michel123456

From the previous site: I have no doubt. Archimedes, (c. 287 BC – 212BC) Said to be his assertion in demonstrating the principle of the lever; as quoted by Pappus of Alexandria, Synagoge, Book VIII, c. AD 340.

Semjase, Look at the other pages of the same site. it is well done IMHO. Like this one: http://www.ancient-wisdom.co.uk/extremasonry.htm look at the video, http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=pCvx5gSnfW4

Be careful for your skin! (not joking)

When you use a chisel instead of a plane you'll notice the difference.

Better use HB pencil (Architect's advice) I don't upload that way. I use a compatible* FTP program (WsFTP95LE) to upload the pictures to the address that my internet service provider gave me when registering. But you can also upload to any free service on the Net, like Photobucket for example. then copy-paste the address into the "insert image" button. *compatible but totally DOS

I' d propose the following: A blade is an instrument that produces a deformation in the material, in opposition to a saw that is an instrument that removes material. When the blade is inserted, the 2 parts of the wood are obliged to change orientation. In this case, one part is thick and changes not, the other is thin and takes all the deformation. Since wood is a material aligned (not sure how to say that in English ) , it has a resistance that is not isotropic. Wood resists perfectly to traction & compression to a force parallel to its grain and resists poorly in the direction perpendicular to its grain. When the carpenter uses its blade, it is always parallel to the wood grain (with the grain), the exerted force is perpendicular though and the thin peel of wood has absolutely no resistance to it, so it curls. ---------- (edit) Don't put the blade otherwise or it will enter the wood profoundly.

No peeking? As a remark to the problem: if the bug is not traveling ON the rubber band but NEXT to the rubber band (on the ground for example), it will never catch the end of the band. -------------- Remark#2 If I understand correctly, the bug on the band, as observed by an observer at rest, is accelerating. That is not obvious from the (provided) maths.

http://www.cheops-pyramide.ch/khufu-pyramid/rope-roll.html

You'll never change.

Other very interesting article about the structure of the pyramids, with references: http://www.catchpenny.org/accretion.html

Welcome to the club. Other Forum members here are not member of the same club and will enjoy explain you e-ve-ry-thing. -------------------- I'd suggest to go directly to this thread an ask the question again to a specialist.

I've seen that before http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/65635-grade-7-heat-project/?hl=insulation#entry670534 http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/65598-building-a-thermos-out-of-household-items/?hl=insulation

So I was fascinated by this simulator of the solar system on this site. It shows evidently the result of the fact that the orbital speed of the outer planets is less than the speed of the inner ones. The Average Orbital Speed of the Planets In the simulator I increased the speed to 2000 days/sec, put the viewer in zero projection (down right between the arrows), made a zoom out, and I was patiently waiting for all the planets to align. After a few minutes (only) my patience exhausted and I took the following screenshot where I draw roughly the alignment I expected to see: Then I went on drawing the displacement of each planet following Keppler's law: the outer planets moving slower than the inner ones. And it goes like that: Showing a spiral. The spiral is not so obvious because there are not enough planets to see it clearly. If there were more stuff in between the planets, the image of the solar system would be like the one of a spiral galaxy.

Yes I read that. So, is it testable by some experiment somehow? You choose the mass so that "the realm where Newtonian physics and gravity do apply"

The moving observer believes that the Earth is moving, not him. He observes that the Earth is time dilated and length contracted. It is absolutely symmetric. Relativity describes what an observer observes.

It's a scanned image. Scan, upload, insert. -------------------- Sorry, not exactly: It is a screenshot from a scanned image. For some peculiar reason the Forum software does not recognize(d) the .jpg format from my scan.

So that should be testable in laboratory.

For a hydrogen atom? what is the distance?

I can't figure the consequences. Doesn't that work for an extremely small mass too?

Inspired by 2001 a Space Odyssey? http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=D2DQDgp2IMM Sound on for Strauss.

To the OP: The ear is an organ we use constantly as a warning mechanism. Even when sleeping we are hearing sounds that wake us as an alert. The ears have no eyelids, they never stop functioning. I suspect that we like music because it covers the noise of danger.

Wonderful! We agree on something. That must be a first.

I agree that the word 'illusion" is ill=defined. Let's resume the question (again): does the one who "experiences" time dilation has any clue that he actually "experiences" time dilation? Is it possible that one 'experiences" different time dilations at the same time because he is observed by different observers? Of course not.

Many illusions if not all are perfectly consistent with the laws of physics. That's my understanding although I have read so many scientists arguing that time dilation is actually happening. Truly I don't want to enter this debate again.