Mixing
Can you say “The NOₓ are�
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
Wikipedia says
[...] Within the SCR catalyst, the NOxare catalytically reduced by the ammonia [...]
NO2 is nitrogen dioxide, which is singular. x can take any one of a range of values, so NOx means
nitrous oxide or nitrogen dioxide or dinitrogen pentoxide or other alternatives
and so is, logically, singular. If we regard NOx as a chemical of variable composition then this makes sense. x cannot logically have different values at once, but I think NOx is being used in this sentence to mean
nitrous oxide and nitrogen dioxide and dinitrogen pentoxide and other alternatives, all mixed together
It is possible the grammar is also influenced by NOx sounding plural as it is pronounced "knocks".
So can we say "The NOx are" or not?
grammaticality grammatical-number
asked 5 hours ago
David Robinson
1707
 |Â
show 5 more comments
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
Wikipedia says
[...] Within the SCR catalyst, the NOxare catalytically reduced by the ammonia [...]
NO2 is nitrogen dioxide, which is singular. x can take any one of a range of values, so NOx means
nitrous oxide or nitrogen dioxide or dinitrogen pentoxide or other alternatives
and so is, logically, singular. If we regard NOx as a chemical of variable composition then this makes sense. x cannot logically have different values at once, but I think NOx is being used in this sentence to mean
nitrous oxide and nitrogen dioxide and dinitrogen pentoxide and other alternatives, all mixed together
It is possible the grammar is also influenced by NOx sounding plural as it is pronounced "knocks".
So can we say "The NOx are" or not?
grammaticality grammatical-number
asked 5 hours ago
David Robinson
1707
If anyone knows how to change the title to say NO<sub>*x*</sub> (without the backslashes!),please can they do so?
– David Robinson
5 hours ago
So, if it were H2O molecules would you want to say "the waters is" or "the waters are"?
– Hot Licks
4 hours ago
@DavidRobinson I don't think you can do that in titles on this site.
– Azor Ahai
4 hours ago
Is this like saying "the gases are" ?
– Azor Ahai
4 hours ago
@HotLicks It's not a question of how many molecules, but of how many different molecules. You might say the waters if you were talking about different types of water, e.g. Perrier and Highland Spring.
– David Robinson
4 hours ago
 |Â
show 5 more comments
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
Wikipedia says
[...] Within the SCR catalyst, the NOxare catalytically reduced by the ammonia [...]
NO2 is nitrogen dioxide, which is singular. x can take any one of a range of values, so NOx means
nitrous oxide or nitrogen dioxide or dinitrogen pentoxide or other alternatives
and so is, logically, singular. If we regard NOx as a chemical of variable composition then this makes sense. x cannot logically have different values at once, but I think NOx is being used in this sentence to mean
nitrous oxide and nitrogen dioxide and dinitrogen pentoxide and other alternatives, all mixed together
It is possible the grammar is also influenced by NOx sounding plural as it is pronounced "knocks".
So can we say "The NOx are" or not?
grammaticality grammatical-number
asked 5 hours ago
David Robinson
1707
Wikipedia says
[...] Within the SCR catalyst, the NOxare catalytically reduced by the ammonia [...]
NO2 is nitrogen dioxide, which is singular. x can take any one of a range of values, so NOx means
nitrous oxide or nitrogen dioxide or dinitrogen pentoxide or other alternatives
and so is, logically, singular. If we regard NOx as a chemical of variable composition then this makes sense. x cannot logically have different values at once, but I think NOx is being used in this sentence to mean
nitrous oxide and nitrogen dioxide and dinitrogen pentoxide and other alternatives, all mixed together
It is possible the grammar is also influenced by NOx sounding plural as it is pronounced "knocks".
So can we say "The NOx are" or not?
grammaticality grammatical-number
grammaticality grammatical-number
asked 5 hours ago
David Robinson
1707
asked 5 hours ago
David Robinson
1707
edited 4 hours ago
asked 5 hours ago
David Robinson
1707
asked 5 hours ago
David Robinson
1707
asked 5 hours ago
David Robinson
1707
1707
If anyone knows how to change the title to say NO<sub>*x*</sub> (without the backslashes!),please can they do so?
– David Robinson
5 hours ago
So, if it were H2O molecules would you want to say "the waters is" or "the waters are"?
– Hot Licks
4 hours ago
@DavidRobinson I don't think you can do that in titles on this site.
– Azor Ahai
4 hours ago
Is this like saying "the gases are" ?
– Azor Ahai
4 hours ago
@HotLicks It's not a question of how many molecules, but of how many different molecules. You might say the waters if you were talking about different types of water, e.g. Perrier and Highland Spring.
– David Robinson
4 hours ago
 |Â
show 5 more comments
If anyone knows how to change the title to say NO<sub>*x*</sub> (without the backslashes!),please can they do so?
– David Robinson
5 hours ago
So, if it were H2O molecules would you want to say "the waters is" or "the waters are"?
– Hot Licks
4 hours ago
@DavidRobinson I don't think you can do that in titles on this site.
– Azor Ahai
4 hours ago
Is this like saying "the gases are" ?
– Azor Ahai
4 hours ago
@HotLicks It's not a question of how many molecules, but of how many different molecules. You might say the waters if you were talking about different types of water, e.g. Perrier and Highland Spring.
– David Robinson
4 hours ago
If anyone knows how to change the title to say NO<sub>*x*</sub> (without the backslashes!),please can they do so?
– David Robinson
5 hours ago
If anyone knows how to change the title to say NO<sub>*x*</sub> (without the backslashes!),please can they do so?
– David Robinson
5 hours ago
So, if it were H2O molecules would you want to say "the waters is" or "the waters are"?
– Hot Licks
4 hours ago
So, if it were H2O molecules would you want to say "the waters is" or "the waters are"?
– Hot Licks
4 hours ago
@DavidRobinson I don't think you can do that in titles on this site.
– Azor Ahai
4 hours ago
@DavidRobinson I don't think you can do that in titles on this site.
– Azor Ahai
4 hours ago
Is this like saying "the gases are" ?
– Azor Ahai
4 hours ago
Is this like saying "the gases are" ?
– Azor Ahai
4 hours ago
@HotLicks It's not a question of how many molecules, but of how many different molecules. You might say the waters if you were talking about different types of water, e.g. Perrier and Highland Spring.
– David Robinson
4 hours ago
@HotLicks It's not a question of how many molecules, but of how many different molecules. You might say the waters if you were talking about different types of water, e.g. Perrier and Highland Spring.
– David Robinson
4 hours ago
 |Â
show 5 more comments
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
up vote
3
down vote
Yes, but only if you are referring to Nitrogen Dioxide as a category. If you are referring specifically to the gas, the answer is no.
For example, "All types of NOx are converted in the reaction" - valid because it is referring to the types of NOx you have, which is multiple.
"All of my NOx is converted in the reaction" is referring to NOx as a mass noun, so there is no plural in that sense.
answered 3 hours ago
Jamie Clinton
5365
In both your examples, you have taken NOx out of the picture as far as verb agreement goes. All types are, All is. In other words, your examples don't have anything to do with the question or your explanations.
– Phil Sweet
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
Yes, I figure you can. It just means the different nitrogen oxides. I was surprised to read that it also includes Nitrous oxide, considering the 2 Nitrogen atoms, but in any case 'oxides' would take a plural form.
Wikipedia says the following:
In atmospheric chemistry, NOx is a generic term for the nitrogen
oxides that are most relevant for air pollution, namely nitric oxide
(NO) and nitrogen dioxide (NO2).[1][2] These gases contribute to the
formation of smog and acid rain, as well as affecting tropospheric
ozone.
NOx gases are usually produced from the reaction among nitrogen and
oxygen during combustion of fuels, such as hydrocarbons, in air;
especially at high temperatures, such as occur in car
engines.[1][2][3] In areas of high motor vehicle traffic, such as in
large cities, the nitrogen oxides emitted can be a significant source
of air pollution. NOx gases are also produced naturally by lightning.
The term NOx is chemistry shorthand for molecules containing one
nitrogen and one or more oxygen atom. It is generally meant to include
nitrous oxide (N2O),[1] although nitrous oxide is a fairly inert oxide
of nitrogen that has many uses as an oxidizer for rockets and car
engines, an anesthetic, and a propellant for aerosol sprays and
whipped cream. Nitrous oxide plays hardly any role in air pollution,
although it may have a significant impact on the ozone layer,[4] and
is a significant greenhouse gas.
(In the same article NOx is used both in plural and in singular forms depending on whether it refers to various nitrogen oxides or to singular nitrogen oxide.)
answered 3 hours ago
S Conroy
2,0421319
As for the two N atoms, these are stoichiometic formulae - just concerned with the ratios, not the amounts. So N2O counts as the same as NO½. N2O5 is also included as this counts as NO2½. The other problem, which does have linguistic significance is that N2O does not count as a "nasty substance". Whereas the others are nasty pollutants, and indeed the acceptance of the term NOx may have been influenced by the word noxious which is apposite, N2O is not noxious. It is laughing gas which is quite pleasant to breathe and is used in aerosol whipped cream, so is often disregarded as a NOx.
– David Robinson
3 hours ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
NOx is an abbreviation for what is referred to as "nitrogen oxides" in environmental regulations (e.g., 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(v)(E), 42 USC 7403(c)(3)(A)), so you can see why the Wikipedia entry chose this formulation. However, it's awkward. In actual usage in the environmental profession, people just use NOx like a mass noun (no article, singular agreement).
answered 2 hours ago
jlovegren
11.6k12042
add a comment |Â
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
3
down vote
Yes, but only if you are referring to Nitrogen Dioxide as a category. If you are referring specifically to the gas, the answer is no.
For example, "All types of NOx are converted in the reaction" - valid because it is referring to the types of NOx you have, which is multiple.
"All of my NOx is converted in the reaction" is referring to NOx as a mass noun, so there is no plural in that sense.
answered 3 hours ago
Jamie Clinton
5365
In both your examples, you have taken NOx out of the picture as far as verb agreement goes. All types are, All is. In other words, your examples don't have anything to do with the question or your explanations.
– Phil Sweet
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
Yes, but only if you are referring to Nitrogen Dioxide as a category. If you are referring specifically to the gas, the answer is no.
For example, "All types of NOx are converted in the reaction" - valid because it is referring to the types of NOx you have, which is multiple.
"All of my NOx is converted in the reaction" is referring to NOx as a mass noun, so there is no plural in that sense.
answered 3 hours ago
Jamie Clinton
5365
In both your examples, you have taken NOx out of the picture as far as verb agreement goes. All types are, All is. In other words, your examples don't have anything to do with the question or your explanations.
– Phil Sweet
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
up vote
3
down vote
Yes, but only if you are referring to Nitrogen Dioxide as a category. If you are referring specifically to the gas, the answer is no.
For example, "All types of NOx are converted in the reaction" - valid because it is referring to the types of NOx you have, which is multiple.
"All of my NOx is converted in the reaction" is referring to NOx as a mass noun, so there is no plural in that sense.
answered 3 hours ago
Jamie Clinton
5365
Yes, but only if you are referring to Nitrogen Dioxide as a category. If you are referring specifically to the gas, the answer is no.
For example, "All types of NOx are converted in the reaction" - valid because it is referring to the types of NOx you have, which is multiple.
"All of my NOx is converted in the reaction" is referring to NOx as a mass noun, so there is no plural in that sense.
answered 3 hours ago
Jamie Clinton
5365
answered 3 hours ago
Jamie Clinton
5365
answered 3 hours ago
Jamie Clinton
5365
answered 3 hours ago
Jamie Clinton
5365
5365
In both your examples, you have taken NOx out of the picture as far as verb agreement goes. All types are, All is. In other words, your examples don't have anything to do with the question or your explanations.
– Phil Sweet
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
In both your examples, you have taken NOx out of the picture as far as verb agreement goes. All types are, All is. In other words, your examples don't have anything to do with the question or your explanations.
– Phil Sweet
1 hour ago
In both your examples, you have taken NOx out of the picture as far as verb agreement goes. All types are, All is. In other words, your examples don't have anything to do with the question or your explanations.
– Phil Sweet
1 hour ago
In both your examples, you have taken NOx out of the picture as far as verb agreement goes. All types are, All is. In other words, your examples don't have anything to do with the question or your explanations.
– Phil Sweet
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
Yes, I figure you can. It just means the different nitrogen oxides. I was surprised to read that it also includes Nitrous oxide, considering the 2 Nitrogen atoms, but in any case 'oxides' would take a plural form.
Wikipedia says the following:
In atmospheric chemistry, NOx is a generic term for the nitrogen
oxides that are most relevant for air pollution, namely nitric oxide
(NO) and nitrogen dioxide (NO2).[1][2] These gases contribute to the
formation of smog and acid rain, as well as affecting tropospheric
ozone.
NOx gases are usually produced from the reaction among nitrogen and
oxygen during combustion of fuels, such as hydrocarbons, in air;
especially at high temperatures, such as occur in car
engines.[1][2][3] In areas of high motor vehicle traffic, such as in
large cities, the nitrogen oxides emitted can be a significant source
of air pollution. NOx gases are also produced naturally by lightning.
The term NOx is chemistry shorthand for molecules containing one
nitrogen and one or more oxygen atom. It is generally meant to include
nitrous oxide (N2O),[1] although nitrous oxide is a fairly inert oxide
of nitrogen that has many uses as an oxidizer for rockets and car
engines, an anesthetic, and a propellant for aerosol sprays and
whipped cream. Nitrous oxide plays hardly any role in air pollution,
although it may have a significant impact on the ozone layer,[4] and
is a significant greenhouse gas.
(In the same article NOx is used both in plural and in singular forms depending on whether it refers to various nitrogen oxides or to singular nitrogen oxide.)
answered 3 hours ago
S Conroy
2,0421319
As for the two N atoms, these are stoichiometic formulae - just concerned with the ratios, not the amounts. So N2O counts as the same as NO½. N2O5 is also included as this counts as NO2½. The other problem, which does have linguistic significance is that N2O does not count as a "nasty substance". Whereas the others are nasty pollutants, and indeed the acceptance of the term NOx may have been influenced by the word noxious which is apposite, N2O is not noxious. It is laughing gas which is quite pleasant to breathe and is used in aerosol whipped cream, so is often disregarded as a NOx.
– David Robinson
3 hours ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
Yes, I figure you can. It just means the different nitrogen oxides. I was surprised to read that it also includes Nitrous oxide, considering the 2 Nitrogen atoms, but in any case 'oxides' would take a plural form.
Wikipedia says the following:
In atmospheric chemistry, NOx is a generic term for the nitrogen
oxides that are most relevant for air pollution, namely nitric oxide
(NO) and nitrogen dioxide (NO2).[1][2] These gases contribute to the
formation of smog and acid rain, as well as affecting tropospheric
ozone.
NOx gases are usually produced from the reaction among nitrogen and
oxygen during combustion of fuels, such as hydrocarbons, in air;
especially at high temperatures, such as occur in car
engines.[1][2][3] In areas of high motor vehicle traffic, such as in
large cities, the nitrogen oxides emitted can be a significant source
of air pollution. NOx gases are also produced naturally by lightning.
The term NOx is chemistry shorthand for molecules containing one
nitrogen and one or more oxygen atom. It is generally meant to include
nitrous oxide (N2O),[1] although nitrous oxide is a fairly inert oxide
of nitrogen that has many uses as an oxidizer for rockets and car
engines, an anesthetic, and a propellant for aerosol sprays and
whipped cream. Nitrous oxide plays hardly any role in air pollution,
although it may have a significant impact on the ozone layer,[4] and
is a significant greenhouse gas.
(In the same article NOx is used both in plural and in singular forms depending on whether it refers to various nitrogen oxides or to singular nitrogen oxide.)
answered 3 hours ago
S Conroy
2,0421319
As for the two N atoms, these are stoichiometic formulae - just concerned with the ratios, not the amounts. So N2O counts as the same as NO½. N2O5 is also included as this counts as NO2½. The other problem, which does have linguistic significance is that N2O does not count as a "nasty substance". Whereas the others are nasty pollutants, and indeed the acceptance of the term NOx may have been influenced by the word noxious which is apposite, N2O is not noxious. It is laughing gas which is quite pleasant to breathe and is used in aerosol whipped cream, so is often disregarded as a NOx.
– David Robinson
3 hours ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
up vote
1
down vote
Yes, I figure you can. It just means the different nitrogen oxides. I was surprised to read that it also includes Nitrous oxide, considering the 2 Nitrogen atoms, but in any case 'oxides' would take a plural form.
Wikipedia says the following:
In atmospheric chemistry, NOx is a generic term for the nitrogen
oxides that are most relevant for air pollution, namely nitric oxide
(NO) and nitrogen dioxide (NO2).[1][2] These gases contribute to the
formation of smog and acid rain, as well as affecting tropospheric
ozone.
NOx gases are usually produced from the reaction among nitrogen and
oxygen during combustion of fuels, such as hydrocarbons, in air;
especially at high temperatures, such as occur in car
engines.[1][2][3] In areas of high motor vehicle traffic, such as in
large cities, the nitrogen oxides emitted can be a significant source
of air pollution. NOx gases are also produced naturally by lightning.
The term NOx is chemistry shorthand for molecules containing one
nitrogen and one or more oxygen atom. It is generally meant to include
nitrous oxide (N2O),[1] although nitrous oxide is a fairly inert oxide
of nitrogen that has many uses as an oxidizer for rockets and car
engines, an anesthetic, and a propellant for aerosol sprays and
whipped cream. Nitrous oxide plays hardly any role in air pollution,
although it may have a significant impact on the ozone layer,[4] and
is a significant greenhouse gas.
(In the same article NOx is used both in plural and in singular forms depending on whether it refers to various nitrogen oxides or to singular nitrogen oxide.)
answered 3 hours ago
S Conroy
2,0421319
Yes, I figure you can. It just means the different nitrogen oxides. I was surprised to read that it also includes Nitrous oxide, considering the 2 Nitrogen atoms, but in any case 'oxides' would take a plural form.
Wikipedia says the following:
In atmospheric chemistry, NOx is a generic term for the nitrogen
oxides that are most relevant for air pollution, namely nitric oxide
(NO) and nitrogen dioxide (NO2).[1][2] These gases contribute to the
formation of smog and acid rain, as well as affecting tropospheric
ozone.
NOx gases are usually produced from the reaction among nitrogen and
oxygen during combustion of fuels, such as hydrocarbons, in air;
especially at high temperatures, such as occur in car
engines.[1][2][3] In areas of high motor vehicle traffic, such as in
large cities, the nitrogen oxides emitted can be a significant source
of air pollution. NOx gases are also produced naturally by lightning.
The term NOx is chemistry shorthand for molecules containing one
nitrogen and one or more oxygen atom. It is generally meant to include
nitrous oxide (N2O),[1] although nitrous oxide is a fairly inert oxide
of nitrogen that has many uses as an oxidizer for rockets and car
engines, an anesthetic, and a propellant for aerosol sprays and
whipped cream. Nitrous oxide plays hardly any role in air pollution,
although it may have a significant impact on the ozone layer,[4] and
is a significant greenhouse gas.
(In the same article NOx is used both in plural and in singular forms depending on whether it refers to various nitrogen oxides or to singular nitrogen oxide.)
answered 3 hours ago
S Conroy
2,0421319
edited 2 hours ago
answered 3 hours ago
S Conroy
2,0421319
answered 3 hours ago
S Conroy
2,0421319
answered 3 hours ago
S Conroy
2,0421319
2,0421319
As for the two N atoms, these are stoichiometic formulae - just concerned with the ratios, not the amounts. So N2O counts as the same as NO½. N2O5 is also included as this counts as NO2½. The other problem, which does have linguistic significance is that N2O does not count as a "nasty substance". Whereas the others are nasty pollutants, and indeed the acceptance of the term NOx may have been influenced by the word noxious which is apposite, N2O is not noxious. It is laughing gas which is quite pleasant to breathe and is used in aerosol whipped cream, so is often disregarded as a NOx.
– David Robinson
3 hours ago
add a comment |Â
As for the two N atoms, these are stoichiometic formulae - just concerned with the ratios, not the amounts. So N2O counts as the same as NO½. N2O5 is also included as this counts as NO2½. The other problem, which does have linguistic significance is that N2O does not count as a "nasty substance". Whereas the others are nasty pollutants, and indeed the acceptance of the term NOx may have been influenced by the word noxious which is apposite, N2O is not noxious. It is laughing gas which is quite pleasant to breathe and is used in aerosol whipped cream, so is often disregarded as a NOx.
– David Robinson
3 hours ago
As for the two N atoms, these are stoichiometic formulae - just concerned with the ratios, not the amounts. So N2O counts as the same as NO½. N2O5 is also included as this counts as NO2½. The other problem, which does have linguistic significance is that N2O does not count as a "nasty substance". Whereas the others are nasty pollutants, and indeed the acceptance of the term NOx may have been influenced by the word noxious which is apposite, N2O is not noxious. It is laughing gas which is quite pleasant to breathe and is used in aerosol whipped cream, so is often disregarded as a NOx.
– David Robinson
3 hours ago
As for the two N atoms, these are stoichiometic formulae - just concerned with the ratios, not the amounts. So N2O counts as the same as NO½. N2O5 is also included as this counts as NO2½. The other problem, which does have linguistic significance is that N2O does not count as a "nasty substance". Whereas the others are nasty pollutants, and indeed the acceptance of the term NOx may have been influenced by the word noxious which is apposite, N2O is not noxious. It is laughing gas which is quite pleasant to breathe and is used in aerosol whipped cream, so is often disregarded as a NOx.
– David Robinson
3 hours ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
NOx is an abbreviation for what is referred to as "nitrogen oxides" in environmental regulations (e.g., 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(v)(E), 42 USC 7403(c)(3)(A)), so you can see why the Wikipedia entry chose this formulation. However, it's awkward. In actual usage in the environmental profession, people just use NOx like a mass noun (no article, singular agreement).
answered 2 hours ago
jlovegren
11.6k12042
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
NOx is an abbreviation for what is referred to as "nitrogen oxides" in environmental regulations (e.g., 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(v)(E), 42 USC 7403(c)(3)(A)), so you can see why the Wikipedia entry chose this formulation. However, it's awkward. In actual usage in the environmental profession, people just use NOx like a mass noun (no article, singular agreement).
answered 2 hours ago
jlovegren
11.6k12042
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
NOx is an abbreviation for what is referred to as "nitrogen oxides" in environmental regulations (e.g., 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(v)(E), 42 USC 7403(c)(3)(A)), so you can see why the Wikipedia entry chose this formulation. However, it's awkward. In actual usage in the environmental profession, people just use NOx like a mass noun (no article, singular agreement).
answered 2 hours ago
jlovegren
11.6k12042
NOx is an abbreviation for what is referred to as "nitrogen oxides" in environmental regulations (e.g., 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(v)(E), 42 USC 7403(c)(3)(A)), so you can see why the Wikipedia entry chose this formulation. However, it's awkward. In actual usage in the environmental profession, people just use NOx like a mass noun (no article, singular agreement).
answered 2 hours ago
jlovegren
11.6k12042
answered 2 hours ago
jlovegren
11.6k12042
answered 2 hours ago
jlovegren
11.6k12042
answered 2 hours ago
jlovegren
11.6k12042
11.6k12042
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f464850%2fcan-you-say-the-no%25e2%2582%2593-are%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
If anyone knows how to change the title to say NO<sub>*x*</sub> (without the backslashes!),please can they do so?
– David Robinson
5 hours ago
So, if it were H2O molecules would you want to say "the waters is" or "the waters are"?
– Hot Licks
4 hours ago
@DavidRobinson I don't think you can do that in titles on this site.
– Azor Ahai
4 hours ago
Is this like saying "the gases are" ?
– Azor Ahai
4 hours ago
@HotLicks It's not a question of how many molecules, but of how many different molecules. You might say the waters if you were talking about different types of water, e.g. Perrier and Highland Spring.
– David Robinson
4 hours ago