swansont

Because, as we know, storage methods never become obsolete. All my data are on 8-track cassettes and vinyl discs.

We can't because work is defined as it is' date=' and momentum is defined as it is. I already gave an expression for KE and momentum. You can't easily relate it to a change in momentum because KE depends on p[sup']2[/sup], so it depends on how much momntum you have to start with.

Tokomak, also tokamak. It's fusion reactor. Google is your friend.

EM radiation doesn't make a shock wave, since it doesn't use the air as a propagation medium.

In physics it's generally four to twelve years of working long hours as an indentured servant. If you are starting from a Bachelor's degree, it's a few years of classes and then life in the lab (if it's experimental) or on the computer (if it's theoretical), doing your thesis advisor's bidding. It takes a mix of intelligence and stubbornness. The payoff is not necessarily a higher salary, but the opportunity to work on more interesting projects. My degree took six years, which was the average for physics in the US at the time. I think it's gone up since then.

Newton's law tells you the cooling rate - how fast the temperature changes. Fourier's law tells you heat transfer rate, which is how fast the energy is transferred. The link between them is the heat capacity, which tells you how much energy a material can store for a given change in temperature.

You can. Work is change in kinetic energy (if there is no potental energy change), and KE = p2/2m

Then JC was correct; the tension will increase down the cord.

JC is assuming the string has a non-negligible mass. But since it's not given, let's approximate it as zero. The mass m feels a force mg down, and yet it's not accelerating. What's holding it up?

Do you have an equation that relates the wave properties to the tension in the string? and you had to bump the thread because nobody answered it in 45 minutes?

Glue is generally made of stuff that has no noticable magnetic properties.

Instead of getting the normal spread-out pattern of the field, it all goes into the metal. Thus the region above is shielded. A little like a magnetic "sponge" It would look very much like Rebel's first diagram, but the field would be stronger in the material, since you have concentrated it.

Right. Spin 1/2 can have a projection of +1/2 or -1/2.

Having a 4.5 billion year half-life helps, too, vs 24 kyears. Five orders of magnitude less activity right out of the gate.

That's only the center-of-mass atomic/molecular motion. Atoms reaching sub-nanoKelvin temperatures show no signs of changes to their electron structure.

Speaking of which, as this is Valentine's day, it is the 23rd anniversary of the monopole event at Stanford (1982, Cabrera)

Maxwell's equations were well in place before Einstein came up with relativity. There is no velocity addition explicitly in them - it's a set of equations describing the electric and magnetic fields. It was noticed, after the fact, that the speed of light was the wave speed in the equations, dependent on the permittivity and permeability.

My guess was that the metal pieces are [math]\mu[/math]metal, which is metal that has a high magnetic permeability and is used for magnetic shielding. That would explain the lack of a field in the case of one piece - all of the field above the magnet goes through the metal. But I can't see how adding a second piece would give you the field back, so I'm not convinced that this is the case.

emphasis added fissile. fissionable means it is capable of undergoing fission, which U-238 is. fissile means it is capable of undergoing fission with the absorption of a slow moving neutron. U-238 requires the absorption of a fast neutron for fission.

spin 1/2

References, please, for the latter part. Some experiments investigating the fine structure constant, which includes c, have shown limited (a part in 105) change over the period you state, and others are consistent with zero change, so this may just be an upper bound, limited by experimental error.