imatfaal

A combination of freak occurences - the coincidence of pummice like rock (on some of the greek islands after a storm you will find rocks floating out at sea- bit weird), a very dense lower atmosphere in which a heavy gas forms a blanket over the land much like our oceans, a strong magnetic field which is excluded by the natural room temperature superconductor which makes up the body of the rock, and balloon-like appendages to trees which have gas-sacs of hydrogen as part of their energy storing for winter.

! Moderator Note Nah - Sorry this is ScienceForums.net; even the stuff in the lounge needs a foundation in reality. The lounge is not the right place for an investigation of a "weird dream memory vision" - either you post a sensible message in one of the science fora or a chatty message in the lounge; but an invitation to reconsider history based on an ascientific stream of consciousness is unacceptable anywhere. Please do not post this sort of message again. Thread locked. Respond to this moderation only through the report system

! Moderator Note OK - enough off topic. Please stick to the question.

On the whole the dry lubricants will wash off in the rain and the wet lubricants will persist in the wet weather but get very dirty and claggy. You can get a dry waterproof solution - but it is pant-wettingly expensive and will last for about 250km; professionals only occasionally use it when conditions are very uncertain and the rider feels she needs every possible advantage. It is a sort of wax treatment with a compound including very fine ceramic lubricants - you might see half a dozen total uses through the 3 weeks and 198 riders of the tour de france. It is also amazingly slick - in a pursuit of vanishingly small returns I think it is one of the silliest and only worth (?) looking at once every time saving kink has already been implemented. On the whole I use muc-off dry lubricant (never pay full price - it will be reduced to less than half price somewhere) through the spring and summer - but as soon as there are significant puddles on my commute I will switch to some form of wet weather till the spring. Remember the bit you are trying to lubricate is the assembly around the rivet of each link - get the lube there in the first place and wipe off anything else. Also well worth spending a couple of quid on a chain wear gauge. A chain that has gained 1% of length (it is mainly in wear and tear of the cylindrical assembly - not through stretching) will start to damage your expensive chain ring, rear dérailleur, and cassette - and the rate of wear on both the chain and the expensive stuff will get worse if you do not replace the chain. I keep the wear gauge with the lube and check every time - when it gets to 0.75% I start thinking about buying a new chain so that the first time I lube and it has reached 1% I already have a chain ready to replace with

! Moderator Note Theoretical You were warned about this before - you will not be warned again; if you are asked a question please try to answer it - DO NOT claim to have already answered it (yet refuse to provide a link) - DO NOT insult the members nor impugn their knowledge - and it is probably best to actually respond to the question asked rather than providing spurious answers to only vaguely related points. Respond to this moderation only via through the reporting system. Additionally - do not whine about it in User Status updates nor in other threads.

You're editing wikipedia without the first idea of the topic? Think of a frictionless slope and a natural frictional slope. In one case the ball will slide down - in the second it will roll down. They are NOT the same situation. I suggested an energy audit - did you give it a go? Did you answer Studiot's question of why the ball rolls?

" vt = u + ft = 0 + gsin(x) * t " Surely that would be the equation of a block/ball sliding down a frictionless slope. A ball rolling down a slope has a complete other factor to be considered - which your other points show you are keeping in mind - and which I will not spoil the fun by mentioning. To give a hint: create your model based on conservation of energy, consider at start of experiment a still ball at height h1 and at the end a rolling ball at h2. Hint 2 - it is not the same as the frictionless slope equation given above

Stop that!

The Curie Point of a Neodymium Magnet is 320 C

I think you pretty much can although I am on very thin ice here - you need to use a metric which describes a non-inertial uniformly accelerating frame in otherwise flat space; this is the Rindler Metric. A test particle which is at rest in this coordinate system is undergoing constant acceleration. The same time dilation will fall out as the calculation you will have seen for gravitational potential. This sort of time dilation is very much based on the coordinate system that you are doing your calculation on and I am not sure if you can replicate these results if you set your frame as inertial and try to work from there

! Moderator Note I concur. Thread locked. You have failed to fulfill the requirements of the Speculations forum given many opportunities. Please do not open a second thread on this topic.

You have to make a go at answering - we won't do the work for you.

Unlikely - firstly there would need to be a huge number (numerically more than the stars) and secondly black holes (despite the name) are not very dim. A black hole by itself - completely isolated - would be completely black but they never are by themselves. Their huge density means that the the gravitational forces and gradients are very very large in the vicinity, this means that matter falling into them accelerates to very high speeds, and in order to conserve angular momentum the infalling matter spins in a disc and creates jets outwards along the axes. These accretion discs are very hot (due to stuff bumping into each other) and they glow with ultraviolet and x-ray light, the jets can sometimes create the highest energy gamma radiation making some black holes the brightest things around.

I think the assumption is you "throw" with some sort of automated cannon - 30 per second and you have only two seconds firing that's only 20m/s gained. I seem to remember mythbusters doing calcs for what sort of gun you would need to get off the floor like Yosemite Sam in the Bugs Bunny cartoons. I think it was a couple of miniguns one in each hand - not exactly safe to be around the ricochets. The waterjets you can hire on the beach are obviously throwing back enough water to keep you stable - a little stronger one of those AND a very very long feed hose...

Badstuffhere is in th mod queue. One too many rants about Canadians

! Moderator Note Badstuffhere. Thread locked. I asked you not to open a second thread like this. You have been placed in the mod queue pending staff action. your posts will no longer appear till positively vetted by staff member. Hint - posts like your last will not make the grade..

re Mitts. Not really - I don't suffer really with this problem but more importantly fitting is very personal. My favourite mitts are Bontrager - but only cos my cheap Altura died. Go to Evans or Cycle Surgery and try them all on (and then go on to internet and buy them there!)

Definitely. Maybe Rio games for those poor sods in the open water events . Levels of fecal viral pollution orders of magnitude higher than would be acceptable in EU/USA

Gonna steal that line. The two things I really know about are cycling and criminal law - it might be a bad idea but it ain't criminal. The exhaust fumes of a few well tuned and well maintained new cars whilst riding in a non-built up area with access to breezes is practically zero compared to the pollution - both gaseous and particulate - that anyone living or working in a large city has to put up with. Undoubtedly it would be better if there were to be no hydrocarbon burning cars / motos around the cyclists but the car fumes are the least of most procyclists worries. You cannot really use multiple cars - each team car has tens of thousands of bucks worth of bike attached to the roof rack and a backseat stuffed with team equipment. One missed bike change - in which the team takes 2 minutes rather than 30 seconds - can be the difference between a win and a lose on a three week race.

Different mitts? Or, thinking more rationally, wearing mitts in the first place. Your set up seems very front high back low - but maybe you prefer it that way. FYG I have a 34-35 (87cm) inside leg and my saddle height is 81.5cm from middle of bottom bracket to saddle (measured along the centre of the tube - as much as possible) I have never been a great fan of super clever handle bar grips - I use plain round ones with minimal padding (I dumped my fancy ones) and manage (with mitts) to do over 20miles per commute with no numbness. On my road bike for long trips I will shift hand position regularly - and only get numbness if I settle into one position for prolonged periods (but at that point my back, bum, and shoulders are probably also complaining). It sounds like ulnar nerve problems rather than cervical nerve to me. It sounds like a problem with the Ulnar Nerve and the introduction of that nerve into the palm of the hand via guyons canal - or perhaps later on in the ulnar canal - Function is studying this stuff right now so maybe he can look up clinical symptoms in the back of his functional anatomy text I think it is unlikely to be cervical spinal nerve damage. The thing to search on is Cyclists Palsy or Ulnar Nerve Cycling https://www.britishcycling.org.uk/knowledge/article/izn20140820-Physiotherapy-Ask-the-Experts--Hand-and-wrist-pain-on-the-bike-0 I will always use British Cycling in preference to other sites

For the racing - I suppose technically they don't. One bike per group has commissaires / judges - they also ride in some of the cars. There are also neutral service vehicles and bikes - but they tend to be crap The rest of the cars are team support - and you could just force people to abandon with a puncture or wait a huge amount of time for a car which is further back. They would need to arrange for drinks to be delivered regularly if the team cars were not close The rest of the bikes are media - still and video cameramen. But you would have poorer racing, more cheating, more dangerous (dehydration is a real risk), and no coverage; so it does not seem like an option to have none. To have fewer - yes a good idea. Which everyone would love to see as long as it is not their photographer, their team car etc which is cut from the train

! Moderator Note Thread Locked. This is really not philosophy. And it seems that it is either a conspiracy theory or a web of self-delusion verging on paranoia; neither are fitting topics for a science forum

As pro cyclist will top 100kph on descents - some even hitting 10-20% higher and the motos are there to keep up with - just in front and just behind the cyclists around sharp hairpins you need pretty stonking engines / handling. They mosst use 1000cc or 750cc; because with two people and lots of equipment most other bikes just become difficult to handle

! Moderator Note Ok - Thread Locked Don't open another on the same lines.