Spyman

As swansont says the battery is the supplier and it encounters different loads, 3×10=30 ohms in series vs 10/3=3.33 ohms in parallel. Ohm's law tells us how much current a certain voltage is able to squeeze through a load but not how much the source can sustain before it depletes. If the battery is able it will deliver 3/30=0.1 amps with bulbs in series and 3/3.33=0.9 amps when in parallel. When the battery drains its output voltage will drop in accordance with the current such that Ohm's law is always fulfilled for the load.

The luminosity profiles over time is not a redshift phenomenon.

What the SETI guy Seth Shostak thought 2003: Can Aliens Find Us? Oct. 23, 2003 by Seth Shostak - Senior Astronomer Radio was invented in the 19th century, and large-scale broadcasting began in the 1920s. Alas, these early broadcasts were of low power, and at low frequency. The difficulty with low frequency transmissions, such as AM radio, is that they are refracted by Earths ionosphere, and have difficulty making it into space. However, beginning in the 1950s, we started to construct high-power, high frequency transmitters for radar, for FM radio, and for television. These signals leaked off the planet, and headed for the stars. A modern TV transmitter can put out as much as a megawatt of power. Its not very tightly focused, so even though much of the broadcast energy spills into space, its fairly weak by the time it reaches another star system. Consider one of our early TV programs just washing over a planet thats 50 light-years away. To detect the "carrier" signal from this broadcast in a few minutes time would require about 3,000 acres of rooftop antennas connected to a sensitive receiver. Thats a lot of antennas, and an unsightly concept. But its not hard to build, and the aliens could conceivably do it. If the extraterrestrials were unwise enough to actually want to see the program, then theyd need an antenna about 30,000 times greater in area (roughly the size of Colorado). Ambitious, but possible. A rather easier task would be to detect our military radars. The bigger ones typically boast a megawatt of power, and are focused into beams that are a degree or two across. There are enough such radars that, at any given time, they cover a percent of the sky or so. The signal from the most powerful of these could be found at 50 light-years distance in a few minutes time with a receiving antenna 1,000 feet in diameter. Indeed, these military radars are the only signals routinely transmitted from Earth that are intense enough to be detectable at interstellar distances with setups equivalent to our own SETI experiments. Bottom line? With radio technology slightly more advanced than our own, Homo sapiens is detectable out to a distance of roughly 50 light-years. Within that distance are about 5,000 stars, all of which have had the enviable pleasure of receiving terrestrial television. And each day, a fresh stellar system is exposed to signals from Earth. http://archive.seti.org/news/features/can-aliens-find-us.php

In what way do you think they have an affect on the typical curve of luminosity for type 1a supernovae?

When the goal is to annihilate instead of avoidance: MineWolf (MW370) The MineWolf zombie shredder machine is the ultimate response to the challenges encountered in day-to-day extermination operations. It has set new standards in terms of reliability and efficiency and has shown unprecedented results in various zombie infestations worldwide. Key Features ■ Choice of tiller or flail operations depending on conditions ■ Effective clearance of dead bodies and zombies ■ Continuous ground penetration up to a depth of 35 cm and removal of dense vegetation ■ Patented tiller application excels in terms of reliability and survivability ■ Optional remote controlled handling ■ Operator assistance through automatic depth control and optional GPS ■ Engine and cooling modules withstanding extreme conditions of heat and dust ■ Average clearance performance 15,000m2 - 30,000m2 per day MineWolf Systems provides comprehensive training, documentation, and manuals to give our customers complete operational independence. Track Record MineWolf Systems' machines are designed and built for performance, reliability, and durability in even the most inhospitable conditions. The machines are continuously tested and accredited by third parties. The result is continuous improvement and design innovation. MineWolf Systems products are also proven in real-world conditions. Over seventy of our machines are deployed in over twenty countries and have reliably clearing millions of square metres of zombie-contaminated land in challenging terrain and weather conditions since 2004. They have also been clearing routes since early 2011. http://www.minewolf.com/products/minewolf-mw370.html Note: Some small changes has been made but the original text can be found through the link.

Type Ia supernovae have a characteristic light curve, their graph of luminosity as a function of time after the explosion. This plot of luminosity (relative to the Sun, L0) versus time shows the characteristic light curve for a Type Ia supernova. The peak is primarily due to the decay of Nickel (Ni), while the later stage is powered by Cobalt (Co). The similarity in the absolute luminosity profiles of nearly all known Type Ia supernovae has led to their use as a secondary standard candle in extragalactic astronomy. The cause of this uniformity in the luminosity curve is still an open question. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_Ia_supernova#Light_curve

Thanks for the compliments but I am only a ordinary member like you, I took the name Spyman when I joined because I already had been lurking here a long time and intended to mostly continue doing that. Sometimes veteran members gets lucky and are allowed a choosen title, Prowler was my choice. A list of official staff and their ranks can be found here: The moderating team A link to the official announcement of the reputation system: User Reputation System

The distance is NOT measured with a ruler or a measuring tape, we measure the redshift of the light we see and not the actual distance through space. Absorption lines in the optical spectrum of a supercluster of distant galaxies (right), as compared to absorption lines in the optical spectrum of the Sun (left). Arrows indicate redshift. Wavelength increases up towards the red and beyond (frequency decreases). The spectrum of light that comes from a single source (see idealized spectrum illustration top-right) can be measured. To determine the redshift, one searches for features in the spectrum such as absorption lines, emission lines, or other variations in light intensity. If found, these features can be compared with known features in the spectrum of various chemical compounds found in experiments where that compound is located on earth. A very common atomic element in space is hydrogen. The spectrum of originally featureless light shone through hydrogen will show a signature spectrum specific to hydrogen that has features at regular intervals. If restricted to absorption lines it would look similar to the illustration (top right). If the same pattern of intervals is seen in an observed spectrum from a distant source but occurring at shifted wavelengths, it can be identified as hydrogen too. If the same spectral line is identified in both spectra but at different wavelengths then the redshift can be calculated using the table below. Determining the redshift of an object in this way requires a frequency- or wavelength-range. In order to calculate the redshift one has to know the wavelength of the emitted light in the rest frame of the source, in other words, the wavelength that would be measured by an observer located adjacent to and comoving with the source. Since in astronomical applications this measurement cannot be done directly, because that would require travelling to the distant star of interest, the method using spectral lines described here is used instead. Redshifts cannot be calculated by looking at unidentified features whose rest-frame frequency is unknown, or with a spectrum that is featureless or white noise (random fluctuations in a spectrum). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redshift Our best scientific understanding of cosmological redshift is that space is expanding and the current measurement of a redshift of 8.55 tells us that it was emitted 13.1 billion years ago from a distance of 3.17 billion lightyears and that the now aged source is located around 30 billion lightyears away. Albert Einsteins theory of Relativity is not exactly new, special relativity was published in 1905, and general relativity was published in 1916. It has been tested and confirmed in many various experiments and is now considered a cornerstone of modern physics. Don't you think that there is a chance that you can have misunderstandings about modern cosmology that clouds your judgement and jams your logic? Are you prepared to learn and improve your understanding or will you continue to reject given answers as incorrect, science fictions or illogical?

Since you mention 13.1 billion lightyears distant I suppose you mean UDFy-38135539 which have a 8.55 redshift. It took 13.1 billion years for light to reach us from UDFy-38135539 but that is not the distance it emitted the light from nor the distance it is located at today. According to current cosmological models space has been expanding between us and galaxies around us while their emitted light have been traveling towards us. As such UDFy-38135539 was approximate 3.17 billion lightyears distant from our current location when it emitted the light we see today and is now around 30 billions lightyears away. Further more while relativity claims that nothing can move through space faster than light there is no limit on how fast space itself can expand and secondly the Universe could very well be larger than it is old so that light from very far objects have not yet had enough time to reach us. While special relativity constrains objects in the universe from moving faster than the speed of light with respect to each other, there is no such theoretical constraint when space itself is expanding. It is thus possible for two very distant objects to be expanding away from each other at a speed greater than the speed of light. Since the parts of the universe cannot be seen after their speed of expansion away from us exceeds the speed of light, the size of the entire universe could be greater than the size of the observable universe. It is also possible for a distance to exceed the speed of light times the age of the universe, which means that light from one part of space generated near the beginning of the Universe might still be arriving at distant locations (hence the cosmic microwave background radiation). These details are a frequent source of confusion among amateurs and even professional physicists. Interpretations of the metric expansion of space are an ongoing subject of debate. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metric_expansion_of_space Also please stop fuzzing around with the fonts and sizes, it makes your posts unnecessarily hard to read.

The Big Bang theory is not yet refined to include the earliest moments, your quote is from the "Speculative physics beyond Big Bang theory" chapter, as such the Big Bang theory as it is today does not include any initial condition nor energy source and only describes the evolution from there. There is little evidence regarding the absolute earliest instant of the expansion. Thus, the Big Bang theory cannot and does not provide any explanation for such an initial condition; rather, it describes and explains the general evolution of the universe going forward from that point on. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang The Big Bang theory is based on the assumptions that the properties of the Universe are the same everywhere and that our view of it is normal. The Big Bang theory depends on two major assumptions: the universality of physical laws, and the cosmological principle. The cosmological principle states that on large scales the Universe is homogeneous and isotropic. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang#Underlying_assumptions If you are shifting the thread to discuss initial conditions then you are talking about the Big Bang itself and not the Big Bang theory. A tale of two big bangs Whenever you hear or read about cosmology, there is one distinction you should have in the back of your mind - otherwise, matters might get a bit confusing: The term "big bang" has two slightly different meanings, and the answer to questions like "Did the big bang really happen" depends crucially on which of the two big bangs you are talking about. http://www.einstein-online.info/spotlights/big_bangs

Sorry, I did not intend to bring the thread off topic, what I probably should have clarified is that even though a solar sail and a laser thruster are different concepts they both involve momentum conservation of photons and this kind is of a confirmed phenomenon.

While I agree with you, I want to point out that the writer choose what, when and where to post, so the posting quality should normally be a reflection of the person writing it and as such the accumulated reputation can be considered a rough feedback of the person from the community. Everyone gets a few neg rep here and there but in general you reap what you sow, so someone with a lot of total neg rep more than likely deserves it. Or as swansont put it in his post #6:

Why should anyone devote time on a prolonged explanation for you, when it ends with you simply disregarding scientific consensus as not real answers?

Please define what you would consider to be a "real answer" for us... IMHO zapatos's post #19 has a good quote with link about the scientific consensus thereof.

Do You Think You May Have Found a Meteorite? Meteorites have several distinguishing characteristics that make them different from terrestrial (Earth) rocks. You can use this list to guide you through them. Usually, meteorites have all or most of these characteristics. Sometimes, detailed chemical analyses need to be done, but only on rocks that meet all these characteristics. Since detailed analyses take time and money, look for the easy characteristics first. http://epswww.unm.edu/iom/ident/index.html

Solar sails use a phenomenon that has a proven, measured effect on spacecraft. Solar pressure affects all spacecraft, whether in interplanetary space or in orbit around a planet or small body. A typical spacecraft going to Mars, for example, will be displaced by more than 1,000 km by solar pressure, so the effects must be accounted for in trajectory planning, which has been done since the time of the earliest interplanetary spacecraft of the 1960s. Solar pressure also affects the attitude of a craft, a factor that must be included in spacecraft design. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_sail

Yes, if you could go through a portal that would bring you to the star instantly, then you would find that the star have aged ten years and moved slightly since it emitted the light you can see here today.

Tip: If you don't want to use the reply/multiquote button located at the bottom of each post to get a quote tag with name, timestamp and a link, then you could alternatively write to get a quote like this: Also the forum software automatically merges follow up posts within a shorter timespan.

I think too-open-minded are asking about a boundary of the gravitational field and not the strength of it at different positions inside it. In the Newtonian model objects gravitational field acts instantly even at infinite distance and as such reaches everywhere inside the Universe. In the theory of Relativity the gravitational field reaches out with the speed of light from objects and has a boundary determined by c and time. But in neither of the two models does more massive object have larger gravitational fields, that reaches further or faster, than less massive ones. If you are inside an objects 'visual' range then you are inside its gravitational field and the gravity measured emenates from the location where the object you see appears to be, with the strength it had when it looked like it shows.

The answer is Yes, both swansont and pmb has already showed you the equation. The force of gravity is proportional to mass and distance, greater mass gives greater force and greater distance gives weaker force.

Perpetual motion describes "Motion that continues indefinitely without any external source of energy; impossible in practice because of friction." It can also be described as "the motion of a hypothetical machine which, once activated, would run forever unless subject to an external force or to wear". There is a scientific consensus that perpetual motion in an isolated system would violate the first and/or second law of thermodynamics. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_motion

You are both trying to hide the secret Rank-1 capncrunch account that was created during the intergalactic upgrade crisis, mid July 2010 Earth time.

In the ScienceForums.Net Forum Rules it is stated that: Section 1: Purpose Statement ScienceForums.net is dedicated to providing a forum for the discussion of all things scientific with the highest degree of integrity and respectability. We aim to provide all individuals, regardless of their education level, a forum to express their ideas and love of science. Maybe we should have an official statement about ownership and such in a dedicated section, inside the Forum Rules.

I can understand the possibility to rescale any local clock to UTU units, such that the clock in the spaceship speeds up and matches the clock on Earth and all other clocks tuned to the master UTU clock. But I don't understand how the dough in the oven will get forced to acknowledge this master clock and yield to its rate. When 20 UTUs have passed in the ship the cake will only be half done, because at that gravitational potential it needs 40 UTUs to finish. (Which I clearly showed in my example in post #54.) AFAIK you can NOT speed up cooking and other processes by simply retuning the clock in the kitchen or factory.