J'Dona

Merry Newton Day all! And a happy new zero orbital displacement!

Natural selection isn't a theorem, but rather a theory, since there's a difference between the two, so unless bloodhound allows it I don't think it counts. Pythagoras's theorem will probably win, but I'll suggest the fundamental theorem of calculus (basically the statement that differentiation and integration are inverses of each other), since the relationship is used quite a lot and maybe more so than Pythagoras's theorem is in real life.

I think the rule is that you use "me" or "I" in the same way as you would use it if the other person wasn't there (I'm getting this from my father, who's an English teacher and has virtually more grammar books in his office than there are words in the English language.) For example: I like contraceptives. My clone and I like contraceptives. "My clone and me like contraceptives" would be incorrect, since you don't go around saying "Me like contraceptives" unless you want people to skip the pills and just have you sterilised. Similarly: ...and some beer for me. ...and some beer for Bob and me. "...and some beer for Bob and I" sounds reasonable, but if the rule applies then I think you can agree that "...and some beer for I" is incorrect, unless you want a bottle forced up your nose.

I've only read the excerpt for non-subscribers, but that sounds an awful like a cosmic string. The idea is that one way of detecting it would be by the appearance of pairs of stars, galaxies, and the like as light is bent around it on both sides, and that seems similar to what is being described. I don't know that cosmic strings are related to superstring theory though. I'll see if I can find more online.

Great post! Though it's going to sound like I don't actually think so if I ask about one of the points. This is just a clarifying point for me:

Ooh, ooh, me! I'd definitely like to join, as long as I don't have to play you in the first round or something; I'm still hurting from the last time.

Yep, that's why I thought a separate forum might be better suited, since short stories don't make up a scientific discussion and shouldn't really be on a science forum, and might be too big to warrant the use of space in GD and in server memory. Unless you mean having a story thread but only posting the links to them from other sites, which would be a good compromise, since scientific feedback on stories would help, and the links would draw in more readers and feedback than would otherwise be possible.

I suppose I could use this space to post a link to the miniforum I'm trying to start, which is basically the exact same thing as you've suggested! The only difference is that it's meant more for posting stories and not as much for general discussion of stories, at least not until things get moving and I could start posting more general discussion "threads", though the idea was that people with good technical knowledge, like here on SFN, would be able to post and leave feedback on the science and such. (You'll also notice the several entries where I repeatedly postpone the opening date—even though it's really just because nobody was posting—and making a big diplomatic fuss for the one or two members.) Of course, it's just a LiveJournal community, but for the small scale of the community it would work well. I'm leaving tomorrow and won't be back until about the 15th, so I won't be able to help with the story thread or anything else until then. EDIT: Bear in mind that I'm mentioning this here mainly to offer an alternative to creating a new thread (or much more likely forum) for stories, which was proposed in one form or another earlier and was met with mixed feelings because there are simply already a large number of forums on SFN, and it's not quite as scientific a topic as others.

Reading some of these posts it makes me glad that my siblings and I were homeschooled for most of our lives, after our parents got fed up with our schools. Out of the four real schools I went to, the first I was expelled or otherwise removed from (and you don't even want to know why), the second was kindergarten (nothing much to speak of), the third held me back with stupid-level work (maths worksheets with questions like "4 + 0 = ?"), and the time I spent at the fourth were some of the best years of my life, since it was then further education and some individual thought was allowed. It's interesting, Lance, because we were/are both homeschooled, and we were/are both in the situation where we could get into college two years early because of it.

I buy it on and off, but I'm getting a year's subscription this Christmas so I voted yes.

8. Take a spacecraft and see the Earth from space.

To answer that question, people don't get banned from SFN for simply disagreeing; that would be contrary to the principles upon which the whole of science and its associated forums of discussion are based. If they did get banned for that it was a mistake. People DO get banned if they show blatant disregard for the scientific method. Most people who get banned from SFN are pseudoscientists who did not appreciate the value of evidence, proof, or open-mindedness, and who would thereby destroy any chance of meaningful debate as they were not willing to consider any new information. Most discussions like that are confined to the pseudoscience forum, which serves as something of a pressure valve for heated and ofttimes humorous threads, or the religion forum, where discussion is very much more based on personal beliefs than on science. Understandably, the mods are very strict in keeping such discussion out of the main threads, to the point that they might appear to be somewhat closed-minded for banning someone with a different opinion. But if you look at the member's posts there would have been good cause, as that person would have been refusing to accept logical arguments or responding with unfounded opinions or rudeness. After years of experience in watching and dealing with these people, they are quick to gain a moderator's ire, and in their banning SFN often looks to be run by an oligarchy. And it is, but it's a rather good one, see, and we all know that if we're really serious enough about scientific debate to debate in a scientific fashion, it's all good and jolly and Faberge eggs for tea.

Schrodngr's_cat: Filthy stink worm botter ebayzon maphack user!!! Nah, I'm only joking, I don't really care. I'm just proud to say I was one of the only players on D2 who was 100% legit. Seriously, I really am just joking! I don't even play D2 any more. In fact, I'll give you all my items if you want, since they're just going to get deleted otherwise.

Uh, okay. I know exactly where you're coming from, but I'll still take that a little personally just because I'm Canadian, and so I happened to know already with a little pride about how large the given area was (about half the size of Europe). It's not obvious but one of the links on the page with the map also leads to a page that states how far it has moved in some 200 years or so, and approximately how far it moves per year, which gives a little idea as to the scale. Of course the site that made the mistake was itself Canadian, which saddens me.

The 10% to 25% figure I gave was from: http://www.geolab.nrcan.gc.ca/geomag/reversals_e.shtml Double-checking that, it does seem that they are saying it would drop to that level, though that's the only link I've seen so far with that figure. The image I linked to was from this page: http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2003/29dec_magneticfield.htm It mentions that the magnetic field strength has decreased by 10% since the 19th century, which might be the figure you were thinking about or just something else. Incidentally, following links on that page about the map comes up with this: http://www.geolab.nrcan.gc.ca/geomag/long_mvt_nmp2_e.shtml It shows the pole moving both North and South with no real order, and one of the links on the way to it shows a projected course passing through and hitting Northern Russia in about 2050. It seems like normal fluctuations to me, like you say, as opposed to something to do with a pole reversal.

Here's a map of the change over time too. It's moving pretty quickly: Sorry, posted just as you updated.

Actually it happens quite often, on average about once every 700,000 years, and they say that we are now overdue for the next one since it's been 780,000 years since, though the gap varies a lot. But if you look at the past excinction record, there doesn't seem to be any correlation with the magnetic pole shift in the past and it, so I don't imagine it has a huge effect on animal life on Earth. As for mechincal devices, some things like compasses would obviously be messed up and some especially sensitive pieces of scientific equipment might be affected, though by the time it happens technology would have advanced to such a point that it won't be much of an issue. The time taken for reversal can take up to several thousand years, however, during which time the field strength is 25% to 10% normal levels (though solar wind can set up a temporary one I hear) so there would be a point during which compasses would be pretty slow to turn, if they even had a solid direction to turn in. I'd have thought that this would affect birds and animals who make migrations by following the magnetic field, though they seemed to have managed all right in the past.

I don't expect more than two people on the whole of SFN to be interested (probably both with 1 post, joined in May 2003, and no visits since June 2003), so I wasn't trying to interest you personally. You don't need to join to leave comments though. The filth sibling isn't responding to AIM, no doubt because he's watching the Simpsons or at the pub. I'll keep bugging him though... May I ask though, how do those Wikipedia links you're referring to work? I didn't think it had any ads.

I'm going to go bug my brother about it now so that he starts posting on your forum again! He probably only stopped because we went to California for ten days shortly after I showed it to him, and he probably got mixed up with college work as soon as he was back. ...Since this thread technically doesn't state which forum it's for, I'll post a link to mine as well! It's a bit dirt and only has one (1) member (excluding myself and one other who doesn't post), but I only intend for it to reach about 40 or so anyway. It's a creative writing forum where people can share actual work and leave/receive feedback, like a creative writing class except free and always running, so that memebrs can constantly improve. Here it is: http://logorrhoea.livejournal.com/ And yes, it's just a livejournal community... though I do actually pay for it.

To quote the short story "The Long Watch" by Robert A. Heinlein: Now that's just sci-fi, but it gives some idea as to the dangers of plutonium, and sounds about right with YT2095's figure of 0.5 nanograms. Given that it's also the most valuable metal on the planet (as far as I know), I don't think it's used in therapeutic medicine, so it probably doesn't have a therapeutic index. I'm sure there are laws against using it for anything other than power production, scientific research, or *ahem* foreign affairs.

It's a bit of a trivial thing to make a thread over, but does anyone here know of any good online revision or testing sites for subjects like physics, mathematics, and chemistry? Not necessarily ones with revision notes themselves, but ones with questions and/or quizzes would be helpful, and I'm sure some of the people here are into those sites and know of a few good ones that would take a while to Google. I ask because I'm doing some quick revision of previous work in preparation for university interviews, and it's been almost two years since I finished the A-Level so I'm a little rusty. I'm reading through textbooks from about 25 years ago, but they're so much more in-depth that I might not be able to cover everything, hence I could use some quick sites.

It's a bit of a trivial thing to make a thread over, but does anyone here know of any good online revision or testing sites for subjects like physics, mathematics, and chemistry? Not necessarily ones with revision notes themselves, but ones with questions and/or quizzes would be helpful, and I'm sure some of the people here are into those sites and know of a few good ones that would take a while to Google. I ask because I'm doing some quick revision of previous work in preparation for university interviews, and it's been almost two years since I finished the A-Level so I'm a little rusty. I'm reading through textbooks from about 25 years ago, but they're so much more in-depth that I might not be able to cover everything, hence I could use some quick sites.

Here's another useful link to help in composing logical arguments, though it seems better suited for the debating forum. Fallacious Arguments

Here's another useful link to help in composing logical arguments, though it seems better suited for the debating forum. Fallacious Arguments