[Tycho?]

Some things that make your idea totally unfeasible: Economics Production Techniques General technology Knowledge of ecosystems Political will Purpose All these things are not in your favour. Even there was enough money for such an incredible costly venture (and there isn't, not even close), we couldn't build it anyway. A self sustaining enclosed ecosystem continues to elude us, as well as other somewhat more minor technical hurdles that we have yet to overcome. And finally, why? It is very difficult to justify these kind of enourmous projects unless you have a good reason to do so. With unmanned probes you can spend a (compartively) small amount of money and greatly increase our understanding of the universe. Manned missions are thus far way too inefficient to really do much that a few probes can't do better and cheaper. (Also, for these reasons and other I still dont believe that man will be landing on mars any time soon, despite with the Bush Administration says)

"Looks at hands on a clock move" I think the concept of time is far from obsolete, in any field, especially physics.

Um, we do see light energy. Light energy and light are not different things, how can one distinguish them? You also shouldn't go to a dictionary if you're looking for a meaning based in physics. Look up energy on wikipedia, that'll probably give some more info.

Ok sunspot, you'd better whip out your math lickity split. I've seen you post nothing but nonsense on these forums, so its not like you have any credibility. If you want me or anyone else to even think of taking you seriously, we're going to need something way more tangible than your rants to work with. Something verifiable is definately required.

Man there's even a homework forum, how lazy can you get?

What the hell?

I dont think most of the pictures would be artificially brightened. You could probably calculate this yourself if you were motivated enough, find luminosity of the sun, then with jupiter's distance and surface area, determine how much light hits it, then with its albedo find out how much is reflected off. Or you could just assume the pics are good, since all the pics of Jupiter I've seen have been around the same brightness; if they were hightened artificially you would expect some to be brighter than others.

3.1415926535897932 Thats how many I know off the top of my head (although I looked it up just to make sure before I posted this)

WHAT!? Neither of the two posters said anything like that. Its not even clear what you're asking.

Why dont you show us the math that allowed you to come to this number. This should be amusing.

What is BBRC?

I meant that in that time the wave travelled a distance equal to that fraction of a wavelength. I still dont see what wrong with my assumption. Boy, this homework is making me feel as dumb as a brick, even basic problem solving stuff I'm having trouble with. Maybe I'm tired or something.

Well if your experiment is going to be scientific, your goal should be to find forms of excersise which can be standardized. Swimming would not be a good example of this, as there are all kinds of different strokes and stuff you can use, some which are more tiring than others. One should be stationary bike machine. Especially with a digital one, it tells you your distance, difficulty, calories burned and stuff like that. The other machine should be similar. Treadmill works, but there are also rowing machines, stair machines, etc. For an experiment you want to get as much data as possible, and you want other people to be able to re-create the experiment. Using machines in this way makes your data a lot more exact, it would be "Biking 15km at difficulty 5 for 14 and a half minutes" instead of "swam for around 15 minutes". The biking one can be re-done exactly by anyone (with a bike machine) while the swimming one can depend on your technique, waves in the water and other stuff.

If t2 = 17.00 s for slinky (a), what is t1?'' That is all the information I have to complete this question, and I dont really know where to begin. t1 and t2 seem to be .16 of a full wavelenght apart, and the amplitude is given, but I can't seem to get any more useful information out of there. Or alternately, I dont know what to do with the information I do have. Any help on this would be appreciated. I doubt its actually very hard, but I really need some help on starting off.

I wonder if thats even possible for a human to do. It probably is, but I bet you wont complete it before your life ends.

..sure. My question was what was producing them in your example.

Oh really.

Well if horses hadn't evolved any parasites/predators/whatever would have developed to attack similar animas. A horse is pretty much your standard hooved animal, of which there are many varieties. I'm sure there are some microbes or bacteria that exist only in horses, but I doubt anything major relies on them. Except for humans, since they do make excellent riding animals.

How can you say its consistent with anything when it doesn't make a lick of sense, and you dont back it up with any info? All your posts seem to be like this, talking about logical consistancy while rambling on with sentances that dont even make sense from a physics point of view. Case in point: Are we supposed to know what you mean by galaxy level mini big bangs? What caused these? What evidence supports their existence? How is this logically consistant with anything? What in the world are you talking about?