John Cuthber

If that's the choice I'd rather you made an educated guess at what you are probably trying to get across. Then I'd like you notice that it has nothing to do with this thread so you shouldn't post it here. After that I'd like you to notice that it's gibberish so there's not a lot of point posting it elsewhere. If you insist on posting it, please be sure to explain what testable hypotheses can me deduced form "What if this machine gun was simply influence - sound waves, 'Music'?" Thanks.

You can measure that rate at more than one temperature then solve the equations. On the other hand, you can calculate how often molecules bump into eachother from kinetic theory. The second approach gives an upper bound to the reaction rate since it assumes every collision is successful in producing a reaction.

Second helping.

Word salad.

As you say, smoking kills people and the effects are delayed. We noticed this. Why would we not have noticed if drinking milk also kills people?

I don't think it's my job to prove a negative. If you think there are apparent ill effects please say why you think so. Otherwise, as DJBruce says, I think we can assume that no such effects exist.

"It seems that most if not ALL of you who responded to this post are psychotic." It only seems that way to you. What does that tell you? Does this tell you the same thing? "Most of society are psychotic. " It's a long time ago but I studied pharmacology as well as chemistry. One of the subjects we covered was psychopharmacology- the use of chemicals to treat psychoses. Before you can do that you need to decide whoo needs treating. You need to be able to tell the difference between someone with depression and someone who is upset for a reason. Someone crying because their mother just died isn't psychotic. The definition that we were given was that "a psychotic is someone who believes something that most people would not believe". Now Buddahneo, I have news for you. Most people don't believe that yoga is any different from other forms of light exercise and most people don't believe that, for example "Psychiatry is TERRORISM. They are linked with Al Qeada and are trying to take over the world with psychiatry". Do you see what I'm hinting at here?

I think your problem is that the replies were more intelligent than the "question". I put question in quotes because you didn't actually ask one. Klaynos also didn't ask a question but he raised a valid point so I will rephrase it as a question. Buddhaneo, Can you show how yoga can make testable predictions and then be shown to get the right answer? If not then it's not part of science, never mind the ultimate science. OK, that's a question; dare you give an intelligent answer?

I'm more worried that I find myself agreeing with klaplunk than I am about drinking milk. The reality is that lots of people drink lots of milk with no apparent ill effects so it's certainly not that harmful. On the other hand the saturated fat levels in it might be a bit high.

"At present there is no explanation of why periods of the elements start and end at their particular points" There was when I was at school. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aufbau_principle

You certainly used to be able to buy lead lined bags for film and such. That would block everything from radio waves to xrays (and it would thin any gammas down a bit too.) Why bother? All you would do would be piss off the customs/ immigration officers. Is that ever a good idea?

Is this a homework question?

I think tinfoil hats work just as well with THz radiation as they do with GHz stuff.

"I have successfully invented a perpetual motion machine " LOL

OK, Klaplunk, I will accept your view on the product of two negative numbers, but on one condition. You start a bank and lend me money; that way you will have to pay me interest. Otherwise, stop trolling.

It's quite common to see babies think, well before they learn a language. How could such a baby decide to, for example, try to speak, if such a thought required language? If we need language to think, how do we ever come up with new ideas (there aren't words for them)- and why do we come up with new words? The phrase "Isn't it a beautiful day?" may mean either of two absolutely opposed things depending on whether the speaker is being ironic or not. If thought is just a mirror of the language, how can the same piece of language have two meanings? Many jokes also require language to have two meanings (or more); I can't see how that works if we only think in words. Can metaphor work if a thought is expressed in words? On the whole, I'm not convinced that we think in words or language.

"Look, I have no opinion of this - to me the mathmatics we're educated are wrong. " Must be the only thing he hasn't an opinion on. Anyway, two of the real uses of negative numbers are temperatures and bank balances; another one is time, where negative numbers are used to indicate the past. Last night I watched the temperature fall. It was falling steadily at 1 degree per hour. The rate of change of temperature was minus one degree per hour. Imagine I wanted a guess for the temperature a couple of hours before I made the first measurement. Two hours before I made my first measurement (i.e. at time = minus 2) the temperature was minus 1 (degrees per hour) multiplied by minus 2 (hours) ie plus two degrees different from the time I made my first measurement. Or, if you live in a world where Kaplunk lives, it was a couple of degrees colder before it cooled down. You can do the same sort of thing with a regular direct debit on a bank account; at negative time the net value was higher. The simple reason for the rules is that they give the right answer. Kaplunk, if your model of the universe gives the wrong answer, it isn't reality that's wrong.

I see from Kaplunk's post "I used to see the good in education, where learning wasn't just to earn the grade - but to open our mind and elevate our brains to new heights. My love for learning has been stripped down, and now I see what truly goes on. " that religion has robbed him of the understanding of the good of education. That seems to me to be an adequate reason to ditch religion.

North Korea has fewer than a dozen nukes, and the only way it could get them an American city would be by post. A nuclear strike against the US would bring retaliation. The only thing that would stop the US nuking North Korea from the map would be South Korea. That might be enough to persuade them to destroy the North with conventional weapons- and I think they have the industrial strength to do it. The government of North Korea is dumb, but not suicidal. I think they have issued the "warning" for their own propaganda, rather than for it to be taken seriously. In due course, the Americans will do as they please and the North Koreans will tell their people that the Americans chickened out. You only need to react to a threat if the threat is serious, and I don't think this one can be. The comparison with the Cuban crisis seems flawed to me. North Korea simply hasn't got as many nukes as the Russians had. (Strictly speaking, the numbers might be comparable, but back then the uncertainty was rather greater- the USSR claimed to have lots more than it really had, so the threat seemed real.)

I suggest a better typeface.

Just for the record, I'd like to quote kaplunk here. "You know what? Fuck it, Carry on " Anyway, it didn't trouble religion much when it turned out that the earth isn't the centre of the universe; they tried to pretend it wasn't true; then they tried to pretend the never thought it mattered. It didn't bother them much when someone discovered the moons of other planets; they did exactly the same. When someone first discovered microbes they ran through roughly the same process. It's good to know that, this time, they are ahead of the game and have accepted the inevitable before it happened. Incidentally, re. "As we're never going to be able to travel a light year, the belief in other life is just as skeptical as the 'taught religion'. " I have never been to America, but I believe it exists. We don't need to turn up on the alien's doorstep to prove they exits; a 'phone call would do.

There seem to be many places that sell chemicals. Please, could someone let me know where I can buy something that isn't made from chemicals?

Poe's law demonstrated in the first post and Godwin's in the second post. Is this a record? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/6408927/Internet-rules-and-laws-the-top-10-from-Godwin-to-Poe.html

Not many things live in active volcanoes.

This is probably a good place to start. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technetium