Dave

That's a big PSU Does make sense if you've got a lot of PCs and you don't want to install the power points, but I'd probably just put the power points in tbh. Wouldn't fancy rigging that thing up.

I suppose so. I've not seen him around at all.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/pauli.html

clearly you have no idea what you're talking about.

Statistics can be misleading. I don't believe for one minute that they could accurately predict what is going to happen in such a varied and complex society when it comes to something like drugs.

I saw a Horizon documentary about this a few weeks ago. The one story that interested me was a woman who was clinically dead (i.e. no electrical activity in the brain) for an hour while they performed some rather delicate surgery on her. She survived, and managed to describe in detail what had gone on during that hour, which she could not possibly have known otherwise. Personally, I believe that there is some kind of afterlife, but it's not particularly easy to prove or disprove it. We don't have the understanding at the moment to do this sort of stuff, and we may never have the understanding to do so. Of course, another speculation raised in this documentary was whether conciousness can be attributed to a physical characteristic of the human body. I suspect this is even harder to answer

Why would you want to run two PCs off of one psu anyway? It's quicker and cheaper just to go and buy another one for £40 down at the computer store.

I've used it for writing up a few notes, but after that I kindof changed over to MS Word and Equation Editor. The main reason is that I completely and utterly hate the Computer Modern font in its entirety, and I really cannot be bothered trying to find out how to change the font because it's ridiculously complicated.

Create a cathode-ray tube, because they're cool and shiny and stuff. Or build a spark chamber, they're pretty funky also.

That's rather large.

Hasn't been released over here unfortunately. Saw the trailor though, so I'll go and see it cos it looks a little different.

"random"

bah.

Some of the more advanced ideas in electrical engineering specifically require complex numbers to be able to use them. Indeed, the entire concept of algebra is derived from the number system. Basic questions like "me and my friend have 3 bananas, I have one, how many are there" are the basis of the algebraic system. From this (and observations of measured quantities of things) we can derive equations to understand things like electricity, mechanics, and we gradually move on. My point is that without a basic number system with some sense and order, we cannot possibly have the things that you talk about. Sure, we might be able to "randomly" grab a number of things, but I very much doubt you could "randomly" come up with the equipment to make a particle accelerator. And where do you think we could get a speaker from anyway? Without a number system, there would be none of these things. Argue all you want, but it's a bit silly because you cannot possibly be right.

Has anyone seen this film yet? Personally I thought the effects on it were pretty damn nice, although the story left much to be desired. Apart from that, it wasn't too bad.

If the government decided to legalize drugs, then quite clearly it would be seen as a concession by them and wouldn't be appreciated by the public as a whole. Also, people who take drugs (and I'm mainly talking about heroin/crack takers, etc) often do crime to be able to pay for them. If you legalize drugs, then the crime rate would probably increase. More people will be on the damn things, and not being able to afford them, you get an increase in crime. This is my stance on it anyway. There's enough drugs as it is in the UK and if you legalize them then small kiddies are gonna think it's 'popular' and we'd turn into a bunch of crack-addicts. I hate drugs.

I think you mean relativistic mechanics I've pondered this question myself for a while, but lacking the physics behind it is kind-of useless. My own gut instinct is that we are missing something from the existing theories and postulates to explain this sort of behaviour should it ever occur. I also don't believe that we are constrained to travel up to the speed of light because it just doesn't feel right. Of course, I have nothing to back this up and I may indeed turn out to be completely wrong, but I certainly believe something is missing at the moment.

In the case of numbers, this is blatently not true. I very much doubt that the arabic number system was "dreamt up" overnight by a bloke. Much more likely is that mathematicians had a series of discussions for a number of years trying to find a decent kind of number system, and this is what they came up with.

You have to realise that it's only a dream, but without waking yourself up. It's quite fun. I think it's called lucid dreaming, but I'm not entirely sure about that. It's good because you can sleep and also do crazy stuff like go through floors and things

ick, matrices. I can't do these (because I've never looked at them) but I'll see what I can find out for you.

I opted out of taking computer science at uni in favour of mathematics because of this concern. As it stands at the moment, there's not a heck of a lot in terms of jobs mainly because everyone seems to be coming out with Computer Science degrees from not-so-good unis. Generally, if you go to a good uni (like Warwick here) then you'll be okay becase the employers like these kinds of unis. My advice would be to choose the broadest range of modules that you can, because this would greatly improve the chances of you getting a job in a different area other than programming after you complete your degree just in case you can't get the job you want. Or that's my stance on it anyway.

just like that it's not particularly hard. you can take out factors and whatnot.

You could convert them to the imaginary form as mentioned, but a much easier way is to just draw a diagram. I've attached a little screenshot of my notes that I did quite a while ago now (over 2 years) so sorry if you can't read it M1 (Method 1) uses the cos rule to find the side PQ. M2 uses Pythagoras to find the side PQ. When you combine the equations, you can get a derivation for cos(A-B). That was the hardest part, because from now on you can work the rest out with some simple algebra. cos(A+B) can be found by using cos(A-(-B)) which comes out quite simply. You also know that the cos graph is a transformation of the sin curve, so sin(A+B) = cos(90 - (A+B)) and from that you can then work out sin(A-B). Once you have these two equations, it's pretty easy to work out a formula for tan(A+B) because you know that tan(A+B) = sin(A+B)/cos(A+B). Hope that answers the question.

bye then

sorry