insane_alien

0.96fm is the radius of the NUCLEUS of deuterium. its only in the big section labelled 'nuclear properties'. and you should define if you are considering van der waals radius or covalent radius. the covalent radius of hydrogen is 31+/- 5 pm and the van der waals radius is 120 pm. all texts i have giving this information ignore isotopes explicitly because 'there is no measurable difference'

i wouldn't be surprised if you could get it done. might have to wait till they're replacing the oil though, try sometime in 2332

tbh i'm surprised it wasn't invented in scotland. we deepfry everything. there's even a chippy (a shop that sells chips, or what the yanks would call 'fries') theat will deep fry anything you give them. if they can't deep fry it, they'll give you money.

i'm conflicted about the 2012 movie. part of me wants to go see it for awesome CGI epicness part of me wouldn't be able to tolerate the ridiculous premise of the movie and the utter bull they will inevitably use to explain it all.

iNow, waitforufo != jryan

by using knowledge outside wikipedia. anode rays are protons(although other positively charged ions could be used) the anode provides the ionization and the ions are accelerated towards the cathode electrostatically as in a cathode ray tube. basically, you reverse the polarity of a CRT and replace the electrons with protons. also, the antimatter counterpart of a CRT would also be classed as an ART as positrons carry a positive charge.

thermionic emission has nothing to do with the stability ofthe nucleus or the strong nuclear force(mediated by gluons not mesons). thermionic emission occurs because the outer electrons are only weakly held to the the atom so given relatively little energy input (in this case thermal vibrations) the electron can be released into free space. also, nucleus stability has nothing to do with mechanical strength which is due to interactions of the electron shells. a diamond made of C12 and a diamond made of C14 will be equally hard, but the diamond made of C14 will degrade over time eventually becoming composed of nitrogen which won't stick around.

i believe it would make for an efficient solar sail, yes.

nor considering the fact it'd be carried off by the solar winds and that the gas would dissipate on its own or that the pressure will be different within the volume.

http://www.badmovies.org/ < would fit in quite well here.

the word 'may' in the rules refferes to the moderators right to choose not to punish someone for a violation in the rules should they decide that it would not be appropriate to punish someone for the violation. for instance, if there was a discussion on vulgar language, it would be impossible to not break rule 1.b so people would not be punished for using such language as long as it served a purpose related to the conversation. if someone entered that thread and just posted '****' 1000 times, they would be punished as it is clearly just gratuitous and not related to the discussion. it does not reffer to the users choice to break the rules. if you continually ignore the rules of the forum you will eventually be banned.

have you ever watched a B-movie? there are movies far more ridiculous than this that have been produced. i suggest you go watch some. it makes you cringe at the cheesiness and bad acting but its good for the soul.

assuming all the nutrients are water soluble(which is a fair assumption as they pretty much need to be to be absorbed by the plant) nothing short of an osmotic membrane (also called a molecular sieve) isn't going to remove the nutrients. a good filter capable of handling small particles should be fine. Also, Brita is a brand of filter, not a single type. i'm pretty sure they have a few different lines that would be completely unsuitible for your purposes. you need to show us exactly what filter you are planning on using. To illustrate this, say you came here saying you wanted to know if a car was suitible for you to go about your business. you said you were going to be getting a ford. now, ford make a lot of cars are you getting a model-T? a fiesta? a GT? these are very different cars all made by the same manufacturer and fit very different purposes. it would also help if we knew the particle size of the stuff blocking your jets, are the individual particles visible?

do you even read the posts or do you just make up your own version in your head?

thats the best you can come up with? a book. not peer reviewed, you haven't given us a page number(or even a chapter) do you really expect us to go purchase a book and wade through it to find a handful of sentences related to this thread? give use a peer reviewed source or GTFO. you can write a book about any old crap you want and get it published.

its only -13.6 eV in hydrogen. helium is more like -25eV

Tolmosoff, the question is where do you get that crap from. i've never seen a paper talking about this.

Tolmosoff, i thin you're taking the sci-fi definition of dimension a bit too seriously. we haven't reached a conclusion on how many dimensions the universe has because we have as yet been unable to devise an experiment capable of telling us how many dimensions there are. It is possible the the LHC will provide some clues however and allow us to construct an experiment explicitly to determine the universes dimensionality. currently it is taken as 4 dimentions. the proposed extra dimensions are a bit wierd as they are supposed to be 'curled up' i myself have no idea how this is supposed to work so i'm going to default to the people who say this is a possibility.

it hasn't stopped, it is just that evolutionary time scales greatly exceed the timescales of recorded history never mind the timescale where we have had detailed knowledge of species world wide. you cannot extrapolate from what is essentially one data point.

we aren't going to start this crap again. you provide no evidence, no arguements in your favour or anything like intelligent feedback. all you do is repeat yourself time and time again like a 4year old kid trying to get a candy. this may be news to you, but this is not how science or even everyday life works. repeating claims does not make them true. If you want us to take you seriously, provide evidence. or at least a coherent and internally consistant framework for your hypothesis, at least then it would follow logic if not reflect upon reality. you are proposing that 'attraction gravity' can replace general relativity. you will need to explain ALL the phenomenon that GR does and then show why GR is flawed, where it is flawed and how your theory is more accurate when the flaw becomes apparent.

yes, but the mix will stay at the same fraction of toluene and water and the boiling point will remain 85*C. this is what an azeotrope is. i suggest that you go refresh your memory.

but it can't reach that high due to rain. and there are people living in areas where relative humidity is regularly 100% for extended periods of time. and CO2 is not classified as a pollutant for its toxic properties, it is classified as a pollutant because it can alter the environment from its natural equilibrium.

ah yes, you're right.

tsk tsk john, when its an azeotrope, they come of at the same rate at the same temperature.

onequestion: that's called rounding error for a reason. what you should have said for the last line is 2 + 2 ≈ 5 which basically means it doesn't equal 5 but its close enough if your tolerance for error is large enough.