Anjruu

"alright lets try something else. What would I want to make a bunker out of to survive a direct hit from an atomic bomb?" Well, what sort of volume are we talking about here? Because a bajillion miles of silly putty would work well. Sorry, that was stupid, but if you are asking what material would sustain such a hit, restricted to a few metres in thickness, I don't think there is anything. Bunkers are almost always under ground, with thick, thick walls. I am not sure, but I think the US government bunker where the senate, etc, go to if there is any emergency is in a hollowed-out section of some mountain. And I don't think anything could be sent into the sun and come out the other side, still intact. Except for a compound of fairy dust and adimantium.

Sorry. I deleted an essentially useless post. I noticed that, once again, I have failed to see that the page i was reading on was not the last page...go me...

Oh, right, sorry. It is fun though. You should do it next year. Actually, no don't. Because then there's more competition... .

http://www.aia-aerospace.org/aianews/features/team_america/. This one is a model rockery challenge, if you build rockets at all. Its a bit far advanced this year, but you could still do it if you wanted. It is team-based.

"4) Nobody has ever displayed paranormal activity in any legitimate scientific investigation" Well, that's a bit hard to prove. If it DID, it probably would not be publicized. "5) no convincing mechanism for psychic powers has ever been proposed." Well, pre-Einstein, no mechanism for gravity had been either. And pre-Newton, nobody had even considered the force downwards to be the same force that...etc. I am not saying I believe in such a field, rather, I think that this could very well be a Copernicus or Avagadro situation. Nobody believed them either. I do not know enough about it to make an educated opinion. However, I do know that we do not know everything about the physical world. While, yes, there is such a thing as having a mind so "open that it falls out" as someone so pithily commented a while back, sometimes an open mind is very important. Again, I think the likely-hood of this being real is almost negligible. But then again, I don't get quantum mechanics either.

Nah, that's Cheney. Easily confusable though.

Is that true, pogo? Do you mind providing a site, I'm curious. -Anjruu

Who, me? Ahehe, nope, I've never even heard of it before.

For cosine's question, I think that it is like limits. In theory, it is possible to reach that point, in the same way that certain functions in theory eventually reach their limit, however, it is more philosophical than literal. It is a necessary yet unreal extension of the mathematics in order to give correct results. At least, that's what I have been told by various teachers, but these have only been overviews of hyperbolic geometry, not in depth teachings.

I was wondering if anyone knows how to go about making a very short-range transmitter/receiver for electronic signals, particularly music. The size of the transmitter wouldn't have to be that big, but the receiver would be preferably small enough to hook to a ear bud. I was thinking of cutting a headphone cable, and attaching an antenna to the jack, with a pair of receivers on each bud. Would this work, and if it is possible, how? -Anjruu

Its a shame, but you can only use one "standered 12 inch party balloon," and you have to blow it up on site with air, so no haydrogen or sasuage balloons, but the straw idea is cool, thanks. Weight to a minimum then, gcol? Ok, thanks.

My friend and I are doing a physics project where we need to design and build a car that will travel the maximum distance powered by a party balloon, as in by the force applied by the air coming out from the hole. The maximum weight is one kilogram. The problem is, we cannot decide to minimize or maximize weight. I think there are good arguments for both sides. For the less weight, the force of the balloon has more effect when the balloon still has air inside of it, when it is still applying force, but after it runs out of air, it quickly slows down because of lack of momentum. With greater mass, it is the opposite. We were wondering which would be the best course to take. -Anjruu

He's not asking about the x value. He's wondering if there is a elegant and relativly simple way to relate pi and phi. Like a Euler's Identity for pi and phi, instead of pi, e, and i.

While I think the basic point is correct (the complexity of modern scientific thought) I happen to disagree that this is a bad thing. For example, having the atom be the most fundemental building block is less compex than bringing in subatomic particles, but we have basically proven that subatomic particles exist. Maybe reality really IS as complex as string theory suggests.

There is a point in calculating the digits of pi. It is to look for patterns in pi. I'm not sure what the point of THAT is, but it would be interesting. The Chudnovsky brothers have done a lot with this, but so far they havn't found anything.

Thermite is made from aluminum and iron oxide, right? Just out of curiosity, will shreded aluminum foil work? Or is that not pure enough? How do you light thermite? I've read a sparker, like a 4th of July firework tpye sparker will work, but that seems to be a stretch... And how did you make your own thermite granades, YT2095?

"Ice, in the extreme low temperate is the hardest thing known to man as it is in a state whereby no atoms are moving." Thats unfair. Its like saying, "Oh, at extremly high temperatures, diamond is a liquid, so it is softer than ice." If you are goning to drop ice down to near absolute zero temperaters, than you need to do the same thing for the diamond, and if that were the case, I think that the diamond would win. Furthermore, you can crush ice with your teeth! Try crushing a diamond with your teeth. But be sure you have severe painkillers and and a damn fine dentists on hand. You need a hella more accleration, thus force, to break a diamond, and a normal hammer would not remain unharmed. To break diamonds you need special hammers.

Sorry, I meant natrual magnets, not electromagnets. And the electron configuration makes sense.

"When it reaches almost is present size it has enough gravitational influence to eject many of the remaining moonlets out of the Earth / Moon system." Interesting idea, but I am not clear on this point. Gravity is attractive, so how could it repel moonlets?

I know its one of the four fundemental forces, but why does it happen? Is it inherant in the atomic structure of magnets?

"that is what everyone has always believed that space is infinite and that is a big reason to believe that is wrong" You know what, you've convinced me. You really have. Likewise, I now believe that I have two heads, 2+2=19.1032, and when you jump, you fall up. After all, everyone has always believed these things to be wrong, so they must be right. Cabiterol, mind giving evidence? Its interesting. Also, I was under the impression that the universe, due to its amount of mass, is curved into a saddle-shape, because a cosmological constant, can't remeber which one, was less than one. However, what DOES saddle-shaped mean under this context?

Heat isn't the problem. Its the heat escape thats the problem. There is very little atmosphere, so heat escapes like crazy. If you blow a nuke, all that heat will just diffuse away, out into space. To fix this, maybe introduce lots of greenhouse gasses, and then slllooowwwwlllyyy change that into the mix of earth's gases, by planting plants to get the oxygen, and beans to get nitrogen? I don't know about the nitrogen, are there nitrites in the soil like on earth?

Wait, I thought that was a joke. "My blog will be my thesis"?

Hmmm...You know, being unfamilar with the exact rules, I cannot say what, if any, rules this violates. But being familar with the spirit of the rules, I'm pretty sure self-promotion violates SOMETHING. As always, feel free to mock me if I'm wrong...

Actually, I don't think any universities require any particular SAT-II, only a certain number. And its only Harvard, Yale, MIT, ect. that require three. It looks better to have three, but two high ones and one low one looks worse than two high ones.