insane_alien

zenos paradox is an example of where he proved himself wrong. and how would it be a contradiction for them to be wrong?

things have advanced since plato and zeno. and it is fallacious to think that everything they ever said is completely true. this would be a fallacy called arguement from authority. just because A said B does not mean B is true.

yes, we could do that. if you really wanted you could breed a few octillion slaves and give them all abacus's and use messenger pidgeons as the data bus. of course this over looks the many practical problems but in principle it is possible. using a modern computer system would be much much more efficient. you should never be closing your mind either way. i think you are assuming the word quantum means any number of wacky things can occur. it is not equivalent to magic

technically there is no such thing as deceleration, there is only acceleration. accelreation is a vector which means it has magnitude and direction. in this case the acceleration is in the positive direction and 3m/s /t in magnitude. you get a discrepancy by mixing scalars and vectors without thinking about it. you expect the acceleration to be negative because the velocity is becoming less but you completely ignore the direction of the velocity. to slow down when it is travelling backwards it must accelerate forwards.

yes it is although this depends on how far the phosphor is from the anode.

In a 3 minute song(recorded at 44.1kHz sampling and in stereo, the same as redbook cd) there are 15,876,000 samples each of these samples is a 16 bit number. there are 65536 (2^16) possible values for each sample and 65536^15876000 (2^254016000) possible combinations for a 3 minute song. this is an astoundingly massive number. and while most of it will be random noise, there is still an amazing amount of room for music of some description. i don't think we'll run out in the lifetime of the universe. especially considering songs can be of lengths much longer than 3 minutes which increases the options exponentially. adding on a single sample increases the possibilities by 65536.

if it blew up tomorrow you'll need to wait a few centuries before seeing it. what you really want is for it to have blown up a few centuries ago so we can see it now.

bombus, the brain is not a superconductor. it has resistance, magnetic fields can pass through it un impeded. it can barely be called a good conductor never mind a super conductor. also, regarding structures in the brain, there is nothing special at the scales considered for superconductivity. pretty much indistinguishable from your skin really. also, superconductors tend to be highly crystaline.

a theory is the highest level an explanation for something can rise to. gravity is a theory as well but you are not floating away. this is because it also fact. like evolution it has been observed.

no one ever said that natural selection produces new features because that is not what it does, natural selection merely ensures that good traits are passed on and bad traits are not. new traits come from mutations which either do nothing, are bad or very very rarely are good. try not to use strawmen(like attacking a false notion of the theory of evolution) as it is a logical fallacy and against the rules of this forum

much the same as various bits of debris in space are attracted towards the earth but they miss it.

there are plans for space based telescopes a lot ess conservative than that. mainly, the plan would be multiple units orbiting in formation rather than a single platform. and that booster thing you have stuck on the back is massive for what it'll have to do. your telescope is basically a satellite all it should be doing is station keeping(minor trajectory corrections so it is where it is supposed to be) thrusters for this are typically about 5N and a nozzle diameter of 1 or 2 centimeters.

the reason we will not download it is due to the fact that it is a very popular way to spread viruses and lets face it, you haven't even been here a day how do we know your intentions are honourable.

i had a breakfast of epic proportions this morning. sausage, beans, eggs, bacon, black pudding and grilled tomato. woke up with the munchies this morning. then i went and actually did exercise for 4 hours. i usually just have a slice of toast and a cup of tea.

so basically you want a thin client rather than a laptop? this isn't a new thing, it has been done pretty much since the introduction of the computer to the business place and universities. terminals with limited computing ability(even none) communicating with a central server/mainframe that does the heavy lifting. this fell out of fashion slightly as terminals with some serious computing ability behind them became widely available and most terminals on a network are classed as computers in their own right but it is still possible to send commands to a server farm to do the really heavy lifting. also, can you try rewriting that with paragraphs, it was really difficult to read.

i already explained this to you, its where the shockwave hits the cloud layer. and of course it hit half a mile behind the plane, it takes time for the wave to hit the cloud layer and by that time the plane has moved on(about half a mile on in this case) it wasn't an after shock, after shocks are a purely earthquake phenomenon, not a supersonic flow phenomenon. the airforce know about it dince they know about shockwaves

yes, the shockwave hit the clouds but it wasn't travelling as fast as the jet. the shockwave was travelling at the speed of sound. i'll show you what i mean using ripples on a pond as an example. if you drag your finger or something through the water you'll have a shockwave coming off your finger which is seen as a ripple. this ripple isn't moving as fast as your finger. if you look towards the edge, you'll see the point where the shockwave hits the edge moving as fast as your finger. same thing happening with the shockwave and the cloud layer.

well, the shockwave starts at the nose of the jet(and other shockwaves will start at the leading edges of pretty much everything else on the jet). what you seen was the disturbance in the cloud layer caused by the shockwave.

and are you going to bring up any points for discussion? i'll even start, you didn't see the shockwave, you say its effects on the cloud layer. if you seen the shockwave itself then you would have seen it extending from the aircraft itself. it is however possible to make shokwaves directly visible but this requires special conditions and cameras. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schlieren_photography

you should have put 'Hg' instead of hg. Hg is mercury, hg could be anything from a typo to an acronym of horatio's girdle. just because some people will be able to correctly guess what you mean is no excuse to leave room for uncertainty. be clear what you mean. you also didn't mention that you had tried other places and failed. this would also have been nice to know so we could have carried on from there. instead you gave us very little to work with so we went to the default of linking you to sites that are actually quite complete in the functioning of the mercury vapour lamp. so we answer your question and you claim we are patronizing you.

food colouring would probably work fine.

bombus, you are misinterpreting what he is saying. he is saying that the reasons why plate tectonics tend to be completely ignored by proponents of expanding earth, they only focus on the problems without even attempting to account for the things that plate tectonics works for, often leaving these things out entirely. the only incredulity is in regard to the behaviour of these people. any theory that is going to replace tectonics must be capable of describing everything plate tectonics does right and then some more.

how hard it is to accept has no bearing on its reality however.

if an elctronic computer can do it, then a mechanical computer can do it. however, with a mechanicla computer complexity will need to be greater to achieve the same result and it won't be capable of being as fast.

yes, it is theoretically possible to build a mechanical computer. it is also practically possible as evidenced by the difference engine. in theory, if you had enough time you could do everything a modern computer can do on babbages difference engine.