insane_alien

well, if they had seen it before. monkey see, monkey do. i know i done similar(albeit less dramatic) things when i was a wee kid. it wouldn't be hard to envisage a kid thats had all this exposure to this stuff emulating it subconciously. They might even see is as 'normal' so fake it just to fit in, or for fear of their parents claiming they have 'demons'. Alternatively, sermons like that could have a sort of hypnotic aspect that makes the kids suggestible. nothing heavy like in proper hypnotist shows but similar. i'm not sure on the psychology of it, i'm just going with my own experiences in childhood. and what i've picked up when out drinking with psychologists, not a good idea unless your also a psychologist.

well, i would say it doesn't have value outside religion. (maybe in history at a stretch) but in the field of biological evolution it has none. just as a PhD in religious studies would teach you nothing of quantum mechanics.

well, the dictionary does occasionally list the scientific meaning along with other nonscientific meanings. the scientific definition of sound is a mechanical vibration in an elastic medium. the sensory part is not a soundwave therefore should not be included in the definition. just as we do not describe photoresistors in our definition of light because they can detect light. and as klay said, this is the physics forum.

carbon fits the criteria - Lacks metallic lustre check, graphite is black - Lacks ductility check, graphite is brittle - Good conductor of electricity as a solid check, graphite conducts - Very unreactive check, graphite is stable(the stablest form of carbon - Solid at room temperature check, doesn't sublime until over 3000*C

psychosomatic. if they expect it to happen enough then their brains will probably cause it to happen. as for scientists being able to find out, well, the sorts of people who get like that don't want a scientist within 50 meters of them.

well it sounds like genecs is thinking of normal glass but thats not an element so it doesn't meet the requirements for the question. carbon is the only non-metal room temperature conducting element thats reasonably unreactive.

well, theres uh... oo and um... well, theres lots of jokes about them.

Genecks, have you never used carbon electrodes? carbon conducts fine. well, as long as you move the current across the planes of the graphite and not perpendicularly to them. then it doesn't work. carbon nanotubes can also behave like mini(nano) wires diamond and amorphous carbon will not conduct since they do not contain delocalised electrons. see here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphite

Antony, we are scientists and engineers. we use the scientific definition rather than rely on the dictionary meanings of words. this cuts out the possibilities of misunderstanding something. the scientific definition is the second one. a mechanical vibration. in this case the medium is air.

i'm liking that idea.

It looks all blurry when i'm drunk. fix it.

what sisyphus said ^. just a chemical guy backing him up.

so you should know that carbons electron arangement is 1s2 2sp^3 4 so its 4 sp^3 orbitals are half filled. this is the second most stable arrangement (the most stable being having them all filled) the other arrangements aren't as stable so are more likely to break down. Since it has this stability, it won't react unless its forced to. the fact that its 4 possible bonds can form a fantastic array of chemicals doesn't have much to do with reacitivity.

while they're at it they could lay down a lot more fibre and put tv through it. think of getting any tv channel anywhere in the world. how awesome would that be. bascule, don't the big internet hubs use things with 128-bit processors already anyway?

thought i would revive this thread since i got my desktop looking nice and awesome. here it is, ignore the assignment i'm working on down the bottom. [ATTACH]1523[/ATTACH]

well, seeing as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_subspace this is what they mean by subspace in string theory, i think you're getting your sci-fi a bit muddled in with your science.

when the romans did it they would have been skilled craftsmen in that field with the craft being passed on from father to son so it had plenty of time to develop. the re-enactors are basically just reading then trying. since they can do it reasonably well we can safely assume that the original builders could do it better.

yes, it does form an awful lot of compounds. doesn't mean that it is very reactive though. and unless you can think of another non-metal conductor that is an element i think carbon will have to be it. carbon, specifically the graphite allotrope, is usually unreactive which is why it is used in electrodes quite often. it takes a bit of effort to get it to react to form hydrocarbons though which is why petrol has such a high energy density and is a good fuel. EDIT> just thinking here, how much do you know about electron orbitals? if you know what a sp3 orbital is i'll explain it.

no typos but it might have been penciled in. <another big hint to follow swansonts.

its oxidation. and cars aren't usually made of the same metals that planes are. planes are made of a copper/aluminium alloy (duralium or something i believe) which doesn't corrode under normal conditions.

you could do it through integration. do you know much calculus?

this is currently the main focus. lighter materials. its a far easier challenge than removing very necessary bits. other areas being researched are more efficient engines, designs with less drag(blended body/wing designs) and a couple of others.

i was imagining one of those pneumatic rams they use for flattening tarmac(they're basically pneumatic drills with a flat bit on the end instead.) in fact, one of those would probably work if you made some sort of a frame to hold it. otherwise it would be a bit awkward.

hah bonzi buddy, that was my first serious tangle with malware. i needed to do a full reinstall to get rid of that bugger. does your wife know you've got tahni 2d, yt?

so, are you wanting to calculate the force it'll hit things with if its rotating at X RPM? or is it something else. The more information you can give us then the more likely we'll be able to help you.