stereologist

Water crystals have a generic name - ice. These are small objects (in the video) if they have to use a microscope. Snowflake Bentley did his work using much large objects showing all of the complexities water can take when frozen. There is a lot in this video that doesn't make sense. You forgot to mention the tapping to "activate the water". Then there are all of the other numbers that are given no reasoning: 50 petri dishes, -25C, -5C, 1ml. The large crystal in the middle appears to be a seed for the dendritic growths. The new dendritic growths are seeded at points along the edges of the larger ice crystal. Here is a snowflake with the same crystal habit: http://snowflakebentley.com/00011.htm This was shot by Snowflake Bentley.

Here is a political joke that I hope the moderator can tolerate: Back in the old days of the Soviet Union this man is waiting in line outside of the butcher shop in a terrible cold blizzard. As each person exits the shop he gets to take one step closer to the front door and the hopes of a roast for dinner. He is getting closer and now stand at the front door. Suddenly a hand emerges from the shop and places a closed for the day sign on the door. The man can't take it any longer. "This country is terrible, horrible. The government no longer deserves my respect!" At this point a man in an overcoat whispers in his ear. "Comrade. You are fortunate today with your out burst. In the past this would have been your doom." The man in the overcoat points a finger like a gun and pretends to shoot the upset man in the temple. Despondent the man returns home. His wife accosts him in the entrance hall to their apartment. "What? What? No meat for dinner again? They've run out of meat yet again. What is this country coming to?" The man replies, "It's worse that you think dear. They even run out of bullets."

A rainbow seen from a plane can be a complete circle. To see lots of information and really pretty photos take a look at this link. http://www.atoptics.co.uk/bows.htm

I think we've made excellent progress here. The important part is to recognize that simulations are extremely useful tools, but you have to careful in applying what is learned from them. I know of at least 2 published simulations that were wrong. In both cases the material slipped through the journal review case because the reviewers did not understand the material. The authors were unclear as well. Fortunately, the other people on this forum seem quite good at understanding these issues - much better than I can. I think that there are many interesting things for you to learn here as you work with your simulations and perfect them.

I have seen these simulations. I don't care if you added a spring to your simulations. That is not what I am suggesting. I am suggesting you use real, physical models to better understand what you are simulating. Your simulations are incorrect and we are all trying to assist you in finding the cause of the mistake. I do have to commend you on your simulation movies. They are very nicely done.

Without looking at the simulations here is what I think is going on. If I stood on a chair and grabbed the back and pulled upward. There would be a force going upward. Why doesn't the chair move up and defy gravity? There is another force pointed downward in the opposite direction. This has already been pointed out by Sisyphus. I think your original vector diagram is in error. The jump YT talked about is not a failed flight. It is likely due to a change in velocity of the gyroscopes. That change in velocity is an acceleration and F=ma and all that stuff.

I guess I have to ask again. Have you actual tried this? I think you'll find that your vectors are wrong. You don't have to get anything to fly or turn as fast as you state. Hang a model on a string with a spring. According to your claim you should see the spring contract as your device 'defies gravity'.

Thanks for the info iNow. I looked at the abstract to see how they determined hippocampal damage. What the article does is claim hippocampal damage as a result of changes in chemistry and not as physical damage. It is well known that alcohol has a profound and long term effect on neurons. What is often mistakenly claimed is that the the neurons die. That is not true. The neurons are there, but there behavior has changed. I was interested in seeing how the work was done because earlier studies showing loss of neurons in alcoholics was based on physical estimation techniques that give the wrong answer. Thanks.

The old math joke is: A mathematician and and engineer are told that they are to stand on one side of a room and that on the other side of the room is a beautiful person of the opposite gender that they can have if they only follow the rule that in any given time they are only allowed to move half of the remaining distance. They ask the mathematician what will happen. Sadly the person says, "I'll never reach the person of my dreams." They ask the engineer what will happen. With a smile they say, "I'll soon get there for all practical purposes."

These are all solids. Dense liquids are also interesting. Some dense liquids are oils and mixtures that can be used for sorting materials. We used to use an oil to sort topaz from quartz. The quartz floated on the oil and topaz being denser sank. I recall some liquids having specific gravities of 3 or 4.

Computer simulations are used to suggest that something may work. Only physical experiments can prove something works. Since this is a simulation can you explain to us why the device moves upwards? Why is there a net force pointing upwards? I have to tell you that when I see what is happening I see a simulation that does not appear to properly reflect the physical world.

The question is cost of the computation. The original question is how to do this without a calculator. The method I propose generates the correct next digit at each step. If you need 10 digits of precision, then 10 steps are required. Each step is simple and direct. You used a calculator. The question says "without a calculator". For hand calculations my method is likely to be simpler - less prone to errors. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts mergedIsn't it nice when someone else has already posted the information. Here is the method I was going to post and it is already done: http://www.itl.nist.gov/div897/sqg/dads/HTML/squareRoot.html No calculator needed. No divisions.

I was trying to figure out how to show you the square root method, but it is easy to diagram and a little tricky for me to explain so I think I'll write up a web page and send in the link. But it is possible to directly calculate square roots one digit at a time without using a method that uses refinement.

I can show you how to calculate square roots by hand if you are interested.

The idea to take away from this is that the way magnets work is often confused by people that think there is some sort of free collectible energy that can be harnessed for endless free energy. I remember one device drawn by Stevin that used hinged arms that would be short on one side and long on the other. Didn't work.

It's interesting to learn that drinking does not kill off brain cells. The hangover is not due to cell death as conventional wisdom would suggest. A person that dies of alcoholism has the same number of neurons as someone that does not drink. Clearly, the neurons are not working the same in an alcoholic.

In general if your distribution is symmetrical, then the median and mean are the same. Remember that the 3 sigma rule relates to normal distributions. If you do not have a normal distribution then the 99.7% does not apply. The percent might be higher or lower - it all depends on your data.

Do you have a reference for the hippocampal damage? I'd like to see how the work was done.

One of the first people to openly discuss the meaning of fossils was DaVinci. He was interested in discussing two issues: 1. Were fossils the product of the devil to confuse people 2. What did fossils have to say about the biblical account of the flood He quickly disputes claim 1 and moves on to 2. He points out that bivalves have connected shells that are quickly torn apart by the action of waves. Connected shells are ones found near the place where the animals were alive. Then he discusses fossil deposits of connects shells found far inland. He concludes that the flood could not have tossed the bivalves far inland without separating the shells. These discussions of fossils and their interpretation should realize that this has been going on for half a millenium or longer. The upshot over this long time has been that fossils are real, demonstrate evolution, and there is always more to learn as new and exciting fossil discoveries are made.

One of the most impressive and detailed fossil sequences is the one that shows the evolution from reptile to mammal. It wasn't that long ago that the origin of whales was unknown. Now the sequence from land mammal to whale is one of the best known evolutionary sequences. So to claim that scientists can't find any evidence of evolution is baseless. Let me tell you about a lecture I went to in which the lecture was on the fallacy of evolution. In that lecture the person showed a fuzzy photo of what was described as a sandal print crushing a trilobite. The lecturer lamented that this was a poor photo. He claimed to have a better one back in his office where you could actually see the stitching. Now why this person brought a low quality version of the photo to a lecture was never explained. He went on to describe the print in detail showing the heel of the sandal, where stitching was visible in the better photo, and so forth. He told the audience he would send the better photo if you asked for it. I did. I also have a fairly good idea that this was nothing more than a mineral stain in the rock that have formed around the trilobite. Research at the university library verified that the fossil deposit was prone to these stains. I did receive the photo in the mail. It was the same fuzzy mark although now I could see that the so-called heel mark was nothing more than a crack that extended across the entire rock face. It was just an oval stain on a rock. And someone had the gall to stand in front of an audience and lie like that. What else is untrue?

Although it is often believed that drinking kills neurons it does not. Someone that dies of alcoholism dies with as many brain cells as a person who does not drink. Regardless of bubbles or mixing liquors you keep the nerve cells. They don't work the same, but they are still there.

Isn't this what Goretex and other fabrics do?

The Carson guy was from Richmond Vermont. He tried to patent this perpetual motion machine. They said that's against the law. He claimed it wasn't really a perpetual motion machine since it put out more energy than it consumed and so was a generator. Never worked at the patent office. He claimed they were improperly operating the equipment. He has been out of collecting money from investors for a long time.