Lol you’re not the only person that studied chem
Great! So then you understand the relationship between pressure and temperature 
Why doesn’t @Photon_noir get blasted for being an educated chemist? I was contributing to a conversation and others might be following along just fine
3 Likes
He only asked if it was an ideal gas
1 Like
I was being overly pedantic trying to make a joke that didn’t really come through. We can leave it at that, sorry to derail.
1 Like
This is why the temp of the plates is lower than what the rosin is actually experiencing
2 Likes
The biggest part I agree with on all of this is that…this is a big waste of energy. It seems like those who want the change in the term really just want to flex there “scientific knowledge” over the customer. This debate over terminology has developed much past the point where it’s helping, especially when people want the customer to start using words like “isoamyl acetate” lol. I think a true practice of skill is to develop a way to get the point across to the end customer/consumer instead of all this focus to change what terms are used by the creator.
When someone says “solventless”, you know what they mean. The words “without use of hydrocarbon or ethanol” just doesn’t fit as well on a label. It’s kind of on you to be an adult and do a little bit of deciphering or even ASK QUESTIONS to figure out more about the product you are consuming. There was a term for a female dog that was used quite often, not that long ago. Terminology will change with time.
Maybe people want rosin not because it’s better then others or because it has more/less of this and that, or because of it’s extraction method, maybe they just want rosin because…it’s different…
Let’s pay more attention to what the customer/child is really saying with there actions instead of trying to scold them for not using your preferred words. As my wife would say, “if you are so focused on the specific words I’m using to describe the way I feel,then you aren’t really listening”
Make hash,not war 
15 Likes
Words have meaning. Especially in chemistry. I understand it gets in the way of selling your stuff, and it benefits the seller for the buyer to remain ignorant, I just don’t care.
Language should evolve with our understanding (which is paltry at the moment), and we should strive to educate consumers instead of pandering to THC numbers.
I’m a chemist, and I approved this message.
12 Likes
Some people just like to hear themselves talk.
3 Likes
Except that wasn’t the case in his posts to me in this thread. He wasn’t revealing the secrets of the universe; he was being a jerk, plain and simple. He was trying to be dismissive, sarcastic, and condescending, or at least he doesn’t know (or care to learn) how to post without coming across that way.
Also, speaking about secrets of the universe, Carl Sagan would tend to disagree with your (and @dukejohnsons’s) position. A truly knowledgeable expert in their field can communicate the most complex concepts so those less knowledgeable can understand.
A sure sign that someone is not a truly knowledgeable expert is they cannot break down the complex into simplified concepts and terms. Unless you’re suggesting @moronnabis more brilliant than Carl Sagan, and it’s just impossible for him?
Here’s something Carl Sagan wrote that I try to practice when I write about complex topics involving plant science, chemistry, quantum physics, and advanced cultivation concepts, theories, and practices. In my opinion, Graywolf and Photon also follow this advise, and maybe @moronnabis should as well:
Don’t talk to the general audience as you would your scientific colleagues. There are terms that convey your meaning instantly and accurately to fellow experts. You may parse these phrases every day in your professional work. But they do no more than mystify an audience of non-specialists. Use the simplest possible language. Above all, remember how it was before you, yourself, grasped whatever it is you’re explaining.
I give @moronnabis zero points for being so intelligent we can’t understand him. It’s certainly true that I’m not an expert in his field of expertise, nor is he in mine, so if he was sharing complex concepts, it might take me a bit of time and hand-holding to get up to speed. But that’s not what’s happening here. I’m plenty bright, as are you and duke. I’m positive he’s no more intelligent than the three of us. The fault is in the teacher, not the student.
If what you say about him is accurate and he comes across differently in person. Then the problem with his posting style is his, by not accounting for the lack of inflection when posting. I can’t see his facial microexpressions, hear the tone of his voice, or see his body posture. All we can do online is read text; that’s why I add emojis for some inflection.
So while I’m sure he’s a nice guy, at least online and in this thread, he has been a dismissive, sarcastic, and condescending asshole.
But I have written enough about him; if he chooses to adjust his attitude and writing style to be a better communicator and teacher to bestow his knowledge, great. If not, great. I don’t care either way because what use is someone with knowledge if they don’t share that knowledge in a useful way for the broadest audience when posting on a public forum?
I’m pretty sure it was mentioned many times. Just not in the sense of pressure = heat. I plan to account for the heat from pressure + heat from plates in experimentation with freeze-dried full melt using sous vide. To see if warm terpenes are the reason secretions are released from trichome glands.
However, rather than using PV = nrT, I would prefer to directly measure temp with a wire thermister inside a rosin bag filled with trichomes to get the most accurate estimate.
Rosin is susceptible to more potential contaminates than solvent based extractions, especially at larger scales.
This is why I prefer solvent based extraction, it only takes one bad hit of rosin made from bacteria ridden flower to change your mind.
9 Likes
This is a perfect example of how a lack of inflection online leads to resentment, even if it was a misunderstanding caused by the person posting the offending message. Because I, too, read @munkdooligan’s post as being sarcastic and condescending before he explained it was a poorly delivered pedantic “joke.” And even after, it seems sarcastic and condescending, but at least I now know it was not intentionally rude.
The italics suggestion for snark and sarcasm exists at this site for a reason, people 
1 Like
Please remember that this is a public forum, and any/all actual assistance given by people is purely from a place of good will. Nobody owes you their labor.
6 Likes
I think the thing I struggle with (and I know I’m not alone here) is that I am ND and don’t always get jokes and sarcasm especially when engaging my higher thinking like with chemistry and physics. Jokes don’t land like they are intended but it doesn’t mean I don’t have a sense of humor, I just need to switch my brain over to get it.
It’s incredibly intimidating to put yourself out here on a public forum. Lots of people still have nightmares of being called on in front of in their grade-school classes and saying something potentially “stupid”. Only this isn’t a class of 20 kids, this is the internet and some people on this forum only contribute with abuse.
I still believe that sharing knowledge and finding people with the same special interests is a good thing overall and that’s why I keep trying here
Rosin is its own category of “solventless” just like bubble hash
If getting specific I would say
rosin is “pressure assisted mechanically separated extract”,
and
bubble hash is “water assisted mechanically separated extract” 
It’s easier to say rosin and bubble hash
5 Likes
I chewed through my anxiety somewhat early in my academic career. There was one professor who was a very brilliant asshole, and had the knack of asking the questions of student presenters he knew they couldn’t answer. When the time came for my department research presentation, I looked down at him in the second row… and he was trying his hardest to look confused as if he didn’t understand what I was saying… I just cracked up. I knew my shit, I knew he knew what I was talking about, and after that it was all easy.
2 Likes
Indeed, I agree. But posting online is a double-edged sword. You get to post how and when you want, but you also open yourself up to critique, constructive criticism, and just plain criticism if you’re being a jerk. I’m not demanding anything from anyone, least of all moronnabis. Still, I am making my feelings (and those of others) known. Hopefully, it sinks home, but I’m not holding my breath, especially when enablers dismiss such behavior.
If I were being a jerk to someone without cause, I would want to know so I could correct course.
For me, a key thing to keep in mind is everyone is fallible. No one is superior to anyone else. On any given day, any one of us could write or do something “stupid.” I know I have many times and will in the future. We often view our posts and thoughts much more harshly than others would. Most people wouldn’t consider a post, position, or question to be “stupid,” even though we (ourselves) do. Overall, I think negative self-talk, self-doubt, self-consciousness, and self-criticism are the root of the issue.
That, and giving power to people other than ourselves. I don’t give away that power. I don’t care what other people think about me, even when it’s hard if I’m at the beach and my belly is out 
. I only care what I think about myself; am I being a kind, caring, selfless, and giving person? And most importantly of all, am I being as empathetic as possible?
If someone thinks poorly of me, I want to know and know why, so I can consider their opinion. And if I agree, I will change. If not, I won’t.
Lastly, I think it’s important to stand up for oneself. If someone is being a jerk, I tell them they’re being a jerk. Often the person isn’t aware they’re a jerk or are acting that way because of something negative in their life. Usually, the person will apologize and correct their actions - but not always, which is most common online when people aren’t looking you in the eyes.
It’s easier to be a jerk online because people disassociate from the person at the receiving end of their jerkiness. They lose empathy for the other person because humans didn’t evolve to communite through a screen 1,000 miles away from each other. Then there are the keyboard warriors and trolls, but they are a different beast.
1 Like
Hell yes they do @anon64373531
And deceptive marketing tactics are unethical. The consumer should not be lead to believe something is “safe” or “safer” by applying buzz words labels to gain their confidence
7 Likes
IME “easier” (short cuts) rarely leads to better results for consumers or businesses
But I agree rosin and bubble hash is more honest than saying solventless
4 Likes
So what about the hash is “bubble”?!?
My recall is that it was about the way it behaved when heated…
Does your rosin bubble? CO2 extract? BHO?
Can I call them all “bubble hash”?
5 Likes
Ok hash and rosin
But saying bubble does not imply a safer product like the solventless
The key here is avoiding deceptive terminology like solventless. Not made up names like bubble that do not have a broader implication.
I still think “no added solvents” is best.
1 Like
When you mix the plant material and water and ice it foams or bubbles
3 Likes