Cap'n Refsmmat

That wouldn't be the mass in Newtons, that would be the weight. You wouldn't get a number in Joules that way because of the way the units work out. See my post above.

You wouldn't be able to pump air up that far just by sucking with a pump at the top -- you'd need to push the air up from the bottom and probably at several stations along the way. A space shuttle in orbit less than 200 miles usually has its orbit decay (assuming no boosters) within a month. Dropping a tube down to suck up extra air would no doubt make it happen much, much faster. And it would probably spin the spacecraft.

No.

Okay, look, Mr. Enigmatic, you're never going to get a point across unless you decide to elaborate and explain. This Socratic question-and-answer style is getting you nowhere. Unless you decide to elucidate much more clearly, I'm just going to close this thread. It's clearly not going anywhere.

Calculus. Do explain.

Why?

Or simply enclose it in single quotes instead of double quotes. PHP does not parse variables in single-quoted strings.

You seem to be trying to prove that the math is wrong. It is not. If you give me a quarter of a pie, you gave me 25% of it. If you divided it into four unequal pieces and give me one, you do not give me 1/4 of a pie -- you give me 2/3 or 3/7 or whatever proportion the one piece you gave me is. The math is not broken. So are you trying to prove that since math can be wrong, photons accelerate?

What the hell do pies have to do with light accelerating? Look. You could have a 99% slice and three 0.33% slices. Now, what's your point? Is there even a point to this?

WMAP merely looks at the cosmic microwave background. It has not generated an image of all matter and energy. This is not true. The galaxies have not been measured to all be moving away from a central point. The distance between them has merely been observed to increase. What this means is this: The galaxies are not all "moving" per se. The universe is expanding and the galaxies move apart with it. It's like drawing dots on a balloon and then inflating it -- the dots stretch apart, but they're not moving on the balloon. So we can't say "over there, at that point, is the center of the universe." Everything used to be the center, since the entire universe is involved in the expansion. There is no need to be so condescending and rude. The point of this forum is to allow people to learn, not to allow you to tell those you think are less intelligent than you to bugger off.

Twin studies are a good start. First you find a bunch of identical twins (who have identical DNA) and see how much difference there is between them in various traits (like visual-spatial skills). Next, find fraternal twins (who only share about half of their DNA) and see how much difference there is between them. If there is more difference, it is likely that the trait is genetically determined. I'd have to do some research to see what studies have been done.

Could you try to maintain a bit more civility in future responses? I don't think hostility is required here.

Clever. Another scary thought is some viruses and malicious sites try to log into your router from your computer using the default password so they can reconfigure it to do what they'd like. Change the default password!

There are lots of different parts of basic physics -- kinematics (moving things), dynamics (forces and such), electricity and magnetism, waves, etc. Which are you most interested in? I might be able to find something for you.

The experimental style's improvements have been added back in to the default style for everybody's enjoyment. If you notice any bugs, send me a PM or post a comment here. I hope everyone enjoys the tweaks.

Lindt.

Just write $latex LaTeX Equation Here$ and you'll have it.

So basically you'd have to make it a bit colder if you wanted to freeze a stronger pipe?

I'll bet they would be on their own lines if you used WordPad. Notepad doesn't recognize \n as a line-ending character and insists on \r\n. Thanks for the hint though. There might be a custom dictionary browser extension...

Take a look at this: http://www.icefield.yk.ca/www/products/radar/radar.htm

I could tweak the templates and do it. I'll try that in the morning.

You should be able to do tables now. Let's try and see ...but it's a bit quirky. I'd have to play with it for a while to make the alignment problems go away, and you might break the post layout if you do it wrong.

In my neighborhood here in Texas we have the water flow valves to each house above ground, apparently due to some building code. This means that, of course, the valves freeze over the winter and start leaking water everywhere. So, a question: Suppose I were to take a very strong pipe and freeze the water in it. Would it break just as easily as a weak pipe would, since water will expand as it freezes regardless of its container, or would it withstand the force? I was thinking two things could happen: the strength of the container would mean increased pressure on the water as it started freezing (since it would try to expand and fail), meaning more energy would be required to freeze the water and break the container; or, the freezing water would merely extrude itself along the insides of the pipe rather than breaking it. Which explanation makes the most sense, or would each pipe break at the same time? (We actually put a fake plastic rock over our valve to help protect it from the weather, and that seems to have saved us.)

I once posted at a rate that would give me 9000 posts in about a year... that didn't last, clearly. J'Dona, glad to see you back. Not knowing anything never stopped me

Acrylonitrile butadiene styrene, I'd guess.