tomgwyther

I'm not sure if this is of any help but: I smoke; I also play the saxophone (Every day). Approximately once a month, I clean the mouth piece to remove tar from the mouthpiece chamber. I guess I could mail you a sample?! The mouthpiece is solid silver (not sure if that would have a good or bad effect on the tar deposit) And the mouthpiece is only every blown into, not inhaled through. So, presumably any deposits within the chamber must have come from my lungs. I don't necessarily inhale smoke, then blow it through the saxophone, but I've noticed that non-smoking wind/brass instrument players don't have a tar residue on there mouthpiece. There are quite a lot of smoking wind/brass players to get a reasonably large sample of exhaled muck.

#4: I am God; I just don't know it yet.

I'm inclined to agree with you, as the wing's leading edge would - more or less- always be facing the direction of airflow; as in the glider/roller coaster analogy. With regards to the 747, it seems the control surfaces would be insufficient to pull the aircraft into a tight enough loop; and the airspeed, too slow to maintain low enough Re. In my limited understanding of boundary layers; the turbulent far exceeds the laminar when performing aerobatics in large aircraft. Unless you have a very fast jumbo-jet with enormous elevators.

According to their site, this test was focus grouped and refined extensively, I can only advise that their focus group invest in some contact lenses. There is another similar questionnaire called 'Philosophical Heath Check' containing similar errors. I'm tempted to email them and send them over here to SFN so as they might improve the bullet-holed test.

it's a fun test, but it is fallible. i effectively stated that a being with god-like characteristics would be morally good. Then I bit a bullet because I reasoned that a god-like entity - being omnipotent - could if he so chose; be evil. I also ran into the same problem that others have encountered... The one about evolution. The quiz forces you to make assertions which you would not otherwise make, and then calls you a hypocrite. There needs to be an 'I Don't know' or 'Skip' response on the drop-down menu instead of just true or false. Many of the questions contain more than one clause, thus a true/false answer is meaningless. The test - although fun - is flawed

Probably not. The 747 is quite a big bird and so manoeuvres quite slowly. From level flight at full thrust; the weight of the plane pulling it down would exceed the thrust pushing it up. as Insane Alien said, 'It would probably get to about 80 degrees and then stall. A 747-400 weighs about 600,000 lbs All four engines at full throttle generate about 250,000 lbs. That said, you may be able to generate enough airspeed by angling the nose down 45 degrees, then at full throttle, pull up sharply. This might give you enough momentum to perform a loop, or maybe an angel-fall* Rather like a roller coaster going downhill before a loop. IIRC this is how you perform a loop in a glider also. In any of these scenarios; I'd want a free upgrade afterwards! Angel-fall - When a plane flies vertically until it stalls, then bank hard left (or right) rudder to fall over sideways and fall nose first

Nice picture. here's one I made using my desk-top background. The photo is genuine; you can still see quite a close correlation between the Fibonacci spiral and the path of the water. Little more than a curiosity, but still looks quite cool though.

Great site; a vast repository of knowledge. I'm tempted to sign up. it also reminds me of an idea I had to create a website with links to lectures already present on the internet, all organised into catagories etc.

If aliens 'headed' for Earth, this implies that they are no longer 'Heading' for Earth. So what's to worry about This kind of grammatical error makes me tense.

Sounds like something Tesla would have done. Try googleing 'Nikola Tesla'. as far as I can remember he was working on a transmission tower which could transmit mains electricity to homes in the New York area. There's an article about it here... My link

A friend of mine died in real life, but dreamt she was alive. (She was only dead for a minute or so but made a full recovery.)

before the 1970s it was just a childrens' toy, then it got used as a prop in a film (The shining IIRC) to contact the dead. Ever since then it's been thought of as mystical/evil, etc. Presumably, had they used monopoly or Cludo as a prop in the film; those games would now be thought of a having mystical qualities. The idea that a childrens' toy could harm you via the intervention of evil spirits is just another bit of BS more commonly used to scare the mentally challenged and cattle

what is the mind and where is it located? This is till a bit of an open question, there's a lot of philosophy about mind/brain duality; what is consciousness etc. have a read of some Dan Dennet, his writing explore such issues. My own rough explanation of what causes consciousness is that it is the constant and organised electrical activity between millions of neurons. what is its limit and what would happen if we went over the cerebral limit You need to define some parameters before discussing limitations. Or have some environment in mind where limits would be an issue. do we have a natural cerebral block that keeps our brain at a lower lvl? Again we'd need to have an idea of the environment within which there are higher and lower levels. e.g my car wont go faster than 90Mph; it is limited by it's environment and physical properties; there are speeds in excess of 90Mph which can be contemplated/observed. if our brain worked faster would time change? a second wouldnt be a second? Our perception of time passing changes all the time depending on our mental state. when we're stressed or anxious, time feels like it's passing more slowly, when we're relaxed or content it feels like it's passing more quickly. Time itself doesn't change depending on what we're thinking or what mental state we're in. could the mind affect things in the outside of the body? The brain can effect things outside the body but only at very close range. e.i. electrodes attached to the head which measure electrical activity. One can't move object with the power of the mind (There's actually a million dollar prize to anyone who can.)

You need to authorise someone to for the right to copy it, usually in some sort of written contract. e.g. "I authorise Mr. Smith to make 1000 copies of my book and sell them at $10 each." You may also have an agreement which entitle you to a certain percentage of the gross sales. You may transfer full copyright, which is essentially giving someone the right to copy something in any way they want. here's a link to a pretty standard copyright transfer. www.tandf.co.uk/journals/authors/copyrightinc.pdf

The Diaphragm doesn't move up and down that much, at least, not enough to cause severe contraction of the abdominal organs. The chest cavity expands outwards and upwards to fill with air. If you lie on your back and breath this movement is more obvious.

I've been in exactly that kind of place; I know where your coming from. These rituals do seem alien and unintelligible. I feel it's better to join in the experience (Any experience) than to decline and look like an awkward stranger. it's good to put yourself out of your comfort zone for a while; maybe even feel apprehensive and scare yourself in the process, the insight potentially to gain, far out-weighs ducking out and not knowing. I am friends with a very religious Christian family (in Kent, UK) who asked me 'If i wanted to join them' for their Sunday Baptist pentecostal service: complete with arm waving, Jesus praising, kneeling in the aisle activity which goes with it. i still felt like an outsider looking in; but gained an understanding and respect for other beliefs which I could not - indeed have not - gained simply from reading about it. I'm still an atheist, but not one whom wishes to soap-box about the absurdity of other's beliefs. Whilst chatting to some pastures afterwards, I stated the old scientific maxim that "Everyone is entitled to their own beliefs; their own opinions, but no-one is entitled to their own facts." The fact which I discovered at that religious service was that everyone is very friendly, polite, congenial and we all had a fun time. I also asked the question "Why are there eight credit/debit card machines at the back of the room?" "So as people can give money to the church, for it's up-keep etc." was the reply. I enquired thus. "Surely lending money at interest (Usury) is a bit of a no-no for most religions, and having the money changers (Or at least their means) In the temple, is something Jesus got a bit annoyed about... Mark 11-15." The room filled with silence. I've not been back since.

A fantastic Diagram be David mcCandless, putting all the billions of dollars spent on this and that into beautiful perspective. It really gives you an idea of how much things cost relative to each other. Enjoy

Lisp : a speech defect that involves pronouncing `s' like voiceless `th' and `z' like voiced `th' There is no one on the BBC or in the British Parliament with a lisp. not that I've every heard. I know this to be true because i have watched/listened to the BBC, politicians and all for about 30 years. I've never heard anyone lisp. On the contrary My link The video link above is a clip from Stewart Little, where the young American boy can clearly be heard speaking with a lisp (about 35 second in, when he says the line "It Works!"

I'm not quite sure if you're describing a lisp or describing the mispronunciation of the letter 'R' a lisp being when the letter 'S', is pronounced as a 'Th' sound; as in "thience forumth" (instead of Science forums) The word you typed in your post - incompwehensiboo - suggests someone who cannot pronounce their Rs Which is indeed more common in the UK than in the USA. The TV celebrity Jonathan Ross would be a chief exponent of this. he pronounces his own name more like Woss or Ywoss. i don't know anyone with a lisp, but I do know a few who mispronounce their 'R's I don't see how having an unconscious desire to talk baby talk, or to subconsciously be infantile would explain why English people misspronounce their Rs It's more likely that the way English people are taught to pronounce words beginning with R, to be the reason why they're more commonly mispronounced in England than in America. The R sound in English - as in 'Really' or 'Ramp'- has the tongue lying quite flat at the back with the front of the tongue close to the front or the pallet, making it very similar to the way 'Y' is pronounced - as in 'Yacht' or 'Yesterday'. Whereas with an American accent that back of the tongue is closer to the pallet, distinguishing it from the 'Y' sound, so that children who are learning English in America would be less likely to mispronounce their 'R's I'd also like to refute the allegation that The English have such a subconscious desire to talk baby talk, or to prefer somehow a more childlike state of mind. As an English man who has spent a fair amount of time in the states; I've always found that Americans - although far friendlier, polite and sociable than their English counterparts - tend to have a more naive childlike persona and world view than the Brits. A view echoed by other Brits who have returned from the states. It's more evident in U.S cities than in the small towns though.

Indonesia springs to mind immediately as a primary example of sweat-shop working conditions. Most developing countries which have had infrastructure projects initiated and/or large deficits to go with it, tend to have poorer working conditions for the poor of that country. Although, it's worth noting that Europe and America had sweat-shop style working conditions at one time, before they developed to have the working conditions we have today. It can also be argued that working in a sweat-shop is the least worst alternative to being unemployed are trying to make a living off the land. Benjamin Powell, a Professor of Economics from San Jose State University. Professor Powell argues that sweatshop-type jobs in a developing country are often a significant improvement over other employment options (for example, subsistence farming). He further notes that the United States went through its own period of sweatshop labor during its development.[34] From wikipedia

I believe it is similar, although I don't know that much about it. I don't work with pyro-technics; I don't have a pyro license. I've seen it done though, they use a computer program plus some other hardware to send signals to pyrotechnic devices (Fireworks) and have them set off in time to music etc.

it would be an assault under the law. assault of a sexual nature is generally considered rape. Ergo the answer's yes, it's a rape

Nice to see someone's getting some. What bars are you going to with easy women? I'm tempted to accompany you next time; wait until you need the bathroom. Then move in on your prospective mate and explain how 'He's sizing up the statistical probability of you giving him an STD' Whilst simultaneously offering better odds on my - well protected - self. At school, we once played a game whereby the teacher told us to shake hands with six different people, and remember with whom we'd shaken hands. Then she picked one student from the class, had them stand at the front and said "This person has an STD, could the six people who shook his hand please stand up." To which six people stood up. The she asked "Could anyone who shook hands with any of the now standing people also stand up." To which a much larger group now stood. This went on so on and so forth until over half the room of about 200 students - ws now standing. thus demonstrating the spread of STDs Given that about one in five people* have an STD, your chances of contracting a nasty disease must go up exponentially with every non-protected encounter you have. * http://www.livestrong.com/article/13924-std-information/

That's not to say that the lights in the video were done the way I suggested. The light show may have been achieved some other way. It's just the way I would have done it. Probably the most likely way, without having to design a whole system from scratch. The company which create these displays is called Holdman. I found lots more videos like this on their website holdman.com

You'll need a lot of money and a fair bit of expertise in lighting rigs. Looks like the person who build this works with theatre/stage lighting for a living. basically, you'll need a set of DMX compatible lighting and a DMX lighting controller. DMX is a system which tells lights what colour to be, and how bright to be. The controller here is most likely a DMX computer program like this cheap one. each light has an XLR plug on the back which receives a signal from the DMX controller. The lights (Or lamps/lanterns to be precise) are then programmed to fire at specific times. lets say there is a drum sound 1min 23.567 sec into the music, you can set a DMX channel or channels to switch on at that exact time. The software can also be programmed to respond to MIDI (Musical instrument digital interface) signals, so that when a specific note is pressed; a specific light comes on. If you go and see a big live concert and you notice the drummer has an ear-peice in. it's likely that the lights will be set perfectly in time with the music. The drummer is listening to a click track sourced from the same SMPTE time code or MIDI code as the lighting rig.