Say, a diamond. Tetrahedral giant structure with each carbon atom bonded to four other carbon atoms. What happens at the surface of the diamond where the last atom is? Does it just end with one layer of atoms with incomplete octets?

Though I ask about sulfur specifically, I suppose the answer would partially apply to all 3p elements. O, which should be similar in properties, being in the same column, only forms 2 bonds. O desires to fill its valence shell, which lacks 2 elections. Sulfur, seems to me would be in the same boat, having only 4 3p elections.

An example: SO4

Edit: I mistakenly put 8 in the original subject instead of 6.

Back in the early 60s I knew a man with a keen interest in science.  He   explained to me how he had developed an analogue memory which consisted of a shallow rectangular non-conducting dish filled with a super saturated solution of ? and with 2 rows of electrical contacts down opposite sides so that when an ac current of a particular frequency and waveform was made to pass from a contact on one side to a contact on the other side it set up a crystalised path with the waveform of the current. Many such waves could be set up in the same dish, even crossing each other which could then be used as wave "gates" for that particular frequency and waveform. I do not know what the solution was and I would guess that it would be rather sensitive to knocks and movement.

I am exploring the properties of waves when traveling thorough a transparent medium. I observed that when white light is shone through a prism the blue light refracts more than the red light in the spectrum. This is due to the interaction between the blue light and the molecules within that medium. 

I wish to know if anyone can give me more details the nature of this interaction.

A more through explanation as to why wavelength of the light effects the speed through a medium would be appreciated and any relevant laws or theories as this is a mystery to me.

Human beings have identified four fundamental forces of nature (the strong nuclear force, the weak nuclear force, the electromagnetic force, and gravity), and it appears that these four fundamental forces enable us to account for everything we observe in the universe (including all matter – i.e. all particles and subatomic particles are understood to be stable manifestations of these four fundamental forces). It appears that all other forces observed in nature can be derived from these four fundamental forces.

If it is correct that Energy is defined not by what it is but by what it can do, then is it correct to assume that energy must be some measure of the fundamental forces of nature acting upon one another?

The fact that mass (such as matter) can be converted into energy (such as in a nuclear explosion) in accordance with Einstein’s equation suggests that everything we observe in the universe is simply the various stable manifestations of the four fundamental forces acting upon one another. If this is correct, then what is a force, exactly (i.e. what is a force, not what does it do)?

According to the second law of thermodynamics, the energy of a closed system always tends towards equilibrium (because an equilibrium state has a higher probability than any other) and the overall entropy always increases. Can energy (all forms including heat, potential energy, kinetic energy, chemical energy etc.) be explained and defined by the fundamental forces of nature tending towards equilibrium?

According to Einstein's famous equation E = MC2, or Energy = Mass times the speed of light times the speed of light. This tells us that anything that has mass, such as matter, is comprised entirely of energy. Any physical object with mass is therefore simply a lump of energy existing in some stable form.

As I understand it, all forms of energy, including chemical energy, kinetic energy and potential energy are covered by Einstein's equation, meaning that fundamentally all forms of energy are the same basic 'stuff' (for want of a better word). My question is, therefore, what exactly is energy? I want to get to a fundamental understanding of energy, because it seems that such an understanding would help to explain much of reality.

I'm not asking for explanations about work done etc, I'm asking at the fundamental level what is energy?

Sometimes it also appears to exhibit pitting (with no visible insects to be found -- though it's unclear, with all the packaging, if some of the pits were developed during manufacturing) and a slightly rancid (?) taste. White chocolate of similar age seems to be less affected. Caramel centers in chocolate seem to dry out with time, leaving a dry residue.

Chocolate can melt in one's hand, but slight cooling can also make it hard enough to damage some dental work. What accounts for such change?

Back in school we were told how you can seperate salt and (powdered) pepper using static electricity. Someone asked if there was a way to seperate salt and sugar. The teacher didn't know. Since then, no one I asked has come up with anything better than sorting the crystals by shape under a microscope. Melting temperatures are very different, of course, but sugar caremelises before melting decently. Both are soluble in water. But maybe there still is a way? What about solubility in organic liquids?

I've searched the internet but I could not find an exact answer. Some people say its something to do with the carbon to hydrogen ratio.