Timeline for Can flames be colored black?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
26 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 11, 2020 at 10:20 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Commonmark migration
|
|
| May 7, 2019 at 17:36 | history | protected | user7951 | ||
| Dec 8, 2018 at 20:12 | answer | added | Ross | timeline score: -3 | |
| Oct 14, 2018 at 9:00 | comment | added | Ivan Neretin | In a way, all flames are colored black. | |
| S Oct 11, 2018 at 1:40 | history | bounty ended | A.K. | ||
| S Oct 11, 2018 at 1:40 | history | notice removed | A.K. | ||
| S Oct 3, 2018 at 22:17 | history | bounty started | A.K. | ||
| S Oct 3, 2018 at 22:17 | history | notice added | A.K. | Reward existing answer | |
| Oct 3, 2018 at 20:55 | answer | added | This random guy | timeline score: 27 | |
| Nov 21, 2017 at 22:20 | comment | added | Oscar Lanzi | The flame might of course give off radiation in a range not visible to the eye; one night even suppose that an exothermic reaction that heats the air around it and makes the air rise thereby makes a "flame" of sorts from the rising air. But that is invisible as such, not black. | |
| Nov 21, 2017 at 19:28 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackChemistry/status/933054498037215233 | ||
| Nov 21, 2017 at 14:03 | answer | added | Huntter | timeline score: 3 | |
| Jan 17, 2017 at 17:37 | history | edited | Mithoron | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 2 characters in body; edited title
|
| Sep 27, 2016 at 4:55 | history | edited | paracetamol | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 144 characters in body
|
| Sep 26, 2016 at 12:56 | comment | added | Greg | Off course: it is called smoke | |
| Sep 26, 2016 at 12:52 | history | edited | paracetamol | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 332 characters in body
|
| Sep 26, 2016 at 12:07 | history | edited | paracetamol | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 17 characters in body
|
| Sep 25, 2016 at 7:32 | vote | accept | paracetamol | ||
| Sep 25, 2016 at 7:16 | history | edited | paracetamol | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 21 characters in body
|
| Sep 25, 2016 at 3:41 | history | edited | getafix | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 4 characters in body
|
| Sep 25, 2016 at 3:39 | comment | added | Nicolau Saker Neto | Thinking outside the box here, vaporization of solid iodine may be the closest you can get to a "black flame". There is no chemical reaction involved, and the process consumes heat rather than releases it (so it cannot be self-sustaining), but it would generate dark purple wisps. | |
| Sep 24, 2016 at 22:16 | answer | added | aventurin | timeline score: 9 | |
| Sep 24, 2016 at 20:38 | answer | added | Buttonwood | timeline score: 3 | |
| Sep 24, 2016 at 17:04 | comment | added | Mithoron | You basicly answered this - "black flame" is nonsense. | |
| Sep 24, 2016 at 17:01 | history | edited | Mithoron |
edited tags
|
|
| Sep 24, 2016 at 16:45 | history | asked | paracetamol | CC BY-SA 3.0 |