JaKiri

Gravitons, yes.

IT'S A WAVE DAMMIT, A WAVE

The quantity of matter wouldn't double, just the space between the particles would. This doens't really work with a constant speed of light, mind.

It's a latin word, from which we get things like 'situate'. It's to do with location, obviously.

It'd almost certainly be more efficient to mine it in situ. If you possibly can, always situate what you're doing near the required natural conditions for it to be done. Things like putting nuclear power stations next to rivers.

Rock is good, but it all depends on WHAT rock, and where it's at. There isn't that much of a benefit of having something extrasolar in any case, if you're lacking resources it makes it doubly pointless.

Well, it's not his theory. It's Scott Adams's jokey suggestion. Contraction wouldn't work for definite though.

The asteroid belt is the best bet for most things.

The main trouble with extrasolar stations is that there's a distinct lack of natural resources, especially metals.

You should actually base your thing on some kind of fact, other than just saying 'it's like this, because it is'. And the most important element for life (as we know it) is Carbon. By far. You can get anaerobic life, you can definitely get life which isn't aquatic in any sense of the word, but you can't get life without carbon.

How do orbits work?

It's the electrostatic repulsion between the groups of electrons that stop things passing through other things.

Because it has a theorised exchange particle. And particle wave duality means that it's a wave. Sort of.

http://www.scienceforums.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=90 VS http://www.scienceforums.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=3173

Gravity is a wave of a sort, in terms of exchange particles. But it doesn't mean he's right.

Time stops if you travel at the speed of light, but that's impossible. It's also a fallacy to say that if we can slow time, we can stop time, given that the change is asymptotic with 0.

osama q hitler terrorist bush white house kill. THEY'RE ONTO ME

FOR THE LOVE OF GOD. DO NOT BUMP 2 YEAR OLD THREADS WITH ONE WORD REPLIES THAT ADD NOTHING.

The chemical formula of water was discovered long before I was born, so even if your statement was accurate, it'd be pointless. Unless you're talking of fluid dynamics, which is a much more interesting topic.

Carbon dating is useless for long time differences anyway. Furthermore, it only works on earth, and has several assumptions. It's that kind of reason that makes me wince in Babylon 5 - Thirdspace, when they find something floating in hyperspace and carbon date it to several million years old.

What?

No, it flew off into the sunset. The one on Ganymede, though, is a different story.

Again, it looks like circles and some wiggles. It doesn't really show anything, other than that my monitor can show many colours at once.

Two seperate questions I reckon.

It's ok, it'll all end when JC Denton blows up Area 51.