John Cuthber

For those with an even worse grasp of history than mine; we already did vote in the third party. They were called labour. Incidentally here are a couple of questions I keep wondering about. Re. "New labour" When were they last really "new" and were they ever really Labour? And, related to the second bit of that. Apart from the minimum wage (which I accept is important) and the abolition of VAT on tampons and sanitary towels (VAT is roughly the equivalent of sales tax for our friends across the pond), what left wing policies have the current "New Labour" government actually enacted? I did think that part-nationalising a couple of dodgy banks might count, but I figure if we really had a left wing government then we would have controlled them better in the first place. It's hard to call a policy Left wing if it is also followed by the US govt. I'm voting for the Lib Dems because, as the Tories keep saying, "It's time for a change".

Copper chloride is rather hygroscopic. Try leaving the green goo in a shallow dish (not a metal one) in a warm place and see if it dries out.

I'm not sure if you will be pleased to hear this but the reason you are having problems is that the question is impossible. Tyrosine is quite complicated so I will try to illustrate the point with something simple. Alcohol has 2 carbons, an oxygen and 6 hydrogens in it. If you connect two of the carbons together then hang the oxygen on one of them and fill up all the leftover bonds with hydrogens you will get the structure of alcohol. But if you start with the oxygen atom and put a carbon on each side of it, then (as before) fill up the rest of the molecule with hydrogens you get dimethyl ether CH3 CH2 O H vs CH3 O CH3 Since there are two perfectly reasonable compounds made from the same collection of atoms it would be impossible for your program to "know" which one to generate. In general these molecules with the same molecular formula, but different structures are called isomers. There are often a lot of them for any given formula. Incidentally, you have completely the wrong formula for tyrosine http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyrosine

To be honest, I don't really understand the questions in the OP but I think I can answer part of one of them. "how do you regulate your own moral compass?" Do unto others as you would have others do unto you. Now, I realise that's also part of lots of religions (except where they ignore it) but it also seems to me to be simple self interest. If I'm not nice to others, they probably won't be nice to me.

Aspartame isn't an alcohol and it's certainly not a polyol. Are you sure you are not mixing it up with something else?

Cap'n, I'd still like to see your response to my question but, just in case it helps, here are some popular lies people to tell in order to get pleasure. "Yes, I love you" "It's OK I had a vasectomy" "The bank will honour the cheque" "I'm divorced" Obviously your position will be different in detail but your objective will be the same. Tell lies that you think the other person wishes to hear, in order to gain pleasure. Clearly in both cases you need to tell lies that seem plausible- by the time the other party finds out that you lied, it's too late. Of course in the scenario you put forward you have an advantage over the love-rat. If the interrogator were in a position to verify your claims then he wouldn't need to torture you in the first place. On the whole, I think this new idea of "reverse torture" serves to show why torture itself is a dead loss. People lie. Given a strong enough incentive, all people lie. It doesn't matter if that incentive is the avoidance of pain or the pursuit of pleasure. The new take on the idea puts it in a context of seeking pleasure which we are all familiar with, rather then the world of the torture victim which, thankfully, few of us ever see. That, in turn, makes it easier to see exactly what people would do. From that point of view this is a very helpful thread; it helps to explain why torture is not just morally unacceptable, but that it's ineffective too. Oh, BTW, Genecks, torture doesn't make people fear for losing their life, quite often they beg for death rather than continued pain. I't really not a nice way to behave.

I think it's fair to say that nazi propaganda portrayed Jews as 1 sub humans and 2 a different religious group. They also showed the "Aryan" race as superhuman and they attributed this AFIIK to God's will.

Tell me Cap'n, how would you feel if you were the prisoner (and lets assume that the "authorities" have cocked up and you have no information to give them) ? Still sure it's not torture?

Most people who are advised to avoid gluten have a completely different condition; Coeliac Disease. It's not clear that these people would benefit from avoiding aspartame. In any event, these amino acids are fairly common so it's unlikely that a bit more from aspartame will not make any odds.

One of the defining characteristics of a plingybob is that you cannot prove it exists. Sorry I forgot to mention that before. If it were such an algorithm then it would be useful and that would prove it existed; so it's not.

It's an oversimplification, but yes. On the whole, if something is bad for bacterial cells, it's bad for human cells too. A few exceptions like penicillin are used as antibiotics.

Interesting point, but I think it's moot. If I can't tell you what a "plingybob" is then you can't tell me if it exists or not, but if I can't prove that a "plingybob" exists then it doesn't matter what it is.

"I think capital punishment is a different issue. Slaves had no choice in becoming slaves. People on death row are convicted in a court of law because they have committed crimes of the worst form." and the best plan you can think of is to be a killer too. Incidentally about 5 or 10 % of the people on death row have mental health problems. Their capacity to make a choice may be debatable. Anyway, back to the original question. Yes, it makes perfectly good sense to me to commemorate the deaths of the confederates' soldiers. Then again, I'm from the other side of the pond.

At the very least, you would need to know about the size of the magnet etc. Also, if the coin is silver then the answer is "never". There are other issues too. The question is not well enough defined to answer it.

There's not enough data to answer the question.

Unless the burner is designed to deal with gas at 3.3 MPa then this is, at best, not going to work. Most of the Bunsens I have seen are designed to work with about 200 mmH2O (A seriously non SI unit) equivalent to 2.5 KPa i.e. a thousand times less gas.

I have a rough idea of what a soul is as an abstract concept. What I lack is any evidence that such a concept is meaningful. "The fairies at the bottom of my garden" is a logically valid concept, but that doesn't mean they are real. I think the question is not so much "what is a soul?" as "why should I believe that a soul exists?"

Fair point, but there's still the distinction between "denatures" and "destroys". The bleach not only kills bugs, it kills any argument about "contamination" from the ether.

CharonY is not perfectly correct in saying that the body avoids making these nasty chemicals. Generally it does so but, sometimes it makes them deliberately. It makes these aggressive chemicals so it can use them as weapons. Does anyone really them getting about indiscriminately? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Respiratory_burst

This http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Bourgeat-Excellence-88pt-40cm-16-Stock-Pot-lid_W0QQitemZ250461211393QQcmdZViewItemQQptZUK_HomeGarden_Kitchen_Cookware_GL?hash=item3a50a6cb01#ht_500wt_956 is the most expensive stainless steel saucepan currently on sale on Ebay (UK). It's about £200. How much would it cost to clean up after a spill of hot strong NaOH solution (even assuming it doesn't harm anyone)? (Incidentally, since it has an aluminium base, I'd not use this particular pot, but I'm sure you get the idea)

What's the big difference? The USA has huge industrial and military reserves. If some country attacked the US with, for example, chemical weapons then the US could deliver enough good old TNT to erase any and all major population centres in that country. Promising not to use nukes just makes it slightly more expensive in the short term (and probably cheaper in the long terms because fallout goes worldwide. It's not a real military sacrifice to give up on first use of nukes if you are the richest country in the world. BTW, Bascule, have you read about this? http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/sci_tech/highlights/010117_mousepox.shtml

Do you need more information than you could have found here? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermogravimetric_analysis If so then a more specific question would help; other wise try http://tinyurl.com/y8htywv

I doubt that there could be any active viruses in ether but, if you want to prove the point, shaking the ether with bleach then washing it carefully with water would destroy anything with proteins in it. This approach would be pointless, but not lethal.

By the way. Why bother?

I think you need a pressure regulator.