StringJunky

No, the true colour temperature is going down because as it uses it up it's fuel it's getting redder. I'm talking about outside the Earth's atmosphere here. Also on human scales no change will be noticeable anyway...definitely not 2000 years and, relatively, it would have been bluer not redder then. The colour temperature on Earth peaks at noon (5500K) and round about 2000K at dawn and dusk depending on atmospheric conditions

Here's a couple of animations that might make it clearer. It's worth reading the page they are from too: Newton's Universe: http://einstein.stanford.edu/Media/Newtons_Universe_Anima-Flash.html Einstein's Universe: http://einstein.stanford.edu/Media/Einsteins_Universe_Anima-Flash.html From: http://einstein.stanford.edu/SPACETIME/spacetime2.html

Did some Googling. With respect to the reported conversation about the Japanese thinking of the sun symbolically as orange probably relates to fact that they historically believed their land was "The land of the rising sun" which apparently is what 'Nippon' (State of Japan) means. They believed they were the first place to see the sun every day. New Zealand was unknown at the time.

Nobody's excluding gravity; gravity is warped spacetime (space and time) NOT warped space alone. Spacetime tells matter how to move and matter (mass-energy really) tells spacetime how to to bend. If you can visualise it you can see how objects (including photons) follow paths defined by the curvature in spacetime called 'geodesics' which are the shortest possible, paths in that environment. It's a *geometric description of how things behave, as described by General Relativity...to date, data and experiments support it rather well to the limit near singularities. * GR doesn't say what spacetime is only how it behaves and it describes it mathematically....physics is only interested in how things behave and how they measure. It's only us novices that fret about a classical real-world description of difficult-to-grasp physical phenomena. The thing is that, in stuff like this, there are often no real-world correlates that accurately describe these things, instead, we have to rely on the approximate real-world analogies that the scientists give us. The hard truth is that if we want to really understand it we need strong university-level math skills and much time to wade through a book like Gravitation by Misner, Thorne and Wheeler, which is about 1200 pages of heavy-going and a good dent in your wallet...proper science books are dear! This brings to mind something Benjamin Franklin said that seems pertinent here: He who teaches himself has a fool for a master.

I thought so. The restriction on assault weapons and high capacity magazines shouldn't be too difficult should it seeing as it has already been in force but expired?

What's the chances of a change in the constitution occurring...has it happened before? I'm ignorant of American politics although I've learnt a bit here recently. Is it akin to moving a mountain?

Article Five of the United States Constitution describes the process whereby the Constitution may be altered. Altering the Constitution consists of proposing an amendment or amendments and subsequent ratification. Amendments may be proposed by either: two-thirds of both houses of the United States Congress; or by a national convention assembled at the request of the legislatures of at least two-thirds of the states. To become part of the Constitution, amendments must then be ratified either by approval of: the legislatures of three-fourths of the states; or state ratifying conventions held in three-fourths of the states. Congress has discretion as to which method of ratification should be used. Any amendment so ratified becomes a valid part of the Constitution, provided that no state "shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the senate," without its consent. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_Five_of_the_United_States_Constitution

I just watched the President's broadcast concerning gun control and I think that's as much as can be expected and what I would want him to say. It won't be his fault if it fails to cause meaningful change because he's listening and wants to act but he only has the power if he has sufficient support.

You are reading it wrong. In the very early universe the energies at that time (it was super-hot and very dense) were massive enough to overwhelm gravity and caused a very rapid expansion throughout the WHOLE universe...everything was affected but in the present day the expansion only dominates between galaxy clusters; within the boundaries of the clusters gravity dominates. That's why the expansion is only valid between between clusters now. Using the word 'valid' was a poor choice of word by the author, in my opinion, because of it's ambiguity...'expressed' would have been better, for example. You are so far away from the truth about the scientific process. Einstein's theories are not sacrosanct. I bet right this minute there are many thousands of competent scientists working and dreaming of knocking him off his pedestal but to date his theories still stand, but, as has been learnt, GR is not applicable at the subatomic level so it's not the whole story. Alternative ideas don't hold up because they don't hold up to scientific scrutiny...Einstein's got nothing to do with it .

This is the very essence of democracy.

It is sad that the inhabitants of a country with a well-established democratic system should think that they feel need to maintain the option of lethal recourse against their governing body, who they chose. The US government is not some aloof, nepotistic and autocratic body, they are people like the voters who have been chosen to do a fixed term or two of leading them. The US armed forces is made up of their own...are they going to raise arms against them?! I can't get my head around this as a just cause for preserving the Second Amendment.

That says it all. A cursory look at the screenshots didn't make me think it was memory and processor intensive...I thought there was something I was missing. It did say somewhere though a low ping internet connection is desirable for multiplayer.

It's in-falling super-hot gases surrounding the blackhole. Your incredulity is getting tiresome. Nobody here is obligated to convince you.or even cares. The only thing that matters is that we give information to the best of knowledge and if you choke on it that's not our problem...nature doesn't have to make sense to you in order to be true. The truth is you don't have the basics under your belt so things like 'time-dilation' and 'black holes' are too exotic and out of your reach at the moment to comprehend properly. If you are really bothered, you need to start reading properly from proper science books by proper scientists in your fields of interest. If you ask I'm sure you'll be pointed to good resources.

What's the make and model of your pc? I'll find it's spec's and check them against the listed requirements and see how it scores. To give you an example it will be something like this I need. HP Compaq CQ56-212SA. You'll find it on the back somewhere on a metal label probably...I need those last few digits and letters too. Also your windows version you are running...XP Vista or W7

Submarine periscope prisms don't use metallic-mirrored surfaces due to them being vulnerable to saline conditions, relying on internal reflections within the prisms instead. I thought that info might contribute to your "non-metallic-mirror databank". A simple periscope without intermediate lenses: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/68/Periscope_simple.svg/500px-Periscope_simple.svg.png

Right, OK. Thanks.

Might be worth asking in MC forum: http://www.minecraftforum.net/index.php What does the downloadable client do?

Any good?: http://www.minecraftwiki.net/wiki/Hardware_requirements

What property of a material, at the photon-election level, causes the photon to be reflected back rather than pass through like in a transparent material? I know, from Feynman, in a transparent material, the energy of the photon is insufficient to energise the the electron to the next level so it drops back down and the photon is re-emitted in a forwards direction, mostly. How does it work with mirrors since the photons are mostly sent backwards?

INow If you'd used couldn't instead of wouldn't, it would have been consistent and in the spirit of the first two paragraphs.

Good point iNow. In all its conflicts the US armed forces, including NATO, are trying to use just enough force to get the job done and try and minimise collateral damage, which is a very difficult exercise in practice.

Ah, it's an academic exercise...nowt wrong wi' that!

This speaks volumes about the level of faith of the American people (if you're representative) in their political system...not much it would seem. In Western Europe, I think would be fair say that most people think this is an archaic idea and no longer relevant in a 21st century First World country.

Can't GR's singularities be correct for black holes but incorrect for the big bang (or just before it) because this is where the problems I've seen aired seem to lie? Intuitively, I don't have a problem with this because the big bang is a another scenario to which it does not apply or at least extends beyond GR further back in the universe's creation...what I'm saying is that perhaps GR is only relevant after gravity (spacetime) is created in the BB ie prior to a certain point in time, the density was such that it had no geometry because everything was physically connected. Daniel, scientists never talk with absolute certainty. They always leave room for error. They are a cautious lot.

Memories are short: James Holmes’ shooting in Aurora lasted for, at most, a minute and a half. Within two minutes, twenty-five police officers had responded to the scene. Within six minutes, over two hundred officers swarmed the theater. Despite the limited time, Holmes killed twelve viewers and injured fifty-eight others. Scarier still, Holmes’ .223 caliber assault weapon, a semi-automatic AR-15, jammed during the shooting. When we hear about the massacre in Aurora, we must remember only twelve were killed. An AR-15 is capable of carrying a 100-round drum magazine and of shooting between 50 and 60 bullets per minute. It’s incredibly fortunate more lives were not lost. http://hpronline.org/united-states/for-lives-and-liberty-banning-assault-weapons-in-america-3/ This kind of mass destruction does not need to happen anytime...isn't 70 people dead or hurt by one gun in 90 seconds significant? That's one person every 1.3 seconds! High-capacity assault weapons are for highly trained policemen and soldiers; they are not for civilian fantasy-soldier wannabes. It only took the UK to have one massacre with semi-automatic rifles and they were banned as were shotguns with a capacity of more than three cartridges. The next one caused the banning of handguns..