Mr Skeptic

I'd still say that precision is more important than math. Math is just the easiest way to make things precise. There are equivalent ways, such as geometry. Michael Faraday, though he knew little math, was one of the great scientists of the 1800's. From Wikipedia: The simple concept of magnetic fields was partially responsible for the huge discovery of electromagnetic waves which led to modern physics. Perhaps Farsight's concept of twist could have some similar use (if it works out) ... but I don't think he understands twist.

Farsight, no one including yourself understands you theory because it is too vague. Case in point: your claim that charge is twist. Twist along which axis? How much twist? "Flowing" twist (spin) or static twist? Do you even know what twist is? To your credit, you do seem a little less arrogant this time around.

Yes, angular momentum is the product of rotational inertia and angular velocity just as momentum is the product of inertia and velocity. The rotational inertia depends on where your axis of rotation is (unlike regular inertia). The masses in the system need not be connected to each other; an orbital system has angular momentum. Also, though it is fairly popular to use the center of mass as the axis of rotation, you can use whatever axis of rotation you feel like. So as D H said, it is more confusing.

Its impolite to repost the same question in two different threads. It also reads as homework, and there is a section for that. In brief, efficiency is avoiding wasteful use, and conservation is regenerating resources as quickly as they are used (which is helped by efficiency).

It's basically spin. Angular momentum changes when you apply torque to a system.

Yes, otherwise discussion will occur anyhow on several threads. However, I don't believe it will be any more productive than previously. Um, getting back on topic... Maybe time is like matrix multiplication.

Notice the "in part" there. Given two indistinguishable theories, the one that makes less assumptions and is more elegant is preferable to the other. Therefore, they are evaluated in part on their elegance and simplicity, but that need not interfere with experimental data.

Actually, HIV originated with monkeys. I don't want to think about how it spread to humans. Regardless, we can study HIV in monkeys, either to experiment or because they have had it for longer. Apparently some monkeys have a protein called TRIM5-alpha that can fight HIV. Humans have a similar but less effective (against HIV) version of the protein as monkeys.

Aluminum nearly instantly forms an airtight oxide coating. This will at the very least make it much harder to light, and consume some fuel. Filings should work, but will be harder to light than powder and might not burn as good. I've heard of using a strip of magnesium to light thermite.

I think that if it kills and eats a sheep it learns that the fluffy white things that go "baaa!" taste good. It possibly also activates the hunter's instinct that has mostly been bread out of them.

I've recently realized that we can get a photon of known energy, frequency, and wavelength using the emission spectrum of Hydrogen. Really, pretty much anything that involves particles could be used as the initial measure to measure everything else. However, I don't know how to derive particles and their interactions. Also, I'm not sure my definition of acceleration plays nice with gravity, or maybe its because I don't really understand curved spacetime.

50 years and yet, here we are, still on the same little rock we started on.

I you're being sarcastic. Very few scientists like the expression "Junk DNA", but it's a fact that a certain portion of the genome is functionless. [bold added by me] But if by "real scientists" you mean "young earth creationists", then I agree, otherwise its nonsense. There you go. Real scientists search for explanations and proof, they don't just give up and say something is functionless. Care to back up that claim (I'm not saying the claim is false, just noting that you made a claim that is unprovable and offered no evidence besides)

My apologies. Seeing as you mentioned vitamins in half the sentences you used, I thought that was what you were talking about. I had meant it as a clarification, not as an insult. You could as easily say I am the idiot for not understanding you; I'm not sensitive that way.

You're supposed to cancel out the terms that will become infinite before taking the limit where they do become infinite.

Include a table of contents. Also a brief list/summary. I would recommend a brief but specific list of all "new" claims you make. Be as brief as you can without being vague. Good Example: *The charge e is a twist of [quantity] degrees in spacetime along the [insert axis] axis. Bad Examples: *Charge is twist. *blah blah blah Most people here don't have enough faith in you to read 40 pages of stuff, most of which seems like non-congruent analogies. Also, be humble instead of arrogant. You don't need mathematics if you are exact enough. If you are vague, no quantity of mathematics will save you anyhow. Reason people ask for the math is because it is hard to be vague in math and easy to spot mistakes.

Pretty much. Obviously not if their separation was not twice their radius. At close distances, I think the tidal forces exerted on each other would cause the orbit to rapidly decay though.

It works now, I just got it. Might be time to start another Farsight thread Preliminary scan shows very few equations (but he does have some). I don't care about the equations if the description is accurate and precise enough to construct them ourselves, but I only scanned it so far.

You can always file it or grind it with a wheel, but you would need an inert atmosphere if you didn't want it to oxidize. Maybe grind it in a box and fill the box with nitrogen (eg by pouring liquid nitrogen on the bottom and letting it evaporate). Huge amount of contamination, but if you're going to burn it anyhow...

Why would they do that? The only reason you say the smaller object orbits the bigger one is because the bigger one moves less. The orbit is always about the center of mass, btw, and always consists of both objects falling toward each other and moving to the side so they don't collide. I'd say so. You can cut with anything so long as you throw it hard enough...

Well if the color was due to vitamins, it would likely be beta-carotene (the color of carrots, and also used as food coloring). If not, it might be the red equivalents of chlorophyll found in deeper sea levels (red light penetrates farther). Without knowing more we can't help you.

Junk DNA was never pushed by real scientists. That was more the domain of those I like to refer to as "Religious Atheists" and pseudo-scientists trying to conjure up evidence for evolution. People have been finding various uses for "junk" DNA, such as regulation of proteins and genes, spacing, damage buffer, and more. Much of it we still do not understand, but that does not mean it has no purpose.

Yes, there are countlessly infinite such sets. So long as the terms in the set get small enough quickly enough (including canceling), that can happen. When an infinite set is such that the farther along the set you go, the closer you get to a specific number, the set is said to converge to that number. The canonical example is [math]1/2 + 1/4 + 1/8 + ... = \frac{2^n-1}{2^n}[/math] which converges to 1 as n tends toward infinity. Many other infinite sets diverge (they get progressively bigger or smaller) or they oscillate.

Magnetic field lines "flow" through some materials, like iron, better than they do through air. Also, when in a magnetic field, the iron becomes magnetized. The direction of the magnetism is that of the magnetic field, resulting in attraction. That is why iron is attracted to a magnet, and also why you can build chains of paper clips longer than what the magnet alone could lift a paper clip. Anyhow, you can think of the filings as a bunch of tiny magnets which point along the magnetic field lines. Electric charge plays no part in all this except as stated previously, in that it is responsible for the magnetism in the first place.

Actually, I am worried about the politician's and public attention, not their time. I don't particularly like politicians either, though that might be an artifact of the "first past the post" system of voting. But that's a whole different issue.