John Cuthber

"Is it possible to make a covalent [non-ionic] compound consisting of xenon only? " No. You might, on a good day get two xenons bound together by Van der Waals forces but, at anything like room temperature it would decompose.

Fuzzwood, It suggests that you are in the same category as I am; whatever that makes us.

I thought all that had proved ( beyond reasonable doubt) that the chalk moved, but then I woke up.

My word! what a lot of numbers that don't equal zero seem to equal zero in timeoftimezero's world.

At the risk of being labelled as deeply politically incorrect. http://xkcd.com/54/ seems to sum it up for me.

I think it's screwed.

Troll baiting is al very well, but if he keeps using bigger typefaces I will need a bigger monitor.

Yes, she is. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprioception but it has nothing to do with ghosts. "If a person sees a person commiting a robbery that is evidence of a robbery . " If a robbery had been shown to take place then this would be supporting evidence. "If a person sees 2 old people at night-time standing in a room and with a turn of the face they are gone , is that evidence ? " It is evidence of something, but not necessarily of 2 people disappearing. It is much more likely to be evidence of someone making a mistake and "seeing" something that is not real. The brain is good at that. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martian_canal

"But, I can't find any valid experiments anywhere " Nor could the scientific community.

"Not specifically, no, but I was aware that oil spills are generally considered an environmental problem." So putting it back in the ground is a good thing, right?

Do you realise that if they put crude oil back into the ground,they would have "injected large amounts of other hazardous chemicals, including 11.4 million gallons of fluids containing at least one of the toxic or carcinogenic B.T.E.X. chemicals — benzene, toluene, xylene and ethylbenzene. "?

UK libel law is complicated but the essence of it is quite simple. If I say something bad about someone they have the right to object. If I cannot show that what I said was true or that I had valid reasons to believe that it was true then the court will find against me and I will be held to account for my actions. There are other defences but in simple terms, if I don't want to get sued for libel, all I have to do is ensure that I don't tell lies. Is that such a problem? The difference between the US and UK is that in the UK it is sufficient that someone defamed me for me to sue them. In the US I would need to prove that the defamation actually caused me some sort of harm and I could claim compensation for that harm. Proving that my reputation has suffered is very difficult because it doesn't physically exist. Putting a value on that reputation is even harder. The UK system serves to keep people honest because, even if they choose to make derogatory comments about some poor beggar on the street, that beggar still has the right to justice (which he won't get because the government decided that libel laws are not covered by legal aid.) The problem that may happen with the law is that the courts come to the wrong conclusion. For example, in the case of Singh vs the chiropractors, the law found in favour of the latter. In my opinion that's just plain wrong. What he said was substantially true and was backed up by evidence.

A couple of points. First hydrogen atoms cause hydrogen embritlement, not hydrogen ions. Second, according to Wiki " These tests have shown that austenitic stainless steels, aluminum (including alloys), copper (including alloys, e.g. beryllium copper) are not susceptible to hydrogen embrittlement " From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_embrittlement so brass should be relatively safe. What are you plating, and what with?

"Well nothing is infinite" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_by_assertion If space isn't infinite, in time or extent, how come it goes dark at night? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olbers_paradox

"Helium does not decay into alpha and beta particles like many other atoms such as Uranium 238." Most of the atoms that we are familiar with don't decay. "What would the effect be if Helium is synthetically ionized into alpha and beta particles?" Broadly speaking, something like this. http://images-mediawiki-sites.thefullwiki.org/06/1/4/8/90605423217213867.jpg "The alpha particles will attract the Helium atoms and spin around" Why would they spin? "These alpha particles and Helium atoms will bounce around in the containment " Nope, they would almost certainly pick up an electron or two the first time they hit any sort of containment. I could go on. It's a valiant attempt, but it shows a deep lack of understanding of physics.

It's always amusing to see another example of numerology. This one is just as bogus as all the others. There are an infinite number of points on the map where the ratio of the distances to the south pole and North pole are 1.618 Anywhere on the same latitude, or the line of latitude as far from the equator, but in the other hemisphere will do. Mecca is on one of them All the stuff about longitude is, from my point of view as an Englishman, faintly flattering. Those numbers are based on the choice of Greenwich as the "zero " line. There was, a couple of hundred years ago, a serious discussion about using the meridian through Paris, rather than London as the basis for plotting the world's maps. If the French had won the debate then Mecca would need to be moved a few hundred miles in order to be "golden".

"Our problem here is, we probably have a good 35% of Americans not working. Of that, 10% are actually seeking employment, while the other 25% wouldn't take a job if it was shoved under their nose. " You asked them all (or, at least, a statistically significant number of them)? That must have been a lot of work. Or is that a set of made up numbers that may well reflect your prejudice, rather than the facts?

Just a thought. You want to hand in a report that will get you full marks. You won't do that unless your report says what you saw. While you are writing those observations down, you might as well put them here too, along with any ideas you have about what they mean. Perhaps we can help you understand them better.

I shall reserve judgement on this issue until I am dead. If anyone then displays my mortal remains I will see how I feel about it. If it troubles me, then I will come back and haunt them.

" So tell me, how many people do you have in your country on the "dole", taking a daily nap and draining your piggy bank like America does? "I'd say few, if any." " Unemployment in the UK is currently running at about 7.9% It's hard to say how many are napping. 9.6% in France 6.3% in Germany 8.4% in Italy Compared to 9.2% in the USA from http://www.google.com/publicdata?ds=z9a8a3sje0h8ii_&met=unemployment_rate&idim=eu_country:IT&dl=en&hl=en&q=%22unemployment+in+italy%22 etc So there's not a huge difference among these countries

"Can it possible be more efficient than piston driven cars?" Yes, at least in principle- because the "piston" doesn't have to keep stopping and starting again. Also there's the comedy value of the name.

Gauge and absolute pressure are a bit unwieldy when you are measuring vacuum. Do you actually have a vacuum gauge?

"So what would happen if the government completely stopped spending money?" A mess. "Wouldn't we have to re-legalize slavery so that people could perform collaborative labor without pay?" No. We had a society of sorts without money; we even had a government. There's no reason, in principle, why you need money. It just makes things a lot easier- particularly in a complex society. Imagine a bizarre event; all the money in the world suddenly disappears. However, all the people decide to just keep on doing what they were doing. People go to the shops and get the goods they need. The shopkeepers still keep ordering from suppliers. The factories keep running and the workforce still work. People who work in finance go and sit in front of computers and press buttons- but no real transfers are made. Everything happens except there's no actual money. It would need a huge rethink by the whole race- but it would work. With no money the government obviously couldn't spend any but that wouldn't matter. See- no need for slavery. Of course, with a more realistic view of human nature slavery might be a more likely outcome- but there's no need for it. "Is there any other way for people to legally work for each other without having money to pay each other?" Yes, it worked for ages- it was called barter. It still happens today on a small scale. Did you really not know that? The same is true for collaborative labour- though it isn't seen so often these days. Perhaps the commonest examples are the aftermath of disasters where people volunteer to help others with no expectation of payment. " Do people just need to reduce their own spending to avoid relying on credit and government funding?" The people who really spend a lot are the rich. They are not, in general, in need of government support. Through tax breaks and government deals, they are often in receipt of it. If taxes only run to 28% of GDP then the other 72% must be spent by people other than the govt.

Seriously cool!. OK, so you are busy and there's the issue with clearance for release. But if we all ask really nicely, can you get some very slow motion video of it, please?

It depends on how the gauge is calibrated but the force might be a good deal more than that. What does the gauge read when there's no vacuum? is it about 0 or about 30? Normal air pressure is about 30 inches of mercury. If you reduce the pressure to 5 inches then there is a 25 inch difference- that's 25/30 times atmospheric pressure. Normal air pressure is about 15 PSI so 15*25/30 =12.5 pounds per square inch. 1200 square inches of area means 1200 * 12.5 =15000 pounds of force. That's not a couple of big guys standing on it, that's the weight of a couple of small trucks parked on it.