HRS

I think I will. If I do, I'll take some pictures with my phone and post them

After six months of having a screen protector, it fell off. Two days later, my phone fell off a table and hits the floor and now has star-like crack. Well more like half of one. It's on the side of my screen. Replacing my phone is not possible as it is not under warranty (my foresight is lacking), repairing it costs just as much of the phone itself apparently for my model, I decided to get screen crack filling resin and a new phone protector. However, most of the cracks do no go down to the touch sensor, and are only hairline cracks. They did not occur where I type or would minimally use the screen. Could I use a watch chip/scratch resin to fix the smaller cracks to prevent them from spreading, added with the screen protector? Or are there any other agents which could fulfill this task. I am aware that the screen requires the touch capacitive sensors. The largest part of the crack though is on the glass, but just off the screen on the .1 inch border.

The questions and debates on this forum never ceases to amaze me.

Satellite phones are rugged and used for businessmen going on safari for the most part, and run about the same as a regular cellular communications phone. Why are there not any companies seeking to integrate satellite communication phones in the same fashion that cells are today, technologically and economically (i.e. touch screens, contracts)? Are there any difficulties in infrastructure or ability that are limiting in this development?

Basic quantum question. Not even really at that. Wave mechanics perhaps. But when photons and electromagnetic radiation strike a material and cause the emission of an electron because the radiation is at the proper frequency, would this be an atomic example of resonance frequency? Or even, to an extreme, an example of resonance disaster?

I have never heard of masers before. Fascinating I will have to look into them more thank you

Thanks but I should have been more specific in that my inquiry was to nonphysical communications, such as future theoretical space communication networks, or at the least space probe communications. Though that does remind me that mass amounts of information can be transmitted through light. Though would there be a difference between the light being contained within fiber optic cables with total internal refraction and the light in lasers being transmitted to a theoretical satellite or probe?

I remember reading about a new form of communication where lasers are used in place of radio waves with one of the proposed applications being transmissions between space probes and such. For one it would not be faster. But would it be more accurate? Could it carry more information than radio? Why or why not?

The cage divers use to observe sharks on occasions are in essence Faraday cages. If you ran a current through them, would it attract sharks because of their ability to sense electrostatic discharge? Or would they ignore it because of their other senses not noticing any disturbances? Just an idle curiosity.

To scream off the nanotech bandwagon as it drives by this conversation, there is a proposed method for destroying cancer cells using a "nanorobot." Proposed. Some of you likely have heard of this, and probably have a better, more technical grasp on the scoence. The concept is to inject little nanobots that are set to attach only to cancer cells specifically because of certain qualities specific to the patient and the cancer, and attach to them (I believe by an electrostatic signature specific to the cancer cell). They then would basically inject the cells with bee venom to kill cancer cells. They would hypothetically inject thousands into the system in treatments. All propsed of course but hopeful. This hopefully would be more effective and make certain cancers have an extremely higher survival rate.

Thank you very much that should be very helpful. Although the circuit you posted is a little different than what I wish. It had several different tunes. Though I do find it very helpful. But judging by that circuit, could I substitute R1-8 for a Resistor Substitution Box and be able to play a very large variation of frequencies? I'm not looking quite for something along the lines of a musical instrument, which this circuit emulates.

I understand the magnetic principle behind the working of speakers and microphones. I am just inquiring into the circuitry sense of it. I am pre-designing a project where I would require a very basic speaker where I could modify the frequency at which it plays. Old speakers from headphones or computer speakers would probably be the primary source, with a homemade resonance chamber for my purposes. In order to modify the frequency though using a "basic" circuit, I was wondering about the configuration of this. Would it be accomplished with a variable resistor, an oscillator or timer, and a speaker, on the most basic level? (With batteries, resistors, switches and LEDs to taste of course) EDIT: Change in oscillator requirements

I am planning on using some online schematics to make my multimeter also convertible to a gaussmeter. One DIY page said I could find a Hall Effect Sensor in CD ROM and DVD players. Where might this be located in the players? We have a few old DVD players so I suppose I'll extract the motor, laser, variable resistor dials and some other things too.

Ah, I suppose I needed to be talked to like an child to get it. Thank you.

I get the analogy: The contents inside shake with it. Analogies often work so much better. Sorry if I seem to bypass your points but I suppose I'm making deductions from somewhere I need not.