insane_alien

yeah, repeater masts could be built taller on the moon but you have to remember the horizon will be closer due to curvature of the moons surface being greater. couple of satellites would be an easier and cheaper option.

hey new dude, you don't need any qualifications at all here, just an interest in some loosely science related topic(which could be anything). don't let the occasional crackpot that stumbles onto these forums and starts denouncing relativity/evolution/gravity/plate tectonics put you off, go on an take a swing at them with logic, its pointless but fun and good practice for making logical arguements

this is more a job for google. seeing as we don't give direct answers as a rule. you may want to search these terms though: ITER neutrino detection Neutron moderation JET

so he does totally missed that.

no, the gravitaional field exists in space. it isn't space itself.

circumference of george bush's brain? he actually, made a mistake in the film, a nanometer is a billionth of a meter, not a millionth. a millionth is a micrometer. most of us here have a pretty good sense of scale as some of us deal with similar sizes daily. especially those in the optics field.

not to mention the whole point of a UFO is that it is unidentified, you don't know anything about it other than it flies and it is an object. you are assuming that they are manned for one. they could be UAV's you are also assuming that they are extraterrestrial, governments have black book projects. and you are making a huge assumption on how they are powered despite the fact that these aliens are supposedly miles ahead of us in technology and probably have stuff we couldn't imagine. then theres the whole bad science of ether and 'knife particles' and what not.... your hypothesis has less to stand on than a no legged man in an asskicking contest in the depths of space.

if velocities added linearly it would only appear to be doing 1.6c your maths is flawed there. and velocities don't add linearly in the real world, it would only appear to be doing 0.9something c

depends on how fast you are going and your depth in the local gravitaional well. 'speed' is the wrong word though, language wasn't developed with the complexities of modern physics in mind.

if you don't mind something that quite frankly looks as ugly as hell, get a thinkpad. i've got one and it runs fairly cool, has a decent amount of power(although you'll be hard pressed to get one as slow nowadays) and is fairly luggable.

30lbs in 25cm^3? thats denser than any material we can make on earth. 170grams maximum.

all planets observed so far... it is possible that a planet could exist as a roughly homogenous ball of gas. infact, during the first generation of star formation, there would have been many not-quite stars that would be like gas giants with temperatures hot enough so they remained gaseous. sub brown dwarf but still bigger than jupiter.

well, you could melt them down and cast them into a solid block. but they wouldn't resemble coins anymore. maybe if you heat them up till almost melting and put a metal plate on top and gave it a few bashes with a large mallet quickly... but that runs the risk of sending red hot 20p coins flying everywhere. why is it you want to do this? it won't be legal tender you know.

no, you'd have a 25cm^3 wooden box of very cold 20p coins. if you wore gloves you could pick them up and move them around like they were at room temperature. it would be a very bad idea to lick them for anyone thinking of trying it.

it is mostly gas but some thousands of kilometers down, the hydrogen it is comprised of liquefies due to the massive pressure and eventually becomes metallic hydrogen, not to mention ices of all the other components. it is also probable that there is a mars-earth sized rocky core in the middle of it all. but the large majority is gaseous.

yes, mars has some interesting geology, and it is exactly that, geology, not architecture or landscaping.

Sparky, we are actually in a cold spell for the earths historic average, also, the amount of gases we have pumped into the atmosphere have had an effect. on both the composition and behaviour.

imp, a 3 cubic kilometer block of aerogel would be very heavy but not dense. a needle made of iridium would be dense but not heavy.

as long as that doesn't lead to a gattaca type scenario...

still, all the transuranic's do, they'd be produced in supernova, hence, natural.

well, a local gravitational field of 10m/s^2 at T and P where density of water = 1000kg/m^2 if you want to be accurate.

that phase diagram does not go above 10 bar(about 100m below the surface seeing as we are talking about water) and the critical point deals with the liquid and gaseous phases only, above the critical point the gas phase and liquid phase have no clear transition, there is a supercritical fluid. solids phase can exist above this point but only under extremes of pressure.

yeah, everybody lives longer, but not everyone reproduces. there are other forms of selection than simply survival of the fittest, there is sexual selection as well. it is a common misconception that the only thing about evolution is natural selection.

no but gold salts will ruin your kidneys and liver, these are the gold compounds that'll get absorbed.

plutonium exists in nature(oklo natural reactor) and in trace amounts in uranium ores. though there isn't a whole lot left. and i suppose all sorts of exotic elements are produced in the heart of a supernova. as for density, iridium and osmium are about equal for the densest. and neutronium(neutron star stuff) is denser still. suppose it could be called a natural element perhaps?