In my hardcover copy of the book, this error is found on p. 338, Subversive Factions, in the scene where the LP curses in frustration at the obnoxious virtue of the Alaalids.

quote:

For the first time, Nita saw an old idiom come true, as the Lone Power began to curse and around It the shocked air literally turned blue with a haze of locally annihilated water atoms and oxygen broken down to ozone.

Locally annihilated water atoms?

Locally annihilated water atoms?!

*whistles* Oooh, DD done made a boo-boo!

I think it's a cool image though.

That's a tough call, if the whole molecule was vaporized so were it's atoms, which certainly are no longer part of the whole molecule. It sounds like the water was split into oxygen and hydrogen, and those atoms annihilated. If they came from water, the were the water's atoms.

Though as it's written is does sound very odd, perhaps "atoms from water" instead of "water atoms" would make it a little less stand-out. Then again, it could have been written like that as a subtle way to catch your attention.

actually, DD didnt make a...boo-boo. atoms make up everything, in cluding water and can be broken apart. havent you pplz ever heard of a particle-accelorator? you know, angels and demons, by dan brown....? well, read it, and the davinci code. their both awesome. and back to the topic....even though DD didnt usa a p-a, this IS a sccience fic book and the fact still stands. (and read the books!!!)
-the peridexis

quote:

atoms make up everything, including water and can be broken apart.

I would venture a guess that Caledonian's point was not that there are no atoms in water, but that as it stands, the passage seems to imply that water is an element, and the LP was vaporising water atoms. Rather than the elements (and hence atoms...) involved being oxygen and hydrogen! I thought it was a pretty funny mistake, because DD obviously knows perfectly well the difference between atoms and molecules.

OTOH, you can make a good case for "water" being a typo for "hydrogen", since oxygen is mentioned later on in the sentence. (And not to get too distracted, but I am fortunate in that my minimal knowledge of particle accelerators does not come from having read Angels and Demons, because nothing could force me to read a second Dan Brown novel. Sorry. I hated The Da Vinci Code. :P)

water is not an ATOM, water is a MOLECULE, made of two hydrogen atoms and one atom of oxygen.
However, the way ozone (O3) is made is when 1 oxygen atom hits an oxygen molecule (O2), and they form an unstable bond. So, in order for ozone to form, not only must hydrolysis occur,and only the hydrogen atoms be annihilated, in order for the leftover oxygen to be able to form ozone with the free oxygen molecules in the atmosphere.

arrrrgh!! this happend on the hp site too. that last post by "me" was actually my little bro. he must've found out my password. again.

i knew the stuff bout water (since everybody should...)but i do object to one thing....why[/I] do you hate the dan brown books?

oh, and just a note: my bro is 9, and obviously hasn't read the books, but he knows i love them because after i read them i was constantly talkin bout them. smart little devil. and my bro posting as me will stop...i'll see to that.

-the (real) peridexis

quote:

why do you hate the dan brown books?

Well, obviously this is a YMMV (your mileage may vary) matter of personal taste, and possibly not appropriate for this location, but briefly... I felt it was poorly written and overhyped. Its popularity and general acclaim seems to me to be a consequence of a large bulk of people who do not read a lot of fiction, and do not recognise good writing, reading and enjoying this book - which is absolutely their prerogative and I'm thrilled non-readers are reading at all - and therefore assuming the book must be well-written, which in my personal opinion it is not. The characters are cardboard, the plot, while entertaining, is conspiracy theorist, sensationalist and poorly supported by historical fact (not that there's necessarily anything wrong with that, but he does present it as telling this Whole! New! Story!) and frankly I found it a bit of a slog. I won't extend this to all of his books because, as I say, I have only read the one (and I only finished that one to, er, denigrate it with authenticity!); however, I am reliably informed that Angels and Demons at least suffers the same flaws.

Really, though, this is a matter of personal taste; if you get pleasure out of his stuff, I'm glad, and more power to you.

i suppose i understand your reasoning; i've noticed the opinion on the book seems to be very divided. and while reading it i did notice the charachters were not very "real"...or at lest not as real as many other books i have read and enjoyed. and one factor that might have added to my enthusiasm for the book is this: i had read it after being deprived of a book for an entire week.(my friend snuck it to me.) yes, a whole week!! my parents don't approve of me reading so much...they want me to work on "more important things"(i.e. getting a's in math. bleh.)absolute crap, i know...i'm already getting b's!! well, there's my parents for you...

-the peridexis

and just a qick question...when i posted my first(real) post on this forum, a little window came up that said it had a "trigger" word in it and someone would have to read it and post it later...what was the trigger word? i mean, i think it was pretty clean...i might have said "aarrrgghh" and threatend my bro, but other than that...?

- the peridexis

-

Maybe it was devil? The security on this forum is very high, after all.

I personally think the above quote was a typo, because she was not talking about atoms splitting apart, as in a particle eccelerator. She was talking about molecules splitting into their constituent atoms to form new molecules.

Edit: it was the 'd' word afterall, because my post got put on the waiting list too.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Space Cadet,

ahh...pray tell, how is "d" a bad word....? and thanx cadet.

-peri

The trigger thing, as far as I can make out, isn't looking for bad words--that's what the language censor that asterisks things out is doing. The trigger thing is going for certain patterns of words. I'd assume that it's trying to warn DD and Lee if anybody's doing any fundamental Christian condementation of other members, or anybody's making a death threat to another member, or the like. But because it's a rather primitive piece of logic (i.e., "word in post -> trigger"), and it probably comes with default words that aren't too finely tuned, or considered in isolation, it's going to do some funny stuff, just like the language censor, which used to keep me from posting the word "muffin".

Think of it as an opportunity to expand your vocabulary, and a chance to finally use a thesaurus...

yes, a very good opportunity to use my thesaurus....

*looks around, finds thesaurus under bed,next to old package of club crackers, grabs crackers*

so...*munching* lets see what happens! muffin muffin muffin muffin...MUFFIN.hmmm...

*gets thesaurus,trys to look up another word for muffin...*

-peri!!!!!!

It used to choke on a muffin. However, an e-mail to Lee about the language censor, and she adjusted its filter list of words. The same might apply for nuisance trigger words.

ah, well...curiosity often leads to stupidity. in my case, almost always :P. arabic is hard...and i dont have any books to read!!!!!! i have to got o the library here, and soon, or i might need medical help.

-peri

quote:

i had read it after being deprived of a book for an entire week.

Ah. In which case I completely understand a disproportionate affection for it.

As for the d-word: Ah-ha! I had the same thing happen to me a few weeks back. The crucial phrase was the d's advocate, which I will avoid from now on. :P

and who were you calling a de- i mean d's advocate? *runs through list of possible ppl* or maybe it was in a book? and i really am just curious; what made you name yourself birdhead? you seem like an intelligent person....:P but then again, you see lots of creative names online, so its quite normal compared to say, "Bogeyman". don't ask...

-peri

This message has been edited. Last edited by: the_peridexis,

I was calling myself one, as in, "But to play d's advocate"; I wanted to identify myself as arguing from a position I wasn't personally convicted of. It was in the atheism topic in Chatter, if you're particularly interested.

As for my sn, it's an extremely venerable screenname from my earliest days online; my IRL given name is Tui, which is the name of a bird, and the head bit is a pun on my last name. A very bad pun, in fact. Anyway, I'm still reasonably fond of it, although most people call me Tui around here and you're welcome to do so as well!

that's so strange! when i saw you sign off as tui, i immedietley(sp?) thought, "that sounds like a bird-sounding name." and i didn't know it WAS a bird name...:P. dai tui,

-peri

P.S. have any of you pplz noticed my lack of caps? i was just reading a recent topic and the starter mentioned being annoyed he couldn't use caps. i find that so odd...as you can see, i don't really care unless i'm mentioning a book or something...