Sayonara

Why should a natural law preventing a paradox have any special status, as opposed to, say, the laws that make gravity such a drag?

I don't think the assessors will be looking for a complete solution to every ecosphere problem. What they will want to see evidence of is that the entrants understand the problems that an ecosphere would face, and that they have researched different approaches for dealing with those problems.

It really isn't. Chance has its role, particularly where mutations have a bearing, but evolution is far from random.

Would a lensing effect from the atmosphere also apply?

Well no, but the "bang" might be what propelled the spanner AT your head. manta, when you ask "how does it start", do you mean what are the historical origins of modern science, or do you mean how does any given scientific enquiry begin?

I'm guessing this is homework? Whenever you hear "blah blah number of atoms blah blah certain volume blah blah at STP", you can generally be sure that the question is going to get you to use molarity: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mole_(unit) The section titled "Example Calculation" should be very helpful. Also this bit will have some bearing on your answer: "For example, one mole of water is equivalent to 18.02 grams of water and contains one mole of H2O molecules, but three moles of atoms (two moles H and one mole O)."

I don't think that's very fair to them... they may focus on physics and engineering, but they still have quite busy forums for the other sciences. They are not as interested in things like medicinal sciences, neurology etc, but then of course that is not in their remit, is it? I am not sure what you mean by "stronger". They have over five times as many threads as us, and well over a million posts. We can guess there is a low level of spam pushing up the figures because of their reputation for tight control. They also have ten times as many members as us, which must be nice. I wonder what their activity percentage is? Like us, they made the decision to effectively outlaw religious discussions and that seems to be working well for them. One thing they do that we don't, and this might explain the 63k members, is that they actually do help people to do their homework. Maybe that is something we should consider, because our attitude at the minute is basically "move threads that look like they are homework requests to the homework help forum, where we then refuse to do people's homework for them." Look at the depth in their homework/coursework forum: http://www.physicsforums.com/forumdisplay.php?f=152 "Depth" is something they are quite proud of. Whereas we twice compressed our depth from what it was in 2004 to what it is now, they seem to have expanded theirs into quite an elegant structure. Also I notice they have the inverted forum stack going on, where THE SCIENCE! is at the top of the forum list, and miscellanea and even forum announcements are right at the bottom. We are getting there, but our forum priority is not so clearly defined.

I think you want http://www.theologyforums.net/

Or at least, one or two of them thought so in 2005...

lol That should scare the hell out of anyone who has so far had any faith in Bush's military and strategic decisions. "THAT is the man who commands our defences? Oh my sweet baby Jesus!"

Looks like you might need to rethink that design YT *bang*

So if YT connected both ends at the same time, it would take 1.1 hours, but as the question is phrased, it would be instantaneous.

Did we ever decide on this?

I have posted one possible explanation on my blog already. Another is that Putin is simply under pressure to appear to be stopping the capitalists from doing the kind of things that Russians probably grumble about in day-to-day life. I think it is fairly clear that Putin KNOWS the missile shield would make a negligible difference in a conflict between Russia and the US. The issue is one of strategic balance, and he makes a good point.

Not entirely your fault - I should really have made it clear who I was talking to.

I noticed this happening way before the Firefox update, I just wasn't sufficiently annoyed to mention it until now

Is anyone else finding that threads they have posts in are occasionally appearing below the line "The threads below have not been updated since your last visit but still contain unread posts" on the search results page, even though they have new replies?

Yes, but I was not replying to you. I was replying to Dhondy. Specifically to his "gastritis and peptic ulcers" example. If he wants to use your example as evidence for his argument, fine, but he did not do this. Instead he chose to give an example that failed to support his argument (because of the way it was presented, rather than because of the specifics of the scenario), and I am attempting to encourage clarification of that.

It just seems to me that if you are going to show how Occam's Razor fails to help explain gastritis and peptic ulcers, it might be useful to state how the principle was applied and why this was inadequate. The way you have described it, it doesn't read as if there was much razoring going on at all.

It might if nobody else gets nominated.

Not the way you have described it, no.

I start at 0800 and finish at 1600. So you are going to have to start over.

Is it true that Palm has a "five lovely daughters" add-on?

Perhaps they brutally murdered him?

/me slaps YT.