ewmon

It's not really a bridge circuit because of R5. You may want to use Kirchhoff's current law that deals with the currents flowing into and out of nodes.

Is this homework? What are your thoughts about this circuit so far? What have you tried? It requires a couple of assumptions and working through some algebra using some laws of electricity that you probably know.

Tom, I've read about vortex tubes, and I'm interested in your project. An inch more or less shouldn't affect the tube's operation much/dramatically. A vacuum clearly shows something wrong. I haven't read about plugging either tube with anything. It seems a matter of drawing the outputs from either the perimeter or center of the tube. There's no moving or "spinning" parts that I know, and damaging the inside surfaces may adversely affect its operation. Insulation shouldn't make much difference. There shouldn't be any oscillations or cycling; the operation should be continuous. What's inside your tubes? What does your diaphragm look like? What internally distinguished the cold end from the hot end?

To begin with, this sounds like homework, so I'm staying away from any direct answers. I'm not ignorant of computers, and I'm not being a jerk, just cautious. Besides, there's information about the project that's not quite kosher, and I'm trying to draw it out of you. As I understand it, you intend to run various numbers/types of programs in the background along with benchmarking software that apparently will display some sort of video, and you intend to see a correlations among the number/type of programs, the image refresh rate and the electric consumption. I suppose the image refresh rate will be measured and shown/recorded by the benchmarking software. But how do you intend to measure the electricity from the wall, and what about it do you intend to measure?

Please describe the terms FPS and electricity in more detail.

BTW, this trick question has evolved in many ways, but it was once: Which is heavier, a pound of gold or a pound of feathers? The answer is a pound of feathers. Feathers are measured using the avoirdupois system (ie, 16 oz per pound). Gold is measured using the troy system (ie, 12 oz per pound). 16 oz is greater than 12 oz; thus, a pound of feathers is heavier.

The first point is to use standard terminology. Google something such as gestation lifespan. Find a website with data in tables like this one. Copy and paste the whole table into a spreadsheet. Replace cell contents with average values (round to whole numbers). Create an XY (Scatter) chart of the data. For best viewing of the data, use the log-log format. Choose a trendline. Display the trendline's equation on the chart. Come back with any questions on how to do this.

The speakers of the English language as a whole seemed to have dominated the pronunciation/spelling of words until Samuel Johnson's dictionary in 1755, and so, until then, spelling was inconsistent to some degree, and tended to be influenced by local pronunciations and spelling customs. Johnson's dictionary drove Noah Webster to want to produce an American dictionary, which he believed would help unify the various far-flung parts of his newly-formed country, making it stronger and more successful. He spent 27 years producing it, which culminated in its publication in 1828. In the process, he learned 26 languages, including Anglo-Saxon, Greek, Latin, Hebrew, Arabic, and Sanskrit. He also simplified complex spelling rules, which is how some American words have slightly different spelling than their British counterparts.

As with almost any language, the users of the language decide. Look at the histories of some "kn-" words, where the first entry on that page describes its general evolution. A few of these words are related to one another. For example, it's no mystery that knitting involves some sort of knotting. The "k" was pronounced in previous centuries. A few related words came to modern usage still pronouncing the "k" or its equivalent "g". When Catholics perform "genuflection", the linguistic expert can see that the act is a "knee flex" (genu = knee, flection = flex). Likewise, the linguistic expert can clearly see that an "agnostic" is someone who does not know (a- = not, gnostic = know), or that a "polygon" is a geometric figure with many angles (poly- = many, gon = knee/angle).

In a sense, electric breakdown happens with "static" electricity as your hand approaches a doorknob, etc. The air acts as an insulator until the gap narrows enough for the charge to break down the insulating properties of the air.

I have several years of experience in this field. Expect to test positive for at least a month and maybe longer. I am familiar with several websites that discuss cheating drug tests, and I found various errors in them, some of them rather ridiculous. I don't know of any website that was 100% correct. Your body will release THC into bodily fluids regardless of weigh loss or gain. Using diuretics can result in a test failure. Depending on the testing regime, bald-headed people may need to provide armpit hair, which will result in a test failure. Never drink Visine. The Erowid website mentions spiking a urine sample with Visine, which can result in a test failure. Substituting warm water for urine can result in a test failure. Employers and schools almost certainly require drug tests that detect both drugs and adulterants.

You make vague generalizations, so please explain yourself.

Hopefully without seeming too extreme, I think that academic cheating (at least on a major scale by either the student or the provider) should be illegal, at least in post-secondary education. We certainly would all scream and shout about someone with a fake medical degree practicing medicine, or someone with a fake law degree practicing law,or someone with a fake engineering degree designing a nuclear power plant. Fake is fake — someone cheats to obtain credentials not otherwise deserved.

Wow, you paint evangelicals and conservatives with a broad brush — and it gives a false impression. And no wonder, because it's the very few wackos who make the news, while plenty of evangelicals and conservatives are out there doing wonderful things that don't make the news because their work doesn't have enough "shock value" that the world so eagerly craves. Consider for example, the Mennonite Disaster Service, whose volunteers — without any fanfare — appear after a disaster, perform their services, and go home. Then there's that govt/media guy who purposely didn't want to show Christians doing good things. And consider the mindnumbing grace and forgiveness by the Amish immediately following their school massacre. Even during the massacre, one of the girls volunteered her life to save others.

Someone needs to show that they can be sued. Do gays really want caterers grimacing and shaking their heads in disgust at their reception? Do gays really want to be told that their entire relationship is naturally repugnant instead of trying to resolve the complaint by one of them that he's always on the bottom* ? * A gay neighbor complained to me that he was "always on the bottom".

I'm a Christian, and this reminds me of the wailing by [other] Christians about legalized abortions supposedly violating physicians so-called "Conscience Clause". Nowhere in the law does it force physicians to perform abortions, and that includes training to perform abortions. Do you really want a physician performing any operation that s/he find morally repugnant and/or has refused to train for? I certainly don't. So, nowhere is anyone forced to cater gay weddings or counsel gays couples, just as churches are not forced to perform gay marriages. Other caterers and counselors may accept these clients, and in doing so may make more money than Catholic ones, but Catholics aren't forced to do this work. No person in any profession can be forced to do work that they find morally repugnant. The only fact coming out of this is that people with strong moral consciences have the right for their moral conscience to override (to some extent) the laws of the land. We have conscientious objectors who can decline military conscription, Native Indians who can use controlled substances because their religion requires it, potential jurors are dropped from jury pools (for example, if they could never find someone guilty of a crime that could result in the death penalty), Amish don't pay into the government's social security system (although they must have their own provisions), etc. Another cause of rejection that I've run into is so-called lack of skill. I went to a barber one day (who happened to be black), and he refused to cut my hair because, as he told me, he "can't cut straight hair". Was his claim true, or was it merely a convenient way to maintain a bigoted attitude? Could I actually force him to cut my hair? Would I really want to?

Mr Mormon, please explain to us as to whether and where the Wikipedia description of the Book of Mormon is wrong. Specifically, among other things, Wikipedia states: The one reason I have consistently heard throughout my life as to why most Christians perceive the Mormons as non-Christians is because, in addition to the Bible, the Mormons consider as Holy Scripture the Book of Mormon, which of course, Christians consider non-canonical.

The brain's cortex contains the processes of perception, judgment, memory, etc. An increase in the cortex's size results in an increase in the processes of perception, judgment, memory, etc. Science has generally concluded that the cortex became convoluted to allow the skull to pass through the birth canal.

Well, you're right in a way. I meant originally that I couldn't find why Maryland was headed toward bankruptcy. Now, for example, America has plenty of home foreclosures everywhere, not just in one state. Then again, maybe all the states were close to bankruptcy and Maryland was simply the lemming closest to the cliff.

Actually, I had read it somewhere in the distant past about George Peabody assisting Baltimore from bankruptcy, but on the Internet, I only find this claim about Maryland. Many sites can be found by googling "George Peabody" Maryland bankrupt, and in particular, one from Maryland's state archives.

Thank you everyone. This places MD's bankruptcy in perspective.

Marqq. you're absolutely correct: The probability of drawing a 1 or a 2 as the first ball is 1.000 (ie, unity, or an absolute certainty). This is a common misinterpretation of these kinds of problems, and I'm glad you raised it. The problem does not ask for this probability, but instead, it asks for the probability that {all the 11 drawn balls are 1s} OR(+) {all the 11 drawn balls are 2s}. To quote myself more precisely: So, this is what I meant by taking a word problem and restating it with a particular form of English (or any other language).

As to you BS in Biology, you could work many jobs in the biopharmaceutical industry, and once skilled there in chemistry, your career could expand into other chemistry work. Also, green chemistry, in vivo research, etc. Right now, your could search bachelor biology on employment websites to get a real life sense of the jobs, the employers, and their locations. I would guess the jobs would range from outdoorsy Fisheries & Wildlife jobs to ultra-high-tech R&D laboratory jobs.

DStebbins, you're having difficulty "translating" a word problem into an algebraic equation. So, here's my method of "translating" word problems into algebra. The word "AND" translates into multiplication (×). The word "OR" translates into addition (+). The words "MUST BE" translate into a probability (that is, the probability based on the circumstances given to you, which you've described to us). At this point, you need to re-write/re-think the word problem to conform with the words used above: You seek the probability of an outcome of all 1's OR all 2's. So, for example, to draw all 1's, the first ball MUST BE a 1, AND the second ball MUST BE a 1, AND the third ... etc And that's pretty much all you need to know. I have not given you the answer, I have not given you all the work you must do, and I have not computed even one probability. You must compute individual probabilities and combine them appropriately according to their relationship with each other as I have shown above. I don't like saying that anything is "easy" with math, so you won't hear that from me. However, I will say that this kind of math is one of methodically translating and calculating. Hopefully at some point, the reasoning behind my method will become intuitively obvious. PS — DStebbins, please ask a moderator to move this to the Homework Help sub-forum.

In a time of financial problems for the US, some historical perspective here.... answers.com I've looked around the Internet, but cannot find any other details. Can anyone shed some light on this near-catastrophe?