John Cuthber

You can get a display based on leds from here http://www.eurodisplay.com/LED-screen-how-it-works.asp No doubt others are available too.

Surface tension effects can significantly alter the boiling point of a liquid; the effect is dependent on the radius of curvature of the drop. However, for the vapour pressure to drop below the atmospheric pressure on the moon, the radius of the "drop" would be much smaller than a water molecule. There is no liquid water on the moon- it would evaporate instantly.

I'm a staunch atheist so I couldn't get through the third question "Any being which it is right to call God must be free to do anything." There is no being which it is right to call God and therefore it is impossible to rationally assign properties to it. I couldn't answer yes or no to that any more than I could answer the question "Do unicorns have gall bladders?" How did you decide what properties God would have?

I tried fermenting cola once. It didn't work because the stuff was too acidic. It's possible that some of the bugs that grow in weird conditions like acid mine drainage water would do just fine in cola. Incidentally, after I removed some of the acid with calcium carbonate the stuff fermented perfectly well, (the resulting brew was still undrinkable though)

Once you chill the ceiling below about 80K it will start to rain liquid air. That will cool you in a hurry. GX seems to have missed my point. People are not hot enough to radiate much.

Apart from anything else the cold ceiling would cool the air near it which would become denser and fall. This would set up a convection current which would do a much better job of taking heat from the person than radiation will. People are just not hot enough to radiate much.

I'm sure we all look forward to Starseedleo's return with some evidence.

The SI unit of temperature is the Kelvin and it's not defined in terms of the normal freezing point of water (which varies with pressure) but the tipple point of water 273.16K (about 0.01C) where the pressure is also fixed. Vigorous mixing would locally heat the mixture. The uniformity of temperature is ensured by making sure the system is well lagged. Incidentally, water is perfectly capable of existing between 0 and 4 C. This statement "BTW if I remember correctly water freezes at about 4oC, melts at 0oC and doesn't exist between 0-4oC this is due to the energy used or released during the phase transition between solid-liquid and liquid-solid. A mixture of ice and water will give an average temperature of 2oC (for instance) " is wrong in every major respect. Any mixture of ice and water will be very close to 0C.

" if it is true that ancient peoples like the Greeks thought in a way that was incommensurably odd " And if not?

What's the difference between a duck? "Everyone know this phenomena well." But please don't use the answer that "its leg are both the same". OK, That's probably enough piss taking. Alpha, it is clear that you did not express the question clearly. What did you mean?

Thanks for that clarification. It suggests to me that the people who vote don't like or don't understand drug use.

I thought it over. I waved. Some kid who was passing waved back, which was nice. What were you hoping to achieve from this thread?

Sorry to interrupt the argument, but I wonder if someone can tell me if the votes referred to in DJBruce's post were actually referenda (i.e. votes by the people ) or votes cast in some sort of senate/ parliament (i.e. votes by political representatives)? If it's the latter then I think we might be seeing the politicians preference not to be seen as "soft on drugs" rather than any manifestation of the real will of the people.

Unless there is something to do the conceiving, no concept can exist. As far as I know, mankind is the only thing with a conception of negative numbers. If that's right then the concept of negative numbers is man-made.

Yes. Both the pain and the upset will cause adrenalin release. In this case, it won't help her at all.

Go into your local electronics supply store and, in a loud clear voice, ask the sales staff "Do you have sticky rubber feet?". Even if you don't get something to hold your laptop clear of the table, you should get a laugh.

It's a scaling problem. Fusion reactors the size of stars are easy. Fusion reactors (of any decent output) the size of cathedrals a re just about possible and you want one that's too small to see? Good luck.

I suspect you are right about the "drive-by trolling". Of course, since all our laws are now perfect, we can disband parliament/ congress/ whatever. That will probably save enough money to rehabilitate the poor souls who get into difficulties with their drug use.

It is , of course, true that archaeology might get things totally wrong. So can the rest of science. It's what happens when they find the bit of evidence that makes them shift their ideas that matters. As long as they say "Oops! we were wrong; here's our new theory" then they are doing science.

Not that it matters, I suspect the OP wrote "turbine" where he meant "dynamo". In any event, buying the system will almost certainly get a better result than trying to build one.

"Are there any possibility about molecular attraction force is reduced?" Yes, that's why blacksmiths heat iron bars before hammering them into shape. "Is the vibration important role on the solid state energy storage at high temperature?" Yes "Which percentage does the vibration energy contribute to? " It depends on the system and the maths is pretty horrible. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debye_model

The thing I don't understand about US politics is that you think that you have a left wing party.

I explain it as a heat engine using electrons as the working fluid. Much the same as a steam engine is a heat engine using water as the working fluid. If I wanted to be more detailed I would talk about the contact potentials, how they vary with temperature and how there is no reason to expect the contact potentials of two different metals to vary in the same way as the temperature changes. BTW, this has bugger all to do with the original question.

I am in favour of both legalising dope and of public healthcare. What's the contradiction? Most of the damage to society that is attributed to drugs is actually a consequence of their illegality. Both publicly funded healthcare and legalising (most) drugs would improve the health of the nation. If we stopped police wasting time chasing drug dealers we could get by with fewer cops (and save money) or we might reasonably expect them to do a better job of the other aspects of their work, for example we might improve the clear up rate for murder (it's not bad but there's always room for improvement). That's a choice of ways we win in addition to the fact that a lot of crime is drug related and would go away anyway. On a not entirely unrelated note, would someone like to explain this "No intelligent individual supports and/or endorses an illegal activity" to Nelson Mandela?

"the trade-offs that governments make is that they typically only increase the likelihood that people will die " Odd that, because people are living longer than ever. The government here, not so long ago, banned smoking in public places in spite of the reduction in tax revenue that it would bring and the current government pledged to maintain spending on healthcare, even while it was cutting all other expenditure. Perhaps you need to tell them they are getting it wrong; they keep doing things that will keep people alive.