DJBruce

You realize that in science you can't simple throw out random numbers, and join them together by making up impossible situations. That said: -How did you derive your density of the "white matter"? -What observations and/or mathematics do you have to support your white matter interaction idea? -You realize that the idea of worm holes has begun to fall out of mainstream physics? Again could you try and proof read and/or use a spell checker because it is exceptionally hard to decipher your points?

Yes, and they if they were a team they wouldn't be able to win a rec-league game. The entire point is to pick your favorite physicists living or dead and make a soccer team out of them. Its kind of like an All Time Team of physicists.

The three major styles, APA, MLA, and Chicago, all require that there be at least one inch margins all around the page. I am guessing that these was selected to optimize the number of people who could successfully print a work. This as well as Paul's stating a default of .75" suggests that setting the margins to 1" all around would probably be a safe bet to work for most people.

I realize that this is your beliefs, but as this is a science forum you cannot just say something without providing evidence for it. You cannot use religion to prove or explain an phenomena in a scientific way.

So I define my system as the entire universe, no force is need for the object to leave the system because by definition it is impossible for something to leave the universe. Also it is important to note that a force does not necessarily cause movement. A force causes an acceleration. If the acceleration is in opposition to the objects velocity the object will slow down, and possibly stop, slow down, or change directions.

No, if the system in which the object is moving is a isolated one then there will be no loss of energy or matter. Of course there is really only one true isolated system, and that is the universe as a whole. Why would motion in a straight line necessarily mean that the object must leave the system? You could define the system in such away that the object doesn't leave it.

Many things are possible, but without any proof your idea is not science. So as of right now I'm gonna go out on a limb and say its impossible to have "white matter as you describe it. It would help if you answered any of the question poised in earlier in the thread if you wish to make your idea seem more realistic.

Okay likes start with this dark energy is energy not matter. There is a large difference between the two. If white matter does bend light it should probably be detectable, as the bending of light has been successfully measured before, ie. Eddington's 1919 experiment. As far as I know Plutonium does not break the law of Universal Gravitation. Also please address the rest of my points considering your idea. On another note, I hope I am interrupting what you posted right. To be honest I am struggling to read what you post. You might wanna consider using a spell checker like the built in one in Firefox or the one in the Google Toolbar for IE

Some questions: -Do you have any proof for the existence of this "white matter"? -So the law of Universal Gravitation does not apply to "white matter"? -What does [math]E=mc^{2}[/math] have to do with the expansion of the universe? -You realize that you said you wanted to make [math]E=mc^{2}[/math] greater, but: [math]DM=2[/math] [math]WM=4[/math] [math]\frac{DM}{WM}E=\frac{2}{4}E<E[/math]

Thanks for the solution. The first line was the thing, which I was missing.

As for the science in the video it is sub-par popular science. If you wish to see a video about the big bang there are many documentaries which do a much better good presenting it accurately. I definitely was not a fan of the use of science to justify a religion. The big bang theory does not prove the Qur'an, just as it does not probe the Bible or any other religion. After researching the creator of this video, Adnan Oktar, I do not support any of his projects, and have found no credentials, which would make him a reliable source for anything in science. Alex Sam where you impressed by the weaving of science and religion together, or by the science behind the big bang. If it is the former then I can't help you, but if it is the later I am sure many people on this forum, including myself, could recommend other documentaries, which are more accurate.

I am glad you save you could use FTOC Pt. I to go about this a different way, but were you able to show: [math] \frac{\frac{1}{x+a}-\frac{x-a}{(x+a)^{2}}}{\sqrt{1-\frac{(x-a)^{2}}{(x+a)^{2}}}}=\frac{\sqrt{a}}{(x+a)\sqrt{x}}??? [/math] because to successfully prove that [math] \int \frac{\sqrt{a}}{(x+a)\sqrt{x}} dx = arcsin(\frac{x-a}{x+a}) [/math] You would need to show that those are equal, which at least I wasn't able to do.

Must Read Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead- Tom Stoppard (You will probably want to have read Hamlet first) The Federalist Papers Crime and Punishment- Fyodor Dostoevsky The World is Flat- Thomas L Friedman The Great Gatsby- F. Scott Fitzgerald. A Brave New World- Aldous Huxley The Divine Comedy- Dante Alighieri As a recommendation by Thomas Jefferson I highly recommend taking a few moments on every July 4th to read The Deceleration of Independence. Read How to Read Literature like a Professor- Thomas C. Foster A Tale of Two Cities- Boz The Music of the Primes- Marcus Du Sautoy 1984- George Orwell Grapes of Wrath- John Stienbeck My Antonia- Willa Cather Candide- Voltaire

Like it or not America's educational system, at least k-12 education, is very much promoting the later. I definitely agree that this is not a good educational system, but when a student is part of a flawed system can you really fault them for following it. Yes I believe our society is not in moral decline. It seems to me that if our society was truly in moral decline, which has been claimed for a long long time, we would fail to exist as a functioning society. If we look through time I believe its obvious that our morals have not declined, but have simply changed as Mr. Skeptic points out. If we take a brief stroll through history lets see what at different times we viewed as acceptable. Roman Era: Slavery, Persecution of Christians, Public Slaughter for Entertainment. Middle Ages: Torture and Execution due to the Inquisition. Colonial: Mass Genocide of Native Peoples, Slavery, Unequal treatment of Women and most other minority groups. Early 1900's: Racism, Sexism, Intentional Killing of Civilians during war. 2010- More Gender and Ethnic Tolerance, Outrage over Civilian Casualties. This debate reminds me of this comic.

I am not sure what that referee was doing in a World Cup game, he did a poor good officiating the entire game. That being said I am now going to put my US jersey on and say: that joke of referee jobbed us not once, but twice. That yellow card on Findley was a completely bogus call, that challenge was by no means worthy of a yellow. As for that disallowed goal, I cannot describe what type of idiot he must have been to call whatever he called. I also like the fact that he can disallow a goal then not state what offense he saw, or his reasoning behind it. I disagree slightly with the Wikipedia page at least Jim Joyce manned up went to the media and said I ****ed up, I am sorry. None of this not explaining the call BS, and this is coming form a Detroit Tigers fan.

I agree that this method should work, but the answer is not that apparent: [math]\frac{d}{dx}\int\frac{\sqrt{a}}{(x+a)\sqrt{x}}dx= \frac{d}{dx}arsin\left(\frac{x-a}{x+a}\right)[/math] [math]\frac{d}{dx}arsin\left(\frac{x-a}{x+a}\right)=\frac{\frac{1}{x+a}-\frac{x-a}{(x+a)^{2}}}{\sqrt{1-\frac{(x-a)^{2}}{(x+a)^{2}}}}[/math] [math]\frac{\frac{1}{x+a}-\frac{x-a}{(x+a)^{2}}}{\sqrt{1-\frac{(x-a)^{2}}{(x+a)^{2}}}}=\frac{\sqrt{a}}{(x+a)\sqrt{x}}???[/math] I did also take the antiderivative: [math]\int\frac{\sqrt{a}}{(x+a)\sqrt{x}}dx= 2arctan\left(\frac{\sqrt{x}}{\sqrt{a}}\right)+c[/math] However this did not seem to help much. I'm guessing their is some identity involved in this that I cannot for the life of me think of.

I do not think that character went away. There has been cheating forever, and cheating will continue to exist forever. Looking back and saying in the past there were more people with character I believe is a fallacy, similar to claiming that our society is doomed to moral decline. As for DrDNA's analysis, yes in those situations the person doing them, I did not say I myself participated in them, is losing something for themselves, but they are not explicitly or even intentionally breaking the rules. They are in the two final cases simply using every resource to their advantage.

I know this is off topic, but I just want point out that I think your experience not be the exception and not the rule. At least in Michigan contesting a traffic ticket takes under an hour, I've actually been in and out in 15 minutes, and usually end in the cop changing the ticket to a slightly higher fine, but no points, which saves your insurance. I am not saying that abusing their power is right, but does not everyone abuse their power at their work place in some way. I realize it is not quite the same thing, but how many people who work at restaurants get undue discounts, or people who work at an office get free personal copies or supplies. I feel like the majority of the population abuse whatever power they have, it seems to be human nature. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts mergedA interesting case of cameras involved with police actives actually just occurred in Detroit a month ago. In May the Detroit Police Department executed a warrant on a house containing a murder suspect. During the chaos that surrounded the raid a shot was fired. The shot hit a 7 year old girl sleeping on the living room couch killing her. The raid was being filmed by a professional camera crew filming for A&E's show The First 48. This tragic indecent has led some to say that camera's have no place in police raids. Saying it causes cops to play to the camera.

This treatment seems very promising, hopefully future research will show this treatment as a viable option. I am astonished that a majority of people undergoing this type of treatment can leave the hospital same day. Does anyone know if this type of treatment can be applied to other types of cancer? Nagaprasad just a heads up you might want to put direct quotes in either quotations or use the quotation tags so people don't accuse you of plagiarism, see rule 2.2. Here is a direct link to the article in discussion.

I honestly believe that cheating is wrong, however, the problem I have is what exactly justifies cheating. There are incidents that are blatantly cheating and others, which are less so. Some examples of the incidents where I find it difficult to decern whether it is cheating or not include: - A practice test is given for a class to be done for completion credit. Meaning the teacher simply asks if you did it or not. Would it be cheating if you said you completed the test, but you completed it by simply guessed through out the entire test. -A teacher for my honors English course used to give use a weekly set of analogies. These were to be done at home, and she stated we could use what ever reference material we wished. Well at some point during the class someone while using Google to research a question came across the answer key to all of the analogy assignments for the entire year. Would using and distributing these answer keys be considered cheating even though the teacher allowed the class to use the internet for research purposes? -For my Orgo course someone discovered a website which contained a bank of questions and answers from the material we were studying. Many of these identical questions appeared verbatim on the exams. Would using this be considered cheating? So what would be your guys feelings on these situations? Cheating or Not??

To be completely honest its San Francisco, I am not really surprised by anything they do. I highly doubt this bill will make any difference. I mean do you honestly think that when a person goes to buy a new phone their line of questioning will be: So can I get my email on this phone? Does it take pictures and videos? Can I download Apps for it? How much radiation does this phone admit and does it comply with the FCC's standards? I really don't think anyone will stop and look at the chart. So the law is basically useless.

Technically nothing is stopping the republicans from doing that. However, if a party were to attempt to sabotage the oppositions candidate they must be careful that they have enough people voting in their own elections so that the opposite party cannot sabotage their candidate. Also my guess is if a party formally did this the bad press and publicity would much out-way and gains they were to get.

Yes the primaries are elections held to narrow down the number of candidates so that in the general election only a few choices appear. In the US there are basically two types of primaries: open primaries and closed primaries. In an open primary a person goes to their local polling place and then asks for either a Democratic or a Republican ballot, and then votes amoungst the candidates for who they believe should run in the general elections. In an open primary it does not matter if you have party affiliation. In a closed election only people can only vote for the party they are affiliated with. So for example in an open primary for a senate seat there is a ballot with a list of Republicans and a ballot with a list of Democrats that wish to represent their party in the general election. Since the primary is open republicans, independents, and democrats can vote on either ballot. So an incumbent Democrat would have to worry about anti-incumbent feelings from fellow Democrats, indpendents, and cross over Republicans. So in contrast if this was a closed primary the incumbent Democrat would only have to worry about anti-incumbent feelings from fellow registered Democrats. Which is what you described in your post.

Could you please enumerate some of the flaws you find in the big bang. As for the article I might be wrong, but they do not seem to be questioning the big bang theory. It seems to me that they are simply questioning the existence and prominence of dark energy, which should not be seen as a flaw in the big bang. Also even the scientists themselves state their paper will probably not change much, "Odds are that the standard model with its enigmatic dark energy and dark matter will survive ".

I believe that there should definitely be a watchdog for the police, however I do see the problem with people video typing police actions. It seems to me that when most people video tape a police action they are inserting themselves into a situation, which they have no part of being in. This seems to complicate the situation, and makes it more difficult for the police to effectively do their jobs. Not to mention the fact that a person standing by a cop with a video camera definitely has the potential to draw a crowd. An example of this is Pangloss's video. Did the person filming this have an reason to be standing near a cop attempting to arrest a person? No. Did the camera-person interfere with the cop doing his job? Well I would say that yelling at the officer definitely would make an orderly arrest harder. It seems to me that a lot of the problems with cops arise when a crowd builds up around officers and they feel as if they are threatened, and that case in Seattle shows just that. Had there been no crowd no video camera the officer would have not even had to deal with the woman in the pink. Pangloss at least in Michigan it was required to take a full year of government and civics to graduate from high school, I think I might have been changed to one semester of civics and one semester of economics, but it is a state mandated requirement. As a question how prevalent do you guys think police brutality is? I honestly would think that the percentage of accidents that end in police brutality is incredibly tiny probably >1%, and that the shock value and the media make the amount seem much more.