vampares

If a DC current is just passing by on a plate, the electrons would bypass the plants entirely, like a bird on a wire. An AC current might effect the plants. A square wave would have more of an effect if this were the case, I think. I've seen green grass on catch fire on older electric fences. I don't think electrical currents would ever have a positive effect on plants. If the electricity does channel into the plant, the water in the plant would undergo electrolysis. I think this would be almost always a bad thing. Photosynthesis involves electrical potential. If there was a negative potential it may help pull the electrons across membranes but isolating the membrane would be nearly impossible for a high school biology student. You would need an oscilloscope, preferably an analog one (I don't know that a digital would work). With this you would need to analysis the plant. The first thing to do would be to learn how to read key strokes on a keyboard from 6 inches away. There is a signal that can be picked up, the probe acts like an antenna, you can add a coil to this. Why don't you set up a circuit that would make stink bugs dance using a keyboard. That would be easier if you have fine motor skills. You could make popcorn with an arc welder. A more interesting experiment would be to see if l-methionine supplementation has an effect on the size of green peas. Green peas are naturally high in methionine and I would like to know if these plants will absorb exogenous methionine. If you like that idea I will tell you how to grow the peas quickly in a sterile enviroment.

The vacuum of space won't take all that much energy from you like cold stiff wind will. Provided you are a warm blooded individual you shouldn't need much additional heating. The radiation in space is a concern. And you would need pressurization of some sort for the entire body so that the blood in the head doesn't pressed out. That pressurization portion would need extra protection against punctures and it would need flexible joints.

The maintance of a vaccuumed commuter transport system would be way too expensive. It is also dangerous. And there no air to provide cooling to the brakes and engine ect. I think the best way to deal with the forward pressure in a tunnel is have channels that run the length of the train for the air to travel. In this way it would be similar to the aerodynamics of a car. Air goes up over and the behind the vehicle to replace the vacuum that is left behind. Provided there is smooth continous flow there should be a minimal loss of efficiency. The front end of the train could be designed like a scoop to push the air into the channels. I think the addition of gates to prevent air loss at the back of the train might help as well.

I was interested in power generation on and off. My original idea was that of geo-thermal energy back in 1996. This has been explored and thus far it is neither clean cheap, reliable or very productive. It's still a good idea though in my opinion. Just terribly, um . . . you'd need an oil rig greater than you could afford, a local government with it's head up its ass and a gung-ho attitude. The next is non-mainstream solar energy. First let me tell you something I tell my sister and she blows me off: If you save 50% on everything you purchase, you will have to work 50% as much. We don't live in a communist economy. There is no token gratitude. Same holds for energy. If you save it, you earn it. Very difficult concept. If you pay twice as much for what you purchase you will have to work twice as much! In all honesty, few people can work 80 work weeks. Why does this matter? My next suggestion is low energy solar films. We can print anything on an aluminum can. This is as simple a two coats. Copper as thin as gold plating and on top red copper oxide. You don't get alot from it. BUT if you coat a lot of stuff you get a lot of surface area producing something. There are many different combinations that could be used. Problem is if you have no money and I give you $0.45, there is just about nothing you can buy. If I do this 100 times, I would expect you to have $45. But if you don't think $0.45 is worth anything each time I give it to you . . . well now you have nothing. And in some regards it is really a waste of time if I don't walk up to you and put it in your hand. You have to take 1/2 hour out of your day to get it from me, now it really isn't worth anything at all. This is the attraction of nuclear energy. The power output of a steam driven turbine is quite large. It's like having $100 for everyone on scienceforums.net. I make a lot of friends. It is reliable. It is clean as the LLRW disposal. OK back to the solar coating. Cars for example are a good example where the technology could be used. Don't like the color? Bah. It's elemental. Its so solid. You can store the energy in the 12volt battery. You may only get 25 watts. What good is 25 watts in todays automobile? It's nothing. Because automobile manufactures have given themselves to a worthless token economy; somehow it has become virtuous to over-consume. I did some google on low level nuclear waste. It seem that my state is part of some program where we deal with it ourselves...but nobody seems to know where it is or what happened to it. There is sort of a common problem that begins to crop up 40 years after the original technology came along. If you were to propose technology of that era today, you'd run into stiff resistance. Most of the stuff is shrouded in "you can't understand this because your too stupid" kindof unit mismatch and what not. These days we have googleearth imagry. You can find a hole with w, x, y and z aggregate in piles. Could be road work, could be the solution-to-pollution-is-dilution (and I'm not saying it isn't). This is the same "industry" that detonated atomic weapons on American soil and abroad for years. Not exactly clean as the whistle. They did eventually stop testing atomic weapons all together (as far as we know) but I haven't heard of them tyeing up any loose ends regarding the LLRW. Apparently the soil has a "carrying capacity" for nuclear reactors. See you shoot a few presidents and now everyone has to tippy-toe around his or her own personal security. As I see it, as a casual observer, there's only a few years before something gets outed. They work with the old-timers exclusively. At which point in time we'll see what comes of it. Probably not more nuclear reactor permits.

OSHA is very intolerant of hypoxic enviroments. I don't have the times for low oxygen enviroments on hand but I think it is 12 or 13% for 5 minutes. mount everest is 29,000 feet. 500mb is 18,000 feet (5,500m). You can use resistive breathing techniques to increase the pressure. The lower pressure will allow CO2 to escape more easily, I would think.

So does the "counter-clockwise" magnetic field have any relavance to our non-quantum world? Or is it just like looking at the front or the back of an electron?

It's for economic reasons.

It's not. I just kindof think that there would be too much water on this hypothetical planet. Well then get out the Tang, I guess. Of the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giant_impact_hypothesis Giant collisions would be destructive to the solar system. If this happened to a planet sized glob of water, the water might suround the non-water planet and they would become one.

If it is a better alternative to pesticides, I think that may be a positive thing. Corn isn't known for having overwhelming number insect-pests in comparison to other crops. I have bean plants which attract a number of insects. They do eat the leaves but I still have beans. I could kill these insects but some of them are insects I've never seen before. I have monarch butterflies, lady bugs, honey bees... not to mention a dozen brown bats and barn swallows. Preying mantis's. It's not fair to plant corn across entire states that would kill the first insect to take one bite. NEW SUB-TOPIC Massive Tumors in Rats Fed Monsanto’s Genetically Engineered Corn The study done by a lab in France. Interestingly the most GMO maize fed to the rats was 33%. Monsanto spokesman Thomas Helscher said the company would review the study thoroughly. However, he added: "Numerous peer-reviewed scientific studies performed on biotech crops to date, including more than a hundred feeding studies, have continuously confirmed their safety, as reflected in the respective safety assessments by regulatory authorities around the world." Reviewing articles and links it seems that it is very difficult to get farmers to comply with any regulations (when there are any). Off the top of my head, no I can't, and I can't tell you how it does it either. The sugar cane apparently doesn't need excessive fertilizer or doesn't need any at all. This is how Brazil is able to viably produce 70% of it's combustable liquid fuel needs as ethanol. Obviously sugar has less protien than does corn. You cannot feed a cow primarily raw sugar. But high-fructose corn syrup comes to mind. Fructose is very fermentable. More so than cane sugar. The commodity price of corn has risen from under 200 to over 800 in the past decade. I would expect that GMO was proven to be more relevant to the market. We could blame this on ethanol but 2005 show a very stable price >200 <300. "86% of the US maize crop was genetically modified in 2010" 2010 happens to be a year corn prices rose substantively. This price increase situation would be putting the ethanol fuel concept on its head. The prices are cents per bushel. A bushel is 56lbs of corn. The maximum amount of ethanol would be ~4.4 gallons, realistically 4 gallons. C6H12O6 → 2C2H5OH + 2CO2 4 gallons X $3.00/gallon = $12 $12 - 756.50/bushel (up 16.5c today) It's not easy to distill 4 gallons of alcohol on $4.43. It can be done but the profit margin is stifling.

I heard the sugar cane in Brazil has nitrogen fixing capability. But it's not GMO.

The North Pole has receded to record levels. There isn't much left. The oceans won't rise much more The antarctic on the other hand still has a dense block of ice on it. And it is on land. Icebergs on the north pole are floating in water and so already displacing it anyways. Greenland's glaciers are melting but not quickly.

After Ganymede.

OK it was an Asteroid, technically. It is only relevant to the assertion that mars accidentally or intentionally IDK... nudged or rubbed the earth a little and knocked what off? The dead sea? I don't see any red paint. But it is to the point that clearly something did hit the moon but not the earth. It was so large that the impact crater did not leave a bowl shaped poc mark. Instead the creator was relatively shallow in comparison to its width. The former life on Mars that attacks North America and steals the atmosphere. If you jump off a bridge, do you fall anywhere but straight down? Same thing only this bridge is very, very high (or far away). True but none of the knocked the water off the earth or earth. The largest known creator is in South Africa. It is 300km wide. That's the size of South Africa. It is only to the assertion that earth once had that much water on it. no no that mars or some rouge nudged earth and it will happen again to that planet very soon. If a planet did have that much H and O on it, it would be an unlit star, in my opinion. It would not get hit intergalacticly all that often but if it did....where is it the OP's moon unit since he is designing entire planets.

I post a lot of images from the wiki but here is another This is not a non-issue in our solar system.

No, German Beer is very good at removing dead skin cell and allowing the porous nature of the hands an feet survive. They use a lot of hops. This might be the cause of the phenomenon. But American beer is a flesh-eating fungus. No joke (and no offense, I am an American and I don't dislike the beer). I think it sort of stems from the "Science will Guide us" mentality. Science is not always the "higher power". Science is not always legal. Remember that WW2 was a time of innovation. Germans have a very strong culture of beer making -- and laws that prevent any adulteration. All technology that might screw this up, winds up in the US. Really not that big of a deal if you don't mind festering ulcerations. I notice a dog in your avatar. Dogs are subject to technology that is more "questionable" than humans. DL-methionine is in your dogs food. DL-methionine is not an ingredient in human food. DL-methionine is not anywhere found in nature. But you don't know why it is there, do you? How would you define "Animal Digest"? Do you know where the Champ is?

OK, the moon of the Earth (does it have a name? no, because it's just one moon) is the largest planetary satellite in our solar system!!! There is a center of gravitational force and a movement such that if any oversized meteorite were to headed in our direction, it would just miss earth and slam the moon. Saturn or Jupiter had a meteorite hit in recent history, maybe a couple of years ago. It was so large it would have really done damage here on earth. But this never happens. OK, once, if you believe the asteroid theory of Dinosaur extinction. The moon is predominately Al and Si. Not dense at all. Three hours of my shielded metal arc welding looks remarkably similar to the inside of the "mare". Spewed hot metal and sand dust. Analogy: There earthquakes that are big and there are earthquakes that are enormous. The difference between a 5.0 and a 9.0 is 10,000 fold. When dealing with meteorites, the result of a "large" event would look dramatically different from those little pimples. Mars might look like it had an ocean. Sure and the moon looks like Grover Cleavland. Asteroids fall into the planetary orbital plane easily. Gravity aims these things at the equator. Thats why there looks like it had an ocean at one point but the reality is much colder. And all the Martians lived on either the north pole or the south pole.

"what equation do galaxies and hurricanes have in common?" The flat aspect of the hurricane is what make it look flat. It is a very large cloud. The center is low pressure. The air entering the eye keeps the thing off the ground. The spiral pattern fiddle head look is very common to weather patterns that are "overtaking" as opposed to being pushed forward or falling over. The fact that it is spinning, the tail drags. The eye of the hurricane always follows the sea level surface temperature. In this way you can predict the path of the hurricane. The sea level surface temperature determines what type of hurricane it will be. The colder ones don't make direct land fall all that often. Probably because of the land temperature. Wiki's Hubble classification system "An E indicates a type of elliptical galaxy; an S is a spiral; and SB is a barred-spiral galaxy" You know these things don't move a million miles an hour. The S0 seems like it might be and S a,b or c on its side. The spiral-barred kind of looks like its gyration is out of kilter. Could be overwhelming central dominance. I've never seen an hurricane with two eyes. Nothing here has twin peaks either. from the noaa visualization laboratory

I didn't want to loose the stalk but I hadn't thought about the placement. Obviously corn is not autonomous.

Huh. I guess the apple could be a chimera or a mosaic. 250lbs an acre of ammonia nitrate does not last long. (I'm thinking about putting another o in oolong tea) If corn DID grow in three days, the loss of fertilizers would be greatly reduced because it would all go into one location. This would give the opportunity to cultivate some natural variety so that half the continent wasn't bare open dirt twice a year from top to bottom. Transport cost would be reduced. There would be fewer runs on futures in the commodities. It would make the corn more valuable on the market because it would be so reliable. Right now we don't know what will happen, so the fuel market doesn't take it seriously.

You could try fixing the Google search engine. And the news too.

Was this Q-ball wearing an inner-tube? Are you sure you didn't get this theory from the "What if the Earth had a big chunk taken out of it?" thread. I think the spots on the near side of the moon show where large object tend towards. Unless there really was a very small population of highly intelligent ape like naturalist humanoids who had a very barbaric but elegant "device" (this culture of super beast individualist -- all WOMEN -- does not have the concept of tools) which catapulted boulders -- no wait they have nuclear capabilities but these are not true weapons, merely incendiary devices -- at the moon with rocket like force. Using the powers of the ocean. The Navy. Simply because they had no other hard target to shoot at. Or maybe they were establishing a system of lakes and reservoirs so they could colonize in the near future. But then they were squashed when Jupiter threw one of it's moon at them.

German beer.

The industrial revolution feeds people. DNA modification on the scientific basis of mapping the genome is in line with the industrial revolution. Mutating plants may have a few niches in which a real production is seen. It's not to likely you would find DNA in one species that was better at producing an enzyme, et al, than the species from which that enzyme came from in the first place. And when this organism is modified, it now occupies a place in our ecosystem that is not existent. If all corn is GMO'd, then it is as if there is no corn at all in a sense. Another thing. It worries me that they have developed, thus far, only a handful of quasi-useful GMO traits. I build my own Linux operating systems from source code. This is like have a C:\ prompt and writing some PacMan knockoff. This is how bored farmer must be to find BT corn commercially attractive. How about corn that grows an ear in three days? Or green beans that taste like chocolate? Or red, white and blue apples?

At its highest CO2 is only 0.04% of the atmosphere. Water at the same time is 1% of the atmosphere, or 25 fold greater. There we see that CO2 has not much to do with this thing any more than O2 which we hope IR radiation will never slip past. The absorption in the stratosphere or upper troposphere of the IR radiation would not considerably alter temperatures here on earth (cold goes down, hot goes up). The problem is: CO2 is an acid. It *attacks* the water. CO3-2 is very uncommon while CO3H- is somewhat common and CO3H2 is very common. Water vapor is not as common in the upper atmosphere because it exists at near saturation at the surface but due to Van Der Wals forces it forms clouds and precipitates. CO2 does not precipitate except with the water. SO, water is here V but up there ^, not so much. SO not so much that you get microwaved. The emperical evidence of this is Texas, Kansas and Oklahoma. They had ranges around 20% RH to close to 3%. Temperatures were in the 110's. Need something to keep it off of you. Problem is heat only excites molecules more and more. NOW near Salt Lake city there's a pressure drop of 10, 16 even 20 millibars! Very tight topography. This is because there is water in the lake which evaporates. That water in the atmosphere absorbs more and more energy and excites every thing around it and this rises and continues into the column of atmosphere above it. That atmosphere is hot, it expands and there is a marked pressure drop despite there being more water in the air which tends to make it heavier, I think. Again it is cold above Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas. The more farming they do the hotter it gets on the ground. That same heat is above locations with sufficient a sufficiently hydrated atmosphere. They talk about the long-term effects but this is actually very unpredictable weather. It could or could not happen at any point in time. The natural world does not want to stay this way. It is like someone turning the volume of a TV or radio up and down, up and down, up and down. Very annoying.

As Derin said. The yeast need to be electrically isolated. Otherwise they will leverage (or loose) electricity to reduce the oxygen in CO2 and continue on. This would occur more slower. The breakdown of glucose goes to fructose and then pyruvate and cascades down to acetaldehyde. The acetaldehyde accepts the -H from NADH. I guess because it is a good place to put the -H. Alcohol has 8 calories per gram and it is lighter than water. It evaporates quickly if need be. It is a good solvent. It oxidizes to acetic acid readily (provided there is oxygen).