Cap'n Refsmmat

Basically. If you learn one property of a particle, you cannot learn another with great certainty.

I have never studied (revised, for you Britishers). This will probably screw me over in the long run, but it's served incredibly well so far.

Why does that mean the reference frame doesn't exist? It's a valid perspective to use, isn't it?

The question of whether physical objects exist when not observed is an unanswered one because quantum physics doesn't have a satisfactory answer (according to the books I've read).

Yeah, probably docking rings. They'd be painted to make them more visible. American subs may not have the painted rings, but they do have escape hatches.

Economies of scale.

Don't worry. We feed him

No. The uncertainty principle would, in that case, be easily violated by measuring the properties of entangled photons -- you can measure one property in one photon and the other property in the other photon and then know each with great certainty, violating the uncertainty principle. That's not the case. Even a measuring device that somehow doesn't alter the photon at all cannot measure both properties at once.

I've taken exams in which I've been told that I am never allowed to discuss any question from the exam. It's not unusual.

Suppose we have an alien in a spaceship with a telescope watching the bench being made and built from the very beginning. There is no longer a "before." It has been observed by two different observers from the start, and they disagree on the length. You cannot find an "intrinsic length" in such a situation.

Because the correlation between words of different languages is inexact at best. Turkish, for example, cannot express the concept of "having fun." It simply doesn't exist in the language.

I suggest you purchase a copy of the book Misquoting Jesus, by Bart D. Ehrman, as a good overview of what's been added and removed in various different manuscripts of the Bible over the years.

Sound is simply matter in one of the other phases vibrating. You can have sound travel through water (jump in a swimming pool), air (of course), solids (put your ear on a table and tap it), and presumably the other phases such as plasma, although I'd hesitate putting your ear to plasma. No extra phase necessary.

I think the best thing to do here is to postpone further criticism until Graviphoton has a chance to compile a sufficient explanation of his exact methodology. I, for one, do not doubt that one could easily find patterns in the Bible, the Koran, War and Peace, or Cryptonomicon if one looks hard enough. Some may be intentional (as JohnB pointed out). Before we draw that conclusion for Graviphoton's selected passages I suggest we look at what sort of statistical analysis he did.

That's true, but I tweaked the system so the veteran members only have slightly more weight -- at one point during the last time we tested the system YT was giving and taking dozens of points at once. And yes, negative reputations are possible but not allowed. So the only people with scores less than 10 are those that had them left over from the last time we experimented with reputations.

I'm talking about what this means about the writer of the "fairy tales", not the discoverer.

If you mean the "antimatter is on a distinguished road" sort of things, sure: can only hope to improve: > -50 has a little shameless behaviour in the past: > -10 is a decent person: > 10 is on a distinguished road: > 20 will become famous soon enough: > 50 has a spectacular aura about: > 150 and, well, nobody's gotten past that yet, I think.

Assuming you did actually produce sodium hydroxide, you should remember that it's a strong base and would be caustic if it touched your skin. Handle it with care (preferably with gloves). If some comes in contact with your skin (or anything else you value), wash it off immediately.

What, exactly, would this imply (assuming you are entirely correct)? That someone writing that section of the Bible thought it would be cool to make words add up?

Does that mean that in case of a Splenda shortage we can recover it from septic treatment plants? I'll have to add that to my master disaster plan.

They certainly wouldn't be very effective at sound absorption.

So it sounds like all it is is a really fancy sound absorber. Isn't that what sofas are for? Any soft material will absorb sound. As for the RFI absorption: just use shielded cables. Voila, problem solved.

I opened this week's New Scientist and was in for a bit of a shock when I saw a full-page ad title "No Black Holes (General Relativity Contradicts Itself)". The clincher: Surprise! You can read the full text of the ad here (we may leave a comment to let the author know we're discussing his ad). I'm naturally a tad skeptical (the argument doesn't make sense to me), but I thought I'd open this up to a typical SFN free-for-all. What do you think? Another crackpot?

No.

We caused a huge increase in C-14 levels via nuclear testing, so I doubt the effect would make much difference.