StringJunky

Try Googling "Anti-glare screens laptops". I think most of them have a slightly matted surface to diffuse and attenuate reflections...one of these might give you some relief.

Here's a wiki on the mechanics of afterimages: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afterimage This is a condition with that as a symptom: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palinopsia If you've been staring at a computer screen for long periods accompanied with intense mental focus which sounds like you have, you ought to try to take time out physically and mentally from your work. I'd do this and if it still persists after a couple of weeks go and see an expert...your body is is telling you something and it's not happy. Hopefully, it's just stress and over-stimulation.

If the Moon has insufficient mass to cause that then that blows that idea out the window. It just seemed odd that it was so bright as it reappeared and seeing Lensing mentioned earlier I wondered. The Moon was at about between 1 and 2 0 clock in position so it was quite high up. I remember it was very clear sky and depth of vision into the night sky was exceptional with many stars seen. It occurred about 6ish which at that time of the year in the UK it's properly dark...sunset occurs about 4pm. It must have been the limits of human vision and some atmospheric effect in combination then. Reading a wiki on proofs for Relativity it mentions the 1919 experiment by Eddington which showed it correctly predicted the deflection of a star's light. Maybe I'm using the wrong terminology and should perhaps call it deflection rather than lensing or are they the same?

A question inspired by another thread on the same subject sprang to mind that has puzzled me for about 10 years. Round about late December of 2000 there was an occultation of Venus by the Moon. The atmospheric conditions that evening were crisp and clear with Venus in sharp view which I knew from the news somewhere was due to pass behind the Moon through its exact centre. The Moon was in fine crescent phase (might have been a New Moon.). Venus passed behind the Moon into the lit side and passed out the the unlit side such that the Moon and Venus looked like the Islamic symbol. The size and intensity of Venus was pretty good before it passed behind but as it came back in to view for about 30-60 minutes it was several times bigger and much more luminous compared to before the occultation...then it dimmed and reduced to its previous intensity and size. It was an amazing spectacle and the geometry looked absolutely perfect with Venus looking unreally intense and large...I was quite moved by it. Was this phenomenon caused by the Moon lensing the light of Venus?

Here's a Wiki on it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_entanglement

I'm an avid user of Chrome with MSE and Rapport as security and I've yet to get hit by a virus and I'm quite cavalier about clicking links. I am safe in the knowledge that I have whole-system images to fall back on if I get hit or it screws up...images are virtually a cure all. Macrium Reflect Free or Norton Ghost (not free) are good imagers and have good reliability records. I've yet to use a backup to recover from malware yet though. Adding a website checker like WOT is a good idea as well to warn you of dodgy sites beforehand.

It doesn't work that way...it just doesn't remember your history in that mode...it's also called "Porn Mode". To protect your online transactions and passwords from snoopers and trojans use Rapport...it is the default protection with quite a few UK banks: http://www.trusteer.com/product/trusteer-rapport Make your everyday account have Standard User privileges not Admin...only use Admin account for actions that require it. This is the big difference between Linux and Windows...in Windows one has admin status by default and in Linux you have to enter a password everytime you make system changes...a virus needs admin priveleges to make changes and it can't do it from an open account with lower status...I think!

Not surprising really...because it's illegal.

Owl If you didn't know Earth was spherical like in our present FOR you would accept the oblate speroid version as the real one as you shot by at some silly fast speed. Thanks Cap'n I've been following this thread and another similar and just could not quite get the not having an 'objective' frame but I think it's sunk in now...there is no preferred frame.

1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second 2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metre 3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kilogram Wiki is your friend. And Google.

deleted. I answered my own question...there can be no preferred frame of reference. In principle, would the 'correct' or 'ideal' frame(s) be the one(s) that are moving with the same velocity and in the same direction (so that they appear stationary with respect to each other) for measurement purposes?

The Gimp is the most comprehensive free photoeditor like photoshop but the learning curve is quite steep . I use Paint. Net myself which is more intuitive than GIMP to use although not so featured. http://gimp-win.sourceforge.net/stable.html http://www.getpaint.net/ Here's a download for a set of about 500 effects plugins to go with it: http://paint.net.amihotornot.com.au/Download/PluginsPack/

I'm not an expert on this but you can set a router to Exclude All to your network by default and then selectively allow which MAC addresses can access your network.

The topic of this was inspired by the thread on overpopulation but its content is overwhelmingly ethical/political in nature. The intent of this thread is to be based on hard science and thus research references must be cited, as befits this forum category, if requested and no ethical or political considerations are to be brought to this discussion. What effects, potential or actual, are we having on the Earth's natural mechanisms and resources?

Yes, I it's stiil in that phase. I agree, wants it gets public they'll nail a large user base in no time...They've got a potentially immediate 51m gmail accounts to link up automatically and it will be linked into the Google page. It allows compartmentalisation of one's online social activities instead of having to share with everybody like Facebook apparently. I found this June article: http://www.secaucusnewjersey.org/google-plus-preparing-to-take-off-1253.html

Mooey I hope you'll take the time out to read that article...they've been working on the evolutionary origins of rape for forty years and we would do well to try and bring some scholarly references to this discussion of a difficult subject.

" For example, if rape is evolutionary in origin, it should be a threat mostly to women of childbearing age. And, in fact, young adult women are vastly overrepresented among rape victims in the female population as a whole, and female children and post-reproductive-age women are greatly underrepresented. By the same token, if rape has persisted in the human population through the action of sexual selection, rapists should not seriously injure their victims -- the rapist's reproductive success would be hampered, after all, if he killed his victim or inflicted so much harm that the potential pregnancy was compromised. Once again, the evolutionary logic seems to predict reality. Rapists seldom engage in gratuitous violence; instead, they usually limit themselves to the force required to subdue or control their victims. A survey by one of us (Palmer), of volunteers at rape crisis centers, found that only 15 percent of the victims whom the volunteers had encountered reported having been beaten in excess of what was needed to accomplish the rape. And in a 1979 study of 1,401 rape victims, a team led by the sociologist Thomas W. McCahill found that most of the victims reported being pushed or held, but that acts of gratuitous violence, such as beating, slapping or choking, were reported in only a minority of the rapes -- 22 percent or less. A very small number of rape victims are murdered: about .01 percent (that figure includes unreported as well as reported rapes). Even in those few cases, it may be that the murder takes place not because the rapist is motivated by a desire to kill, but because by removing the only witness to the crime he greatly increases his chance of escaping punishment." http://iranscope.ghandchi.com/Anthology/Women/rape.htm The whole article by an evolutionary biologist and evolutionary anthropologist is pertinent to this thread and is largely contrary to the feminist interpretation of rape which you seem to support.

I wish I'd been as fortunate as you...I was in the first intake of the 'comprehensive' system. TBH, coming here has made me analyse my style and subsequent errors on the way. I'm evolving all the time with this...there are some very good users of English here that I learn bits from here and there. Rules are made to be broken but it should not be done without being mindful of the potential consequences.

Tony The spurious rule about not ending sentences with prepositions is a remnant of Latin grammar, in which a preposition was the one word that a writer could not end a sentence with. But Latin grammar should never straightjacket English grammar. If the superstition is a "rule" at all, it is a rule of rhetoric and not of grammar, the idea being to end sentences with strong words that drive a point home. That principle is sound, of course, but not to the extent of meriting lockstep adherence or flouting established idiom. (Garner's Modern American Usage, Oxford University Press, 2003) http://grammar.about.com/od/grammarfaq/f/terminalprepositionmyth.htm Hal You should always put your punctuation marks immediately after the last word and then make a space before the next sentence or part of it...except when using dashes (-) and the ellipsis (...).

Can you clarify?

Of the three activities mentioned: football, golf and hockey; which of these are we going to go to? Of the three activities mentioned: football, golf and hockey...which of these are we going to go to? Of the three activities mentioned: football, golf and hockey. Which of these are we going to go to? Of the three activities mentioned: football, golf and hockey-which of these are we going to go to?

I've exposed myself to seeing and reading the dark side (to me anyway as a non-islamic European) of Islamic culture and "justice" via the internet at some depth and given the mindset entrenched in those populations (not all I might add) maybe "under-dressed" women are asking for it in the minds of the sexually oppressed males? Quite a few Saudi men engage in homosexual behaviour because the social mores there prevent casual social liaisons and hence sexual contact with women. In that kind of social climate any woman seen with bare flesh may just be like a red rag to a bull. I think in this kind of discussion one needs to first define the culture the discourse is relevant to given the sheer diversity of global civilisations...some are more advanced socially than others and therefore expectations differ between them. I don't think we can have a 'one size fits all' conversation about it.

In Egypt and other Islamic countries women are very often held as responsible for being raped with appalling social consequences for them and not the perpetrator. If you don't believe me here's an Egyptian ad urging women to cover up or face the consequences...it demeans men as well. Shocking really: http://pollyticking.files.wordpress.com/2008/07/hajibcampaign.jpg

"Inane" political chat is in the mind of the beholder.

I agree, there is no 'I' in Team.