MetaFrizzics

Are these your only good options? But seriously, it seems critically important to actually establish what was said and done and how serious it was. People often warn off neighbouring children using 'threats' for their bad behaviour. And children are notorious liars and exaggerators when it comes to gossiping about incidents in which they are personally emotionally involved, or to get attention. Thats why even Moses never stoned anyone to death without at least two innocent witnesses.

Okay that was cruel. Here's some good jokes to make up for that: -------------- How many women's libbers does it take to screw in a light bulb? That's not funny. ----------------------- How many women's libbers does it take to screw in a light bulb? One. You got a problem with that? ---------------------- How many computer programmers does it take to screw in a lightbulb? None. That's a hardware problem. ------------------------ How many engineers does it take to screw in a lightbulb? None. That's a union job. -------------------------- How many union guys does it take to screw in a lightbulb? None. It's not in the job description. -------------------------- How many management reps does it take to screw in a lightbulb? None. We hire scabs for that. ------------------------- How many scabs does it take to screw in a lightbulb? One. But he had an accident. ------------------------- How many govt spokesmen does it take to screw in a lightbulb? None. But we've hired programmers to do design a tutorial. ------------------------- How many real men does it take to screw in a lightbulb? None. Real men aren't afraid of the dark. ------------------------ How many real women does it take to screw in a lightbulb? None. They get a real man to do it for them. ------------------------ How many Quantum physicists does it take to screw in a lightbulb? An infinite number. But when the light comes on, there is only one.

Here are some warm up jokes for the one my brother wrote: Man: Doctor, I've broken my leg. Doctor: I'm afraid it is a very bad break. You will never walk again. ------------------ Policeman: Knock, knock. Woman: Who's there? Policeman: The police. I'm afraid there's been an accident. Your husband has been killed. ------------------------ There's an Englishman, an Irishman and a Scotsman. They are all trapped in a jail cell. Eventually they all starved to death. ------------------------- Why did the chicken cross the road? To escape the Nazis. -------------------------- A man walks into a pub. He is an alcoholic whose drink problem is destroying his family. ----------------------- Did you hear about the blonde who jumped out off a bridge? She was clinically depressed and took her own life because of her terribly low self-esteem. ----------------------- What do you call a cat with no tail? A manx cat. ------------------------- Why do undertakers wear ties? Because their profession is very serious, and it is important that their appearance has a degree of gravitas. -------------------------- How many electricians does it take to change a lightbulb? One. ----------------------------- Why do women fake orgasms? Because they want to give men the impression that they have climaxed. -------------------------------- Two men are sitting in a pub. One man turns to the other and says: "Last night I saw lots of strange men coming in and out of your wife's house." The other man replies: "Yes, she has become a prostitue to subsidise her drug habit." ------------------------------ Did you hear about the Irishman found under a shop? Yes, he was killed and buried there. It was gang-related. ----------------------------- Man: What a beautiful dog. Does he bite? Dog-owner: No. Man: Can I pet him? Dog-owner: No, he has a form of eczema that makes him skin weep if touched. ------------------------ How can you tell when an Essex girl wants sex? She displays signs of arousal, such as enlargement of the clitoris and swelling of the labia. ------------------------- What's the difference between a rottwieller and a poodle? There are many differences. They are two totally different breeds of dog. ----------------------------- What do you get if you cross a horse and a donkey? A mule. -------------------------- A priest and a rabbi are sitting next to each other on a plane. However, it is a short flight and they do not talk to each other. -------------------------- What do you call a man with a spade in his head? You call him an ambulance. He may have fractured his skull. --------------------------

I don't know. Now after playing this animation, I can't get the song out of my head. BananaPhone InCaseYouCan'tConnect

In standard Newtonian Physics, the 'void' of space has no properties other than the 'axiom' concerning absolute rotation and a single unique 'rest frame'. In various formulations of Quantum Mechanics, the 'void' is more complex, allowing instantaneous particle generation and annilation for very short periods of time. (its popping like popcorn, and the trails vanish like playful ghosts.) Some of this 'randomness' built into QM 'space' allows quantum tunnelling of particles and energy out of 'black holes', while other particle pair formations allow extremely improbable events to happen. However, even in the 'loose cannon' spacetime of QM, there are rules about preservation and destruction of energy and information based upon symmetry...

Also keep in mind that most organizers and DMs are psychology students and have a hidden agenda that may involve electric shocks.

I'm sorry. I have to agree with the 1st poster: Silver solder is king. For all discrete component soldering, for instance caps, resistors, inductors etc, Silver solder is safe and effective, and offers the best electrical connection possible. All my hi-fidelity tube (point-to-point wiring) power amplifiers I use only silver solder, and silver-plated wire. The result is incredible in terms of audio purity of sound, and reliability. No one should be hand-soldering I.C. components unless they have to. You should either doing that by a wave-solder machine or using a socket-mount. You can do it with special heat-sink tools and soldering tips, and it works for repairs if you are skilled: but you need a delicate balance of proper wattage stations, low-temp solder and experience and care to hand-solder most Integrated Circuit components. Nowadays most heavily miniaturized chips are surface-soldered. Any way, hand-soldering electronic connections with discrete components of reasonable size and scale: silver solder. Standard solder is crap, and low-temp solder isn't so good either.

It might be easier for a student to approach this in two parts: First the simpler case of the block on the inclined plane *without* any external forces: Make an Assumption: (1) Suppose the block isn't moving at all, but resting on the inclined plane. This means that the force of gravity is exactly balanced by a resisting counter-force from the solid inclined plane. Parallelogram Law and Coordinate Systems (2) Each force can be split into x', y' components, with the two axeese placed in any arbitrary orientation, at rest with the whole setup. Here we choose to orient the x'-axis in parallel with the inclined plane, and the y'-axis perpendicular to it. (This is a simple right-angle version of the Parallelogram Law for combining forces.) First note that the gravity force can be seen as two parts or components, one force pressing directly on the plane, and the other pushing the block along the plane downward (blue downward arrows). How to Deal with Passive Counter-Forces The counter-forces are merely passive. We can assume since the plane is solid that it will always match the gravity component with an exact counter-force (but no more, since there is no active machinery). We can think of the counter-force upward from the plane as an 'infinite reservoir', since we don't forsee gravity actually winning by crushing the inclined plane. Thus since the forces perpendicular to the inclined plane always match and cancel, we can ignore them! Now the question is, what about the gravity component pushing the block downward along the plane? If the block is not moving, then the only counter-force available is friction. This force is small relative to the direct pressure on the plane, so only a little friction will hold the block from sliding. (Again, *more* friction won't add an active force, just provide a reservoir of counter-force for a larger downward push). That is, we can say that if the block isn't moving, the opposing friction is >= the downward force along the plane, and if the block slides, there isn't enough friction to hold it. We might even be able to calculate the friction by measuring the acceleration of the sliding block (but that's another question). Eliminating Non-Existant Forces (3) And now the 'trick' part of the question. It said 'smooth' surface, which we are supposed to interpret apparently as 'friction-free' or with insignificant friction. This means the smaller downward force component of the gravity force along the plane is unopposed, and the block will slide down the plane (it becomes the net force). Note also that we treated the passive resisting forces each a bit differently, but intuitively, as the physical situation seemed to require. In one case we imagined an uncrushable ramp and infinite opposing force available, and in the other we assumed we *could* overcome the opposing force of friction at some unknown point (or incline). Now we have all the tools and ideas with which to tackle the original question. What You Needed to Solve This a) A familiarity with the Parallelogram Law for Addition of Forces and graphical treatment of forces as vectors. b) A familiarity with Coordinate Systems and Orthogonal Vectors/Directions. This is more than just adding vectors. You should understand why you are choosing right-angle vectors, and why you are choosing a certain orientation of the vectors when breaking down basic vectors into their components. c) An ability to handle 'problem' forces like friction and passive resistance intuitively and accurately. d) An ability to break the problem down into simpler components or isolated parts and solve a step at a time. Notes for Later Later on in your course, you may be revisiting this question with more information. For instance, you may have to find the net force, then calculate the expected acceleration of the block sliding down the plane, or vice versa: You may be given the acceleration of the block, and have to calculate the force. In these cases, you'll use differentiation or integration to move from one answer to the other.

To me the slippery bit is: His question as to the effect of extension in space of the proton is also exciting (I think). I don't think the Belgians can pronounce 'nabla'. It ends up with a carrot over one of the vowels or something like runes.

Here's some links to explore: Build a Tube Amp Hi fidelity Tube Amps for stereos Serious Tube Amps Tube Amps for Guitars Forum

How about an efficient steam engine? Maybe with a twist, like a Wankel Rotary design, or some kind of ball/cylinder thing? Then again home holography projects are nice, and lasers and stuff are getting cheap. Do you like audio? I could help you design and build an awesome tube amp.

Fusion is fusion. If they can carry it out in an area the size of a breadbox, then I don't think it matters. That is still remarkable.

Wow, finally now I can actually read one of your questions: perhaps I can try to solve it before you do!

I am posting this interesting paper as a background to talk about this: Hydrino Article

Sorry: Here is a link to Assis' published works and scientific articles: Books and Articles by Assis Buy on Amazon I hope this helps. I can probably find other material more easily suited to MagLev as well.

If you've gone through basic calculus, and a year of physics and electromagnetics, Why not prepare to move into Partial Differential Equations? You will have already been exposed to basic Differential Equations, but for a solid physics background you need to put time in on these. Differential Equations with Applications and Historical Notes by Simmons is a good opener. Then try Partial Differential Equations Basic Theory by Taylor. These things flow naturally out of Multivariable Calculus. For a good extra textbook on that try Calculus of Several Variables by Lang, and follow up with Multivariable Analysis by G. Bailey Price. On the regular Calculus you need to fill out your theoretical understanding with A Primer of Infinitesimal Analysis by Bell, then expand in the direction of: Laplace and Fourier Transforms for Electrical Engineers by Craig, then see if you can go past that into A Primer of Lebesgue Integration by Bear. Now on the Quantum Mechanics side, you'll need to pick up some Linear Algebra with Applications (any good used textbook), and add to that a good introduction to Group Theory. For actual textbooks on Quantum Mechanics start with something light like: Introduction to Quantum Mechanics by H. Smith. Your main textbook in a course will be something like: Relativistic Quantum Mechanics by Strange. (or a less advanced tome). Many of these can be borrowed from your University or local library on an as needed basis. Grab as many popular books on quantum mechanics, relativity and cosmology that you can to keep up your interest in wading through the math. Also fill out your historical background as much as you can using gems like: Black-Body Theory and the Quantum Discontinuity by Kuhn, Dreams of a Final Theory by Weinberg etc. and Quantum Reality by Herbert. (there will be dozens of these in the library). Finally don't neglect your other math interests to keep your mind sharp: Knot Theory, Topology, Chess.

I am not going to respond further to this. it would certainly be off-topic then. Your questions are likewise off-topic so I will take them as rhetorical. I have been peacefully and helpfully posting here for months. Since posting yesterday in the AIDS thread and starting a post on the Northwoods Operation in the Politics forum where it belongs, I have been under fire. It is clear to me that now you are looking for excuses to escalate matters for the purpose of banning me. I suggest you do it now and save us the trouble of all the hand waving and lies. Many others have encouraged me for my helpful and insightful contributions to many threads here. If you don't like me, or have been offended because we disagree on some scientific matters, who cares? There are plenty of science boards where helpful and knowledgable people are welcome, as well as free opinion. If everyone were as brilliant as you we'd all agree, but there'd be no point in a forum of any kind. Penalizing someone for recommending the wrong book? over the top and childish. Good thing you didn't recommend a restaurant!

(1) By thinking that in a void there would be no force suggests the corollary of Mach that 'substance' out in space (i.e., distant masses etc) *should* cause a force on the spinning object. It is in effect a bold claim to 'explain' centrepital forces and rotational effects by a hitherto unconfirmed cause, based upon the appearances of physical phenomenae which we can't explain now. (2) An account of forces within and across any system of masses must still be made, with or without a void. (i.e., is there a force of gravity acting between particles in the local system? and what kind of force is it that will explain predicted effects?)

I have some translations into English on homosexuality and Islam sold in a religious bookstore. The last I looked at them, I thought they were incredibly semi-literate hysterical treatese. I will post some quotations from them if you wish.

Who needs conspiracy theories when the Elite of the U.S. Armed Forces Strategic Command are willing to sign their names to things this incredibly stupid? Why wait for a conspiracy? Just fire the goofs and find someone with an I.Q. higher than 80 to do the job.

Glad you could find a way to make the idea of 'fake documents' sound plausible. Good luck convincing others on that. Do you think it is possible to blow up a U.S. Navy vessel and list the causalties in U.S. newspapers without killing any U.S. servicemen? And by the way does that scenario sound familiar? It ought to, since they have done this too, long after the Northwoods Operation proposals. ....And I notice you're carefully avoiding the thousands of people that would have been killed if the generals had actually started a war with Cuba.

Do you need assistance reading the date of the document, or finding out the date of the assassination of President Kennedy? Come on, how lame is it going to get here about this? Perhaps the document is in code, and it is really all about harmless practice exercises in the Pentagon cafeteria involving paint-guns. So far you've just criticized my understanding of the significance of this document: What is your interpretation of the document? Perhaps the Democrats faked the document and planted it in the Government Archives to make the Republicans look bad!?!? A fair-handed account of the Northwoods Operation and the background can be found here: Exerpt from Body of Secrets by J.Bamford (2001 doubleday publ.)

The Joint Chiefs of Staff suggested multiple scenarios for attacking U.S. property and citizens in a covert operation and blaming the Cubans (in order to excuse an invasion). Some of the suggestions and many of the variations clearly involve danger to human life and probable killings, possibly involving U.S. citizens too. Are you just hoping no one reads the document? Are you suggesting there is no parallel to the current Middle East conflict?

It is ironic however that Einstein's plan (SRT) to follow his mentor Mach's lead and eliminate Absolute Space later backfired in his face too, as his (GRT) requires Absolute Motion relative to the G-field. Mach died disappointed, and Einstein quietly sidestepped the issue of 'eliminating the aether', and admitted he had not adequately solved the 'bucket experiment'. In fact, Einstein clarified the remaining dilemma: In his 1916 paper he explicitly reformulates the thought-experiment as two globes rotating relative to each other in empty space along their axis of connection: In (Einstein 1916, pp112-113) Einstein, in conformity with his understanding of the law of causality, restates Mach's thesis that the only possible explanation for any difference in the 'bulging' between globe 1 and 2 must lie in their mutual motion to distant masses (background of stars). Einstein merely echoes the relationist tradition that phenomenae of rotation (equatorial bulge) be explained purly in terms of relative motions of bodies. What is novel, ironic, and embarrassing, is Einstein's implicit claim that GTR actually conforms to his demand. There is no basis for this latter claim, as Einstein later quietly acknowledged at various times many years later.