John Cuthber

You need to learn to "proof test" tanks with water first. Then you need to learn that this idea " tank thickness to psi ratio " won't work.

Not a very strong one. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_quotient#Income A 2002 study[113] further examined the impact of non-IQ factors on income and concluded that an individual's location, inherited wealth, race, and schooling are more important as factors in determining income than IQ. "Achieving good grades depends on many factors other than IQ, such as "persistence, interest in school, and willingness to study" (p. 81).[9] It has been found that the correlation of IQ scores with school performance depends on the IQ measurement used. For undergraduate students, the Verbal IQ as measured by WAIS-R has been found to correlate significantly (0.53) with the grade point average (GPA) of the last 60 hours. In contrast, Performance IQ correlation with the same GPA was only 0.22 in the same study.[96]"

There would be a problem if you were at any great depth because the water pressure would squash the air out of your lungs and you wouldn't be able to breathe in. A long horizontal tube to a "diver" not far under water who breathed out through their nose would be much less of a problem- as long as the pipe was wide enough- but pretty pointless. Meanwhile back at the topic...

If you don't know what they are, then there's no way you can attribute things to them. you have just summarised the utter pointlessness of this thread.

With no indication of the diameter of the tube, or the work rate, it's impossible to say if it's safe or not. If, for example, he's using this method to hide from an attacker, it may well prolong his life. If it fails then the question of what the blood HCO3 levels in his corpse are is still valid. If he breathes in through his mouth + out through his nose, the problem largely goes away.

The problem is that 1,1 dimethylaminoethane isn't the same as 1,1di(methylamino)ethane I think that stuff should be 1,1 bis(methylamino) ethane

I saw the article and I couldn't help wondering how much VLF radiation we get from the sun, compared to how much we generate.

I think that , if one says the [HCO3-] rises, and the other says it falls, it's pretty damned certain that one of them is right. The point of the question is that, because it leaves you with too much CO2 it isn't safe. So telling them it's a poor snorkel isn't helpful- they know that. Not flushing out the CO2 will certainly raise the amount of CO2 in the air, and hence the blood. The next question is what happens to that CO2? Whatever the pH, adding more carbon is going to increase the bicarbonate concentration- where else can it go? Some of it has to dissociate and form bicarbonate. (The pH will dictate the ratios of HCO3- to CO3- and HCO3- to CO2 ) The numbers don't really matter.

My theory is that IQ is a measure of how well you can do IQ tests. (and a poor measure of anything else)

Well, if you pointed all the vehicles towards the sun (this is possible, BTW Velocity boy, vehicles are mobile. you can park them all on or near a particular line of longitude- that would be close enough.) and switched the headlights on you would change the Earth's orbit. Not much, but it's better than the mathematically zero change you would get from speeding up + slowing down. (Calculation the magnitude of the effect is left as an exercise for the interested reader)

More likely common cause than direct causation. It might be a "philosophical question". It's definitely a false dichotomy. We don't "rely completely" on the technology. And we don't "relying only on the course of human events " I got lots of vaccinations; but if I come across a bug I have not met before (naturally or not), I can still rely on my immune system. It is not an either/or thing.

Why do you say "finally" It's always been like that- because it has to be.

All the proof I needed for my point about education. There are (very simplistically) two ways to acquire immunity. Get the disease and have a serious risk of death or long term damage or get vaccinated and have a much lower risk of death or long term damage. And you need to ask if one of those is better than the other? Re."Eventually such gets passed on to the next Human generation." No, it doesn't. Or, at least, not in a helpful way. Also "My concern is not so much any possible bad side effects of the government required immunization but" might be the logical fallacy known as "the thin end of the wedge" or it might be more focussed on "Then, for whatever reason, be accidental or designed, such mandated government programs suddenly stop? What then? Are we perhaps setting ourselves up?" Well, one of the better known vaccination programs has now been halted. We no longer have a smallpox vaccination program. Because we effectively eliminated the disease.We are well on the way to doing that with polio. What would happen if we stopped, for example, the measles vaccine programme? Initially there would be a spike in infections- the total number of people (mainly children) killed would be less than the number who have been saved by the programme in its history. And the rates would then fall back to "the bad old days" where a fair number of kids died or were left harmed by it every year until we got our act back together and started vaccinating again.

Does "making up random stuff" count as philosophy? If philosophy proceeds without bothering to see if it is right or not then it's hard to tell the two apart. Before you ask Is philosophy more advanced than science in understanding reality because ... you need to check that philosophy Is more advanced than science in understanding reality

I apologise for mis-attributing the quote. What you said was "It depends on the kind of stress and the modern diet can be a factor". How is that different from "Modern diet and stress cause homosexuality." - as long as you interpret the word "cause" as meaning "might be a factor in favour of""? Anyway, the point stands We have no idea of what the incidence of homosexuality was like in ancient times- so we can not possibly know if it is higehr or lower today. So we can't say whether modern life has made any difference- and we certainly can't say which direction it might have influenced it.

Fundamentally, intelligence doesn't matter here. A sky high IQ won't stop you seeing the horizontal line in the optical illusion here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vertical%E2%80%93horizontal_illusion as shorter than the vertical one. In the same way, your intelligence won't stop you falling for the innate cognitive biases that people have. Religion exploits those human traits. http://www2.psych.ubc.ca/~ara/Manuscripts/Willard_Norenzayan_Cognitive_Biases.pdf And it is very hard to overcome them.

Because they are anti- vaccination we can deduce that there is at least one gap in their education. In the relevant field, they are not well educated.

It's becoming more practical every day to test new keyboard layouts as more people use "keyboards" that are arbitrarily adjustable. If the "keys" are areas of a touch screen, then you can lay them out however you please. You still need to get people to "learn" them, but that's the same for any new layout.

What he's looking for is probably a hybrid rocket system - because that's what he asks about. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid-propellant_rocket That rules out black powder (and I think it rules out all the other systems you linked to). I can't think of a good reason why timber of coal wouldn't work. I'd be a bit worried about the solid cracking under the pressure and breaking up.

It shows.

Let's have a look at the 10th amendment. "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." So, if the people vote for something it's OK. The constitution does not stop the people deciding to get the government to insure health care.

A spot of googling indicates that pu looks normal for the first rather a lot of digits https://arxiv.org/abs/1612.00489v1 So, unless the OP has looked at more digits, there's nothing to see here.

When you were looking at the occurrence of different digits, did you look at the whole of pi, or some truncated approximation?

A well known book says otherwise Genesis 1:16 "God made the two great lights, the greater light to govern the day, and the lesser light to govern the night; He made the stars also." An interesting point; how very human of God to start- as we would- by switching on the light. Why? Was He worried about not knowing where He was? Did He think He might bump into something? Is this the first bit of the Bible that gives strong evidence that it was actually written by people

Your question "Why is the developer of a scientific theory not allowed to discuss their own theory on this website?" was meaningless because the developers of scientific theories are allowed to discuss them here. Moreover, your implication that Zephyr's posts were scientific theories is also incorrect. They might manage to classify as hypotheses - on a good day. I could compare your initial post to one that said "Why am I not allowed to use words with nine letters on this site? Fred Bogs was thrown off for using the word 'unquestionably ' " Do you see why that makes no sense?