yes
Yes, oddly enough, they do mean the same thing.Normally the prefix "in" added to a word is a negative (like un) that means "not" or "unable to be". In this case the Latin intensive prefix in created inflammabilis (to inflame) from flammare (set fire to). This can be seen in the English word "inflame".The actual "not flammable" word is "nonflammable / non-flammable", or incombustible.
the same thing she did
'Mimicking,' 'imitating' or 'copying' can mean to 'do the same thing'.
It can be interpreted as meaning the same thing. Yes.
no they are not the same thing. mEq is a milliequivlant. cc and ml are the same thing.
Antonyms for inflammable (able to burn) are noncombustible, incombustible, or nonflammable (non-flammable).(*The words flammable and inflammable have the same general meaning of combustible.)
Flame-retardant (I realize that's hyphenated),incombustible, fireproof, noncombustible, nonflammable...
Asbestos is fairly incombustible.
Incombustible means that it cannot burn.
incombustible objects are things that can be light up
Ashtrays are necessarily incombustible. Glass window panes, sand on the beach, rocks, frying pans, and stainless steel forks are incombustible.
An incombustible gas is one that does not burn or explode.(Incombustible means something that cannot be burnt.)Some good examples of incombustible gases arenitrogen (which is fortunate, because 78% of the air is nitrogen, and if nitrogen was combustible, the air would explode!)carbon dioxideargon
An incombustible gas is one that does not burn or explode.(Incombustible means something that cannot be burnt.)Some good examples of incombustible gases arenitrogen (which is fortunate, because 78% of the air is nitrogen, and if nitrogen was combustible, the air would explode!)carbon dioxideargon
No.
yes
Will not catch on fire.
paint