moth

Do you have a reference for that? The YEC brigade might be relieved to know this.

Now that is funny. If you had said "pornographic pictures of my mother" then, well...

Sometimes distraction is my only way to cope with obsession.(I say half jokingly while trying to introduce a half-twist to my old kaleidocycle.)

Where do you find "God's law"?

Or, thinking of the world ending in horror and violence while you are rewarded for your superior opinions, and seeing all those sinners who mis-underestimated you eternally punished in hell just makes you feel better. In the real world, it would appear that blind faith makes you blind to the truth.

Robo-Coup

If something is measured, how can we tell if we are measuring an emergent phenomena or a fundamental phenomena? We can measure temperature, but that does not make degrees real. We can detect light, but that does not mean Photons are real.

Is a photon made of photons? Virtual photons are used to describe electric and magnetic fields, and the fields define the photon. If they are circular how can they be real. Photons are just a map, not the territory.

Hey,cut the christians some slack. They're persecuted you know.

A mass attached to a linear bearing with a launcher on one end of the bearing, and a spring on the other Half of the mass of the entire setup is in the linear bearing,launcher, and spring. The other half is in the weight mounted to the linear bearing. The launcher end and the mounted mass are initially together, and the launcher accelerates the movable mass with enough momentum to bounce off the spring end and return to the start of the cycle. Since the masses are equal the mounted mass and the launcher end of the bearing assembly move away from each other until the mounted mass hits the spring. The spring looses some of the momentum to friction and returns the mounted mass to the launcher end. The launcher end produces enough force to complete a full cycle The spring end looses some of that energy to heat. It seems unbalanced, but the spring releases photons that have inertial mass and that balances/accounts for the conservation of momentum. It is a net force, but not enough to overcome thermal noise in the molecules of the contraption. but I'm just using intuition here. Edit: Please ignore my intrusion. i just realized what Imatfaal said about the difference between momentum and kinetic energy. sorry 'bout that.

Sorry for being so dense, but are you trying to transform some of the momentum to heat through friction? Winding up with a net force.

How do they do it? Is it really as easy as changing your name from silent majority to moral majority to compassionate conservative to neo-conservative to tea party while keeping so much of the Nixon white house as ringleaders. My experiences talking to right wing friends on facebook have become so puzzling I quit trying to keep in touch with them completely. When shown evidence of their delusions, they don't dispute it, they just don't care.

It seems bazaar to me how effectivly some words have been weaponized, like socialist or community organizer, and others like torturer or war profiteer, are like a fart in the wind.

The call to get government out of the way seems liberating, but I like the government in the way of people who would like to dump their trash in the air or water. I like the government in the way of a lot of things, and blindly assuming the U.S. government is always the problem (or solution) is a fallacy. How many conservative heros have we seen like Rick Scott or Cliven bundy who are just trying to protect their place at the government nipple by calling for getting government out of the way? I hope you are right about the internet, but it seems to be as Balkanized as the rest of the country.

HA, now no one suspects I'm actually SwansonTs ignorant twin from the dummy dimension. I look just like him too, except I have a goatee.

I feel like your speculations on puppet theatre is a tactic. You are trying to convince me that you are not a sock-puppet. Nice try.

I got the impression, from the story of Henrietta Lacks, that HeLa was considered to be immortal. I don't know if it can survive without life-support, but the contamination of so many other cell lines suggest to me, it can.

I apologize, Unity+, I didn't explain what I'm doing very well, and chose a poor example, but the main point is that these blocks of ones and zeros are not meant to be prime. They are pieces of a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sieve_of_Eratosthenes. The rightmost 'digit' represents 1, each digit to the left of the first represents it's position on the list. 2 is second,3 is third on the list etc.. If I was using the sieve to find all primes less than 10 million, it will take a list 10 million digits long. The 8 digit group with 2,4,6, and 8 marked with a 1 looks like:10101010 and that pattern repeats for the rest of the digits in the sieve. Since multiples of a prime are not prime you only have to check the digits marked '0' for primes. I'm looking at combining many patterns, like the 1010 pattern for 2 with the next primes: 3,5,7 etc. to form a modular block that can be repeated over and over for a sieve with most of the composites already marked. Belphegor's Prime may be my next pseudonymn.

While looking for a modular building block for a sieve of Eratosthenes, for example, an 8-bit block of zeros with composite multiples of 2 and 3 already marked as ones,I noticed something bazaar. If I grouped the digits from the sieve into groups of 8 and marked the composites, it takes the same number of groups of eight to form a repeatable block as the prime who's composites i was marking. For example, here are some primes and the groups of eight digits for the sieve. 2 == 10101010 3 == 10010010 01001001 00100100 5 == 10000100 00100001 00001000 01000010 00010000 7 == 10000001 00000010 00000100 00001000 00010000 00100000 01000000 11 == 10000000 00010000 00000010 00000000 01000000 00001000 00000001 00000000 00100000 00000100 00000000 13 == 10000000 00000100 00000000 00100000 00000001 00000000 00001000 00000000 01000000 00000010 00000000 00010000 00000000 17 == 10000000 00000000 01000000 00000000 00100000 00000000 00010000 00000000 00001000 00000000 00000100 00000000 00000010 00000000 00000001 00000000 00000000 19 == 10000000 00000000 00010000 00000000 00000010 00000000 00000000 01000000 00000000 00001000 00000000 00000001 00000000 00000000 00100000 00000000 00000100 00000000 00000000 For a little more context: Start with the rightmost digit representing one. The digit to the left represents 2 the digit to the left of that represents 3 etc. the digit representing one is left a zero and multiples of 2 and 3 are marked with a 1. A string of digits is repeatable if it has a 1 as the leftmost digit and a zero on the right. To make a repeatable block for 2 and 3: 2 == 10101010 10101010 10101010 3 == 10010010 01001001 00100100 building block == 10111010 11101011 10101110 Now the building block can be repeated over and over and only the zeros on the list (except 1 of course) are potential primes. I thought it was cool that (as far as i can tell) no matter what size blocks you use 8,5 ,64 whatever, the prime self-references in the number of groups like that.

Raygun's probably providing arms to terrorists and funding right wing death squads in third world hellholes. Maybe Obame should have rolled over like W did when the ruskys invaded Georgia.

The Owl: http://youtu.be/0Lu0G1xCjEM

http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/79240-shocking-new-video-of-comet-ison-very-scary/ Maybe it's a piece of comet Ison.

Maybe the glass is too big? I'm not staking a claim, my views on AGW could change with new evidence. I'm old enough to remember the "controversy" about smoking tobacco and it seems like the AGW-deniers are using the same tactics the cigarette industry used to delay acceptance of the facts by the public.

If I accepted your argument that a list of papers about AGW alarm supported your argument for objective global cooling somehow, the disclaimer from the webpage would still cause me some concern. from your link: ... While certain authors on the list cannot be labeled skeptics (e.g. Harold Brooks, Roger Pielke Jr., Roger Pielke Sr.) their paper(s) or results from their paper(s) can still support skeptic's arguments against ACC/AGW alarm. Various papers are mutually exclusive and should be considered independently. This list will be updated and corrected as necessary. Where are the interpretations of a paper that got a paper on the list displayed?