John Cuthber

Polyethylene and polypropylene are both pretty good. PTFE is a bit better. All the fluorine atoms round the carbon chain get in the way of any chemical attack.

"But, in all of this, is there not a 50/50 chance of a black hole absorbing either a positive energy particle or negative energy particle? " No. The particles may have positive or negative charge, but they have positive mass and that's all that matters. No particle has negative energy.

A wise man once pointed out to me that you should never use e coli in an experiment where you could use brewing yeast. Yeast colonies smell better. Also, they are not pathogens.

It's not clear from the OP whether he is talking about the number of numbers between one and infinity or the number of rationals in that range. There are more numbers (including transendentals) in the range 0 ->1 than there are integers in the range 1-> infinity or rationals in the range 0->1

Well done on the different use of the word "feel" there. Doesn't make any difference. The behaviour of the universe is not affected much by what you think we can do. More importantly, what people reading this believe is more influenced by the evidence you bring, than by your asserted opinion.

reality neither knows nor cares what you "feel".

And then he comprehensively failed to do so. By his own criterion, he's a loser.

That proves that there are at least as many numbers between 0 and 1 as there are between 1 and infinity. There are , I think, actually rather more http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleph_number

It's not as if those laws changed much when Christianity was widely adopted anyway. it's only recently that Christians have stopped burning witches, holding trials by ordeal and even crusading. The improved morality that we see today isn't due to Christ. Not only did he say that the old laws should stand, they stood.

OK, so when Christ said " Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled" and "Think not that I am come to destroy the law" What "law" do you think he meant? Also, where on earth did you get the idea that words like this "If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them: Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place; And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard. And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die" or "He that smiteth his father, or his mother, shall be surely put to death." are mine? Those are (among) the laws to which Christ was referring when he said he wasn't here to change the laws..

Part of the reason that shopping bags don't last is that they are often designed not to. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biodegradable_bag I suspect that the film used for poly tunnels already contains some sort of UV stabiliser. This sort of thing http://www.mpi-chemie.com/category/uv-absorbers.html (Other suppliers are available)

If quoting Jesus causes embarrassment to those who follow him, that's not my fault. If it is true that "He couldn't change the law while he was alive but achieved that upon his death," then why did he say that the laws would not change? As far as I'm aware you have not proved anything about this.

As I said, the effects are well known and well documented. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relativistic_quantum_chemistry The electron has a finite probability of being arbitrarily close to the nucleus and, in that circumstance it's "velocity" is high enough for relativistic effects to be significant. I really don't see why you are arguing about this well established physics. Incidentally, you don't seem to have yet provided an answer to the questions asked here http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/87510-sulfuric-acid-in-ppm/?p=850748

"Until we can explain our awareness of the present moment - what many physicists say defies explanation," Which physicists have said that? Is there any reason to suppose that they are correct? There's a great difference between "We cant explain it yet" and "It can not be explained". "We give them time because at a gut level, we all kind of know there is something afoot. " Perhaps we listen to them because they tell us what we want to hear.

It's a tricky point. Since the electron doesn't have a well defined location it's not easy to define a rate of change of that location. However MWresearch is quite correct in saying that the electron behaviour within heavy atoms is affected (strongly) by relativity. It's widely cited as the reason for the colour of gold and the low melting point of mercury. Who cares? Electrons are not involved in nuclear fission. Fundamentally, if, from your point of view, the uranium is moving at a velocity near the speed of light then the energy it carries as a result of that velocity is bigger than any it will release by fission. If, on the other hand, you are more or less stationary WRT the uranium, the relativistic effects will be small.

Indeed, and his message (according to Matthew) was "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven." So Jesus' message was perfectly clear- keep the old laws about stoning people to death and killing children for talking back to their parents. All this sort of stuff http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/says_about/children.html is from the old laws that Jesus said we should still follow. Yes, whether he was real or not isn't the issue. The important thing is the evil which he stood for.

ISIL kill people for no valid reason. Dawkins does not. Why assume that both are insane?

Yes. Compared to the uncertainty of that data, any relativistic effects that will ever be observed are likely to be small.

As far as I'm aware, the exact neutron yield is- shall we say- not publicly documented. The idea that you can guess the critical mass or the multiplication factor to an accuracy where you need to consider relativistic effects is... interesting.

Is there some suggestion that the death of the opponent of former Lieutenant colonel of the KGB is, in some way, suspicious? Rats! I can't find the tags for irony.

This seems to me to be a bit like saying-"most planets don't have water; why are we on one of the few that does?".

Let's hope it never needs updating.

http://www.polytunnelgardening.co.uk/polytunnel-frequently-asked-questions/2010/how-long-does-the-polythene-cover-last/

PET would almost certainly work (Though it absorbs a lot of UV), so would whatever they make "polytunnels" from; I think it's polythene which is cheap.

Neat! I guess the answer is essentially that this stuff http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limonene which is a major component of orange oil (which gets squirted out of the peel) is quite a good solvent- good enough to dissolve or, at least weaken, the rubber.