StringJunky

I would think the ultimate peer review is peers conducting the same experiment in a research paper and seeing if the results come out in agreement.

I did some reading up on it and it appears to be secure enough, under current conditions, not to need one.

The title indirectly references the previous thread, has a distinct smell of resentment about it and, most importantly, says absolutely nothing about the content. You wish to talk about a very delicate topic - think matches near petrol. You need to use all your skills to present and navigate such a discussion in an objective and calm manner.

I might be wrong, but I see it as a mathematically-derived framework superimposed on space that describes and predicts the behaviour of objects in it.. Spacetime is the physics version of an ontological description (What something is) of space and is useful. Physicists are interested in behaviour and properties from which they build models that they use to understand and predict things i.e. they are not interested what something is made of. Once you start getting into the real fundamentals, classical ideas as to the 'substance' of things become meaningless...it all seems to be about fields. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Field_(physics)

Tridimity Just take it on the chin and carry on. Past experience tells the mods when a thread is likely to go awry. An ounce of prevention is better than a pound of cure.

Solitude is a state of mind that some find desirable. Solitude is not loneliness. Some people feel more complete and self-expressive in the absence of a partner. Relationships are necessarily about compromise, if one is not selfish, thus inhibitive to one's full self-expression and quite a few solitary-minded people likely don't want to do that. .

Is a photon a perfect device due to the endless reciprocation between the magnetic and electric components in a vacuum?

People, including myself, look around on a search engine for answers and they get lead here, regardless of the time a thread was made. Forums are archives of information not just places for current conversation is the simple answer..

I just want to make it clear that in my reply to Airbrush I was only talking about one universe and just cutting it up into OU sized sections - a section this size now might have started out the size of a proton then.

Evidence? Just because you can't comprehend it, it doesn't objectively follow that it's infinitely improbable...it just means your brain has turned into blancmange thinking about it.

They would remove some, but not all, of the sanctions. Put another way, they are lessening the severity of the sanctions i.e. weakening them so that they are not so harsh if they will limit their nuclear programme.

Yes

The finite observable universe is a subset of an infinite universe. There can be an infinite number of side-by-side observable universes within an infinite one, so, that would mean an infinite number of proton-sized observable universes made up the early universe, It should now follow that It can be infinite at all times with a proton-sized early observable universe and still make sense. Infinity / Some finite size = Infinity

He's not supporting him but he does accept they are reasonable questions and the scientific consensus is actually uncertain ...as do I. It is not important if crystals or fire are found eventually via argument to not be living things. What matters is that it is a pertinent line of enquiry, in a discussion of this nature, from someone that doesn't know.

Morality is what allows more people to settle in closer proximity to each other than it's absence would otherwise allow ... they are the rules of engagement and behaviour that allows social harmony. More explicitly, it is selected for evolutionarily because it increases the propagative potential of those species that practice it by allowing more individuals to occupy a given space, and hence, the incidence of mating and nurturing/survival of the resulting progeny is improved.

The actions of a government that knows it's buggered and wading in the ethical mire to find a solution

If you notice, in the rear illuminated picture, the hair and face and hands are more transparent to the light which conforms with the 'image' on the rear. There was sufficient photons illuminating the surface fibres on the rear of the picture to cause them to darken. in those areas much more than the rest of the picture. Your camera is 13 years old, it's worth getting a new one because they have advanced significantly since then and the indoor performance will be quite a bit better. Bear in mind, even with a new camera, the outdoor pictures will still look better than the indoor ones but if you compare the indoor shots of the current camera with those taken indoors with a modern one you should see better images.

What Sony model do you have?

Try taking pictures, at decreasing distances, of the same thing indoors and see if the quality improves with each shorter distance. If it does then you need a more powerful flash. From a fixed light source, like a flash or electric light, the rate of photons reflecting off a subject into the camera reduces with distance, so the pictures appear noisier and less saturated colours ie less clear...the sensor's performance is dependent on the rate of photons striking it and the spectrum of the light source.

The important thing, when absorbing information, is to filter out distractions and irrelevant data.

"A break-up would pose no threat to Earth, assures Yeomans. "Comet ISON is not on a collision course. If it breaks up, the fragments would continue along the same safe trajectory as the original comet." http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2013/18jan_cometison/

Your link doesn't work for me.

Even with the best of intentions news will always be biased in some way from any given source so it's best to have two or three sources I think and observe where they agree. I use the BBC and Reuters websites because they seem to present news in a relatively dry sort of way with the minimum of judgemental tone which is important when disseminating news. The BBC's default initial position of scepticism, mentioned above, is the right one if one wants to try to present news transparently and also good practice to help prevent being used as a vehicle to promote someone else's possibly ill-intentioned agenda.

What's wrong with having some sense of self worth (ego) from having applied much time and effort to become what they are now? AJB, and others here like him, likely feels good when they enlighten someone in their area of expertise ...they deserve it. What can be more laudable than to give time and share what one has worked hard for? As a counterexample I remember, years ago, working in the building trade asking a bricklayer something related to his job to aid me in my task and he said: " I've worked thirty f-ing years to know what I know today and i'm not giving it away." Give me people like AJB everytime.