JaKiri

The larger radius you have, the less powerful the magnetic field has to be to have the same speed, and, similarly, the faster you can go with the same magnetic field. The particle accelerators we're using at the moment don't produce anywhere near the energy for the collisions we'd like to investigate, hence the building of things such as the LHC at Cern.

Everyone comes round to my house and uses my chess set.

It wouldn't work, because the engineering constraints are so enormous. It's a small step from this to a dyson sphere, you know.

I imagine blike changed it. It being christmas and all.

I say 'Bah' to this yahoo chess. I'm really lazy.

You're defending the wrong part of your argument. I'd argue with the late term thing, depending on how late term is defined.

According to Mohammed Al Fayad anyway, and outside this area he's a lying, cheating, stealing crook. That's a kind of clothing

One way to work it out (I don't know if it is the way that has been used): 1. Estimate the size of the universe. 2. Estimate the energy concentration between galaxies and in galaxies (this isn't as hard as it seems). 3. Work out the galaxy concentration of the universe (again, samples should do)

It's not ignored, it's just negligable at both temperatures. For instance, if you have 1.0000000000000000000000kg of water at 3K. When you cool it to 0K it'll have a mass of 9.9999999999999999999985kg.

Deus Ex runs on the Unreal Engine.

How about an infinite number of (potential) days in prison?

My sister has an iPod Mini, she seems to like it. Although according to Wiggles, iTunes has if anything gotten worse.

It depends if it's QM or not. It's fairly likely to be the everyday version.

Well would you look at that. Literally!

We've got a live one! Moved to pseudoscience, although pseudoreality might be a better bet.

Then we agree, thread over.

Welcome to the world of 'coincidence'. Also statistics. Similarly: If you have 20 people, how likely is it that two of them will share a birthday?

It's another of those fun instances where a reply to my post is replied to by the origional post. The term isn't "copyright" "theft", it's "copyright theft". It's not theft, in the same way that if eating a banana was termed "banana theft" that wouldn't be theft either. It's only theft if and only if the conditions for theft are fulfilled. Changing the name of something just doesn't cut the mustard.

Again, that's not selling the pseudoscience, that's selling the bunkum behind it. Damn Hawking.

So what you're saying is one game... you've never played has less story than another game. You've never played. The plots of Half Life and Doom are almost identical; add in the Half Life style 'everything's not gone to hell yet' opening sequence in Doom III and the game IS nigh on identical. Except Doom III has all the PDAs and the like, and some kind (but not much) explanation. To be honest, Doom III has a much more fleshed out plot than Half Life. In Half Life, and to an extent Half Life 2, you're just bumbling along from event to event, with very little (if any) exposition. In HL1, this is done by the G-Man. In HL2... Time, Dr Freeman? That is all, to an extent, true, but it's based on opinion. It's an immersion thing, something that most games do very badly. Look at Doom III; you keep going to 3rd person all the time, which is just idiotic. It's also something that almost all games have copied. Halo has it, don't forget. It takes about 5-10 minutes at most, and for quite a lot of that you don't actually have to be at your computer. What kind of attention span have you got? Don't play Half Life 2 without playing Half Life 1. You'll miss a lot of the point of the events, and all of the references to the previous game. Furthermore, quite a lot of the game is designed behind the idea that you've played HL1; the enemies, for example. And you gave up on Deus Ex because you didn't like the graphics? Christ. I don't like the Unreal engine either, but that's fairly extreme. No-One Lives Forever. A spoof '60s spy game by Monolith, the makers of (amongst other things), Shogo: MAD.

You're assuming that electrons stop moving at 0K, or at least that they lose their quantum fuzz. I'm not sure that is the case; 0K has the minimum energy for the thang to be stable, not no energy at all. Yes, you are. Any change in energy represents a change in mass, just (usually) an exceptionally tiny one. I know of no special conditions around 0K that would change this.

No, that's not it. I've never heard a name for it, it's always stated in a 'When you gaze into the abyss, etc' way.

Revenge isn't a good basis for governance.