StringJunky

There is much greater variation in barometric pressure during the winter than during the summer. On average, high pressure systems are higher pressure and low pressure systems are lower pressure. This leads to a more rapid flow of air between the systems. This fluctuation is caused by much greater variation in temperature during the winter. While most summer days are roughly the same temperature, winter temperatures fluctuate dramatically. The charts linked below show the seasonal variation in temperature, barometric pressure, and wind speed for New York City in 2008. Note how as temperatures become more stable from May to October, barometric pressure also becomes more stable, and wind speeds decrease. Source: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Why_is_it_windier_in_the_winter_than_in_the_summer Just my unqualified thought: Molecules move from high pressure to low pressure…if you are situated in a low pressure area there are more opportunities for greater temperature and pressure gradients than standing in a high pressure area and thus you will have the wind coming at you more often.

You may some form of Google Redirect malware on your PC.

Found this simulation of galaxy formation: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=VQBzdcFkB7w

Is a galaxy spiralling inwards or outwards energy direction-wise?

As is commonly said about gravity in GR: matter tells spacetime how to curve and spacetime tells matter how to move, so, spacetime behaviour is the mediator between two bits of matter...they aren't exchanging anything so they aren't, strictly speaking, attracted to each other, like in magnetism where there is an exchange of virtual particles. I think there are ideas being worked where there is an exchange of virtual particles (gravitons) but it's not, as yet, mathematically sound.

I tried it about a dozen times ten years ago as part of drug rehabilitation. Needles were inserted in various points on my ear for forty minutes. The effect for the first eight or nine times was similar to having a low dose of opiate or tranquilliser which lasted maybe half an hour after the needles were removed. My thoughts at the time why it does this was a combination of my consciously relaxed state and the needles triggering endorphins to be released. After the eighth or ninth time the needles felt very hot in my ears and hurt so I stopped. I surmised that my body could no longer be tricked into producing endorphins at the sites of the insertions so the needles hurt. I think there is a very strong placebo effect in this method but it 'works' if you want it to. I haven't studied acupuncture in depth so can't say anything more.

What's wrong with it?

There's no point spending hundreds of millions putting a product through stringent time-consuming safety trials then chucking them out in less than ergonomic containers that don't seek to maximise shelf-life...it could compromise safety, accessibilty and drug efficacy.

You have possibly noticed something that was symptomatic of a more racist past...if that's the right way to put it. Probably doesn't happen now...people now don't think: I'm not having my children named the same as the Jews.

There might be some substance in the OP as it's mentioned in a letter to an editor that may provide a clue: To the Editor: In his stimulating article concerning “Jewish First Names Through the Ages,” Rabbi Benzion C. Kaganoff refers to the assimilation of names by Jews in America. This phenomenon is, perhaps, best illustrated by names like Milton, Sidney, and others which have become “Jewish” names in the United States because Jews have used them so frequently. In pre-World War I Germany and the Austrian monarchy, a comparable development took place. Siegfried, Siegbert, Sigismund, and similar names also became “Jewish” names and, for that reason, were eventually avoided by non-Jews. In fact, the combination of these names with typically Jewish family names produced strange bedfellows as, for example, Sigmund Freud or Siegfried Moses (a veteran Zionist leader in Germany). While French and Italian Jews use both Hebraic and non-Hebraic first names, there appears to be no case where a non-Hebraic name has come to be considered a “Jewish” name, probably because of the small number of Jews in either France or Italy. Ernest Maass New York, N.Y. http://www.commentarymagazine.com/article/jewish-first-names/ There was anti-Semitic element historically whereby if a name became popular in the Jewish community it was avoided by non-Jews hence the Jewish association with certain names.

I came across that link myself and looked around a bit more and it was about 2.5 billion years ago when 97+% of the Earth was possibly underwater. When the Earth was hotter the lighter molecules, including water, would have been in the atmosphere and on the surface I think...the bible is only out by about 2 499 996 000 years.

...and I doubt would only take a year or so which it apparently took to recede in the bible.

Yes, like you, he asked where did all the water go? What about the Great Flood mentioned in the Bible? Leonardo doubted the existence of a single worldwide flood, noting that there would have been no place for the water to go when it receded. He also noted that "if the shells had been carried by the muddy deluge they would have been mixed up, and separated from each other amidst the mud, and not in regular steps and layers -- as we see them now in our time." He noted that rain falling on mountains rushed downhill, not uphill, and suggested that any Great Flood would have carried fossils away from the land, not towards it. He described sessile fossils such as oysters and corals, and considered it impossible that one flood could have carried them 300 miles inland, or that they could have crawled 300 miles in the forty days and nights of the Biblical flood. http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/history/vinci.html Pat yourself on the back for thinking like Leonardo.

Leonardo Da Vinci came to the same conclusion.

In the broader scheme of preventing a much more catastrophic conflict (M.A.D.), Nagasaki and Hiroshima are real and poignant reminders of what nuclear weapons can do. If they hadn't been bombed a nuclear war would have probably been much more likely because the world would be in ignorance and the outcome, especially now, would have long-lasting global consequences...the world would not be the same again. To surmise: it cost tens of thousands of lives to save billions of future lives and also keep a habitable planet for much longer...I hope. My thoughts may seem cold but we must learn from history so that those lost Japanese lives were not totally wasted and may have actually helped to preserve the existence and state of humanity as we know it...I think so.

I think Epigenetics is about as far it goes...a parent's experience via their exposure to environmental influences, like exposure to some chemicals, can influence their progeny without altering their DNA.

Nee...Naw...Nee...Naw...Skitt's Law alert! I have yet to see a post that picks up on someone's error and not fall foul themselves...this law is apparently infallible!

I concur, especially with first-timers. Even with long-timers in their opening post I'd like to see a summary of the video posted with it. TBH I ignore threads that start on a video with speech content but might contribute if they put something in writing...I am severely deaf is the reason. It also strikes me as a bit lazy.

M.A.D. is doing its job and has done it for half a century...no credit due to anyone imo.

Hi Rai Go It's best to understand what the current standard state of knowledge is before hypothesising and offering new ideas. The standard theories are derived from actual observations and measurements and any new ideas must encompass those measurements, which scientists consensually accept to be correct, as well...regardless of whether they appear to defy commonsense. Measurement is king in science. Here's a good place to start.

Apparently, what an organism experiences environmentally could be passed on to the next generation without change to its DNA: Research into epigenetics has shown that environmental factors affect characteristics of organisms. These changes are sometimes passed on to the offspring. ETH professor Renato Paro does not believe that this opposes Darwin’s theory of evolution. A certain laboratory strain of the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster has white eyes. If the surrounding temperature of the embryos, which are normally nurtured at 25 degrees Celsius, is briefly raised to 37 degrees Celsius, the flies later hatch with red eyes. If these flies are again crossed, the following generations are partly red-eyed – without further temperature treatment – even though only white-eyed flies are expected according to the rules of genetics. <snip>...the DNA sequence for the gene responsible for eye colour was proven to remain the same for white-eyed parents and red-eyed offspring. For more: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/04/090412081315.htm

Would it be right to say: you cannot observe from that which you are observing with. Is this why it is illogical to talk about a photon's FOR?

Would a very finely etched screen placed in front of the lens, etched side outwards, be worth trying? Anti-newton glass has such a surface...it will cause some degree of image softening depending on the distance between the lens and glass.

The apparent slowdown is caused by the additive time effects of absorption and emission of a photon through consecutive molecules in its path. In a transparent medium the absorbed photon transfers insufficient energy to an electron to enable it to overcome the energy threshold that would allow to go the next higher energy level or orbital...if it did the material would be classed as opaque.

There's nothing wrong with your question: Emfield is distracting it with his own pet ideas and objections which is not allowed here in the classical physics section. Your question (post 32) is answered by quantum electrodynamics which is concerned with electron-photon interactions and it is these interactions which determine the reflection/absorption/transmission properties of materials. Perhaps someone more knowledgeable than I can link you to some good sites that explain the basic idea around the reflection/transmission properties of materials in QED terms for layman. QED: The strange theory of light and matter by Richard Feynman is a well-known book written for the general reader that is well-regarded.