ewmon

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn: ... and a corollary is that: When authorities kill what they cannot tolerate, what does that teach our children? And, currently in America, most killings end up in plea agreements, which is a swift and cheap conclusion. However, due to the lack of murder trials, society never learns what actually happened, and the legal system fails to advance toward its goal of perfect justice. The death penalty also forces some people plead guilty to something they didn't do rather than risk getting the death penalty. Federal Justice William Campbell:

News and video of mysterious missile launch off California coast Well, here's a one-of-a-kind news item (let's hope). Any real news from the military is missing from this situation. Someone (ATCs, NORAD, etc) must know where the launch came from, how fast it was going, and where the missile came down ... they're just not saying right now. They're obvious not concerned that it's some sort of threat, so I'm leaning toward it being a US military mistake. Oops!! From it's trajectory, they can estimate its minimum weight and size.

Likewise, European settlers introduced the now-familiar earthworm and honeybee (the designated "state insect" in 17 US states) to North America, which have profoundly transformed the continent.

Let's look at the basics. Time of flight (ie, regarding which object "lands first") is inversely related to velocity, and velocity is the integral of the acceleration, which is caused by the sum of the forces, which in turn, is the force of gravity minus the drag. For all intents and purposes, the force of gravity is a constant depending on the object's mass (although it does vary by extremely small amounts depending on its altitude). Traditionally, D = ½·CD·p·V2·S D is drag CD is the coefficient of drag (due to its shape) p (rho) = air density V = velocity S = cross-sectional area The drag is a function of the object's shape, velocity and cross-sectional area (although the density of the air does change by extremely small amounts depending on the altitude). With shape, area and air density remaining the same, drag becomes a function of velocity, and velocity is an integral of the sum of the forces. So, for relatively small drops in altitude, the time of flight is a function of the object's mass (–), shape (±) and cross-sectional area (+), where the sign in parentheses shows the variable's correlation to the time of flight. Terminal velocity occurs when the force of drag perfectly counteracts the force of gravity (ie, the sum of forces equals zero, and no further acceleration occurs). Technically speaking, a falling object will approach but never attain its terminal velocity. Computing the time of flight involves integrating it through the drop as the velocity increases.

So you're pointing to "the spirit of the law" as compared to "the letter of the law". Regarding separation of church and state, let me offer a real-life example. At an early time in Massachusetts, the churches couldn't decide together on how often to observe the Lord's Supper (bread and wine) -- every Sunday, or every other Sunday, or once a month, or etc. So they agreed to ask Governor Winthrop (who served on and off between 1630 and 1649) for his opinion on it. Today, a governor ordering or even suggesting operational details for churches (or temples or mosques) simply would not happen. Americans are largely religious (mostly some form of Christianity) and moral, and they hold their elected officials to high moral standards. So it make sense that they would want fellow believers in office ... especially in the Bible Belt states.

Let's not forget salt, the third leg of the flavor triad. Free capitalism will find ways to entice people to buy products they don't need.

We're related to apes and other animals, but "related" does not mean "exactly the same". There's aspects that are the same, and there's aspects that are different How we differ is what's at stake here. For example, some endogenous molecules are exactly the same, some are not, and it also depends upon the other species. The major systems of the body can be similar, though not the same. Overall, humans are obviously significantly different than any other animal; most parts are not interchangeable. Humans and chimps share about 99% of the same genome, and all humans share about 99.9% of the same genome — about a magnitude of difference between human-human variation and human-chimp variation. So, is it really any wonder why most people find some animal behavior repulsive?

Sorry, I have yet to use LC and have done very little precipitating of proteins.

Perhaps it's our nature to think ourselves "above" animals. Consider all that animals do and then ask yourself why humans don't do the same thing. For example: some use their tongues as their washcloths AND their toilet paper, some (like rabbits) eat the own feces, some (like dogs) eat other animals' feces, some eat carrion, some eat each other, some eat their young when distressed, some males kill the (unrelated) young of the females they take into their harems, some males (there's plenty of them) form harems, all of them pay no taxes and take/use/eat/*&^% whatever and whenever they want, it's a dog-eat-dog world out there, etc, etc. Saying that "animals do it" is reaching down the evolutionary scale for excuses. Remember, that we "ascended" from the [other] animals. So then, what do we aspire to be? Animals? We're at the pinnacle of evolution and there's nothing greater to inspire us. I think that's one reason why some people become moral/spiritual/etc.

Unless you have access to a chromatography column, it'll probably need to be precipitated out, so I googled alpha amylase precipitation and found PURIFICATION OF SALIVARY α-AMYLASE

... and behind the generation and upkeep of SOPs, you will find guidelines, authors, approvers, responsible authorities, regulators (eg, the FDA), review procedures (probably an SOP itself), review cycles, a history of revisions (electronic, microfiched and/or hardcopy), etc.

Here's a cool website: Causes of Color

As it stands, marriage is a legal "contract" with verbal promises made in front of witnesses (although not usually recorded). A recorded contract is typically called a "pre-nuptial agreement". Any party officially wanting out of the contract sue to do so ... people literally "sue" for divorce. Being a contract is why marriages of underage parties (<18yo in the US) require parental consent and/or a court order, etc, because any contract involving minors is not binding. Marriages are unusual contracts. Most people enter into such contracts, some more than once; it is expected for people to do so. It is a social contract, and one of cultural importance, typically defining a couple seeking to start and raise a family. The law defines it as a contract of sexual and emotional exclusivity, and a breach of this exclusivity is called "infidelity" and "bigamy". It is a contract of mutual support, and a breach of this is called "abandonment". Other contracts are not necessarily "recognized" or rubber-stamped by any government, although the parties can turn to the judicial system under contractual law to seek remedies of wrongs committed. Most of the time, two or more parties simply enter into a contract on their own. Major corporate takeovers sometimes require government approval, but not otherwise. Perhaps the question should be: Why should government define/approve the marriage contract? Many nations have already flipped on the biggest "tabu" — that is, dropping the one-man-one-woman requirement. Why shouldn't so-called "confirmed bachelors" make it official? A Taiwanese woman "married" herself. What's so "illegal" with polygamy among consenting adults? A billionaire who wants 5 wives could engage in "parallel" polygamy instead of "serial" polygamy. Don't people already say, "Anne is my first wife, Betty is my second wife, Claire is my third wife, Donna is my fourth wife, and Esther is my fifth wife"? The punishment for polygamy would be five mother-in-laws. Probably the most serious reason why governments define/approve marriage contracts is to secure stable, long-term situations under which the next generation is created and raised and, thus, secure the future of of the population.

Some biopharmaceuticals are meant to have such precise applications, especially when they supply otherwise endogenous substances that the person's body fails to make in appropriate amounts/forms/etc, thus resulting in the disease/syndrome/etc that the maker intends the biopharmaceutical to control.

Richard Quest describes an ingenious and very useful device called a hydraulic ram. I finally found more on the device I described — Hero's Fountain invented by Hero of Alexandria (a Greek mathematician living in Roman Egypt, b.~10AD, d.~70AD), shown here in a simpler arrangement where the fountain's basin also acts as my Chamber A. The device just sits there doing nothing, but water poured into the basin fountain produces the spray.

Gametes carry half the genetic information of a normal cell. The interesting follow-on discussion I thought would happen involves how sperm and eggs survive (and do what they do) with only half the normal genetic information.

The ancient portable fountain in question consisted of three chambers below the fountain's basin, and it simply worked on pressure. Label the chambers A, B and C from top to bottom. Chambers A and B contain water, and Chamber A is vented to the atmosphere to allow the chamber to drain as follows. Chamber A connects to Chamber C, and water drains from Chamber A to Chamber C, building pressure in Chamber C. The airspace in Chamber C is connected to the airspace in Chamber B, transferring the air/pressure from Chamber C to Chamber B. The bottom of Chamber B connects to a spout above the fountain basin,and the pressure in Chamber B pushes the water up and out the spout, falling back into the basin. I might be able to provide a diagram if needed. The Wangensteen suction works in a somewhat reverse manner, and provides suction instead of pressure.

According to catholic.com, "God’s gift of the sex act, along with its pleasure and intimacy, must not be abused by deliberately frustrating its natural end—procreation." (which is what I remember from my catholic upbringing.) Somewhat like bulimia or starch blockers with regards to eating. The catholic.com webpage also states that "until 1930, all Protestant denominations agreed with the Catholic Church’s teaching condemning contraception as sinful." The Seventh Lambeth Conference in 1930 resulted in the Protestant's first break on the subject by approving the use of birth control in limited circumstances.

Here's a well-known example — Peppered moth evolution This is true for all traits (not just coloration), and includes the senses (such as touch, smell, and sight), motor control (muscles, bones, tendons, and ligaments), intelligence (comprehension, abstract thinking, memory, etc), etc.

You have a kind heart, but I've known three people diagnosed with Dependent Personality Disorder, and they did not act as you described. These three could not function properly without supervision, and all had exceptionally strong relationships with, and dependencies upon, their mothers. Examples. One, a intelligent highly-habitual middle-aged man, could not do his own clothes shopping, and he literally wore out his clothes until a co-worker arranged for someone to take him shopping. Another, an average woman, could not lead a normal married life without daily coaching from her mother. And a third, a very active, highly-moral woman, actually suffered a mental breakdown when her mother died, because she had been her connection with reality, and it resulted in her "going off the deep end" (alcoholism, drugging, violence, criminality, etc). IMO, the person you describe seems to have been raised to believe that he doesn't count for anything, and you mentioned his reaction to girlfriends, so he may be specifically enslaved to always please the woman in his life. Again, a nod toward his mother's involvement in his condition. These things can develop out of a perverted sense of "Don't be selfish", or "Always being nice to women", etc. Everyone needs an ego, and IMO, it's pathological not to have one. The future? Most women reject men who are too subservient, even to them, so he may end up with some weirdo. He seems to know how he is, but also that his sense of subservience is stronger than his sense of self. IMO, considering all, he needs professional help that takes him back to early his childhood. But, as with the joke about how many psychologists it takes to change a bulb, only one ... but the bulb must want to change.

Like any fluid, air needs a place to go, and it more easily flows through a room (that is, into and out of it), rather than only into it. Your window is small, which limits your options (without installing a larger window in its place or installing another window elsewhere in the room). So, buy a small window fan (8- to 12-inch blade diameter). If it has an adjustable width, adjust the width to its narrowest or maybe remove the adjustable “wings” altogether. Open the sash and install the fan on one side of the window, leaving the other side open. See if you can tell if the wind outside tends to blow right or left. Try putting the fan in the “downwind” side of the window ... the side toward which the wind blows. With this extra effort, the wind will tend to blow away the exhausted room air. If you install the fan in the “upwind” side, the wind will tend to blow the exhausted air across the open part of window, and it will be drawn in again. To make sure the fresh air doesn’t go right back out again, adjust the fan’s vanes to shoot the air away from the open side of the window or, between the fan and the opening, install a straight partition or bent or curved deflector (even cardboard helps) which extends into the room several inches to a foot.

I've taught ESL to non-European Hispanics. While most of North America and Europe enjoy a very high literacy rate, most of South America does not, and I found many of them who were illiterate in their own native language.

To begin with, it's harassment, and nowadays even more seriously so because, "being connected" with electronic communications (especially the Internet) means that there's fewer places to hide from the perpetrators. It used to be that kids could get away from bullies by simply going home. But now bullies invade domestic space with texts, Internet posts, etc. Also, without domestic space acting as a buffer zone between bullying and sleep, I think the bullying interrupts their sleep more than anyone realizes. Without really realizing the implications, parents have provided their children a quantum leap in connectivity. It can benefit them if healthy, but it can harm them if unhealthy. Parents have also abandoned their supervision of their children's social interactions. It was different when the kids were on the back porch or backyard, talking, laughing or even arguing and mom was cooking in the kitchen or dad was tinkering in the garage and either could get a general flavor of the situation. We just don't have that anymore. I'm not a strict disciplinarian, but I think a lot of childhood can be lost when domestic time is invaded. A generation ago, there was a big hoopla about "latchkey kids". I just don't hear a peep about them anymore.

Just on general principle, if something is theoretically possible but not done in practice, one would want to ask what obstacles exist in its implementation that prevent it from being put into practice (ie, made practical). As of yet, I have not heard of anyone say, "But for this difficulty implementing it, we could have teleportation."

Many thanks for sharing this letter. Although the most surprising part, its should also be the most comforting. In countries where refrigeration is virtually non-existent, the easiest way to keep meat fresh is to keep it on the hoof. So, one would actually want to see it healthy and grazing one day and on a spit over a fire the next. That's also why, in such countries, you get to select your animal at the meat market or restaurant before they prepare it. Then you know it's fresh. These people simply live closer to life than we do.