Royce

I remember Y2k, it didn't happen so we cut the power to the house and my brother ran down stairs. "Did it happen!":-p I think in 2012, when it doesn't happen I'll put a hydrolics system under his bed and start a mini earth quake when he is sleeping.

I wouldn't go around saying that you have a negative angular momentum. All the negative sign indicates is the direction. So if h=-4Nms, from calculations, I would write my final anwser as, 4Nms clockwise.

This is simple: Take the beam balance and put it under one end of the table to elevate one side. Then line all the balls at the elevated edge and roll them all down at the same time. The slower or faster one is the culprit.

QCKJWCCXZCIBKKWBNJIKEILDTNSXTXOKEFOKTZLNACOOEBMJIR FASFASSFSSYHLTJVASYWKYYBFFWOVJQEIYOFELEVPSAFNBNJIB NOLDGFXYIOCDOJLXNGASSFSJYCWTTJILEZIHEFXYCNOPIZOYQF IPSFXYKJYFKIWBTZAKNWQVKBUPELCBFCOAWWSVDCSYGNCTZCSR FTTKQNQJATLVEBGBFCKGEILVNLLSXFXPQLFXTVOSJEEJALICNJ Based of that the first few words are ITSNOTTHAT Q=i C=t K=s J=n W=o x=h z=a bcdefghjklmpqrsuvwx [line 1] itsnotthat(IB)ss(BN)n(I)s(EILDTNS)h(T)h(O)s(EFO)s(T)a(LNA)t(OOEBM)n(IR) I, B, or N has to be a vowel: e or u [line 2] (FASFASSFSSYHLT)n(VASY)hs(YYBFF)o(OV)no(EIYOFELEVPSAFNBN)n(IB) There is no vowel candidate in the first half of line 2. Your deduction is wrong.

Mine does that when I accidently have it half on my bathroom rug or half off. It also happens when I don't stand on it dead center and I lean on it a bit. I wouldn't worry about it, a two pound fluxuation. If it was ten pounds, I'd throw the damn thing out. Other than that, as stated before me. To become obssesive about your weight, it will cause more harm than good. Obssesstion leads to tension, tension leads to stress, stress leads to breakdown and more weightgain I would aim to lose a pound a week. 3500 Kcal, thats about 5 hours on the tredmill for me running 7mph. Eat a lot of vegies, drink a lot of water, do cardio everyday, eat protein, get enough sleep and voila you will lose weight. Being healthy isn't a goal, its a lifestyle.

I don't think thats possible just by looking at the graph. The original Y-axis has peak values, if you switched that with the x for hertz. Then your hertz would have peak to peak values along the y axis. So its like your going back and forth in time and this this isn't a wave any more.

Personally, I think motion can continue with out the fourth dimension. If we lived in the fourth dimension, wouldn't we see all our futures and pasts at the same time? I base this on a video I saw off of tenthdimension.com. If there was no time we would move but there would be no past or future to go back to or see, thats all. But there is a dimension of time, so we can theoreticaly visit our past and future.

I think melting from the inside could occur if you uniformly heated the object just up to before its melting point at a certain pressure. Then once uniformly heated, begin to cool the object on the suface. Then instananeously decrease the pressure on the object. The molecules inside which are hotter on the inside will move more freely on the outside and you might be able to get some internal melting if you don't decrease the pressure too much or cool it off too little. I think... Otherwise the only way I can imagine internal melting is if the object was made of two material, the material in the center having a much lower melting point than the 2nd.

Science to me is about having fun and to make a safer more productive world. We are all we got, and I don't think any of us would be interested in doing scientific research if it wasn't in the best interest of us or others. I will take the Miss America crown now

This is correct. Say you have two vectors r= [1, 2, 0] , v= [3, 2, 0]. the k(z) component is zero because there is none, hence 2d. Now we want the cross product between r and v. To take the cross product you write i j k 1 2 0 3 2 0 Rewrite the first two lines i j k i j 1 2 0 1 2 3 2 0 3 2 Multiply diagonally from top left to bottom right, subtract when you come back multiplying from top right to bottom left. This is a conveniant way to get the determinant. This is where the negative in your equation comes from. You will get this: (0i + 0j +2k) -(0j +0i +6k) =-4k This means that in a coordinate system following the right hand rule the direction of your angular momentum is clockwise which can be easily seen by drawing a 2-d representation of your vectors. (z points out of the page) z.---------------y + | \ r | \ / | / x+ v pointing to the +x axis As you can visually see the velocity of the object is is clockwise. (Srry bad pic) Thus h value indicates counterclockwise movement, while -h values indicate clockwise. This is all based on the coordiante system we chose, which is the based on the right hand rule. It could very well be the opposite on another coordinate system. A good example to think of is a wrench on a bolt in the x y plane. Its mouth is wrapped around the z axis, the centre of the bolt. The length of the shaft is the radius, which we will say lies directly on the + y axis. We apply a force on the end of it down perpendicular to the y axis in the -x direction. We know from experience that this bolt is going to tighten, righty-tighty. Its going to move in the negative z direction. But in a twisting motion, clockwise. Mathamatically, it tells us the same thing. We have y times -x and we get -xy a negative torque. Thus we know clockwise motion.

When I think of collision, I think energy/ momentum problem. The equations for energy and momentum are both derived from F=ma. What I take from your example is that the object being impacted doesn't move and you want to know why. The only reason that the 2nd object would not move is that if it had sufficient forces apposing this force of collision. When an object is left alone on a surface, then struck. The only force that can resist the impact is the friction force. If the friction force is sufficient enough to over come the collsion force the object won't budge. If it is struck at a certain height it might tip, and you could calculate that with by taking moments and all that goody mechanics stuff. If you push with your feet to jump off the earth does it move? The answer is yes, you have the power to move the earth. But very very very little. This is because the earth is in space, and there is nothing but outside gravitational forces to appose the force you just exerted on the planet. If I rammed into the planet at a million mph and didn't happen to tunnel through it then I could describe the result of this collsion by using the idea of momentum. Remember momentum is only conserved in the line of impact. Even then it is still under the influence of how elastic the object is, thats why we use the modulus of elasticity. A purely elastic collision will absorb all the energy from the collision and momentum is entirely conserved. e=1 Keep going to class and don't think to far ahead of what you are learning. I don't think the earth's brightest minds would build are entire technilogical infustructure on an idea that is flawed.

{A bold letter represents a vector} Multiple Forces on an object: Ft=[math]\sum[/math]F If there is more than one force acting on an object, a single resultant force can be used to express their effect. If you know all the forces and their direction, add them up vectorially. Adding vectors is not the same as adding magnitudes (or plane old numbers) There is no need to go through an entire lecture on vectors, I'm sure you can find that online. But a simple example of vector addition is: y | | (5N) -> [_] <-(-6N) |_______________________x A block has two force exerted on it, a five newton force exerted to the right and a 6 newton force exerted to the left. I represent the force which exerts to the left with a negative sign because in my coordinate system, I defined left as negative. The sign indicates the direction, the 6 indicates the magnitude. Now I add them, 5+ -6= -1. This tells me that I have a resultant force of 1N and if this 1N was enough to over come the friction force of the block relative to the surface on which it lays then it would move to the left. Because the math told me so.

At the University of Connecticut a professor, Dr. Ronald L. Mallett, has theoretically designed a way to travel though time. The university thinks its the real deal and is currently trying to get funding to build and test it. A link to one of his sites is here with two technical papers: http://www.phys.uconn.edu/~mallett/main/time_travel.htm Also his email taken off the University's Physics Department webpage is: rlmallett@aol.com I never met him, but I've passed his office a few times going to physics lab .

With your design, how do you get the positrons out safely?