Sensei

Once again, I am explaining from the start. You said that indirect observation of electron trace does not prove existence of electron, and came up with image of lemur. I explained you what does it even means "to see something" i.e. interactions of photons with matter/antimatter/particles. You complained that interaction of photons with electrons in trace of electron is not the same as looking at living animal. But it's pretty much the same. So I came up with three distinct cases in which billions of photons are interpreted by brain as image of known animal (their state to be alive or not, is actually irrelevant). Entire discussion started from your doubt in electron existence. Scientists are firing and accelerating electrons at will (and you too in old CRT TV (CRT - Cathode Ray Tube - basically "electron rays tube") ), in electron gun, simply pressing button, and immediately seeing effect caused by electrons. If they are accelerated to enough velocity, and thus have enough kinetic energy, after hitting luminescent screen, they decelerate and gave part or all of their kinetic energy to atom in screen which they hit. Excited atom is emitting photons in human visible spectrum. Human eye is observing photons, thus know collision did happen. That's not any tiny bit different from case in which photon is emitted by external light source, then it interacted with matter on its path ("lemur" or whatever else what is around you), and reached your eye and has been absorbed by retina, and interpreted by your brain. I rephrased your statement "indirect observation of electron trace does not prove existence of electron" to "indirect observation of image of lemur does not prove existence of lemur", but you failed at understanding this analogy..

Wtf gave good advice to try proxy +1. But if it's truly yours server, on Windows you can simply edit local DNS records in c:\WINDOWS\system32\drivers\etc\hosts file, on Unix /etc/hosts file.

@Reg Prescott You don't know whether you're looking at alive lemur, remote controlled robot with fur of lemur, LED screen, or lemur image printed on the paper. Your brain is interpreting photons that arrive to retina in your eye. If there will be not enough of information e.g. you would never see LED screen in your life, and would not know how it works, you could think somebody put lemur inside of this device (and claim it is "magic" because of lack of knowledge). The first people watching TV screens at the beginning of XX century were amazed and were searching for people in the box. Some armies fooled enemies making carton tanks. From airplanes they looked like the real one tanks. I described you how physics works. If it would not work this way, how 2) and 3) cases could fool people that they see lemur.. ?

Imagine three situations: 1) lemur is alive in front of you 2) lemur is on the LED screen 3) lemur is printed on the paper In the first case photons from light source are absorbed, some of them with the right energy are reflected (diffused in the all directions), some of them are absorbed, therefor from white light source photons there are remaining and arriving to your eye details of lemur body instead of just white light. Your brain is interpreting billions of photons as known image of lemur from the past experiences. In the second case photons are emitted by LED screen itself. Pixels are so close each other and blend together that your eye and brain are just interpreting it as lemur. You don't see true lemur. It's just your brain which is interpreting thousands or millions of red, green and blue light-emitting diodes as image that you know from the past experiences. When resolution of computer screens was lower than 1920x1080 majority of people without eye problems could easily tell difference between lemur on the screen with 640x480 resolution and true one. The larger resolution, the larger quantity of colors, the easier for brain to interpret it and fool it. In the third case photons from external light source like lamp, or the Sun, are absorbed by piece of paper and ink, and some are reflected toward your eye and brain just interprets it as lemur. You don't see true lemur.

It's actually not any different when you're observing yourself in the mirror. Any observation is indirect. You don't really see object, just how it interacts with other particles. Natural or artificial light source is emitting photons. They are colliding and interacting with electrons and nuclei (reflection, refraction, scattering, absorption and emission). Photon is absorbed by electron in atom, atom is excited for a while, then photon is reemited, or couple new photons will be reemitted. To your eye there is arriving photon, exciting electrons in your retina. Millions or billions such events per second. Electron (or any other charged particle) with high kinetic energy passing through medium is decelerated by collisions with medium, and gives part of its kinetic energy to medium. Thus medium is excited or accelerated as a result (which is visible as trace). We can verify electron charge, rest-mass, momentum and kinetic energy using well-known external electric and/or magnetic fields.

Electron's traces are observable in e.g. Cloud Chamber..

Sockpuppets to fool fools..

In C/C++ there is pseudo-random number generator. It's not multi-thread safe. You initialize it by using srand() function. http://www.cplusplus.com/reference/cstdlib/srand/ Usually it's initialized by current time (which is changing, all the time different value). This ensures that later generated numbers are unique i.e. every time program is run, sequence of "random" numbers is different. To get pseudo-random number there is used rand() function: http://www.cplusplus.com/reference/cstdlib/rand/ If you will make loop, finite or infinite loop, which will be calling rand() function and incrementing array element at index pointed by rand() result, you will have array with the most randomly picked up numbers. Perfect random-number generator will not promote any of these numbers. They will be incremented in such a way that none will be growing when the others don't grow. srand(time(NULL)); long long table[ RAND_MAX ] = { 0 }; for( int i = 0; ; i++ ) { int value = rand(); table[ value ]++; // verify if some value is picked up more often than the other here.. } If I would say "there will be picked up ball with number 1 in the next 100 years in lottery", actually I am saying pure truth. Ball with 1 will be picked up (so the same the all other numbers!), but I didn't say, which day of lottery, and what will be other numbers...

You can't predict numbers the next week, but you claim to predict numbers in the next fifty years.. ? Right. Pick up any random numbers. They will be picked up randomly in the next fifty years of lottery.. in random order.. in the random day of lottery...

That's nice rubbish.. If they would do it truly, they would be on the Forbes list..

So God, creator of the Universe, is saying that you are connected to Reg Prescott... Do you agree or disagree with this statement.. ?

If you want supercomputer/computer/microcomputer/smartphone to process the more data at the same time you should do: 1) Optimize your algorithm. 2) Review compiler assembler output to check what has been generated. e.g. if you won't turn on Floating Model: Fast in Visual Studio, floating point operations can be utterly tragic slow. Default compiler option is Precise. Not all programmers (especially people who don't know assembler) are aware of what this option is doing (therefor they don't switch it every time they're making new Visual Studio C/C++ project). This shows how important is programmer's intelligence, knowledge and competence. 3) Replace Java code by C/C++ (the most time consuming tasks), if it's not enough replace it by assembler. 4) Use gfx cards (OpenCL and CUDA) instead of CPU. Now they have 1024+ cores. And you can buy motherboards which allow couple such cards to be inserted in them at the same time. etc. etc.

No. It is not example of macroevolution. It is example of metamorphosis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metamorphosis "Metamorphosis is a biological process by which an animal physically develops after birth or hatching, involving a conspicuous and relatively abrupt change in the animal's body structure through cell growth and differentiation. Metamorphosis is iodothyronine-induced and an ancestral feature of all chordates."

Absolute numbers (as almost always) don't matter as much as quantity per area unit, and quantity per human (consumer of plant) (significant majority of pesticides will be flushed and plant cleaned, but not to absolute zero *). Quote from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pesticide "The US used some 1 kg (2.2 pounds) per hectare of arable land compared with: 4.7 kg in China, 1.3 kg in the UK, 0.1 kg in Cameroon, 5.9 kg in Japan and 2.5 kg in Italy. Insecticide use in the US has declined by more than half since 1980 (.6%/yr), mostly due to the near phase-out of organophosphates. In corn fields, the decline was even steeper, due to the switchover to transgenic Bt corn.[30]" i.e. GMO plants replaced normal plants, GMO were modified to be immune for attacking it microbes etc. thus pesticides are no longer needed (but seeds must be bought year-by-year, because they are made to be infertile). *) so yet another variable is how efficient is plant cleaning up procedure..

If you used pressure difference to put egg to the bottle, you can also reverse it, and use pressure difference to get it out of the bottle. Just place up-side-down bottle with egg, on e.g. lab tripod , in the bigger container (aquarium?) and lower pressure in it (vacuum pump? vacuum cleaner?)..

One path of Uranium fission is: Uranium-235 + n0 -> Barium-141 + Krypton + n0 + n0 + n0 .... (a few neutrons, not constant quantity) (some unstable neutron-rich Krypton and Xenon isotopes are decaying via neutron emission) Either Barium-141 and Krypton are unstable and before they reach stable isotope they undergoes plentiful of decays. Newly created free neutrons are repeating cycle with other fissile material such as Uranium-235.

Relative brightness you will get just because of movement of the Earth around the Sun. [math]P_a =\frac{P_0}{4 \pi r_1^2}[/math] [math]P_b =\frac{P_0}{4 \pi r_2^2}[/math] r2 = r1+300 mln km (Earth orbits around the Sun.. half year later is ~300 mln km away) so [math]P_0 = P_a 4 \pi r_1^2 = P_b 4 \pi (r_1+3*10^8)^2[/math] It could be confronted with parallax technique for the closest stars to verify calculations of opposite method.

If source of light, or source of sound waves, is emitting uniformly, with the same power, and thus obeying inverse-square law, you can use simple triangulation. Two or three detectors are needed if source and detectors are static (not moving). But it can be replaced by single detector, if source is static, but detector will be moving. Samples taken with delay. Assuming there is no reflection or refraction..

Sum of rest-masses of Helium-4 and free neutron is smaller than sum of rest-masses of Tritium and Deuterium. So they can fuse together. They just need to overcome Coulomb's Barrier. Yes. Very fast moving particle will hit surrounding it medium, decelerate, and give away part of its kinetic energy to particles which it hit on its path (which means they will also being accelerated after collision) (and eventually ionization, disintegration, or pair-production of matter-antimatter etc. etc. can happen). That's what we see in Cloud Chambers - the more particle has kinetic energy, the longer is particle trace. Particles which weakly interact with matter, such as neutrinos or antineutrinos, don't have many collisions with matter, so don't leave traces. They require more sophisticated methods of detection.

Tritium and Deuterium fusion reaction: [math]_1^3H + _1^2H \rightarrow _2^4He + n^0 + 17.6 MeV[/math] alternative form: [math]T + D \rightarrow _2^4He + n^0 + 17.6 MeV[/math] Tritium can fuse with other Tritium and release 10.446 MeV: [math]_1^3H + _1^3H \rightarrow _2^5He + n^0 + 10.446 MeV[/math] Helium-5 is unstable isotope of Helium, and has only one decay mode via neutron emission: [math] _2^5He \rightarrow _2^4He + n^0 + 887 keV[/math] Free neutrons will be captured by Uranium-235, Lithium-6 or other fissile element. [math]_3^6Li + n^0 \rightarrow _1^3H + _2^4He + 4.8 MeV[/math] alternative form: [math]_3^6Li + n^0 \rightarrow T + _2^4He + 4.8 MeV[/math] As always, kinetic energy of newly created particles (the lighter particle takes more energy), and gamma photons.

Isoamyl alcohol has b.p +131.1 C.. but it's colorless liquid.. and only slightly soluble in water (28 g/L). Smell disagreeable. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isoamyl_alcohol 2-Methyl-1-butanol has b.p. +127.5 °C .. but it's colorless liquid.. and only slightly soluble in water (31 g/L) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2-Methyl-1-butanol You can confront your IR spectrum graph with correlation table on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infrared_spectroscopy_correlation_table

I didn't speak about damage caused by burning fossil fuels, and this way releasing CO2 to atmosphere, but what has to be done to entirely give up fossil fuels (i.e. the all reasons to dig for them), which Gabriel said in the initial post. Different fractions of refination of crude oil find use, in many different industries. They all must be replaced at the same time, to loss interest in crude oil.

...and fossil fuels are used for production of asphalt (road building), and tires (synthetic rubber) (automotive industry).. and many more usages.. All of them would have to be replaced by alternatives, before entirely giving up fossil fuels.

Just to point one thing. Fossil fuels are not the only source of energy, but they are used to make plastic, which is currently essential material in mass production (because of its durability and inactivity). Going full solar panels, solar towers, wind turbines and dams etc. will bring energy, but won't give you carbon and hydrogen to make plastic. One way is to use currently existing microorganisms (GMO could be used to make more durable, with accelerated rate of production) which process sugars (from crops) (in the case of GMO microorganism could be adopted to consume something else, some organic waste) and expel ethanol, which after distillation, and heating to enough temperature will decompose to ethylene and water. C2H5OH -> C2H4 + H2O. Ethylene can be easily polymerized to polyethylene, or used to make the more complex hydrocarbons. But currently this method without skyscrapers is causing increase of price of food. Many farmers who can pick 1) make food for humans or feed for farm animals or 2) make crops for biofuel, chooses to make the second, because it is bringing them more money for the same effort and the same area land. Second one is to make ethanol straight from CO2 from air, water and energy.

This illustration shows that some people see what they want to see. e.g. somebody in reality is obese, but he/she doesn't think about himself/herself as being fat.