StringJunky

I think the OP is UK based. 'A' (Advanced) levels are done at 16-18 years. I found this about international admissions: http://mitadmissions.org/apply/international/howto

Your girlfriend needs a new boyfriend...she needs to pass on you for being so shallow.

I don't think MD is saying that, he's just saying there seems to be two sets of polarised views.

OK. I'm clearly getting old and out of touch with modern usage. I didn't know there were negative connotations with the word. i consider myself handicapped. I don't support the use of this word for any clinical situation except as a description for an acute state of anger: "He was mad with her for not calling him"

It's definitely a handicap* although the exceptional powers of concentration, given to some, can lead to them having an uncanny skill which may benefit them but overshadow their other problems. I think it is doing autistic people, as a whole, an injustice to pretend that they are just different and such an approach may deny them the help and consideration that they might need. Autism is a lifelong developmental disability that affects how a person communicates with, and relates to, other people. It also affects how they make sense of the world around them. http://www.autism.org.uk/about-autism/autism-and-asperger-syndrome-an-introduction/what-is-autism.aspx?gclid=CLPoifP2-7YCFdHMtAodzWAAsQ Hey! I'm Tony. I'm a life-long deaf person. I'm not handicapped...I'm just different. * hand·i·cap /ˈhandēˌkap/ Noun A condition that markedly restricts a person's ability to function physically, mentally, or socially. Verb Act as an impediment to. Synonyms noun. hindrance - impediment - drawback - obstacle verb. hinder - hamper - impede

Howtobuildabomb.com exists and is mainly about the notion of websites disseminating information about bomb building with respect to US law.

The simple answer iis that your camera lens is made to tighter tolerances than the phone lens.with respect to controlling chromatic aberration which is where not all the frequencies are not equally focussed on a single axis. Like this: This is a perfect lens: Lenses, on the whole, get worse for correction towards the edges and the challenge (and cost) is maintaining image consistency across the whole lens surface. The chromatic aberration effect is very noticeable here...note how the colour is neutral at the centre: The images were acquired from this nice article here: http://photographylife.com/what-is-chromatic-aberration

Here's four models for the evolution of avian flight that you might want to look into...a brief description of each is in the link: Cursorial Model Wing-Assisted Incline Running Model Pouncing Proavis Model Aboreal Model http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_of_avian_flight

Imagine a set of equally spaced points throughout a volume, then imagine the distance between all those points increasing simultaneously at the same rate...that's the big bang. All areas of the universe expanded equally.

Freedom of speech is alive and well.

I think probably Mike and others think this way because scientific ideas are almost invariably presented in a mathematical format but they don't realise this is not necessarily the way the initial ideas were conceived.

I think it's probably a universal first year physics question on the same theme getting students to understand and control conduction, convection and radiation pathways.

Why do you assume conventional scientific ideas disproportionately originated from mathematical inspiration just because they are described mathematically in the final paper? In a field of study like physics where the subjects under observation are mostly beyond ordinary human sensory detection we can only describe things in terms of numerical parameters measured by instruments which necessarily dictates a mathematical description to make any sense and meaning of the data those instruments present. Also, even in the macro world we can't calibrate human beings to experience phenomena in the same way that we can instruments; an essential prerequisite of a good scientific result is repeatability. Your desire for the way you wish science to go will produce nothing meaningful or durable and will produce much misinterpretation and confusion, especially across international languages. Maths is the language of science because it works. The beauty of the scientific process is that if maths didn't cut the mustard it would have been rejected long ago as the de facto means of scientific expression. If there were no math's there would be only limited cross-discipline co-operation because they wouldn't understand each other's professional lingo or at the very least would not facilitate a fluid information exchange like maths can.

Maybe it is reproductively beneficial behaviour because it increases the likelihood of moths chancing upon each other by concentrating them in imore discrete zones

Spencer If you can, think about using thick strong plastic containers as they are less thermally conductive..the rate of heat loss should be less with plastic

I'm just building on a good idea...yours.

To enhance this idea you could get some mirror film or sheet (Mylar), cut it to size and bend it cylindrically with the reflective side facing inwards and line inside both tins with it...base and lids as well. You could fill the space between the two tins with packing foam nuggets or small poly balls so that the inner tin is sitting on the nuggets and is packed with them on top before putting the outer lid on...pack some down the sides as well.

Everything everywhere was created at the same time so it's all the same age. The expansion of space is everywhere and has no single point of origin therefore no part is older than another. Think of space as distributed with an infinite number of equally spaced points through 3600 and the distance between all adjacent points is simultaneously increasing with time. it's not a radial expansion with the outer edge younger than the inner.

It would appear the OP is just mixing terms when he likely actually meant antimicrobials of which antibiotics is a subset.

Good point JC. That difference I overlooked.

http://tools.niehs.nih.gov/srp/1/ResearchBriefs/pdfs/SRP_ResearchBrief_213.pdf Here's a meta-study paper's conclusions on the efficacy of antibacterial soaps and interpretations so far of bacterial tolerance to these products which though not fully conclusive warrant further research: http://cid.oxfordjournals.org/content/45/Supplement_2/S137.long The disturbing thing I got from my readings was that topical application of bactericidal products did not improve the level of hygiene over non-bactericidal products except in specialised environments where hygiene was paramount like operating theatres and these products were about twice as concentrated with the effective ingredient than the consumer versions. One must also consider a regimented hygiene procedure and environment is also very important to the efficacy of any hygiene product which quite frankly will be lacking in most domestic situations. It appears consumers of these products may be harming the community at large and the environment long-term for no real net benefit to themselves.

Ydoaps once mentioned a term that I think is as apt and practicably accurate a description of an 'objective' approach as we can hope to achieve in the real world: intersubjective verifiability

Why spend money? Find a full ashtray, stew some fag ends in water for a while and spray that resulting concoction. Don't make it too strong because it might harm the plants. It will not smell very nice...to put it mildly. A more pleasant alternative would be 6 tablespoons of dish soap in a gallon of water seems to be a common method amongst organic gardeners.

I think this might be the actual paper: http://hubblesite.org/pubinfo/pdf/2013/08/pdf.pdf