Note =Grenades explode and the pieces never get to be joined together.So how did chemistry form if all the pieces fly away?
125244
The Big Bang was not an explosion, it's only described that way because nobody knew how else to describe it.  In a normal explosion, energy is transformed from one form to another.  The Big Bang created energy and matter, it's totally different.
300852
first of all, two elements combine to form molecules...not new elements, unless you are talking fusion, and that will involve radiation, not voltage (electric potential).\n\nsecond of all, there is no question here, unless you are asking if what you wrote makes sense.  If that is the question, then no, it does not make perfect sense.
471529
Particle theory of matter suggests that matter is made of tiny pieces with much space. One support for the idea is when they learned to shoot   particles, and most of them went right through, very few hit a nucleus. They were using a sheet of gold.
288511
According to one theory there are particles, which are exchanged and travel between the objects, giving impression that objects attract or repel each other. Nothing is proved yet and it is just a theory, as far as my knowledge is concerned.
299180
this is a difficult one. theres the initial 'soup' of early compounds that spawned life, theres the meteorite theory of cells from other planets gettin a start here, and theres a possible link between both. this may be that chemicals from the many rocks from outer space, the heat of the planet then, and the interaction of all the early substances may have harboured a good environment for a cell 2 form, with a membrane, enclosing some of these compounds within it.
14873
first of all, the experiment has not been done yet, we have not been able to reach absolute zero yet.  gases liquids and solids are properties of atoms and their compounds and have to do with intermolecular forces. in liquids and solids, the atoms are touching(solids they are stuck in place liquids they slide over each other) but regardless, 2 electrons(both being negatively charged) can never touch. that doesnt mean they are a gas, because these phases of matter do not apply to plain electrons. subatomic particles do not experience these phases or phase changes. At absolute zero(which hasnt been reached and thus is still theoretical), all matter would stop moving, so the electrons would stop moving and lose all kinetic energy.
449812
For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.\n\nThe smaller object gets busted, as is your question.
147627
For some detonations, they wanted to learn how the air around  the blast moved.  Just before the bomb was detonated, they launched small rockets with smoky trails.  Then, when the bomb went off, the smoke trails showed how the air moved.
663826
One earlier answer is close but does not go all the way.  \n\nThe material it formed out of was slowly rotating already, and angular momentum is conserved;  the more compact that material became the faster it had to rotate to conserve angular momentum.\n\nWhy did the material have some rotation in the first place?  Because it is statistically VERY improbable to have a large extended ANYTHING with net zero rotation.  Contract such an anything enough and its rotation becomes appreciable.\n\nIt is worth noting that it is the combined angular momentum of the Earth-Moon system that is relevant here. The moon once orbited much closer and the Earth rotated much faster.  The transfer between the two (terrestrial rotation and the moon's orbital motion) continues, but the total of the combined has changed little since the hypothesised collision that formed the moon.
386859
4. D\nThe most explosive volcanoes are those containing a lot of silica.  The shape of the silca molecule is a bit like a pyramid which means that cannot move past each other very easily.  This makes them very viscous and so it takes much more energy to get it to move and the energy comes out in a single event.\n\n12. B\nIt's the difference between min and max.
190471
To get a nuclear explosion, you need to have an uncontrolled  chain reaction: whenever an atom fissions (and emits neutrons), other fissionable atoms have to be available to capture the neutrons and also fission themselves. The chain reaction occur because one atom fissions, emitting two neutrons; these two cause two more atoms to fission, emitting four, then eight, sixteen, thiry-two ...\n\nCritical mass is also necessary to have enough fissionable material around that enough of the neutrons are absorbed to continue the chain reaction. \n\nBarium-133 decays by electron capture (one of the protons in the nucleus actually combines with  an inner-shell electron to form a neutron. This emits a X-ray instead of a neutron, so it's not suitable for building a bomb. Gotta have those neutrons, and more than one of them.
104304
That's a very good question.  No one really knows how the atomic nucleus holds together but this is generally not the reason for objects not falling through tables.  That is primarily due to the repulsion between the electrons in adjacent atoms.  In highly ordered systems of long-chain molecules or crystals the electrons are fairly densely packed and mostly impenetrable.  However the mechanics of this get more complicated above the molecular level.\n\nAs for your other question, as far as I know most atomic nuclei never spontaneously decay, except for the heavy elements like uranium.  There are many theories why this is the case, but I don't think any have managed a definitive answer.  \n\nThe energy for this bond might well be the mass of the particles themselves, since after all, e=mc^2.\n\nCheck out String Theory if you want a more comprehensive answer, but I warn you, it's a lot of very complicated math.
209397
Planets aren't directly formed from explosions and whatnot, they are formed from gravitational accumulation of mass in dust clouds. They are approximately round for the same reason anything that is approximately fluid that experiences a central force is round. Central forces have circular potential energy wells.\nConsider a cubic planet. A mass on the face of such a planet would be experiencing less force than a mass near a corner of such a planet (The corner has a greater amount of non-cancelling mass "behind" it. If you know the divergence theorem, this can be seen as well.). Since less force is exerted on points on the faces than points near the vertex, the vertex will slowly collapse if the mass is great enough, easily pushing the points on the faces outwards until an equilibrium is reached. This thought experiment works for any polyhedron, with the sphere being the limiting shape. Once the shape is approximately spherical, it is a well known proof that the force experienced by a particle outside the sphere will be the same as the force if the sphere was a point mass at the center of the central force, giving us back the circular potential energy map.
585810
Water, when heated from a solid to liquid state, but ultimately in a gaseous state it again expands.  It still obeys all the laws of chemistry, but the bonds just arrange themselves in a more space efficient manner in liquid than in solid form.\n\nAnd moses with a P, no metals exist with the properties you say.  It is physically impossible, sorry man, but I'm a biochem major and it's my job to know what stuff does under different stresses, and nothing does what you claim.  However, if you do have a material that does this, get in touch with me, we'll talk to the patent office, and we'll license it out to companies for billions of dollars.
11407
If you look at a periodic table you will see the number of protons in an element, these +ve particles are balanced by an equal number of -ve charged electrons.  The cloud theory of electrons is a bit confusing but if you consider the electrons to orbit the nucleus in set patterns/orbits it becomes a bit easier to explain (and the model works at a basic level).\n\nThe inner orbit of an atom can hold 2 electrons, if you look at hydrogen you will see that it has one electron, this means that it has a vacancy in that orbit - and it will want to fill this vacancy to become stable, this can be filled by sharing an electron with another atom perhaps another hydrogen atom to form 2H the normal format for gaseous hydrogen in the atmosphere.  \n\nOxygen has 16 electrons in 3 orbits - inner = 2 (full) layer 2 = 8 (full) layer 3 = 6 (2 vacancies).  It will want to fill these vacancies to become more stable.  Oxygen does this by combining with 2 hydrogen atoms each of which has a single atom to form H20.\n\nIf you look at the periodic table you will see that the materials in each vertical row have the most reactive material at the top going down to the least reactive at the bottom.  In general atoms with a single electron in its outermost orbit or an outermost orbit with a single vacancy (such as Hydrogen) will be more reactive than an atom with two electrons or two vacancies in its outermost orbit.  This can be proven by experiment and working out the number of electrons in the outer orbits.\n\nGenerally atoms combine together to form stable unreactive materials. Iron oxide (Fe02) is a stable natural form of Iron, we remove the oxygen to produce Iron products, but iron is fairly reactive in its Fe form and will naturally recombine with O2 to revert back to its stable form FeO2.
105367
Kids bits in brackets :)\n\nAn atom bomb works by firing a proton/neutron (a little part of an atom) at a mass of uranium (nuclear material) the proton goes into the uranium and eventually hits and joins with an atom of uranium, that atom is now unstable (a bit like too many people on a ladder) so to make it self stable it loses some protons (some people fall off the ladder), usually 2 or 3 (that's the bit they call fission), these fire off and hit other atoms repeating the process in a chain. if the amount of uranium is small then a lot of the protons fly out of the uranium and do nothing, however if there is enough uranium the protons are contained in the mass and break up even more atoms, leading to a catastrophic chain reaction (KaaaaBOOOOOOM)!!! \n\n***Try shouting the last part it should get a few laughs :)\n\nPS. because the uranium lost more protons than was originally put into it as extra, it is no longer standard uranium, this is called a uranium isotope.\n\nbrubeck_take5 yeah I remember the ping-pong ball video... really cool, wouldn't mind seeing that again... gonna see if I can find it... let you know :)\n\nhere goes... thing the slow motion one is the best\n\nhttp://www.ap.stmarys.ca/demos/content/modern/mousetrap_reactor/trap_sideview_slow_high.wmv\n\nbut if you want to look at them all\n\nhttp://www.ap.stmarys.ca/demos/content/modern/mousetrap_reactor/mousetrap_reactor.html
19514
adding water to potassium already causes it to explode.  you are correct - the reaction releases hydrogen and forms an oxide of potassium, and the considerably exothermic nature of the reaction generates enough heat to ignite the hydrogen gas.  so, mixing water and potassium solid typically causes a big-time explosion - just like mixing water and sodium.\n\nas for the powdered magnesium in there - i suspect that the explosion would scatter it, and it might ignite - the ignition temperature for magnesium metal is 450 C - so you'd probably end up with white-hot burning magnesium shrapnel flying everywhere!\n\nso, if you're ever thinking about making a nasty bomb, sounds like a good way to do it.