swansont

IIRC the National Guard was originally set up to be solely under the control of the state, but the laws were changed at some point that allowed federal control. So I think that circumstances dictate whether the President or the governor calls up the guard, and who has control. It's pretty clear that "state" means individual state when reading the constitution. The founding fathers were worried that the somebody in the federal government would take military control and try to rule, but would never be able to really do so because the state militias would vastly outnumber whatever standing army the feds could have. With single-shot, muzzle-loading rifles, the size of the army mattered a great deal. We've long since passed the point where that would be the deciding factor in an armed conflict.

Considering the multitude of experiments that are based on the formulae, I'd consider it experimentally proven, albeit indirectly. You can't stop a photon and try and measure a mass. But all of the scattering processes are consistent with a massless particle.

And I was just trying to demostrate why that's intellectually dishonest. You can do it with anything that's recognized as not being a miracle, if you work hard enough.

As far as I know, yes. It's simply a function of the molar concentration of the solute. So pure water freezes at the nominal temperature of 0 C, and everything else is a some point colder than that.

It doesn't - it tends to help it melt more quickly. When you dissolve something in water' date=' the freezing point decreases. So the liquid can absorb more energy from the solid that allows it to melt. Under conditions where the ambient temperature is a little below 0 C, you can still melt the ice. The freezing point decrease is related to the concentration of solute. Salt does a better job because it's ionic, and you get both Na and Cl contributing. More on freezing point depression

There is precession and nutation, but that's fairly small. The seasons arise because the tilt is present, so at one point one pole is pointed toward the sun and one hemisphere gets a lot more sunlight. But because angular momentum is conserved, six months later the axis is pointed in the same direction (wrt a fixed point in space) so the other pole is point toward the sun and the other hemisphere gets more sunlight.

No, water does not conduct heat better than metals. See here. Metals tend to feel cool to the touch (compared to other materials at ~room temperature) precisely because they conduct heat well. And a small tube probably isn't going to have convection. The roast is largely water already. Adding a water tube isn't going to change anything. Jenny- without a better description of the device I can't be sure what's going on. Do you have a link to a picture? An online ad, maybe?

Because of length contraction, how can "A' = A, M' = M and B' = B" hold true?

I doubt a meteor would have enough angular momentum to tilt us by 23 degrees, especially if it happened near one of the poles. The arctic is not a continent - it's just a bunch of ice. There are reasons to think that the earth's axis wasn't 0 degrees in recent times - there are seasonal deposits in lake beds (varves), and differences in oxygen isotopes (O16 vs O18) in ice (arctic or antarctic) that is seasonal, and there are hard to account for if you don't have seasons! Do have links for any of this?

By that I assume his problems were all behind him, if you take my meaning.

You don't want to assume that, and you obviously haven't been around any really big, industrial-sized capacitors, or heard any "war stories" from people who have. It's the people who assume that the big ones can be treated like the little ones that get into trouble. You don't take chances that the capacitor might be mislabelled or anything, follow proper safety protocol, and you don't get hurt.

More importantly' date=' for purposes of whether you melt the wire, etc. P = I[sup']2[/sup]R, so if you drop the current by 10, you drop the power by 100.

It's also shown in Maxwell's equations - the EM speed of propagation is invariant under coordinate transforms,which was a big clue for Einstein with relativity in trying to make the transformations work properly for other aspects of physics. That light was an EM wave was a fairly recent discovery at that time, and I think a lot of kinks were in the process of being worked out. Physics doesn't answer the fundamental question of "why" in the attempts to explain the behavior of nature - just the "how."

Keep in mind that MS came out with Word, which was a business application, and probably helped them get their foothold. Windows didn't instantly dominate - that took a little time.

I don't find that to be true at all.

Yes, the field amplitude, or strength, changes with time and position. I don't think you'll get much argument that there's a lot we don't understand about the universe, but the nature of light is fairly well understood, and there isn't a lot of basic research going into it. Exotic stuff, yes. I may be off base here, but it seems that you want a short and simple answer that meshes with everyday things that you observe with the naked eye - where waves are waves and particles are particles, and never the twain shall meet. QM isn't like that. But that doesn't mean it's not well understood.

Diet soda, usually cola. Usually Pepsi, though I'll drink Coke if that's all that's available. Occasionally Dr Pepper or Mt Dew. I hate coffee. Yeccch.

My take: Apple made marketing mistakes in the early days. They make the hardware and the operating system, while Microsoft just makes software and has deals in place with manufacturers who make the boxes to make things that will run windows. That gave them an edge in getting into the business market, since the boxes were commodities and could be made cheaply. There's a saying that was prevalent a few years back - "Nobody ever got fired for buying IBM products" - they were a known entity; they weren't going bankrupt anytime soon, which is not something you could necessarily say about almost anybody else. And they made machines that ran DOS and then windows. Not mac. So business people could buy IBM PCs without getting into real trouble, even if they weren't the best product. Nobody knew that mich since it was a relatively new product. Apple eventually let others make hardware, but ran into quality and compatibility problems, similar to some problems that plague PCs. This hurt them more, and MS grabbed more of the market. Apple eventually stopped licensing, and went back to making all of their stuff. But once MS had a large part of the business market, they got most of it because of compatibility issues. Years ago, especially, computers didn't play nicely with each other. People started buying home computers, and got what they used at work. More market share for Windows. So now, if you're writing a game (or really any) program, you tend to do it for the large fraction of Windows users, rather than the small fraction of Mac users. Maybe you port it to the Mac afterwards. But there aren't that many programs that run only on a Mac. The best product doesn't always win. Quality-wise beta is better than VHS, but VHS won the videotape market. because Sony was too protective of beta and it didnt get widely adopted.

Two guys, standing at night on a bridge after having had a few pints, both decide to relieve themselves over the side. The first, in an attempt to impress, says, "Water sure is cold." The second replies, "Yeah. Deep, too."

Seconded. There is no "second law" for information theory.

How much and in what form? It's present in low concentrations in many rocks, such as granite. You even have a small amount in your body.