Cap'n Refsmmat

It was in New Scientist... I'll see if they have it online... nope, not online. Only in the magazine.

I really doubt it. The actual fissionable uranium is only a small percentage of all of the uranium in the ore, and also, the uranium in the ore is not concentrated either.

Now that you mention it... http://capnrefsmmat.blogspot.com/ Much better. And yes, I may hire people to post other science topics along with me. (don't go jumping for it, though. Just be patient)

That's right, I made a science/technology blog thingy. Originally I only had it since I hit "subscribe" on someone else's blog, and I ended up having one myself. So I took the advantage. Since I just got a subscription to New Scientist, and I already had subscriptions to Popular Mechanics, Popular Mechanics, Smithsonian, Discover, and Air and Space, I'll have plenty of articles. (okay, I admit, some of them are from other people in the family) Here it is: http://capnrefsmmat.blogspot.com/

I thought the average IQ was always 100?...

Never bothered. It was a good idea, but I never had the time. I spend a lot of my time programming my calculator to do things, rather than building stuff.

I'm hoping to get the thing published on ticalc.org, which is probably the largest TI calculator reference on the internet,

Not only is that spam on ExtraDense's part, but now you two are spamming as well. Who remembers what happened to TrueLove when he insulted Sayonara?

Details please! What browser then? OS? Etc.

What email program?

Can someone else please tell me then?

No, I'm fine. I've just been doing some math here... I'm glad I spotted your equations! However, I'd like to know: how could I fit something like spring rate (kg of force absorbed per meter, or a similar scale) in that equation?

Note: When I tried the equations, I came out with a slightly higher number. Odd. edit: No, it's because my calculator includes all of the decimals and such, which changes the numbers a bit. Works out to 58,137.767 N on the calculator.

Thanks for the variables. Now I can do what I need to do...

What do all of the variables stand for? I need to know how to do that for something that I am doing.

Whoa... what app is that?

The computers can handle it pretty well as it is. Besides, that's more weight and more radar-reflecting surfaces.

If you leave it on for a few hours without use, at least set it to turn the hard drive off after a while.

I do. I love it. If you're looking for others, it also depends on what depth you're looking for. Either the raw reports by the scientists themselves, or a report on the report. New Scientist is the latter. Scientific American may be good for that, I think... I have only occaisonally seen it though, so I may not be right.

BOTH of them just happened ten minutes ago. ARRRRGH! I thought the server advertised good uptime...

My reasons: It's boring. It's boring. It's boring. It's boring. It's boring. It's boring.

Didn't Mossad kill a guy with a bomb in his phone?

Route one: Save it on your computer as a JPG or PNG (to save space). Below the "reply to thread" box (not the quick reply) there is an "attach file" option. Click "Manage Attachments" and upload one. Route two: Upload a file to http://www.imageshack.us. Use the img tag to post it.

Two things: How the heck did they do that? Where can I get one?

Lenin on a shower curtain! from badastronomy.com