Kyrisch

AHAH! I think I've got it. [hide]THE KING IS DEAD, LONG LIVE THE KING[/hide] Doesn't make much logical sense, but it's consistent with a substitution cipher!

This is what pioneer does... I'm surprised you're not used to it by now. No offense to the user, but why has no action been taken?

Movies are a bad place to get scientific information -- especially horror movies. Twins are no more likely to have two eyes of different colours than any other child. Chimæras, however, are individuals which result from the fusing of two fraternal twins in the earliest stages of development. This results in a single individual in which roughly half of their cells have one genome and the other half one slightly different. If the two eyes happen to be different genetic entities, one may be brown and the other blue.

THIS IS SO AWESOME. How pragmatic, though? I feel that they can't really optimize it much more than the bulky neck-pack, and its dependency on a surface to project upon makes it bad for, say, dark objects.

And by what means, exactly, do you propose that the Earth is expanding?

And to continue iNow's point, a blatant lack of knowledge of basic biology (or, as this may be sarcasm, a non-argument). Either way, having been lurking this thread from the beginning, it contributes nothing.

What baffles me is how people think they can use words like that as if they mean something all crunched together. Precision of language, pleasee >.<

Because, contrary to what people would like, morality is not absolute. You can't have a blanket opinion that works in all cases, it's not practical. In addition, while the number of cases are few, they still exist, and you still are obligated to make a decision about whether or not you think it is acceptable.

And that covers the idea of allowed abortion in cases of rape. Are you against that?

Super-wet water, whatever that may be, is no better for you than normal water. All the 'oxygenation kits' and such are scams, there is no evidence that ingesting oxygen does anything in the way of health...

Well, since we don't actually know how massive a black hole would have to be to operate the way in which you want it to (let alone if it can operate the way in which you want it to), I'm sure you could fudge something about it not being massive enough to 'swallow the earth', per se.

It's not really a formula, it's what is called a falsum, or a logical statement that always evaluates as false. It is the opposite of a tautology, which is a logical statement that always evaluates as true, and the negation of a tautology is always a contradiction, or paradox. Another sense of the word paradox is a statement that can neither be evaluated as true or false, such as (as I know has been cited already) "this statement is false". An awesome form of this is the set of all non-inclusive sets (which cannot logically exist). If a set is inclusive if it includes itself (on such set would be the set of all sets), then the set of all non-inclusive sets would either exclude itself (therefore becoming non-inclusive and thereby fulfilling the parameter) or include itself (and thereby become inclusive, failing the parameter).

The abortion debate has been largely centered about whether or not a fetus has all the rights of a fully-grown human being. Recently, I heard an argument from the pro-choice camp regarding rape victims even given that those rights are in fact secured to that fetus, which is what makes it interesting. It basically argues that even if the baby were a fully-grown human being, it would still be morally acceptable to abort in the case of a forced pregnancy. [disclaimer: please don't get offended, this is not intended to be politically charged at all, and the characters are in no way intended to reflect upon the practices of real people whose relationship therewith may be construed. Also, it's a bit of a stretch, but just go with it -- it's hypothetical.] A French prince is horribly ill, and the King, the prince being his sole heir, demands that he be taken to the doctor and treated with the finest medicine in the land. The doctor discovers that the prince's kidneys have failed and that he will die within 24 hours if action is not immediately taken. However, this taking place in a time long ago, the crude method of dialysis will take nine full months to construct and prepare. Determined to keep his only son alive, the king orders his men to kidnap a Spaniard of the same blood type and bring him to the doctor. They cross the border and spend the day secretly testing men and women for the correct type. When they finally find a match, they smuggle him back into France and present him to the king's physician. In an hour or so, the physician connected the two men's circulatory system so that the imprisoned Spaniard acted as a living dialytic machine, using his own kidneys to filter the Frenchman's blood. So the question is, is it morally acceptable to force a random bystander to keep another human being alive at his own expense for nine months?

Well, we haven't even isolated the graviton yet, though our theory says it should exist. Also, the only thing it would be responsible for is communicating the force of gravity. "Stabilising a wormhole" is a far fetch from what the graviton actually does, but if you're like all the other sci-fi writers and you want to use a word that sounds cool, go ahead >.<. In addition, wormholes themselves have never been observed, and while their existence is possible in theory, there may still be none around and what exact properties they have would vary from type to type, so again you'll be ascribing another random idea (time travel) to a barely related mechanism. Also, the whole joining together to make one giant wormhole is quite the random device. You're miles away from any concrete theory at this point. "Spinning energy field" is jabberwocky. Energy fields emanate from electrically charged particles, particles with mass, and particles with colour charge. What kind of field is it? Why is it spinning? It's just word salad. So, in conclusion, your sci-fi is just that -- highly speculative fiction. No offense, though, because that is what sci-fi tends to be, just don't get the idea that you're staying much true to any concrete theories. Hope you have fun with it .

Ah yes, the translational kinetic energy. So, to clarify, the sum of the two kinetic energies will equal the total gravitational potential energy gained (under ideal conditions).

Well yeah, sure, maybe. But it wasn't a world-wide flood, and there certainly was no animals-two-by-two going on. How do we know? No genetic bottleneck -- something that recent would have lasting effects on the genetic variability of extant species today.

You have the radius of the disc, which means you can determine the circumference. You also have the translational speed. [math]\frac{v (m/sec)}{circumference(m)} = revolutions/sec[/math] [math]1 (revolution) = 2\pi (radians)[/math] With the proper conversion, you can find radians/sec which is angular velocity omega.

Yeah, the heating pad must be a sort of exothermic reaction -- notice the tinfoil center to conduct the heat. The paper balancing trick is just that -- a trick. If you listen, the loudness of the snap as the bystander tests one of the sheets is a testament to how thick the paper is. With enough practice, it's just a matter of distribution of weight and balance.

I'm pretty sure that is the definition of an open interval, [math](-1,1)[/math] which would not include the bounds, whereas [math][-1,1][/math] (a closed interval) would.

My guess is that "ozone treatment" doesn't use real ozone, and is a pseudoscientific endeavour, like magnet therapy >.<. Either way, it's ineffective at best and deleterious at worst.

I think it would be much easier to do this problem in terms of energy conservation. The kinetic energy of the disc [math]\frac{1}{2}I\omega^2[/math] equals the gravitational potential energy it will gain as it comes to rest at some height [math]h[/math] above the surface [math]mgh[/math]. Does that help?

He's a bit... jumpy, en't he? O.o

Let me Google that for you...

Wait, are we allowed to talk about religion again? I'm so confused... Anyway, most of the hardcore Creationists have this idea called "embedded age" where God created the Earth at its inception already aged, so that it looks much, much older, but actually isn't. When asked if God is being deceitful, they will say "nope, because God tells us the real age in the Bible." So, that's not as powerful of an argument as you may think.

I think it boils down to the efficiency of the recharge, though. For instance, I think that the energy required to reverse the reaction inside a one-use battery would be much much greater than that necessary to recharge a marketed "rechargeable" battery.