JaKiri

Look at it this way. How does your theory, which doesn't actually postulate anything that can't be explained by simpler theories, actually help?

Only if Murphy's Law is part of Jude Law.

If you define a creationist as someone who believes the world was created by a god, then you're right. If you're referring to the more popular definition (people who believe in the absolute truth of Genesis) then you're not.

Because Call of Duty is about to finish installing, I must be blunt. SHUT UP

This thread needs more Yoko Kanno.

No. NQP.

.....Whut?

It's generally used for looking for 3D irregularities in the interiors of stars!

Then it's not science. GET OFF MY INTERNET

It's to do with the optical properties of the substances, which change the speed which light propagates.

Not in 3D, no. In 2D, you can't really do it, hence the way it changes all the time.

What?

Fewer caps please. Oh, and Physics will always be just... Physics. And any degree course will cover all you need to know, or at least all you need to know to get you onto a PhD in the relevent subject. Of course, Natural Sciences is a good bet (The tripos course that is)

It won't be broken on the intramolecular level, it'll be broken on the intermolecular level, which is much less energy intensive.

That doesn't really show what it's like. It's like trying to show 3D perspective by drawing a line.

The reason that the force is said to be much stronger than gravity is (as a comparison of basic units) each particle has MUCH more charge than it has mass. You won't be significantly affected by an electromagnet (a few of your particles may change spin states, that kind of thing), because, except for ions, it all cancel's out over long distances, because you have a net charge of 0 (equal numbers of protons and electrons) in the same approximate space. This is why gravity actually operates over large distances, whilst EM doesn't; there isn't any antimass. (Well, ish)

Agree to disagree, then

You know 3D specs? That kind of thing.

The only way I can see it being a 'message' to the world is if it's sensationalised. Hence the comments about tabloids.

You're not factoring in the expansion of space. It wasn't 13 billion light years away 13 billion years ago.

I don't see the problem with relying on their scientific accuracy (as I said before). If you don't think they were AWARE of the scientific method, how do you think Germany produced some of the best physicists of the 20th century? As for using the data, it of course depends (mostly) on how the tabloids spin it.

Songs or music? If it includes the latter, Bach's Concerto for Flute, Violin and Harpsichord in A Minor. If not, Radiohead's Street Spirit (fade out).

I don't see quite where this is going, or what it's meant to demonstrate.

No, a force of 1N would do it. Might take a long time, but it'd do it.

Intensity decreases as the area over which things are spread increases, duder.