As I mentioned in another post of mine, I get very over-paranoid thanks to my OCD but I'd rather be safe than sorry.

The spray itself was a generic Walmart brand version of Lysol, but still, it has been labeled as "flammable", do not expose above 130 F or under heavy pressure and etc.

So I was attempting to kill a couple house flies, and accidently got some into the window AC unit since they were flying around it, I wouldn't just up and say it's a "puny nearly non-existent amount", I immediately stopped but still - there was enough amount of that went it through the vents and stuff to make me concerned.

The AC wasn't on but still, but I don't wanna turn my unit on anymore, I'm kinda of afraid some of it may cause something within the unit itself, maybe the compressor or the condenser to cause a fire.

My AC unit's an old General Electric, so I'm not really familiar with the inner workings of an AC unit to cough off an answer myself.

Thanks in advance.

It's understandable to be concerned about your AC unit after accidentally spraying it with a flammable substance. While it's good to be cautious, the best course of action is to get a professional AC repair service to inspect your unit. They can check for any potential issues and ensure it's safe to use. An AC Repair expert can give you peace of mind and address any problems that might arise from the spray exposure.

LMFAO this was taken from deep in the mines by this bot.

How does anyone make money programming bots to troll forums these days. Reddit or twitter I get, but what money is there to be had here?

Because of the octest rule?

Guess: The only factors at play here are the nuclear charge which without slater's rules we only use a Z_eff estimate play a constant rate increasing effect going across the column left to right.

If the atomic radius isn't dropping as heavily as atomic number increases across a period, the only possibility is the shielding is increasing across the period. But that's a contradiction because you inner shell isn't changing across the same period.

 Why is the slope in order of smallest to 1. largest main group (1-2), 2. transition metals, 3. main groups 13-18?

gp1/2 ionic radius sharper drop


With the exception of phosphide, the difference in ionic radius between successive anion forming non-metals is smaller than that between group I and group II's cations

What explains this slope ( atomic radius to atomic number) besides the Bohr radius trend for isoelectronic to hydrogen elements is applicable to just about all atoms in the main group?

Why is the Bohr radius (slope versus atomic number) trend in the figure below consistent for atoms non-isoelectronic to Hydrogen?


Why is the following true besides it is consistent with Slater's rules? "Lithium has but 3 protons in its nucleus. Adding a fourth, to make it beryllium, increases the nuclear charge by 33%. But if you add yet another proton, to make it boron, you are increasing the nuclear charge by 25%. And so on, down to the change from oxygen to fluorine, an increase in the nuclear charge (really, the proton count) of only 12.5%. This accounts for the decline in rate of change that you observ