Radical Edward

no need. I have been studying Giant squids for years, and see no reason to present my research. the people of the future will thank us.

zarkov. people pay to look at circus freak shows. this does not mean that being in a circus freak show is a good thing.

cos E = mc^2 is a simplification. the proper derived formula is: E = (p^2)(c^2) + (m^2)(c^4) (p is momentum) so in the limit of zero rest mass, all energy has to be in the momentum of the object, in this case, the photon. an object at rest, simplifies to the more conventional E = mc^2

plus all those tentacles just meant that the squid could just spin round in the air. this does not use the conventional 'helicopter' type approach, but by slowly increasing the rate taht they spin at, they generate Radical Spin-Anti-Gravity allowing them to levitate.

I despair. I really do.

that much I figured out, on account of it not being a real language...

huh?

English, funnily enough.

get one in your own language then. what is your first language?

are you really going to read some books on physics now then?

heh, exactly.

hence the large surface area for a dehumidifier.... desalination is far more logical.

there is more than one group working on a topic you know. plus my main gripe is with the peer review system anyway. it would wreck that. no-one would buy any journal that published crap science like that.

images are fine, on the proviso that there is a rule stating that they must be relevant to the topic, and preferably not 1024x768 true colour combining some forums is good too...

I posted these before, but I like repeating myself. http://www.scientecmatrix.com/seghers/tecma/scientecmatrix.nsf/_/583A4822C7CA5B3CC1256B9E00354968 http://english.pravda.ru/main/2002/04/11/27547.html zarkov's dehumidification idea is most likely wrong, because in a dehumidifier you want to expose as much of it to the atmosphere as possible, rather than hope all your air goes into tiny little vents. I know alot more about the pramids, but it isn't suited to this thread.

there is a danger in trying to teach children about too much. and then of course there are just some things that you can't teach - some things that are up to the parents. sadly of course, many of the parents are inadequate.

oh I dunno. It can be good too, but the other half has to have a sense of humour about it. I remember some funny occasions with me and my ex, me saying the 'sciency' thing when I should have been doing the romantic thing.. heh. all clean like, but I think I will leave those little anecdotes for another time unless people really want to hear them

shame no-one wants to talk about this

no no, there is no serious charge separation like you suggest. for example a wire with current flowing along it has a magnetic flux around the wire. electromagnets are coils of wire which use this effect. ferromagnetism (ferro being iron) is more complex, and is reliant on the properties of the atoms themselves, but essentially it is the same thing. what is this microcosmic you have mentioned quite a bit, I keep meaning to ask..

heh, fair enough then. I though you were getting a bit negative about the whole thing!

1) what laws would those be? 2) huh? Special Relativity is based on a) the premise that the laws of physics should be the same in any non accelerating frames of reference and b) the speed of light is constant. General Relativity basically adds the point that you cannot tell whether you are accelerating due to a) some propulsion such as a rocket etc. or b) the gravitational attraction of a planet.

just answer the question will you?

why bother anything? because I want him to clarify himself. there is no point in him just using any old words to describe something, unless specific meaning is attributed to them. now magnetism and poles already have established meanings, and I don't think he is using them.

in what way?

I'm going to ask again, what is a magnetic pole. the reason I feel compelled to ask this, is because a dipole is two poles.