Scioly.org

They may not post it. My understanding is they post recurring questions as an FAQ and simply write you a response for interpretive questions that don't come up often or are not deemed worth posting for everyone.

Skink wrote:They may not post it. My understanding is they post recurring questions as an FAQ and simply write you a response for interpretive questions that don't come up often or are not deemed worth posting for everyone.

What is considered official and what isn't? Its my understanding the FAQ are as official as the Rules Clarification and since I sent the inquiry to the National rules committee and they responded then what? Their response contradicts the post on FAQ.

If it's posted on the National site, it's official. The same goes for anything sent by (I think it's) noreply@soinc.org. If it's contradictory? The newest FAQs would norm earlier ones (in the case of events like this one or Egg Drop) since that's what supervisors would download or print and enforce.
Note: rules clarifications are changes to the wording of the rules. FAQs are interpretations of the rules as-is. Both are equally important. In fact, to use another example, a Food Sci Clarification has been ruled effectively null and void (or, at the very least, a waste of our time) by a recent FAQ. Stay up to date, and I see no reason why you would get stung.

inthewoods wrote:I just received a response from sonic.org to my concern listed above and the response was "They must be Pyrex glass." I received the email March 11 4:49pm if that is helpful. FAQ has not yet posted the response they gave me. This is very confusing and needs to be addressed. Thank you!!!!!!

I, too, recently submitted a FAQ about Thermodynamics and received an extremely curt and perplexing email response from no-reply@soinc.org that doesn't seem to adhere to the spirit of the rules. I wonder if there is some sort of miscommunication in the soinc FAQ responding hierarchy, because the fact that someone else received a similarly weird response to a separate question is quite disconcerting. Hopefully this will all be sorted out and soinc will amend these responses. Perhaps Chalker can look into this?

inthewoods wrote: I just received a response from sonic.org to my concern listed above and the response was "They must be Pyrex glass." I received the email March 11 4:49pm if that is helpful. FAQ has not yet posted the response they gave me. This is very confusing and needs to be addressed. Thank you!!!!!!

I just checked the FAQs and nothing is posted yet. I don't think it will be considered "official" at an event until it is posted. We make sure to bring a print out of the latest FAQs to an event, just in case there are any questions.

Is the ice water 0 degrees C? If not... It's going to throw my predictions off...

tangentline wrote:Is the ice water 0 degrees C? If not... It's going to throw my predictions off...

Likely not. The ice-water may be slightly colder if the ice was freshly taken from a freezer that was below 0°, or it could be slightly warmer if all the ice has melted and it's been sitting on the counter. Plan to bring your own thermometer to measure the ice-water.

Luo wrote:

inthewoods wrote:I just received a response from sonic.org to my concern listed above and the response was "They must be Pyrex glass." I received the email March 11 4:49pm if that is helpful. FAQ has not yet posted the response they gave me. This is very confusing and needs to be addressed. Thank you!!!!!!

I, too, recently submitted a FAQ about Thermodynamics and received an extremely curt and perplexing email response from no-reply@soinc.org that doesn't seem to adhere to the spirit of the rules. I wonder if there is some sort of miscommunication in the soinc FAQ responding hierarchy, because the fact that someone else received a similarly weird response to a separate question is quite disconcerting. Hopefully this will all be sorted out and soinc will amend these responses. Perhaps Chalker can look into this?

I get copied on the responses and saw that too. I'm trying to get the issue corrected as I agree it's not an appropriate reply.

harryk wrote:

tangentline wrote:Is the ice water 0 degrees C? If not... It's going to throw my predictions off...

Likely not. The ice-water may be slightly colder if the ice was freshly taken from a freezer that was below 0°, or it could be slightly warmer if all the ice has melted and it's been sitting on the counter. Plan to bring your own thermometer to measure the ice-water.

Water with ice in it is by definition 0 degrees Celsius (it's actually how they originally calibrated the Celsius scale, along with boiling water for 100). True there might be slight transient variations depending on how long the ice has been in the water, but in general you can reasonably assume it will be at 0 as long as both ice and water are present.

chalker wrote:

harryk wrote:

tangentline wrote:Is the ice water 0 degrees C? If not... It's going to throw my predictions off...

Likely not. The ice-water may be slightly colder if the ice was freshly taken from a freezer that was below 0°, or it could be slightly warmer if all the ice has melted and it's been sitting on the counter. Plan to bring your own thermometer to measure the ice-water.

Water with ice in it is by definition 0 degrees Celsius (it's actually how they originally calibrated the Celsius scale, along with boiling water for 100). True there might be slight transient variations depending on how long the ice has been in the water, but in general you can reasonably assume it will be at 0 as long as both ice and water are present.

I believe that if both ice and water are present, the temperature is between 0 and 0.01 C (melting point and triple point)