John Cuthber

That's a requirement for a perfect mirror. But the impact of a photon on one side of the box pulls the rest of the box along by stretching it out a bit. Unless that's perfectly elastic too, there's a loss of energy.

A partial failure of the insulation would change the electrical characteristics. You might be able to spot that if you had a computer carefully monitoring it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compartmentalization_(psychology)

Which part of "no" don't you understand? However, in fairness, I think that you can model things like refraction by treating the atoms as particles that (only) scatter light. For example, the "traditional" model of refraction treats the gaps in a diffraction grating as separate (but coherent) sources. The interference pattern formed by those sources is the diffraction pattern. That model, in effect, assumes that whatever is in the gaps acts as a scatterer . It's not clear how that model works if you have a set of opaque wires in a vacuum acting as a grating.

True. However the movies they make (and which bring in a lot of money) are not generally based on some rich powerful bloke getting his end away with some poor lass who is too frightened of ending her career to tell him to "F*** off! ". So it's hard to see what relation there is between contents of films and the asserted actions of Weinstein (or indeed, of "progressives"). Casual sex happens in real life; so does rape. Most people can understand the difference. If you want to call it "transactional" then I guess the difference is equivalent to sale of goods or services, and "obtaining goods or services by deception" or any of a variety of crimes like slavery; demanding money with menaces; fraud, or whatever. Just because something is a "transaction" doesn't mean it's right. Society recognises that some transactions are too "one sided" to be legitimate.

Sounds like you have shown it was a bloody stupid idea.

A sheet of cooking foil will shield microwaves "completely" for all practical purposes as long as it completely encloses the source (or detector). It would be practiaclly opaque across the EM spectrum from low frequency RF all the way up to soft Xrays

That makes sense if you assume he wasn't employed by Trump to do this sort of thing. There are two options. Trump didn't know what Malafort was doing on his behalf in which case he's incompetent (and the election is invalid) or He did know in which case he's also a criminal (and the election is invalid). Which of these looks like "in the clear" to you? Don't you understand that, if Trump only got in on the basis of a crooked election, Trump's presidency isn't democracy?

Clearly, no it "shouldn't", or it would. It seems that the aldol reaction is faster. Or maybe the proton transfer is fast, but effectively reversible.

Movies are not real life.

I have seen some hogwash in my time but this is something special. It's an invalid deduction from a false premise. "Hollywood and progressives like to make sex out to be this spur of the moment..." is wrong Hollywood and progressives like to make CONSENSUAL sex out to be this spur of the moment... "no big deal, if it feels good do it routine" It seems to have escaped your notice that rape doesn't "feel good".. Frankly, I expect better from you.

Where did the 10 come from? There are lots of ways to look at it 86 µg/ml in the diluted solution means 50 x 86 µg/ml in the original solution. That's 4300 µg /ml And there was 100 ml of it So, how much was there in that original solution?

There are a number of ways to look at it. The 20 ml is a bit of a red herring.

Sorry, this isn't helpful, but I hope you will let me off. I saw this post just after seeing this web page and it amused me. http://dilbert.com/strip/2017-11-02

Almost certainly not. Nor will it cure malaria or make good coffee: it wasn't designed to do that either.

Poor spectroscopic technique? An impure sample?

As far as I understand it, there's only one Canadian country; it's called Canada, and the Russians don't have control over it. Does the rest of the thread get better, or should I stop reading here?

Apparently, yes it's possible, because you experienced it.

That's not how velocities add at these speeds.

I can try. If you drop a tennis ball it bounces, but not as high as you dropped it from. Energy is lost as heat. Other balls bounce better or worse, but none gets back to the height it started from. In the same way, when you make a box out of mirrors and set a photon bouncing round in it you will lose energy because the box gets stretched (very slightly) when a photon hits it.

Not possible.

I also long for the days when a politician could lose any prospect of being elected because he couldn't spell "potato(e)". Dan Quayle must have cried when he saw Trump get away with covfefe. .

I think it needs to be perfectly elastic, rather than perfectly rigid. So it's impossible for a different reason. The punch-line to all this discussion of why it's impossible is ... people actually do it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cavity_ring-down_spectroscopy http://www.chem.ualberta.ca/~xu/research/crds.htm

The problem is that we already know that Trump has none of those attributes (well, maybe he's a tea total non smoker- but that's hardly important.) He's uninterested in his country https://thinkprogress.org/trump-isnt-saving-jobs-thousands-have-left-the-country-since-he-took-office-d45844db11fb/ He divorced a good fraction of his family. He's a crap negotiator- that's why the Mexicans literally told him to fuck off. https://news.avclub.com/mexico-tells-trump-to-fuck-off-in-this-conan-without-bo-1798258295 and the US is now one of (I think) two countries not signed up to the Paris agreement. and, while we are on the subject, that wall is not smart, and it is nonsense.

All the way from Aberdeen to land's end they will be in synchrony. From Calais to Gibraltar they will be in synchrony. They grids have to be in lock step with themselves. But is the French mains in synch with ours?