Wai

Greenpeace and the alike claim that Japan has been whaling in the Australian Whale Sanctuary. Is this area that they're referring to really the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary, where Australia only has a partial claim, and scientific whaling is legal? Also, the refuelling by the Oriental Bluebird is located south of the southern 60th parallel, where there are no territorial claims. Greenpeace continues to hide the fact that only commercial whaling (i.e. what Norway is doing) is banned from the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary, but scientific whaling is allowed. I think the Japanese put a lot of effort into their research. Whale meat consumption is dropping in Japan, but they still continue to kill around the same number of whales, so I doubt selling of the meat is their primary focus. Why would they kill more whales if no-one wants to eat them? I think they just need more samples, since aquatic mammals would be more difficult to study than land ones.

I have to give a speech to my class arguing that whaling is overpublicised, thanks to anti-whaling groups for attention and funds. Does the International Whaling Commission commend Japan's research papers? How many research papers have Japan written? Nick Gales from Australia says they've only written a mere 43 or so in 18 years, while Dan Goodman from Canada says they've written over 130. Even if Japan hasn't written a lot, or have made little progress, it doesn't mean that they haven't been trying. I'd like to hear from other scientists on this forum in regards to this issue. Thanks!

Thanks! I think I've got the right answer now.

Is it the New Century Schoolbook font?

What is the name of the font used to make the mathematical objects? Eg. [math]y = x^2 - 6x + 8[/math]

How do I express 1/(x^4 + 1) as a partial fraction, without using imaginary numbers? I'm having trouble finding the values of a and b.

Ah... I get it now

Our class was given a "ridiculously hard" extension maths project. I've been able to answer all the questions except one. This is the problem: --------------------- The variable [math]x[/math] is defined: [math]x = 1/2^2 + 1/3^2 + 1/4^2 + 1/5^2 ...[/math] Express the infinite sum [math]1 + 1/2^2 + 1/4^2 + 1/6^2 + 1/8^2 ...[/math] in terms of [math]x[/math]. --------------------- Could someone please give me a clue to solving this? I don't even know where to start. The teacher who wrote the project has received quite a lot of complaints lol.

Does anyone know of a site that lists the "standard" colour codes used to represent atoms of certain elements in structural models? For example, some common ones I know are: Hydrogen: White Nitrogen: Blue Oxygen: Red Carbon: Black I know colour codes vary, but is there a commonly used colour to represent silicon?

Whoops... typo there. Thanks

Hi everyone, I'm just curious, is there a rule or pattern for calculating the charge of a polyatomic or radical ion such as sulfate and cyanide? For example, carbonate has a charge of 2-, and phosphite has a charge of 3-. How can you work out their charges without "memorising" them off a sheet? Thanks

I'm asking these questions because I've honestly never done them in class, the teacher was absent today, and I haven't been able to find the solution in the textbook: An eye of mean diamter 2.5 cm has a near point of 15 cm and far point of 120 m. 1. When this eye looks at an object placed at its far point, what will it's focal length be? 2. When an object is 1 cm from the eye, what is the power of the eye's focusing system in dioptres? I've done all the other questions that I was given, and this is due tomorrow. Once again, thanks for guiding us students.

Apart from carbon and silicon, are there any other good conductors of electricity that are metalloids or non-metals?

I was just confused with that question because my textbook was rating reactivity as: Very reactive: Caesium, fluorine etc. Reactive: Aluminium, magnesium etc. Unreactive: Gold etc. Very unreactive: Helium, neon etc. The question said "very unreactive", so I assumed that it would be something like a noble gas. If it just said "unreactive", then I would have looked onto carbon a little more.

Yeah, I know what subshells are. So it should be carbon then.