abskebabs

After reading the last few posts, I've had a thought. Perhaps the predictive power of determining someone's personality is not as great as it seems, because, the nature of such is quite subjective and open to interpretation. There are a lot of things we can be, we have a lot of different emotions and feelings(soemtimes conflicting). For example an avatar is may exemplify the feelings, or just a small portion of a person at a specific time(when the avatar was attached more accurately), but these, like all other emotions and feelings, will change over time as well. In light of this however, I think that everyone who has made predictions so far(especially kenshin), has appeared quite impressive with their predictions. I suppose what I'm getting at is, that despite the fact we can predict a lot of things with the info provided, we can only produce a limited picture out of the great plethora that makes up our personalities. I think with a better vocabulary, I could have explained that a lot more clearly... anyway, this is a very interesting thread, keep it up!

I would comment, but I don't feel I have sufficient knowledge of the subject area to be able to understand what you are talking about. On the other hand, if you really want a physics expert to have a look at this thread why not PM them?

My, my it's been a while since I posted but I can't believe how wrong I was. I think it would have been more correct to say that generally metals with a higher charge density(like Al3+, Fe3+, etc) tend not to form carbonates in aqueos solutions. Is that a correct statement, or am I wrong again:-( ?

After thinking about this, I would like to ask what kind of wound was inflicted, and how? Or is this not important, and was this carried out wholesale regardless of the kind of injury personnel received?

I'm not sure if this is off the point, but have you heard of Milo Wolff's work on the Wave structure of matter, and what are your opinions on this. It seems to me for whatever reasons the work has been mostly ignored, but perhaps ppl should pay more attention to it. Perhaps going down a different path can get us out of the problems we are facing with current theories like QED. Personally, I don't know, I have a lot more to learn and I am just offering a suggestion.

aaahhhhhh.... I see, sounds reasonable to me. So the fluids in my ear are responsible for that part of my spatial awareness, I wonder how that works.

In that case, perhaps when a song invigorates you, you register that feeling of disdain in your memory much more clearly than when you listen to a song you like. Songs you like may please you but it may just pass by if you get what I mean. I don't know, it's just a suggestion. Perhaps you involuntarily hear crap songs on the radio for example as I suggested, and in doing so you hear them more often than songs you like. This makes them come to the forefront of you memory behind songs you like. Actually I don't think it's something with this deep an explanation, as these things seem to come on a whim.

I just observed something weird and intriguing from my own desk chair at which I am sat writing this. Just to clarify, it's one of those kinds with wheels which you can rotate. Ok, I stood up knelt on the chair, closed my eyes and gave it a spin. I then span for a few revolutions until I noticed I stopped, but; after that I was absolutely convinced that I was spinning in the opposite direction. I was not really trying to make sense of what I felt so I did actually think I was spinning for the time I had my eyes shut(I think my common sense just turned off for a second while I felt the sensation). This delusion felt very "physical" to me, I actually felt like I was spinning. In fact I urge you to try it for yourself if you have the same kind of chair. Finally, my question is, can anyone suggest an explanation what was happenning and what caused the sensations I experienced?

I blame radiostations(and music channels if you watch them) for this. It's them that play the same crap over and over and over and over......................................................................again.

This is what Paul Dirac had to say on the subject. "I must say that I am very dissatisfied with the situation, because this so called good theory does involve neglecting infinities which appear in its equations, neglecting them in an arbitrary way. This is just not sensible mathematics. Sensible mathematics involves neglecting a quantity when it turns out to be small - not neglecting it just because it is infinitely great and you do not want it!"

Feynamnn said this in 1985. I found this information from the following website: http://www.spaceandmotion.com/Physics-Richard-Feynman-QED.htm

This is only my 2nd thread in the chemistry section, and I have a simple question for the bright chemists out there(you know who you are;) ). Why do transition metals not form carbonates. I know it is roughly to do witht heir charge density and polarising power but I know there is a much more concise answer to this question. Thanks in advance:-)

Feynman admitted himself the theory wasn't mathematically sound: "But no matter how clever the word, it is what I call a dippy process! Having to resort to such hocus pocus has prevented us from proving that the theory of quantum electrodynamics is mathematically self consistent. I suspect that renormalization is not mathematically legitimate."

Perhaps it was a misprint, it seems more likely to me to have been 10.8%. Anyway personally, their not really much of a preference, though if i was hungry and, I might have a nibble. It just seems too salty to me, but everyone has their own tastes with food. I like anything(including meat) hot(in the thermodynaimc sense) and spicy pretty much.

In light of their assertions that the Universe is truly deterministic; does this also mean that the probablisitic indeterminism that we observe with principless we observe in quantum physics like the Heisenberg uncertainty principle need not apply, or at least the interpretation of these phenomenon needs to be changed? Bascially does this mean that the indeterminism we observe is really due to a lack of knowledge or complete information of the computations that exist on this "cellular realm"? I naturally feel a little skeptical of this.

I don't think this is right, but perhaps it was to keep the wounds hydrated. Jam is a colloid/gel. After a while it undergoes synersis. Perhaps also because it prevents air from reaching the wounds, therefore preventing potentially pathogenic bacteria from respiring.

Sorry if I'm being ignorant, but what exactly does the Schumann resonance have to do with negative energy? This thread is getting quite confusing, Swansont seems to be the only one I can understand just about. It seems this stuff is far beyond my scope at the moment, and only with patient, persistent study and thought will I ever be able to understand it.

Ah, I see. It is only negative then if we presuppose the energy of a vacuum to be zero, even though it isn't(like using it as a standard). What is the energy of a vacuum by the way? Is such a thing known?

I have another question now, as negative energy can exist, deos that mean negative mass can too(at least in relation to a vacuum)?

I think I see the difference in our methods. I assumed that the work had to be done within 3 quarters of the total time after a third of the time had passed. It doesn't seem to me you took into account that the work needed to be completed within 3 quarters of the time, I think. I'm not sure:confused: ? Where's a maths moderator when you need one:rolleyes: .

I remeber reading the book Quantum a guide for the perplexed, and in one section about Black holes, the contributer Paul Davies mentions negative energy, the Casimir effect, and the negative energy flux going into black holes; which on it's own I found intriguing and enthralling. Not only this, but he goes on to say;"The theoretical possibility of creating a flux of negative energy-in effect a beam of cold and dark, rather than a beam of heat and light- offered some bizarre and puzzling scenarios. Suppose such a beam were directed at a hot object rather than a black hole, such as an oven with an aperture protected by a shutter. It would seem the contents of the oven would lose energy and cool down. But this would be a clear breach of the celebrated second law of thermodynamics, by the loss of heat of the oven which would amount ot a loss of entropy, and the second law forbids the entropy of a closed system going down.(The beam itself has zero entropy.) The second law is the lynchpin of themrodynamics, and any violation would open the way to a perpetual motion machine, which is not thought possible." What are your opinions on this, and do you think a violation would ever represent a possibility?

You're right it is simple harmonic motion, that's the same answer I gave. I suppose you're right, it is pretty basic, and I shouldn't be feeling smug about it just because I got it. I was wondering, if I didn't understand simple harmonic motion so well as well as other similiar physical effects, would I have been able to work out what would have happened? Also Neil, that's a good point you made about the Earth rotating, I didn't think of that, but I'm unsure about the magnitude such an effect would have(unless of course the hole was drilled throught the poles as you mentioned) P.S. Matt(or anyone actually), please could you have a look at my solution to this thread. http://www.scienceforums.net/forums/showthread.php?p=276580#post276580 I've sent a PM ot you about it as well... I'd just like to know if what I did was correct

Ok, I have a question for all of you that a teacher asked me, and he told me it was an old cambridge interview question. I took a minute to think about it, but I was able to answer it correctly the first time. Ok, I drill a hole through the Earth directly from one side of the Earth to the other. I drill it in a staright line that passes through the centre of the Earth and the length of the hole is the diameter of the Earth(ignore things like a hot core of magma etc). Now I drop a ball bearing down the hole which experiences no friction or air resistance as it falls down the hole. Describe to me the motion of the ball bearing. It's sounding quite easy to me now:-)

This "non-profit public policy organization" seems like it's been set up by an industry lobby. If if weren't for these kinds of people, toxic waste would never get dumped into rivers:-p .