swansont

You slam a high energy-proton into the Thorium and hope that three additional protons, and some variable number of neutrons, get ejected. And that happens, some fraction of the time.

No, that's called rationalizing your behavior. Stealing, by any other name, is still stealing.

Probably more of a zoning problem than an NRC issue. Anything small enough to be built in your backyard (unless you're using Bill Gates' back yard) won't have enough power to do any serious high-energy reactions. OTOH, I recall a time when I was at TRIUMF that we were making heavy nuclides with a Thorium target (we were making Francium; somebody else was using some other nuclide) and a local lab whose job it is to detect above-ground nuclear test fallout was able to tell.

Two effects: You get an r change from the oblateness of the earth, plus the change in the normal force owing to the circular motion.

How is gravity not related to weight? W = mg Percieved weight is really the normal force exerted on you. Is that really hard to understand?

It's brighter because your eye is more sensitive - 550 nm is 4x more sensitive than a HeNe, and about 250x more sensitive than a laser at 700 nm. By solid line do you mean the beam as it extends through the room, or when it hits the wall? You can only see the beam if there's something to scatter it, so it's not a function of the laser quality.

So, what do you do? Steal yours?

The problem here is that Van Flandern is a crackpot.

There is no force that prevents it. Electrons go into the nucleus all the time. They just don't usually combine with the protons or neutrons, which requires a weak interaction. The uncertainty principle shows that you can't expect to confine the electron in the nucleus, so the electron doesn't stay there.

Surely you've learned about systematic bias. Don't you think data gathered on the internet, especially on a science bulletin board, might exclude some subset of the IQ distribution? You need a random sample.

My point about Tim Keoth is that it's something you could theoretically build with some basic physics. Who needs plans? A CRT is a particle accelerator.

Maybe you should ask Tim Koeth

So does the iPod.

Asking what the opposite of entropy is, is like asking, "What's the opposite of temperature?" If you want to lower the entropy you have to do work, and the entropy will have to increase somewhere else, as JaKiri stated.

That's one way of getting the copyright holders to let you sell it. It makes it a little harder to steal.

Time is the fourth dimension. According to relativity' date=' time and space are related. The quantity that is conserved in a transformation between reference frames is a four dimentional vector construct of the three spatial dimentions and c*t.

That's how standard deviation is defined.

Very popular? An online petition to Apple has a whopping 302 signatures at this point. Forgive the appearence of conceit, but I'd never heard of it until now, and did a Google search. Their website proclaims that "Ogg Vorbis is a new audio compression format." If it's new, how widely could it have been adopted? If it's not widely adopted, how does that qualify as popular? Plugins apparently do exist to allow it to play in iTunes. Maybe Apple will include the format in future iPod software.

And you edited this for grammar? Oh, the irony...

Yes. String theory is not part of the standard model.