Mr Skeptic

Currently celebrating Independence Day by contemplating that I am forbidden by the government to launch fireworks for fear that I might hurt myself.

Viruses are not considered to be cells, and also not considered to be alive by most biologists. A few do consider them alive, and everyone agrees that they're borderline. Viruses don't really reproduce; they infect a cell and the cell produces viruses. This is similar to prions, which are even simpler.

The way I figure it, stars are exactly as alive as live ammo or a live wire. Really it depends on what you mean by "alive", but by the biological definition they are not alive. Trees do breed by the way, don't know where you got the idea that they don't because they all do. Where did you think more trees come from?

The energy is given by E=mc^2, just remember to double m because an equal amount of matter as antimatter is annihilated. You can multiply them in Google Calculator like so (for a 300 gram bomb), and then put the result into the Joules to Megatons Conversion Calculator

Apart from it not being cool, in my opinion lava is a conspiracy by scientists and journalists so people are afraid of going deep in the earth, so that they can hide the alien base that gave the US all its power and technology. Now don't go telling me my opinion is worse than yours.

Only if you then try to use that to predict something about the real world whether in the past, present, or future.

Because your opinion gives wrong predictions. Go on, predict how quickly the polarity of magnetized rocks or sediments shifts. We're not talking about guessing the future, we're talking about testing predictions based on stuff that's already happened. And one opinion is not as good as any other, because one can simply look and tell which is right and which is wrong.

The laws of thermodynamics, I don't like them... I think there has to be some loophole somewhere, else our universe should be at maximum entropy already. Also, I think they are redundant with other laws of physics.

I've previously said the same thing about reinterpreting laws, in the thread about gay marriage. Reinterpreting the old laws to modernize them may be convenient, but ultimately makes the laws meaningless. The Constitution has a built-in mechanism to change it; that is how changes should be made.

I think it would disintegrate fairly quickly, especially at the start. I certainly would not like to be anywhere in the vicinity.

Wouldn't a lack of confidence in the ability of the US to pay back debts look a lot more like investors scrambling to sell billions of dollars they had invested as dollars, causing massive hyperinflation, etc? I mean, that's what I would do, not just charge double the interest rate or something silly like that.

It's done at the end of every calendar cycle (every 52 years), and involves putting out all fires, then cutting out the heart of a human and lighting a fire in their chest, which is then used to relight all the fires in the city. Also they get rid of all their old stuff. The purpose of this ceremony is to prevent the end of the world, which is why the folks who fear the year 2012 need to do this ceremony.

Insects contain instinctive knowledge, and sometimes their knowledge contradicts the evidence (something they are probably too dumb to realize). Thus it would seem that insects would have unshakable faith in their beliefs. Choice is choice, instinctive or not -- ask people who did and didn't run away from a battle. So these elements are there. The question then, is what sort of beliefs constitute religious beliefs, and are those too abstract for an insect?

You can't see magnetic field lines, and the iron fillings do not show you where the magnetic field lines are. The magnetic field lines are imaginary, simply a way to visualize. Same with the gravitational field lines, and electric field lines. The way the field lines work, is that there are infinitely many of them, although it is only practical to show a finite number of them, and their density is related to the strength of the field, and their direction the direction of the field. The field lines can be drawn as little arrows of varying length instead, its the same thing.

Sure, I'd make a universe right now if I knew how.

Nope, some things cannot be answered with testable predictions about the world.

Everything you make exists. What exactly it is, may not be what you think it is. As John Cuthber said, I can easily draw a million dollars, and will have a nice painting of a million dollars. It won't, however, be a million dollars. On the other hand, if I make a sandwich, then the sandwich I made exists and is a sandwich.

Science is all about being able to predict (being able to predict is considered answering the question). Some questions cannot be answered by a formula for predicting a result; these questions have no relation to science whatsoever.

People who are really worried about the Mayan calendar should perform the New Fire ceremony to help prevent the end of the world, as the Mayans did before them.

We could always call them "moo-moos" and then pretend we're being sophisticated by doing so.

I think there must be some way to cheat the laws of thermodynamics. Even if the only way to do so is to make a new universe.

Insects aren't clever enough to have any of our religion, nor would they be able to communicate such an abstract concept. Of course depending on how religion is defined, they might have some sort of religion instinctively built-in. God save the queen bee!

And which pole would be the attractive, and which the repulsive one?

Both. Of course, there is a limit. If you go cruising at 5 mph, your engine is going to suck a lot of power just to keep itself going (its overpowered for the job required), and it will be very inefficient. Basically, the faster you go the more you save on the gas used to keep the engine running (like idling), but the more you spend on gas to overcome drag. However, time the engine is running is distance/speed, but the power needed to overcome drag is proportional to speed cubed. At a low enough speed, the idling dominates, but at a higher speed the drag dominates. A more powerful car will be more efficient at a faster speed than at a lower speed, but of course will be more inefficient overall. Check what your car's ideal speed is.

I think the example given by swansont was particularly instructive, since the numbers are so very different (rather than 3 and 2). Picking 1 out of 100 gives a 1/100 chance you got the right one, revealing 98 empty ones won't change that fact. However, if you know that the host was only going to reveal empty ones, then you know that the prize is in one of the two left and that your original choice has only 1 in 100 chance of being right, so the other has 99 in 100 of being the right choice. It would be a different story if the host had shown you 98 empty ones before you made your choice.