foofighter

I keep seeing ads in astronomy magaine and other popular science publications for this book written by some guy who claims that he has all the answers that all the string theories don't - he claims that his picture of reality is complete and doesn't need anything to be plugged in ad hoc, such as constants. I'm no physics expert - however such grandiose claims always cause me to raise an eyebrow. Has anyone read this book (which I think is only available from the author's website, nullphysics.com), and if so, does it stand up to critical review? Or are his claims like those of TV infomercials?

we all hear about talk of the space tourism industry getting off the ground in the next decade or so - what interests me more though, is that given NASA's snail pace progress in solar system exploration, as well as bureaucratic processes that bog it down, can we expect private companies to explore the solar system with robotic probes? Would it depend solely on potential profit? If so, would there be a demand realistically, for purchasing the data gathered, to make it commercially viable, if no private company wants to do so for the sake of discovery alone?

Earth produces 1G - is this solely dependant on mass, or density as well? In other words, lets say I have a less massive object, with an extremely high density. Can that exert 1G on something very close to its center of gravity? or must you have as many atoms as earth regardless of density, to produce 1G? thanks

Hello, I currently attend Queens College in NYC. Part of me wants to major in physics. I am not afraid to work hard - however I hear that the physics major at my school is insanely difficult (perhaps even unnecessarily difficult) compared to other colleges. My questions/concerns are as follows: 1. Does the standard physics undergrad program (i.e. non engineering, rather just pure physics) vary in difficulty from college to college considerably, or is it generally the same everywhere, and rather these people i am hearing things from are either lazy, not interested, not smart enough, or a combination of those three? 2. Granted a professor can make or break a course at times, but the truth is that everywhere there will be good and bad professors, and i'll just have to suck it up and deal with it. However, should the answer to Question One be that there is a difference in colleges, can anyone please give me advice as to how I can go about assessing which college would be best for me in terms of giving me a solid foundation in physics that I need - while at the same time not needlessly destroying my GPA no matter how hard I work lol. That is why I am concerned to begin with - again it's not the hard work, it's that I want to leave an open door for grad school, and if I make it out alive I want to be a contender for grad school (and I need a strong GPA in that subject I'm majoring in) - thus if it is possible that a physics program at college XYZ is crazily unfairly hard (and it isn't just the subject itself everywhere) then I'd like to avoid that. thanks in advance for any help you can provide

so we've all heard of the solution to this problem by simulating gravity through centrifugal force, but has anyone considered perhaps maybe there is simply a way in theory (as yet undiscovered) to prevent the body from shedding bone and muscle mass through medicine? perhaps there is a chemical agent that can be taken to trick the body into not shedding bone and muscle, or a way to alter the gene in the DNA (if its genetic) that tells the body to respond to a low gravity environment in the manner of "hey i dont need so much bone and muscle anymore, let me loosen my grip on it". is there any research into this, or is it even feasible theoretically?

i just started studying physics in Conceptual Physics, which is proving to be a good first book. I don't understand something though. It says power=voltage X current. But Current = Volts/Ohms - does that mean power = volts squared / ohms? i'm a little confused...thanks in advance for your help = )

i was perusing the Bulletin on the undergraduate program in physics at my university, Queens College. It seems that although mathematically intense, the labs required are light compared to say, chemistry, at least in terms of the number of lab classes needed for a degree. is this true for physics in general at the undergrad level, or is it just dependant on the particular college in question? thanks

interesting - thanks for the info = )

Hello everyone. i haven't posted here in a few months. as many of you may remember, i often asked questions of speculative pseudo-science based on my penchant for science fiction. however, i am happy to announce that i recently began reading textbooks on true science, and, as several of you had told me earlier, i would find reality a lot more interesting than warp speed and teleportation - which i do. it is liberating to learn true science, and to be unplugged from the fantasy that is called sci-fi - almost as liberating as when one realizes the truth of Natural History as opposed to what is listed in Genesis. anyway, now that the good news of my awakening to reality is over, i actually do have an astronomy related question. = ) lets say we take a trip travelling close to light speed to the nearest star, Proxima Centauri. Granted all stars in the Galactic Disk orbit the bulge of the Milky Way - however - how much change is there in the position of our sun relative to nearby stars as everything orbits the galaxy's center? i ask this because we are seeing Proxima Centauri as it was 4 years ago - so if we aim at the pinprick of light in the sky as we see it at launch time, we will probably arrive way off course. assuming we had the technology to get there, how would we know how to arrive on course and what would we have to plug into the computer from the get-go? thanks

oh i haven't read that yet maybe i should, thx = ). also i would particularly like to find novels that are related to an advanced space-faring earth. (again without breaking current known laws of physics)

hey - i'm trying to find sci-fi novels to read that portray a future that doesn't break CURRENT known laws of science, or at least comes as close to that ideal as possible (i.e. not star trek or star wars). does anyone know any good titles/series? thank you in advance

well he shouldn't be preaching here to begin with

i guess my crude joke wasn't funny

man...this article is da bomb!!!

cool article - i was wondering tho assuming healthy nutrition, environment, and genetics - are there any professional estimates as to its longevity in terms of years? also - interesting because in jewish orthodox law since the bible considers the heart the seat of human thought and consciousness, brain death is not considered death and people are kept on respirators forever...strange...another example of how religion stunts progress

i don't know why, but i get the feeling that the brain can live longer than other organs, and we die due to those other systems failing. maybe i'm wrong tho. my question is, assuming that all other parts of our body are functioning correctly indefinitely (immortal), how long will a healthy brain last before it dies of age (not disease)?

the article was talking about anti-matter production

i heard a show talk about a certain technology developing in geometric progress, as opposed to exponential. i'm assuming this is rather slow progression, however what exactly is geometric progress, and how does it compare to exponential and linear progress? thanks

gravity works opposite on it. it pushes away instead of attracts. other properties i'm not sure about.

armygas - i know u put ur life on the line for the country, but maybe he was simply curious and not accusatory?

bentheman - you are confusing dark matter with exotic matter. i am referring to the latter.

whew! i'm relieved however i suspect that if this type of matter does exist, it might possess other properties that may not be so pleasant for human contact...

i was watching star trek: nemesis the other day, as beverly crusher analyzed the entire genetic code of picard's clone in a few moments. i was wondering how cool it would be if we could do that - it seems a first small step has been taken. apparently a machine the size of a photocopier can sequence 100 million letters in a few hours. current technology before this breakthough could do only 50,000 in the same time. pretty cool eh? wat are ur thoughts on this? http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/07/070712134819.htm

lol this post is going way downhill, not that it was really solid from the start i am referring to an exotic matter with the property of reverse gravity effects. gravity causes it to push away rather than attract. would interacting with such matter be harmful to humans, or just counterintuitive?

i mean can i hold a block of exotic matter without getting injured or dying