I couldn't find this on Google which I think is a bit strange?
What causes an acid to burn skin without heat? It's really bugging me.
Thanks!
What causes an acid to burn skin without heat? It's really bugging me.
Thanks!
Chemical Burns
- Thread starter Pincho Paxton
- Start date
The first anser that springs to mind is "Anything with an R38 risk phrase".
I once had 3rd degree burns on both arms from mineral turpentine, no heat involved what so ever.
They can be caused by allergic reactions to chemical exposure.
Contact Dermatitis on Wiki
I once had 3rd degree burns on both arms from mineral turpentine, no heat involved what so ever.
They can be caused by allergic reactions to chemical exposure.
Contact Dermatitis on Wiki
Heat is NOT required for an oxidation/reduction process to take place. Strong acids and bases quite naturally break down human skin and other tissues (and do so very easily). It's been used for over a hundred years in a process called "rendering."
Acids (and bases) degrade protines and thats what a burn actually is. Its the destruction of cells.
For an experment (and a great meal afterwards
) slice some meat (eye fillet steak or salmon work best) quite thinly and then squese lemon juice over the top and watch what happens. In quite a short time the meat will be "cooked", ie the protines will denature in a similar way to what happens when you applie heat.Chemical burns were common in my high school education- I was the geeky lab assistant. We kept a box of baking soda next to the sink at all times, every time they started burning we'd need to scrub up and neutralize.
That was the late 80's and I swear to God you won't find a real-life 1910 mad scientist lab like I had in my high school unless you were a level 3 chemist.
Anywho- chemical burns occur because the acidity of the liquid you're in contact with is more than the acidity of your skin- simple as that.
That was the late 80's and I swear to God you won't find a real-life 1910 mad scientist lab like I had in my high school unless you were a level 3 chemist.
Anywho- chemical burns occur because the acidity of the liquid you're in contact with is more than the acidity of your skin- simple as that.
So I take it that acids break the bonds between particles. What are the mechanics involved in breaking the bonds? Like the sea breaks the bonding of rocks with force.. I can't figure out the cause of breaking the skin apart.
Acids (and bases) degrade protines and thats what a burn actually is. Its the destruction of cells.
For an experment (and a great meal afterwards
Yep. Alkaline burns are the worst.
cant help you there sorry, my training only goes down to the celular level for most things, not the chemical one. I know it destroys protines and cell membraines but cant help you with the why
Thanks, I think I've figured it out now. This might be a silly question, but has anyone ever detected a reversed polarity of electrons in skin that comes into contact with an acid?
Stop using buzzwords you heard on a sci-fi show.
I don't know any buzzwords, especially in chemistry. This is the first time I have used my theory in chemistry. I takes ages for me to get round to all aspects of science. Now I am interested in chemistry. Now I have something to say about the Ozone Layer. My theory is completely adaptable to everything. That's the whole point of it. My sentences match some other sentences, because I can figure out the results without reading them. Acid is either a reverse of the electron flow of the skin, or a boost of speed. They would both create heat in a different way. The inflation pushes the cells apart, like blowing up a balloon in a bucket.
Last edited:
Then your "theory" is just as badly wrong about chemistry as it is about everything else. Chemical reactions are VERY simple things and many of them have been WELL understood for over a hundred years.
There's absolutely no room in chemistry for a an incompetent theory that would do nothing more than add false information to an extremely well-understood field of science.
Well, yes 1 days self taught chemistry is not much use on its own, but it is one days change of direction for chemistry, which delivers something new. It doesn't really matter to me what happens with my information on Chemistry, as I prefer to stick with physics of propagation, but there is something about the Ozone Layer that tells me to post what I find in here. I would be unhappy not to give out my information on the Ozone Hole charge. The charge strength, and direction are very important to science. So long as the information is available to you, I feel that I have fulfilled my obligation.
But the thing is we need NO confusion (of your kind) being introduced into the field of chemistry. Your little "1 day of self taught" is nothing compared to the amount of study that professional chemists have done, and in my case, having worked in a lab for several years. You are like a newborn baby trying to tell something to fully-grown adults. It's not only stupidity on your part, it's also tremendously annoying.
As to the ozone layer, that's something else that's HIGHLY understood! We don't need your infantile meddling into well-established facts.
In short, you have NOTHING useful to offer - just garbage.
Well the garbage is there is you ever need it.
And I am around for questions.I'm not the single baby typing on a keyboard, I am an infinite number of babies typing on a keyboard, and somehow tend to be the one that stumbles on the useful stuff.
Well the garbage is there is you ever need it.
I'm not the single baby typing on a keyboard, I am an infinite number of babies typing on a keyboard, and somehow tend to be the one that stumbles on the useful stuff.
Oh, really?? So far you've not posted a single bit of "useful stuff."
Nothing but the meanderings of a completely untrained and useless mind.:shrug:
Well personally I think I posted a possible solution to Eczema, allergies, and what's up with the Earth. Acid, and polarity, charge, and what I suppose you call pheromones, or one of their attributes, which would be the wavelength of a human. This also includes a bit of the acupuncture medium.
I've outlined it, and that's all I have to say.
GOOD!! Now maybe you will just go away and grow up (and spend your time studying about REAL science instead of annoying the actual scientists here).
I didn't say you were right, I said you sounded like the science mumbo jumbo they say on sci-fi shows. Infact everything you've said is directly contradicted by known chemistry and physics. You haven't said anything correct.
And yet know nothing about it.
You mean you can make up BS about any topic. Yes, I imagine if you can make up crap about one area of science you know nothing about you can make up crap about any area of science you know nothing about. And you know nothing about ALL of science.
Your 'theory' has yet to actually produce a single correct prediction.
And another mistake! Acid does not, in general, work by generating heat on the atomic or cellular level, it is a chemical reaction which destroys the chemicals which make up the cells in your skin. Chemical burns are not heat burns, they are quite different.
Let's see if I can put this in a way which you can grasp. Its like demolishing a house. You can either blow it up or tear down each wall one at a time. Heating something to extreme temperatures would do to the cells what blowing up a house would. Dipping them in acid eats away at them till they are destroyed, like ripping down te walls of a house, then the inner walls, till the house is gone.
Again, the process by which acids work, to do with $$H^{+}$$ ions, is something taught in high school. Yet another area of basic science you have not learnt, despite (so you claim) being 'interested in it' and despite you claiming to have a theory of everything. Can you explain how your theory of everything keeps getting you to make incorrect claims about nature? If its been wrong on every single thing so far, why do you think its a theory of everything? It's a theory of everything except chemistry, as well as nuclear and atomic physics? Is it even a theory of anything?
I keep asking you to provide me with a working model of even one phenomenon from your 'theory of everything' and not once have you done so. Can't you find anything your theory of everything actually works for?