pwagen

The difference isn't "a few miles". It actually adds up to about 1745 km (1084.3 miles). That's a 15 degree difference, which is huge compared to your original 26 degrees. And to be frank, the numbers don't add up to 26 degrees anywhere. At all. If this is "child's play", it should be easy to answer, so please do.

Sorry, I totally missed the first video. To me, however, the shapes of the "UFOs" aren't even the same in both videos. In the first video, it still looks like something on the glass of the camera. Smudges or something. Especially since the "UFO" is in two places at once, and it doesn't move from either spot.

But it's not really a minor point. You said that the movement at 40 miles per correlates with the 26 degrees shift of the axis. But the actual figure of 40 km per year is only about 25 miles. Accumulating over a few years, this isn't a marginal error. And I doubt both figures of 40 km and 40 miles correlates to your 26 degrees. So which is it?

Reflections in the windshield?

You say the magnetic north pole is moving at 40 miles per year. Yet, the link you seem to be using as source says it's moving at 40 km per year. Don't take this the wrong way, but if you manage to make such a mistake, perhaps you should look over your work a little more, because there's a high probability it isn't the only mistake you made.

Oh, I didn't mean this one was high on magnesium. Was rather thinking of space rocks in general. Thanks for the info! Will read up on elemental magnesium, never heard the expression before.

Well, unless you completely lack standards, I'm guessing you want your friendly neighborhood program to at least have some intelligence. Let's say the intelligence of a dog would suffice. That means you have to create a brain (either through evolutionary algorithms or something similar, or from scratch). The brain would not only need the basic functions necessary to keep it "alive", but functions like vision, hearing (or other forms of input/output, like feeding it with text) would probably be a good idea. Now, once you have the brain, you would have to make it friendly. You can probably hold a long philosophical discussion on what constitutes as friendliness, how you make someone friendly etc. etc. But let's say we want it to be generally nice, in the broadest sense of the word. The only fathomable way to do this, especially considering how advanced such a brain would have to be, is to teach it. So basically, you'd want it to be able to learn things. Okay, cool. Now you might tell yourself "good, I'll just tell it how to be good". And you couldn't be more wrong, because this is where the fun really starts. Now, you would have to teach it the very basics of our reality. You'd have to teach it how to differentiate itself from the world, teach it who and what you are, teach it language (think teaching a toddler to speak, only worse), make it somewhat conscious, and teach it to interact in all sorts of ways with the world. And, depending on how well you managed to simulate a human (or in this case, dog) brain, chances are it'll be too dissimilar to us for us to understand each other. I personally love the idea of sentient computer programs, but I also realize how far away we are from realizing them. If you feel like taking a stroll down to the library, I can recommend Jeff Hawkins' "On Intelligence" for a more in-depth analysis of the whole issue with artificial intelligence. Otherwise, get a tamagotchi.

Ignoring inflation for a while, are you simply asking why the expansion of the universe is expanding? Because to me, the answer would have nothing to do with inflation, as you point out, since the expansion slowed down after it was over (didn't it?), but has been picking up the pace after the event. I'm sure better knowledgeable will correct me about the details of that description, but the question is; is the original question about the accelerated expansion AFTER inflation?

Demons, if you would have asked the people who wrote the Bible. Thing is, they didn't know anything back then (by today's standards). They had no clue about germs and virus or why the Sun rose in the morning. My best guess is that these "rules" came about over generations of trial and error. Someone might perhaps have become ill after eating a lobster once. So by word of mouth, this turned into a rule, which was then accepted as law, and eventually written down. So while lobster in itself isn't bad for you (prepared right), they suspected something was off, and wrote lobster off the menu. Perhaps later, the whole idea of lobster being bad for you was lost in translation, and only left a rule about not eating it, thus rendering it simply unclean.

I do lean towards agreeing with you about the weight. But, along those lines, would the material the meteorid was made of effect the flash or the shockwave? Don't know about the shockwave, but say the meteorid contained a lot of, say, magnesium and be relatively light. Could it produce a fireball as big as a larger rock meteorid, for example?

Also, there seems to be a "working memory", which deals with other types of information. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Working_memory Perhaps it's enough to focus on how the long term memory forgets. Both the short-term and working memories seem to have a really short life-span anyway, and is probably not what the question intends? Anyway, unless I'm mistaken, a memory forms from information "digging a new path" in the brain (I'm sure there's a more scientific term). The more you repeat this specific information bit, the stronger this new connection gets. However, does that mean it fades away in time, unless activated? My guess is not, since I seem to remember really old memories from what seems to be out of nowhere, probably triggered by something most of the time. Maybe the brain forgets which neurons to activate to reach a certain place, but still keeps the link. Then one day, your brain is triggered by some event, goes to a certain place in itself, and BAM, there's a memory! Sorry if that's a bit speculative, I really have no idea. Edit: Perhaps it's better to let scientists answer: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=why-do-we-forget-things

That's an interesting thought. At first glance, it feels as though two weights (the outer cabins) would be too heavy for it to be stable. Would the connecting link be strong enough to hold them together? It does seem NASA has been conceptualizing your idea though: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_habitat (Ctrl + F for "bola"). Image: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Nasa_mars_artificial_gravity_1989.jpg I can't do the math to say whether this would work, but with all this nano technology making promises (or is it just the media?), who knows!

I found a few interesting links regarding your lab. Not sure if any of them helps anything, but especially the first one seems to explain quite a bit, and do things about the same as what you're trying. See if any of them helps, and sorry if you've seen them before! Again, I won't be able to try any of this for a few weeks, so can't vouch for them being accurate, at all. http://www.cis.syr.edu/~wedu/seed/Labs/Vulnerability/Buffer_Overflow/Buffer_Overflow.pdf The next link seems to describe why some older techniques to do what you're trying to do, simply won't work today. http://paulmakowski.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/smashing-the-stack-in-2011/ And one entitled "Stack Smashing on a Modern Linux System". Promising! http://www.exploit-db.com/papers/24085/ Hopefully you can piece together what's going wrong with your code through a few more examples. Edit: Also checking with people I might know, who might have a clue. Because I'd be really interested in the solution.

Due to the size of current space stations, they would have to rotate really fast to produce decent gravity. That would run the risk of having the station break apart due to the stress. Also, there would be a lot of difference in gravity between your head and your feet, with your feet dealing with the most gravity. So most of your blood would gather in your feet, making you nauseous. So until we're able to build quite a bit larger space stations, we probably shouldn't make them spin! http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2012/01/10/3405165.htm http://www.nasa.gov/missions/highlights/webcasts/shuttle/sts110/iss-qa.html

Well, with 1 bit, you can represent 0 and 1. With 2 bit, you can represent 0-3. The formula should be something like 2^n-1, where n is the number of bits needed. So you either do that calculation, or you do it manually by increasing the number of bits you have until you can represent the number you want.

Even if they're mostly metal or rock, there is still a chance of pockets of ice or frozen gas within. The heat from friction builds up enough pressure to cause an explosion.

Think of a gas canister in a fire. Whatever is inside it is heated up more and more until the canister itself can't withstand the pressure, then it explodes. I'd imagine it's the same case with a meteorite. Whatever is inside of it is heated up by its descent through the atmosphere, then internal pressure cracks it open.

I don't have a computer on which to try this right now, so anything I say might be off. You're supposed to use a buffer overflow vulnerability, that is, you need to write outside of something. However, from the looks of it, you're staying neatly within the boundaries everywhere in your code. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffer_overflow#Stack-based_exploitation That link gives a few suggestions on what to overflow - a local variable, a return address or a function pointer. And since the lab is called something in the line of "buffer overflow", and you have a variable called "buffer", I'd start there. Either by making buffer a little smaller, or try to write outside of it by making buffSize a little larger. Hope any of this helps.

I have a pretty good idea how computer memory works, and this isn't it.

This again? What is your obsession with basic addition?

It's probably because you're doing it to yourself. Bending over weirdly to reach your foot, perhaps tapping with your fingers instead of the suggested rubber hammer, your ankle might not be in the correct position. Lots of things that can go wrong. I wouldn't worry too much about any major medical malfunction in your feet.

Injury counts seems to have gone up. The same sources that reported on 400 injured earlier today, now talk about around 1,000. Though, of course, I'd guess it's partly media sensationalism. Edit: Cracked has gathered 5 of the videos from the event. I especially like the last one. No flashy stuff, but the aftermath is really cool. http://www.cracked.com/quick-fixes/5-meteor-videos-that-prove-russians-dont-give-f2340k/

I'm so sorry, in advance.

Well, according to the link below, the Sun loses about 1% of its mass in 160 billion years. Don't worry, we'll be swallowed by the Sun's dying expansion sooner than we'll be flung out into space. http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/ast99/ast99441.htm

This had me thinking of this, which illustrates the idea pretty clearly: http://i.imgur.com/xWpvw.jpg