, is it not? There is no “in-between” option for any given atom; it either has joined onto the lattice or it has not. Going the other direction, melting is certainly the breaking of bonds and there is a very specific amount of energy associated with that break. That again seems clearly to be a quantum transition. Was your objection over other details I originally had that went beyond this description? Please state precisely what was non-factual. Greg L (my talk) 06:55, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I've revised the section you objected to. It does not discuss "electron configuration" or other matters. However, all chemical bonding ("ionic," "covalent," "molecular", etc.) is described by the laws of quantum electrodynamics and are therefore quantized. There either is a bond, or there isn’t a bond; there is never “kind of a bond.” That's why there is a very precise value to the enthalpy of fusion: there is a very precise amount of energy necessary to break an individual bond. Greg L (my talk) 08:30, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]