insane_alien

why would that makit it impossible for time to exist?

ehh, no, the periodic table is not limited to 18 columns. The lanthanides and actinides are shown below for the very simple reason that if you put them in with the rest then the table is very very wide and hard to represent well in books and posters. It is really an aesthetic choice to seperate them out. example : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extended_periodic_table This shows the elements up to the hypothetical Unsepttriium(173) according the the layout rules of the periodic table without seperating the lanthanides and actinides.

the velocity of light does not change with colour. i don't know where you heard it but it isn't true.

maybe the hydrogen is getting diluted by air thats in the headspace of the first conical flask. if you reduce the headspace(prefferably eliminate it entirely) then it could work.

I'm going to be busy until february-ish. I'll start work on an updated version but it might take a while.

your bubbles are too much water, not enough hydrogen. probably due to small bubbles. a quick fix for this(if it is indeed to cause) would be to put a small cap over the metal shavings to catch the bubbles and allow them to form larger bubbles before getting to the surface. although i'm not sure how that will be affected by the soap, they might not join as easily.

quoted for truth. for instance, you can make autonomous line following robots out of a light sensor and some resistors. nothing so complicated as a microcontroller. autonomous does not automatically mean complex. it just means it goes down, does some simple function till it either goes too deep or it runs low on power then comes up. if you wanted it to be autonomous and do something complex like pick up some samples of the seabed or navigate its way into a crevass and back out againthen it would require some more complex logic that would necessitate a computer but i doubt you're building something with that complexity anyway.

unless it's a nitrous ion. in the nitrogen dioxide it should be shown with a resonant structure

thats not going to work. go take a dive under water some time, you'll notice that you can't see very far. this is because water doesn't transmit light very well over long distances. heck, you can even get the effect of the light scattering in some larger swimming pools. there's a reason even military subs have to go to periscope depth to communicate(with the exception of one way ELF radio which can work near the surface but not at any significant depth) you either have a tether or you have it autonomous or you have it very close to the surface. and no, you're not going to be able to build an ELF antenna, the transmission cables need to be on the scale of a few kilometers. then your best bet is to keep the electronics simple, small and sealed inside the thickest piping you can find. also, pressurising the pressure vessel with a few (no more than 5) bars of nitrogen would help it suffer the pressures a bit better.

Incendia, dictionary definitions are rarely rigorous and there are often multiple meanings of a single word (including animal). Scientific definitions are what we go by. and the scientific definition includes us humans.

In terms of a quick and dirty predictor there isn't anything wrong with it. In terms of a proper statistical prediction, it could use soem refinement. you could implement more tiers than the three currently(best would be a continuous scale). factor in the basic error rates of how often your brain takes a holiday and marks an answer you didn't intend to mark and forgets about it. and so on. but when you get to that level, while it might be a bit more accurate its not going to be as quick. maybe something you could tote up after your exams are finished however.

we've actually looked at this one before. it claims to do stuff in contravention the laws of thermodynamics(although goes to some length to hide this). it is a sham.

the simplest one would be to look for aquatic vegetation. algae in particular. If thats there then the location was inundated for some time.

not to mention, if there was no water tower and the pressure was provided solely from pumps, it would require the same amount of energy as lifting it to a height that produces a similar pressure.

because if it didn't then it wouldn't be mass. I think you really want to know "how mass curves space time?" rather than why.

eh? now this may just be a failure of imagination on my part but how the hell do you confuse thirsty and hungry? I mean, they're two very different sensations.

That is an interesting question. hmm. well i suppose its not quite like the gold backed currency system so i suppose the only way to get something physical to represent your money would be to buy something with it. This seems(to me at least) what happens with a gold backed currency system. you exchanged some money for its equivalent value in gold as in, you bought the gold from the government. Ah but have you seen how electrical grids work, if they produce more than the demand the surplus gets wasted or shunted into storage. The supply is dependant on demand. Also, the work you can do with one joule will remain the same. IE, you run a manufacturing plant and your materials cost you 3GJ a month. With all those extra joules capable of being produced isn't going to drive your energy costs down, so its still going to take 3GJ/month to make your product, you won't have to pay your workers any more joules and so on. you seem to be basing your comment on the current system and how many pennies it cost for a unit of leccy. True this is a down point of the system but the system would only work if everywhere used it. And that is the ultimate goal of this system, a universal currency system. The change over would be tricky, and i don't pretend to know enough about the current financial system to even begin to know how to do that.

nope. atoms can only be created or destroyed in high energy nuclear reactions.

the soil. the atoms in the soild come from dead plants. that goes back in a big cycle until you get the rocks that eroded when the earth was young and before that they were in the dustcloud that formed our solar system and before that they wer formed in the heart of a supernova and before that they were hydrogen atoms within a star and before that they were part of the intergalactic medium and before that they were photons from the big bang.

No, its a currency system. Or rather, a Financial System. A company would be free to place whatever margin they want on their product. Say a product has an energy cost of 0.4kJ (or whatever) the company could apply a 50% margin and sell it for 0.8kJ if they wanted to. All the tying into energy would do is provide some rules for how money behaves. A lot of the economic problems caused (such as hyper inflation) are caused by currency not being a conserved value. ie. currency can appear and disappear on the whim of a government which means people, and people are about as sensible as a platypus on a platinum pogostick. Energy on the other hand IS a conserved value. It's value isn't going to wave about, it's value is universal and its value is stable even when there are large fluctuations that would send the stockmarkets into a death spiral. for instance, if we had an energy based currency and tomorrow somebody started up a massive fusion reactor that could power half the globe do you know what would happen to the value of a Joule? nothing. now lets take a comparable situation with our own currency. Lets say tomorrow all the governments in the world decided to print currency until their printers broke or they ran out of paper. BAM economic collapse that would make the current situation seem like a slight blip in the market. energy is safe, energy is sensible, energy has rules. I've yet to see either of these three things in the current currency system. ADDITIONAL: Sort of Cap'n. I would also prefer to do away with 'hard' currency and move to an electronic one. more efficient, cuts down on the incentives to perform muggings etc. But i imagine that wouldn't be too popular with enough people so there probably would be a hard version and yeah, that would work like a gold (or whatever) backed currency.

just another idiot lead a bunch of other idiots

Why not tie currency to energy? Energy is used in manufacturing every product, service and so on. That way, the price of something reflects the resources needed to make and supply it. This would encourage efficiency improvements and so on. Also, you can't create more energy and you can't get rid of it either so balancing the books is nice and easy for accountants if they understand how to perform a simple energy balance.

you could write entire libraries worth of books on both. if you're question really is that broad then go to wikipedia. if you want something from us then i suggesst you narrow down your question.

stuff like this isn't accurate. it depends on your environment. you should drink when you're thirsty and when you're not thirsty you don't drink. funnily enough your body knows when to take a drink. for instance, in the winter when i'm healthy and not actually doing very much i can get by on maybe 2-3 glasses of water per day(yep, i counted. nearly lost count at 2 though) where as in the middle of the summer if i'm climbing i might drink 20 glasses of water in a day. your intake should reflect your needs.

you might have noticed that i said that they rarely form deposits that are actually economically feasible to exploit. what this means is that we won't run out any time soon, but the prices will rise quite sharply. ultimately this comes down to the diffirence between abundance and availability. rare earths are abundant but not readily available. the only reason they are called rare is because it took chemists a while to notice and isolate them so it appeared that they were rare.