Search results

Yep

Why not simply measuring the new blade's frequency?

What exactly do you mean with "light"? The blade only or the whole racket? Did you measure the weight of the blade only? If yes, how heavy was it?

Yes I boosted a 157 x 150 mm sized rubber 3x with very thin layers of Haifu National White and the weight increase was 4 g.

The last two, Haifu Yellow and Seamon, show absolute identical absorption curves. If - as you say - the only difference between those two is the yellow dye in the Haifu Yellow, then the absorption curve for Haifu Yellow absolutely must be different. As both curves are the same, something stinks ...

Have you done the spectroscopy yourself or do you have a source of that information?

I think so, too, but as you don't know what exactly Haifu contains, I guess, you cannot make any conclusions re its chemical reactivity, no? To me Haifu contains something which just supports the longer stay of the rubber softness and as Haifu is thicker the Haifu oil doesn't evaporate so fast...

Yes, right, but I didn't know if the rubber shown also came with such a sticker. Also I have never seen such irregularities in the printing with any of my DHS rubbers.

Are you sure the rubber is authentic?

Thanks. I wasn't aware of that. What about my question for you re the baby oil?

There is nothing such as "chemical absorption". If you boost with baby oil, do you also think that there is a chemical reaction with the sponge?

Yes, could be. And why would the colours still stay as is? Is it not that the colours of rubber and sponge don't change even after months of repeatedly boosting?

Correct, but it still evaporates. If you manage to measure a difference between before and after, you still don't know what has caused the difference.

And how exactly would you factor in natural evaporation of the booster?

Plus, chemical reactions always go hand in hand with decomposition of the impacted materials.

No, sorry. Really not. Please explain why the colours stay when a rubber is boosted and a chemical reaction occurs. We turn in circles so I let you stay with your misbelief. But, if you are stating things like these, you should look at the whole picture and be able to explain observations or at...

Yep

Well, you may believe it, I surely not. This is no evidence of gas creation. The rapid expansion can also be explained by fast absorption. This not evidence of a change of the chemical structure. Change of initial characteristics can be caused by physical changes, e.g. liquid water/solid ice...

Correct. But you say it: not all chemical reactions build gases. Typically, gases are built with strong oxidising or reducing agents like acids or bases. Booster oil and rubbers are chemically very stable and are not such agents. If a rubber gets stiff over time, then it is because over time...

With boostering a rubber to me there is no chemical reactions at all - no formation of gas, no nothing. Everything can be explained by changes of physical properties. Just assume there was a chemical reaction with formation of gases ... Then either the rubber or the top sheet or the booster...