Sensei

Force has unit Newtons. Energy has unit Joule. You can't say "joules of force". In physics we don't use word "obliterate". Do you rather meant annihilation? Potential energy = m*g*h m - mass in kg g - Earth's acceleration 9.81 m/s^2 h - relative height To rise 1000 kg for 1 meter, you would need 1000 kg * 9.81 m/s^2 * 1 m = 9810 J.

You are probably thinking about amount of energy that could be released by fuel when it would be burned (with gaseous oxygen). Not quite the same what I was thinking. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density

Ton of hydrogen and antihydrogen will release the same amount of energy as ton of f.e. carbon and anticarbon. So material doesn't really matter when we're are interested just about matter-energy conversion rate.

Joule [J] is unit of energy, not force [N] J = kg*m^2/s^2 N = kg*m/s^2 1 ton is 1000 kg 1 ton could have energy E=m*c^2=1000 kg * (299,792,458 m/s)^2=1000 * 89875517873681764 = 8.988*10^19 J but you would need 1 ton of antimatter to release that all energy..

I have few lasers, and none has linear polarization. If you have polarization filter, you can find out yours LED/LCD/mobile phones screens polarization. See this thread how I am doing so: http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/80366-particle-location/page-3#entry783255 Modern mobile phones that I checked have screens emitting not linearly polarized light.

I have no idea what are you talking about. Experiments made by Jenkins & Fischbach were made in 2006.. So why are you introducing some "20 years ago" fairy tale, that has nothing to do with article.. ? Ephraim is professor on the Purdue University http://www.physics.purdue.edu/people/faculty/ephraim.shtml Science is constantly making experiments. Prepare Chlorine-36, prepare Manganese-54, and start recording decay rate whole year. If you will have steady decays per second while long term observation, you will have proof and counter-argument for Fischbach & Jenkins observations. You obviously didn't take into account that RTG uses Plutonium that's decaying by emitting alpha particle. That might have meaning. I would expect RTG to have voltage/current stabilizers. Also RTG are using Peltier effect that's very little efficiency. They're not designed to be detector of decays per second, but to be power source. What I noticed is that Manganese-54 decays by both beta decay- and beta decay+, and electron capture: Isotope Manganese-54 Protons 25 Neutrons 29 Mass 53.9404 [u] Nucleus Energy 50232.3 [MeV] Parent 50232.3 Daugther 50231.5 Alpha decay prohibited (-8.7587 MeV) Proton emission prohibited (-7.55958 MeV) Neutron emission prohibited (-8.93835 MeV) Manganese-54 -> Iron-54 + e- + Ve + 0.69713 MeV Manganese-54 -> Chromium-54 + e+ + Ve + 0.355216 MeV Manganese-54 + e- -> Chromium-54 + Ve + 1.37721 MeV Chlorine-36 also decays both by beta decay- and beta decay+, and also electron capture: Isotope Chlorine-36 Protons 17 Neutrons 19 Mass 35.9683 [u] Nucleus Energy 33495.6 [MeV] Parent 33495.6 Daugther 33494.9 Alpha decay prohibited (-7.64155 MeV) Proton emission prohibited (-7.96448 MeV) Neutron emission prohibited (-8.57926 MeV) Chlorine-36 -> Argon-36 + e- + Ve + 0.709681 MeV Chlorine-36 -> Sulfur-36 + e+ + Ve + 0.120219 MeV Chlorine-36 + e- -> Sulfur-36 + Ve + 1.14222 MeV That's why I suggested Ephraim to try also Copper-64 that's also both beta decay- and beta decay+. Wrong. You should perform such experiment regardless of his opinion. But use various radioactive materials. There are proton emitters, neutron emitters, positron emitters, electron emitters, alpha emitters, gamma emitters. Each one should be independently checked at various distances from the Sun. And of course they should not be used to power on whole satellite! Actually I know Ephraim Fischbach. We were talking about his experiments with neutrinos. He asked me what experiments I would like him to perform and I suggest few, that you would definitely call highly speculative..

See article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density Ethanol 30 MJ/kg Methanol 19.7 MJ/kg

There is no theory, but there is evidence. http://www.economist.com/blogs/babbage/2012/08/neutrinos-and-solar-storms Also some normally unstable particles were stopped indefinitely from decaying when properly isolated in magnetic traps.

We have it for $0.1493 per kg ($149.3 per tonne). (The first link from google) But in mountains there is CaCO3. You need to heat it (in furnace), spending money on coal/oil to heat it. Each "processed" 1 kg of CaCO3 will produce 439 grams of CO2 to environment.. After releasing energy by CaO + H2O you would need to convert that energy to electricity. Typical method is heating water to level it's changed to vapor, which is then used to move turbines. Try making such device, and you will have electricity for free. Vietnam has large amount of rainfall? I read on the net about between 50% to 400% higher rainfall in Vietnam than here in a year. If I were you, I would concentrate on this source of power.

Do you know how CaO has been created? By heating Ca(OH)2 at >500 C, it breaks up to CaO + H2O. Or CaCO3 -> CaO + CO2 >900 C. You're just reversing this operation. If you're thinking about using it as replacement fuel for petroleum and natural gas, it's not gonna happen. You have to first spend energy to create CaO. Unlike petroleum, which was created millions years ago from vegetables and animals.

One rotation around galaxy center takes Sun 225-250 million years. Sun has velocity ~220 km/s. Distance to galaxy is average ~2.7*10^17 km. Circle has length 2*PI*r = 2*3.14159265*2.7*10^17 = ~1.7*10^18 km 1.7*10^18 km / 220 km/s = 7.71*10^15 s / ( 60*60*24*365.25 ) = 244,352,611 = 244.4 mln years (within 225-250 mln years range). For elliptical orbit we would need to know min-max distance to galaxy center.

Don't you think so that suggesting getting rid of particle accelerators and replacing them by "5 kg mass on rope" is kinda ridiculous.. ? It shows your misunderstanding what these devices are even doing.. What else these fast computers would be doing? Do you prefer to calculate nuclear explosions simulations on them, instead of doing something for science.. ?

How about learning some real physics, for instance learning how to calculate decay energy, or energy produced by fusion.. ? http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/83451-radioactive-decay-and-information-split-from-what-is-real-in-physics/?p=808149 Electron doesn't change to positron, nor positron doesn't change to electron in time, like you showed on picture in post #22. If you want to see traces leaved by electrons or positrons, simply build cloud chamber for $20. Electric charge of particles is conserved quantity.

Computers are not stupid. They just do what programmer told them to do. In this case programmer that made SFN forum script made predefined array of symbols that are automatically converted to html entities. I am able to enter (c) (select "c" then pick up font size 14). Procedure searching for shortcuts won't be able to find it and convert.

See how easy is to introduce error. Check Zn-64 on wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotopes_of_zinc They say it's "observatory stable" with possible double beta decay+ But calculate decay energy, and it'll be obvious it cannot happen. Simply sum of nucleus of Ni-64 + 2e+ have higher mass-energy than nucleus Zn-64. They had to use D.E.=(mparent-mchild)*931.494 MeV=73.6 keV This error is repeated over and over again in many elements. I have checked three elements, and all three wrong. Ni-58 another example http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotopes_of_nickel

If I am not mistaken you're calculating per hour output from single ozone generator to be just 0.3 grams. The first one generator (for $200 retail) that I found on net has output... 7 grams per hour (7000mg/hr). http://www.a2zozone.com/collections/featured-products/products/a7k-air-ozone-generator That's 23 times more than yours calculations. If I would be producing ozone at Earth's surface level, I would try to use electrolysis of water to have high concentration of oxygen 100%. Then make ozone from it. Instead of relying on air oxygen. Such production can be additional in normal commercial production of Hydrogen in factories.

No. Everybody can vote yea/nay. That's against democracy. You want to create privileged group. Who is to decide who is expert and who is not? Resident experts were normal users couple years ago. ps. What disgust me is giving positive votes for banning somebody, suspending somebody, which is notorious in http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/29763-bannedsuspended-users/page-17#entry809457 Positive votes should be result of valuable knowledge..

It's calling itself with post method... And changing behavior depending on HTTP request method - GET is showing website like normal, POST - doing search.. Do you know how to create post request? Check this http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5647461/how-do-i-send-a-post-request-with-php You will need to analyze the all post variables it's sending (use some packet traffic viewer f.e. good firewall), and then prepare such request by yourself. Better make experiments with your own server, your own website that's using form post method, to see what you will need to do to mimics web browser sending such request. If you won't fool your own code, you won't do it with 3rd party website either. BTW, they are updating database often - if you will duplicate their db somehow on your own disk, you won't know about updates anymore.. You potentially risk loosing some valuable data.

Whenever I am turning on my Cockcroft-Walton high voltage 40 kV generator I am producing ozone that's immediately detectable (by smelt). Especially when there is coronal discharge. The same happens during storm thunderbolt. So, we would need a lot of durable balloons filled by Hydrogen which have solar panels (might be whole surface of balloon?) and turning Sun photons energy to high voltage, and producing ozone for years. They would be already in atmosphere, and using natural source of energy, so problems of transportation and electricity costs wouldn't exist. Production section of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ozone "Corona discharge method This is the most common type of ozone generator for most industrial and personal uses. While variations of the "hot spark" coronal discharge method of ozone production exist, including medical grade and industrial grade ozone generators, these units usually work by means of a corona discharge tube." That's whole problem - humans won't do anything if nobody will pay them to do it. That must be changed. People need to do what is good for all of them, not what is good only for their own wallets. This reminds me Marie Curie-Sklodowska, who gave procedure of production of Radium for free. And then couldn't afford to buy Uranium ores anymore, after everybody started using it, and price increased to ridiculous high levels.

Show website url that you want to get data from. It might be hidden by using frames, iframes, ajax, or using $_POST[] instead of $_GET[]. Sending post args is harder but not impossible.

He wants to automate this process.. How these websites are receiving data? If they're send in URL (like index.php?long=123&lat=45), it should be possible to write script and run it. Do you know how to write script or program C/C++? I have spend whole day writing such script that downloaded data for me for >3000 entries of data

Nickel or Iron that are in Earth's Core are not available for us. In crust it's 24. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abundance_of_elements_in_Earth%27s_crust Production of Nickel is 2.1 mln tonnes per year. That's 2% of Iron production per year. That guy is talking about the same as I said in post #24. "The key is a way of production of neutrons". He needs neutrons to bombard Nickel to start reaction.. Bombarding some isotope by neutrons is normal mainstream physics. It works at room temperature. Decay of Ni-63 produces very little energy, just 67 kev. Ni-63 → Cu-63 + e- + Ve + 67 keV

Photons are described by their properties: energy, momentum, frequency, wavelength. They are all depending on another. frequency = c/wavelength so wavelength = c/frequency (h- Planck constant) E=h*frequency E=h*c/wavelength p=E/c E=p*c Yet another is photon polarization. If we see light, photon has been absorbed by our eye receptors. It disappeared from environment. If photon is absorbed by some material it can't be absorbed by other. Material is heated, accelerated, or other way storing additional energy that photon gave it. Black color is lack of photons in visible spectrum (wavelengths between 380 nm to 700 nm). However they can be in other range. f.e. infra red. White color is photons with at least red, green and blue visible spectrum. Television, monitors use three diodes RGB. If they have equal power, our eye see mixture of them, white color. See Newton's Color Wheel http://www.scitechantiques.com/newtons-color-wheel/

Show website url that you want to get data from. I have been scanning many websites for data. And the most appropriate solution always depends on website structure. The easiest are f.e. http://website/[article number].html just make for() loop. Many times there is no need to look for direct links to know where are data. Google crawlers can't be adjusted to every website on the world, simply too many websites. So search engine bots must rely on links. Proprietary tool not necessarily. Today I will be gathering data from wikipedia. I have database of names of elements. Script will be downloading pages http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotopes_of_[name of element from mine database] and then searching for data in them (isotopes data) such as protons, neutrons, mass etc. and writing this to CSV.

rand() function will give you always the same results each time program is run, if you dont use srand(). You should use srand(time(NULL)); before the first execution. Two rand() in row print rand(); print rand(); will always give the same value of second rand(). Malus was living in XVIII-XIX century, when there was no QM yet. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89tienne-Louis_Malus If you would have linear polarized photons, and correctly adjusted polarization filter, you would see 100% of photons passing through. And 0% passing through after rotating polarization filter by 90 degree. I have made photos and showed in this thread: http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/80366-particle-location/?p=783255