Dear Reader, before continuing I must tell you that I am a Physics teacher. I know a few things about electricity. Some of what I know was hard-earned. For example, in my first year of teaching, during my first period Physics class, on the first day of Electricity, I plunged a hair dryer running on “High” into an aquarium full of tap water to demonstrate how Ground-Fault Circuit Interrupters work. It kept running. All day. We could see the water going through the hair dryer, getting sucked in the back, passing through the heating coils and getting blown out the front, round and round, slightly warmer with each pass. All that day, kids got to see Mr. Stillwater’s hair dryer running under water in a fish tank. I thought I knew about electricity and water, but what I possessed was Conventional Ignorance posing as Conventional Wisdom. Humbling.
My wild guess with my limited knowledge - the water in the aquarium wasn't grounded while your bath would be. If nothing else, this could (and likely should) have tripped the standard breaker but...
My wild guess with my limited knowledge - the water in the aquarium wasn't grounded while your bath would be. If nothing else, this could (and likely should) have tripped the standard breaker but GFCI didn't mind as there was nonleakage to the ground.
Just my bit on hairdryer happily running in aquarium full of water.
I will read the whole article as this seems to be good fella!
EDIT: Yup, Mr. Stillwater (what a great name when conducting such experiment!) explains that at the end of that post.
There is an additional factor at play in that a hairdryer (especially if it is electronically simple and just runs off selector switches or selector buttons) is a VERY simple device for the most...
There is an additional factor at play in that a hairdryer (especially if it is electronically simple and just runs off selector switches or selector buttons) is a VERY simple device for the most part, and in terms of least-resistance-path-to-complete-circuit, the heating element (when turned on) is already a very low resistance path, meaning that adding water (even if you intentionally make it fairly conductive water) is just providing another path that is, most likely (in this hairdryer-turned-on specific instance) less conductive than the heating coils and will therefore draw off a minor portion of the total power.
Very true. That means if you have aquarium with fish and those fish need warmer water, you don't have to buy some speacial heating element for your aquarium! Hairdryer even stirrs the water in the...
Very true.
That means if you have aquarium with fish and those fish need warmer water, you don't have to buy some speacial heating element for your aquarium! Hairdryer even stirrs the water in the process! Until it sucks in the fish...
(It seems obvious to me, but for safety reasons - don't do that!)
…Would it, though? Tungsten is not particularly reactive. It's not going to dissolve into the water on its own (in fact, it will happily ignore baths in some pretty serious acids). The usual way...
…Would it, though? Tungsten is not particularly reactive. It's not going to dissolve into the water on its own (in fact, it will happily ignore baths in some pretty serious acids). The usual way to distribute it in gasses is to heat it white hot as an incandescent light filament, at which point it starts slowly sublimating; but hair dryer coils aren't designed to get anywhere near that hot, and couldn't do so when immersed in water regardless.
Quite valid points all around. I was being humorous, not serious, but given my taste in humor I am genuinely tickled at being corrected in a detailed and technically correct manner. Technically...
Quite valid points all around. I was being humorous, not serious, but given my taste in humor I am genuinely tickled at being corrected in a detailed and technically correct manner.
Technically correct is the best kind of correct correct.
Now my brain is going down a rabbit hole of 'well, if we purposely introduced nano-tungsten particles into the water... and then force circulated them so that they didn't all sink to the bottom and stay there... and if they did bioaccumulate in the fish... ...would the fish be poisoned?' You mentioned that tungsten isn't particularly reactive, and you are correct, so now I'm wondering if tungsten accumulation would be well tolerated by fish? Or by mammals for that matter?
I am fairly sure we don't use it for medical implants, but I think that's just because we have more suitable materials like titanium or surgical steel.
Now I really want to know if there is a way to cause tungsten poisoning, in spite of its lack of reactivity.
Um, edit: I'm not some bond villain or evil person, this was totally just a mental tangent, absolutely not intending to actually poison anyone in weird or exotic manners.
More edit: OR ANY MANNER, for that matter! No more being on watchlists over little misunderstandings like this please!
This seems like the question smart people like Veritasium (I believe his name is Derek) or Steve Mould or Nile (NileRed/Blue) or others would be able to answer.
This seems like the question smart people like Veritasium (I believe his name is Derek) or Steve Mould or Nile (NileRed/Blue) or others would be able to answer.
I don't know about tungsten specifically, but metal poisoning is definitely possible and isn't necessarily caused by the metal being reactive or radioactive -- by far the most commonly known type...
Now I really want to know if there is a way to cause tungsten poisoning, in spite of its lack of reactivity.
I don't know about tungsten specifically, but metal poisoning is definitely possible and isn't necessarily caused by the metal being reactive or radioactive -- by far the most commonly known type is lead poisoning, and lead is famously unreactive. Even metals that are necessary for life in trace amounts can be poisonous in excess, as is the case with iron.
Tungsten is apparently the heaviest element that's known to be biologically functional, at least according to Wikipedia, but not in any eukaryotes. Tungsten has some toxicity, but it varies a lot depending on how it's administered, so it's hard to do any back of the napkin math on those hypothetical fish. NIOSH's recommended short-term exposure limit for humans is 10 mg/m3 (and their recommended exposure limit over an 8 hour workday is half that).
What a fun read! I've recently started reading Carl Sagan's The Demon-Haunted World, and this blog post clearly has the heart of that book at its root. This is the scientific method at work. He...
What a fun read! I've recently started reading Carl Sagan's The Demon-Haunted World, and this blog post clearly has the heart of that book at its root. This is the scientific method at work. He devised a hypothesis, developed a test, and ran the test before drawing any conclusions. I particularly love this line:
This is Faith, presenting itself as Reason, with sarcasm.
I will try to remain scientifically minded, and be willing to question my preconceptions. It's hard to do, but so rewarding when we learn something we believed to be self-evident in fact wasn't.
That was a great little read! It kind of reminds me of styropyro's 'Is it the volts or amps that kill?' video - he starts from a similar place, looking at comments that say with absolute...
That was a great little read! It kind of reminds me of styropyro's 'Is it the volts or amps that kill?' video - he starts from a similar place, looking at comments that say with absolute confidence that the answer is X (a decent number of which contradict each other) and then takes the premise to a kind of terrifying extreme to demonstrate the reality in different situations.
My mom would do something similar with our toaster growing up. She wouldn’t put it in the dishwasher, but she would clean it thoroughly with lots of soap and water. Her reasoning was that she was...
My mom would do something similar with our toaster growing up. She wouldn’t put it in the dishwasher, but she would clean it thoroughly with lots of soap and water. Her reasoning was that she was willing to buy a new one if it broke, but didn’t want a dirty toaster. It always came out working better than before.
My 2¢ is that it depends on how it is built. I have seen some toasters use cardboard to support the heating elements. If those soak through and fall apart, it’s dead. If it uses microelectronics and isn’t fully dry before you start it, that could also kill it. But as long as you turn off heated dry, and let it dry thoroughly before you use it again, it should work just fine.
In fact, I have a sunbeam radiant control toaster back home. I never got it clean enough to feel good about using it. Once I get back to the US, or get it here to Europe and convert it to 240v, I think I’ll try this. I am slightly worried about the Bakelite, but with no heated dry that should be fine. I have had it apart as much as possible without drilling rivets and I can’t think of any part that could get damaged.
I wish he had elaborated on the end result — we know the toaster still worked, but was it clean? Maybe I’m just perpetuating the ignorance, but I have two assumptions about the efficacy of this...
I wish he had elaborated on the end result — we know the toaster still worked, but was it clean? Maybe I’m just perpetuating the ignorance, but I have two assumptions about the efficacy of this method of cleaning:
The dirty parts of a toaster are deep inside it, out of reach of the dishwasher’s jets. While the internals will certainly get wet, I doubt they’d be blasted by enough direct water pressure to dislodge the cooked-on grime.
Assuming he used dishwasher detergent, I’d expect everything to come out cloudy-looking or coated in a layer of residue.
I wish he went deeper. It's probably fine to do, but it would've been cool to see some real evidence or explanation of why rather than just one more "it worked for me" anecdote.
I wish he went deeper. It's probably fine to do, but it would've been cool to see some real evidence or explanation of why rather than just one more "it worked for me" anecdote.
Here's a demo showing the conductivity of water compared to salt water: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wph0Uz_aSr0 The physics of the situation (if I remember my highschool physics correctly this...
The physics of the situation (if I remember my highschool physics correctly this early in the morning) is that there aren't sufficient ions dissolved in the water to complete the circuit. Additionally, it isn't plugged in at the time, so in order for there to be issues, there would need to be damage to some of the purely electrco-mechanical parts (oxidation being the most obvious candidate) that persisted post cleaning.
I meant regarding the toaster. Often when I see someone open with that they couldn't find a decent source answering a question they go on to be the one to do that deeper dive and write the answer...
I meant regarding the toaster. Often when I see someone open with that they couldn't find a decent source answering a question they go on to be the one to do that deeper dive and write the answer themselves. Some previous conditioning taught me that was the format, but then it wasn't there. Instead it was basically just a single line about it working for him.
I'd never really considered it before, but I'm now him at the start of the article: I want to know if I should be putting my toaster in the dishwasher. Is it actually fine or was he lucky? Are there any considerations to make regarding soaps? Is there a recommended method for drying? Just sort of generally, "how should I actually do this if I want to?"
That was an interesting read! Thanks for sharing it. Time to go test it out by putting a toaster in a bathtub with me! J/k, my modern home probably doesn't ground itself via metal pipes, but I...
That was an interesting read! Thanks for sharing it. Time to go test it out by putting a toaster in a bathtub with me! J/k, my modern home probably doesn't ground itself via metal pipes, but I don't want my nasty toaster gunk to get on me.
From the article:
My wild guess with my limited knowledge - the water in the aquarium wasn't grounded while your bath would be. If nothing else, this could (and likely should) have tripped the standard breaker but GFCI didn't mind as there was nonleakage to the ground.
Just my bit on hairdryer happily running in aquarium full of water.
I will read the whole article as this seems to be good fella!
EDIT: Yup, Mr. Stillwater (what a great name when conducting such experiment!) explains that at the end of that post.
There is an additional factor at play in that a hairdryer (especially if it is electronically simple and just runs off selector switches or selector buttons) is a VERY simple device for the most part, and in terms of least-resistance-path-to-complete-circuit, the heating element (when turned on) is already a very low resistance path, meaning that adding water (even if you intentionally make it fairly conductive water) is just providing another path that is, most likely (in this hairdryer-turned-on specific instance) less conductive than the heating coils and will therefore draw off a minor portion of the total power.
Very true.
That means if you have aquarium with fish and those fish need warmer water, you don't have to buy some speacial heating element for your aquarium! Hairdryer even stirrs the water in the process! Until it sucks in the fish...
(It seems obvious to me, but for safety reasons - don't do that!)
It would probably give the fish tungsten poisoning. How exotic!
…Would it, though? Tungsten is not particularly reactive. It's not going to dissolve into the water on its own (in fact, it will happily ignore baths in some pretty serious acids). The usual way to distribute it in gasses is to heat it white hot as an incandescent light filament, at which point it starts slowly sublimating; but hair dryer coils aren't designed to get anywhere near that hot, and couldn't do so when immersed in water regardless.
Quite valid points all around. I was being humorous, not serious, but given my taste in humor I am genuinely tickled at being corrected in a detailed and technically correct manner.
Technically correct is the best kind of correct correct.
Now my brain is going down a rabbit hole of 'well, if we purposely introduced nano-tungsten particles into the water... and then force circulated them so that they didn't all sink to the bottom and stay there... and if they did bioaccumulate in the fish... ...would the fish be poisoned?' You mentioned that tungsten isn't particularly reactive, and you are correct, so now I'm wondering if tungsten accumulation would be well tolerated by fish? Or by mammals for that matter?
I am fairly sure we don't use it for medical implants, but I think that's just because we have more suitable materials like titanium or surgical steel.
Now I really want to know if there is a way to cause tungsten poisoning, in spite of its lack of reactivity.
Um, edit: I'm not some bond villain or evil person, this was totally just a mental tangent, absolutely not intending to actually poison anyone in weird or exotic manners.
More edit: OR ANY MANNER, for that matter! No more being on watchlists over little misunderstandings like this please!
This seems like the question smart people like Veritasium (I believe his name is Derek) or Steve Mould or Nile (NileRed/Blue) or others would be able to answer.
I don't know about tungsten specifically, but metal poisoning is definitely possible and isn't necessarily caused by the metal being reactive or radioactive -- by far the most commonly known type is lead poisoning, and lead is famously unreactive. Even metals that are necessary for life in trace amounts can be poisonous in excess, as is the case with iron.
Tungsten is apparently the heaviest element that's known to be biologically functional, at least according to Wikipedia, but not in any eukaryotes. Tungsten has some toxicity, but it varies a lot depending on how it's administered, so it's hard to do any back of the napkin math on those hypothetical fish. NIOSH's recommended short-term exposure limit for humans is 10 mg/m3 (and their recommended exposure limit over an 8 hour workday is half that).
What a fun read! I've recently started reading Carl Sagan's The Demon-Haunted World, and this blog post clearly has the heart of that book at its root. This is the scientific method at work. He devised a hypothesis, developed a test, and ran the test before drawing any conclusions. I particularly love this line:
I will try to remain scientifically minded, and be willing to question my preconceptions. It's hard to do, but so rewarding when we learn something we believed to be self-evident in fact wasn't.
Sagan was, and his legacy is, a treasure to humanity.
That was a great little read! It kind of reminds me of styropyro's 'Is it the volts or amps that kill?' video - he starts from a similar place, looking at comments that say with absolute confidence that the answer is X (a decent number of which contradict each other) and then takes the premise to a kind of terrifying extreme to demonstrate the reality in different situations.
That dude is deep within the uncanny valley. I feel very uncomfortable watching him.
My mom would do something similar with our toaster growing up. She wouldn’t put it in the dishwasher, but she would clean it thoroughly with lots of soap and water. Her reasoning was that she was willing to buy a new one if it broke, but didn’t want a dirty toaster. It always came out working better than before.
My 2¢ is that it depends on how it is built. I have seen some toasters use cardboard to support the heating elements. If those soak through and fall apart, it’s dead. If it uses microelectronics and isn’t fully dry before you start it, that could also kill it. But as long as you turn off heated dry, and let it dry thoroughly before you use it again, it should work just fine.
In fact, I have a sunbeam radiant control toaster back home. I never got it clean enough to feel good about using it. Once I get back to the US, or get it here to Europe and convert it to 240v, I think I’ll try this. I am slightly worried about the Bakelite, but with no heated dry that should be fine. I have had it apart as much as possible without drilling rivets and I can’t think of any part that could get damaged.
Might be careful here as many toasters are likely to be both these days.
Yeah, it’s worth pointing out for those who missed it, this post is 13 years old. If the mention of Yahoo Answers didn’t give it away, lol.
I wish he had elaborated on the end result — we know the toaster still worked, but was it clean? Maybe I’m just perpetuating the ignorance, but I have two assumptions about the efficacy of this method of cleaning:
The dirty parts of a toaster are deep inside it, out of reach of the dishwasher’s jets. While the internals will certainly get wet, I doubt they’d be blasted by enough direct water pressure to dislodge the cooked-on grime.
Assuming he used dishwasher detergent, I’d expect everything to come out cloudy-looking or coated in a layer of residue.
I wish he went deeper. It's probably fine to do, but it would've been cool to see some real evidence or explanation of why rather than just one more "it worked for me" anecdote.
Here's a demo showing the conductivity of water compared to salt water: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wph0Uz_aSr0
The physics of the situation (if I remember my highschool physics correctly this early in the morning) is that there aren't sufficient ions dissolved in the water to complete the circuit. Additionally, it isn't plugged in at the time, so in order for there to be issues, there would need to be damage to some of the purely electrco-mechanical parts (oxidation being the most obvious candidate) that persisted post cleaning.
I meant regarding the toaster. Often when I see someone open with that they couldn't find a decent source answering a question they go on to be the one to do that deeper dive and write the answer themselves. Some previous conditioning taught me that was the format, but then it wasn't there. Instead it was basically just a single line about it working for him.
I'd never really considered it before, but I'm now him at the start of the article: I want to know if I should be putting my toaster in the dishwasher. Is it actually fine or was he lucky? Are there any considerations to make regarding soaps? Is there a recommended method for drying? Just sort of generally, "how should I actually do this if I want to?"
That was an interesting read! Thanks for sharing it. Time to go test it out by putting a toaster in a bathtub with me! J/k, my modern home probably doesn't ground itself via metal pipes, but I don't want my nasty toaster gunk to get on me.