michel123456

1. They don't have blue blood. From Wiki. 2. what is the color of reptile blood: red. 3. They are humans like you and me. They don't make eggs. French revolutionists killed them without noticing anything so strange. The idea of half-humans hybrids comes from ancient Egypt, maybe earlier. I thought people evolved since then.

I don't understand what you mean.

O.K. that is clear now. I was confused by your statement

From what i understand, the result is not refined oil. It is crude oil.

It is not for sale for households. It costs around 1,000,000 yen,(9200 Euro, 12800$). 1) i found no information on the company's site. edit: around 3hours for 0,7-1 kg of waste. 2) 1,000,000 yen,(9200 Euro, 12800$). 3) no information. there are provided datas, but not about that. Somewhere they say their operational temperature is around 400-450 centigrades. here in question 6. edit: Running Cost 1KW／h (Only as a guide) from here. 4) they do produce larger models.

So you say those waves are relative to the observer. An observer at rest with the object will observe no waves, and an observer in a state of motion will observe waves. That sounds in contradiction with the first statement. The energy of the system does not depend on the state of motion of the observer.

Yes. We have already swallowed that we are lost in space. Our actual place in the Universe is not in the center, not on the edge, it is "somewhere" in the vast incommensurable Universe. Now we have to swallow that we are also lost in time. That would extend the Copernican Principle in what I call the Complete Copernican Principle which is an application of the Mediocrity principle. That is my opinion.

Theoretically you could use a ruler to measure C, indeed. If C was much slower that could be a very simple experiment. So I was wondering, when you make wooden ruler, and put it simply like that on your desk, it does not measure time. If you light it, theoretically it becomes a clock, with the only problem that light goes too fast: you cannot observe the rays reaching the first line of the ruler, then the second line, and so on. The ruler seems to be lighted all at once. Also, you could take the ruler and make it slide on an inclined plane. That would be the reverse of Galileo's type of experiment. So that a moving ruler would transform in a clock. Then, you could state that the ruler does not measure time because the ruler is comoving with you in spacetime. If you choosed another FOR in spacetime, the ruler would be a clock for this FOR. And if the above is correct, one could make a statement following which the ruler is a clock for all FOR different from the ruler's FOR. IOW the ruler is not a clock only for its own FOR.

_Luck is also the fact to be born here or there, in the U.S., Europe or Africa, in Mr the Senator's family or under a tree in the savannah.

I din't go through this list. One is enough. And they should go through trial. conventional trial, with lawyers and the whole stuff. Imagine yourself walking nonchalant along the street wearing your new blue jacket and suddenly being arrested by an army officer just because a few seconds ago a suspected terrorist in blue jacket left a suspect bag near the entrance of the metro station. If you have no right for a phone call, if you have no right for a lawyer, if you can only shut up, bye bye Justin...

Time is what a clock measure. Distance is what a ruler measure. Then a question arises: is it possible to measure time with a ruler? For example, following Galileo's experiment: putting a ruler inclined and making a small sphere rolling upon it. When the sphere passes by over a line of the ruler, one unit of time has passed. Of course the problem arises that if my lines on the ruler are equidistant, I will measure time as accelerating. But although unconventional, that would be a way to measure time with a ruler. Isn't it?

From what place was this thread moved? It is not Religion, and it is not philosophy. To the point: I speak fluently 2 languages. A few days ago I noticed I am not "thinking" in my mother's language anymore. When someone talks to me in the 2nd language, I don't have to translate any more: I simply understand. I still don't know how it works in my head.

Welcome to the club. The club is something more than 2500 years old, its name is "Panta Rhei" (not to be confused with the world renowned restaurant in Bali island)

Is this the same info? That's what you get when you are in a state of war. when President G. W. Bush introduced "war on terror", he virtually changed the civil rights into war rights. And they are quite different from each other. Now it is not virtually any more, it simply is.

---------- Hey newstudent! Are you still alive?

Yes. Isn't that amazing? Think about it twice.

Thanks. Now that you think you have understood how things are going, just figure: I am not pushing you any more: I am attracting you (1) from a distance (2). (1) how is that possible? I am not a magnet and you are not made of steel. (2) how is that possible? How can a force act "magically" through distance ? That's the beauty of gravity.

Or

You said you cut the brownie, you didn't say you eat it. The best way is to put the piece back and cut as usual.

This is the most wonderful thread I have seen since my arrival here. I am touched. (no sarcasm) For the first time, I have spend my available amount of + reputation for the day, I didn't even know there existed a limit.

Welcome. Frankly: If I had to rate: Nature 2/10 Culture 2/10 Politics 8/10 Because that looks more to the speech of a politician: you make long sentences that say nothing except what should be done without proposing any solution. You lost 2 points because (1) you forgot to thank your electors and (2) you forgot to say "vote for me". I gave you 2 points in Nature because you showed some interest for 2 regions. And I gave you 2 points in culture because I wanted to show kindness. But if the goal is Politics, you made it well. I am the one who gets sick with politics. --------------------------------------------- That was not a very constructive comment. Well I don't know what your teacher expects, but if it was me: Try to construct your speech. Begin as you did with the situation as it is today. Put some numbers, they always make a good impression. How many drilling sites in the gulf of Mexico, how many in Alaska, production, etc. Wikipedia is there, use it. Numbers transforms your discourse into absolute and indiscussable truth, even if it is not. Make a difference between accidental leaks and constant leaks, I think constant ones are not negligeable. Make a presentation of available means to minimize the damages (new technology, reinforcement of regulations, control, less sites, drilling in safer zones, drilling in shallow waters, etc.) Make a presentation of other green technologies and make some balance with fossil fuel. Present the main differences also in matter of peripheral needs: ports, refineries, stockage pipe-lines, etc. and their effect. Present a strong point of vue, a POV that your teacher agrees with (you'll need some research some older student may provide) Avoid repetitions. Don't base your work on press articles. Cite your references (NOT Wiki but the original sources). Your teacher wrote a book (or published an article): cite it. If I think of something else, I'll tell you.

Take some bricks and cement, and arrange them together to build a wall: the wall is something more than a simple bunch of bricks. If you construct 4 walls orthogonal to each other, you may obtain a enclosure, which a kind of open space (a patio) which is something more than just 4 walls. When you put a slab upon your 4 walls, you may obtain a closed space, a prison, a home, a temple, something anyway that is more than just 4 walls and a roof. The same goes for tools: a simple iron bar can be a lever or a nail, which is something more than a linear arrangement of particles. And the same goes in biology: an arrangement of molecules is more than the sum of its parts, because the result of the arrangement is something else. So one could say that indeed 1+1 is not 2 but 1+1=[2 and something]. What does that mean? Thanks to the admins, this Forum is not Skype-like. I can't see you and you can't see me. As a note many members here avoid to put their own picture. As long as your fingers obey to your mind and your mind keep in touch with sanity (that counts for me too) I hope we will continue to have interesting conversations here.

THoR, my english isn't good enough to get your point. I rambled through your site and I understand nothing. Nor here do I understand nothing. You wrote "magically merge into a single entity" is a well known chemical process. In chemistry, 1+1=1 , and in biology too. Only in physics there is a problem with that. And when you write "a collection must generate a separate supervening entity (1+1=3)" you say something well-known too: that the whole is more than the sum of the components. Notre-Dame of Paris is more than an sum of stones. What do you mean in this post?: Are you sarcastic or do you believe in metempsychosis?

Now I am more confused than you are... One by one. a Moon that occupies the same space at 2 different times is a Moon at rest. For an observer on the Moon, that is possible, but that does not help the discussion. That is time by time, I don't follow your phrasing. Under standard concept, and on all known spacetime diagrams, the Moon in the past is a point on a line that extends along time. The Moon through time is not a point, but a line. Which means that contrary to space, where an object change coordinates, in time an object does not change coordinates but "develop" in the form of a line. The object is presumed to be remaining at all its past coordinates. (or i have a bad understanding) My question is thus, how can we be sure?