grifter

I think it is very hard to generalize upon what energy is, one can describe it as: the capacity of a system to do work. so to simplify it further: It is the ability of a system to do work, I agree with Swansont, this is more of a metaphysics question... --edit-- I've really got to read the above posts, I've just repeated everything swansont said --edit--

Thats true, I'm glad to see an area of Science not related to String or M; getting some attention, as oppose to those two ludicrous fields of research gaining all funding and all significant minds in the world of science.

lol too much H20 for my liking! and word to the wise, IMP the pressure wont be zero, It'll be 1 bar

I happened to read the exact same article: "Non-Metric Gravity: Spherically Symmetric Solution, Missing Mass and Redshifts of Quasars on the recommendation of a friend, They certainly do take a different approach: their "scale-dependent modification of gravity" as oppose to traditionally modifying the Hilbert–Einstein action by 1./ extra dimensions. 2./ introduction of more fields 3./ more derivatives. now comes the interesting part: the geometric structure of the theory itself is remodeled; making it non metric with regard to the above three points. The formal general-relativistic cosmological equations are also left unaltered (And as a free bonus...) The current theory predicts the appearance of an additional redshift factor between regions of different space-time curvature. This effect can be used to account for the observed high redshifts of quasars. This is an interesting take on modified grav' and I would suggest it as a read, it has gone a little way to convince me but I think some fine tuning is required: i.e. i don't like how there theory (without metric modifications) excludes black holes below a certain size, but none-the less, very interesting; give it a read

Right; I've just checked out one of your sources : http://www.wisdomofsolomon.com/bigbang.html The websites opening statemnt is: Enter the Realms of Expanded Consciousness & Metaphysical Studies. . . the author describes himself as Paul Solomon Friend and Mentor World Teacher of Spiritual Studies please dont post your random thoughts (and those of others) based on nothing but some guys over-active conspiracy gene... never-the-less: the site quotes John Nelson as saying: The big question is whether the planet will disappear in the twinkling of an eye. It is astonishingly unlikely that there is any risk - but I could not prove it this is like me saying : The big question is whether tonight we will be consumed by a black hole created by my cat. It is astonishingly unlikely that there is any risk - but I could not prove it

CERN is Fantastic, I can certainly recommend it, I have now visited three times, I just can't get enough of those muon Detectors About the only possible cause for concern is the residual radiation, it will mean that for the period during the experiment and for a little while afterwords, the immediate area will become un-manned. What's all this talk of black holes? I think you may have the wrong end of the proverbial universe stick... Anyway, CERN is definitely worth the trip over to Geneva, but go quickly, as in the not-to-distant future they will complete the LHC (Large Hadron Collider.) and that means curtains for the visit!

The annihilation of neutrinos and antineutrinos results in the formation of (e+)(e-) pair Plasma. if anyone would like me to post a little more (Okay so it's quite allot...) regarding the nature of the plasma produced as a result of the above: post below

i did actually write the parameters of A and B and yes i realize it is of limited scope and somewhat hopeless, thanks for pointing that out I think perhaps my lapse in intelligence was from experimenting with the formula using beer

I'm dropping in a touch late but i have an almost identical frog that lives around my lake, (SW.england). Apparently; (according to my nature-loving friend), its a common frog, but this is in no way my area of expertise... P.S. I think Julius is a good name...

pour the 10 pint glass (filled) in to the 7 pint glass, twice, the excess gets you 6... 2(10-7) = 6 general rule would equal X(A-B)=3X re arranges to give X/3(A-B)=X where A is 10 and B is 7... so if you wanted to find how many times to fill the 7p glass from the 10p glass to get X number of pints, substitute the value of pints for X e.g. 15 pints would equal 15/3(10-7) 5(10-7) and yes, no suprises it equals 15 hope this isn't to obvious but just incase anyone hadn't allready worked it out

ouch, what is this, a head bitting competition? IN MY OPINION (see disclaimer) I believe that most arguments made in science involving statistics/ evidence involve (to varying levels) "manipulation" and in some cases data becomes highly selective, despite this, it occurs on both sides of arguments, e.g. the oil company's of this world, will select data "dumbing down" global warming, and other organizations, wishing to insight change i.e. greenpeace who want a reduction in green house gas emissions will select data that shows HUGE changes in emissions, and showing the negative effects. these two sides of the arguments "selective statistics" will (to varying degrees) cancel each other out, therefore this issue is only of concern when there is only one side of the argument, i.e. no counter argument, and as this is VERY rarely the case, it begs the question... what difference does it make???

Is it just me or can we end all this by saying 2 + 2 = 5 for relatively high values of 2 e.g. 2.4 + 2.4 = 4.8 rounding all the above vales to the nearest whole integer gives us 2 + 2 = 5 everyone happy?

Like the number 13, oops I mean the number *bleep, bleep* oh and notice the post who mentioned this taboo number topic, yes thats right folks, this is no mere coincidence.....this, my friends is a conspiracy, one aimed at that most taboo number. No but on a slightly more serious note, i think censoring "rude" words is useful in some situations, including games, despite the HUGELY effective method of writing the number "16" on a game the is a remote minuscule chance that your younger brother or sister may walk past and hear some guy screaming something "rude" as he shoots the living daylights out of some totally innocent shopkeeper, and they may repeat said profanity in front of grandmother, and that isn't right now...is it? And before someone says, "yea but grifter that same kid saw a guy blowing someones brains out, so why is swearing such a big deal" my preemptive strike of a response is: yes, this is true, but it is very unlikely said younger person will shoot grandmother, (or other innocent civilian) namely because they don't posses a gun or have easy access to one, BUT this child certainly does have a mouth, and that is a dangerous weapon!

string theory is a disgrace, draining vital funding, resources (not to mention physicists,) from all other areas of physics, thank goodness that the majority of people are beginning to see sense, the disillusionment that String has fueled is finally dissipating, and I couldn't be happier

ha ha I was wondering what was up with the green tails, so I spose this is out of my field lol, sorry about the confusion, i keep my astrophysics to myself in future lol

Wow, this thread died.... BUMP

I wouldn't call myself an expert but i hope i can help a little there are normally two tails produced by a comet : One tail is due to the comet's dust particles, the other is due to ionized gas from the comet (coma) this coma is the comet's atmosphere which is capable of extending for millions of miles and is super thin. the easy way to distinguish the two comes from the ion tail's special interaction with the Interplanetary Magnetic Field (IMF), this causes the ion tail to always points directly away from the Sun. if you are measuring the coma I would measure to the point at which the coma becomes fragmented, i.e. ignore the "chunks" breaking away from the comet as these will cause the length of the comets tail to change i.e. if you took the picture a second later that chunk could be allot further back therefore the comets tail would be much larger... at least this way the tail remains at a almost constant length you may also wish to measure the length of the ion tail (so long as its a good picture) also so long as you aren't dealing with Comet Hyakutake considering it's tail was measured at a whopping 570 million kilometres!!!

maybe not ban-able but definatley punishable by death...

here in Europe, at this time of year, we are all given the gift of the EURO-VISION SONG CONTEST where each country chooses a "pop group" and enters them in to this magical competition. For those of us in the EU please post which nation you think will win this superb competition and which will recieve (nill points) and for those of you not in the EU: you can feel ashamed that your local neighborhood economic policy decision makers have not gifted you with the chance of preforming in-front of your geographical peers, excuse the gross overload of sarcasm, but the euro-vision song contest is such a joke, plus us hear in the UK get Terry Wogan (Irish Comedian) commentating upon the whole surreal experience...

hmm allot of energy, energy that you could harness from the huge temperature difference, sounds like home to me

In a word...No, space is expanding equally in all directions, so no matter if you were looking "right or left" the distances would have expanded the same ammonunt, going back to what has to be my favourite analagy: a baloon, with lots of dots on, consider looking form one of the dots to two other dots, in different directions, the balloon is blown up, the distance between the two of the dots will increase by the same factor, get it?

Okay i did have an explanation but i saw Martin's Superior one above and I figured that mine was pretty much covering old ground, nice one Martin however, if you want any further info feel free to give me a shout and ill be happy to stick something up here. ---------------------edit--------------------- back by popular demand: my original post... I think this is what you are referring to... if not i apologies. Cosmological redshift is explained by a different mechanism to standard doppler namely Hubble's law which is the apparent correlation of redshifts & distances (often required by cosmology models derived from GR that have a metric expansion of space...(another story)) this means; photons which are propagating through the expanding space are "stretched", thus creating the cosmological redshift, which differs from the classic Doppler effect described above, which can be explained by the velocity increase or "Lorentz transformation" between the source and observer that is not due to the classical transfer of momentum and energy, instead the photon's wavelength and redshift increases as the space through which they are traveling "expands" I hope this in some way helps, if you don't get it then post below and I'll try and explain it a bit clearer ---------------------edit---------------------

I'm sorry, I just read the above post, ha ha ah anyway, I’m planning on a career In astrophysics, I'm gunna try the ESA they seem like a nice bunch. Try emailing them and asking them what positions they need, I’m pretty certain they'll be in need of someone with a degree...

wow martin thanks for the vote anyway my nominations follow: 1. Klaynos 2. Severian 3. Insane Alien 4. Sisyphus 5. Insane Alien 6. (I'm sorta new here, it would be a guess)

since sound waves are longitudinal, its impossible to relate them to light waves, as with sound waves, the direction of oscillation is along the direction of travel. so polarization cannot occur.... think of a normal light "wave" traveling in many planes (like the points on a compass) then once it has been polarized think of the light traveling only in one plane i.e. ----\|/----> this is unpolarized (direction of travel -->) (ignore the dots) ....../|\ ........./ ------/-----> this light is polarized (direction of travel -->) (ignore dots) ......./ try not to think of my random lines as light emitting from a central point, as that is NOTHING TO DO WITH POLARIZATION instead thing of the waves traveling along the screen in this direction -----> instead of light traveling in many different planes (unpolarized) think of the light in a single plain (polarized) i hope this poor description helps, for a better worded version with images that will have more meaning than mine check this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polarization