CaptainPanic

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europe 731,000,000 people.

Oh, if you take the definition of an ethnic group that broad as to include race, nation, religion, etc., many families exist that might be part of up to 10 ethnic groups, with single family members belonging to multiple groups. When ethnic groups have gradients rather than a clearly defined border, what would you propose? Where do you draw the line? Why allow these groups any rights based on ethnicity? I think that in Europe, ethnicity has historically been made important by our politicians and dictators... usually either through religion or nationalism. Then people have clearly defined borders - you're either part or not a part of a group. But in fact, today a nation is simply that group of people that have joined together in a functioning democracy. And European countries most certainly do not consist of a single ethnic group - and I don't think they ever did, actually. Only when it's the World/European Cup Football are we united as one... but that's just a few weeks every other year. I do not think we should change our democractic systems too fast (and that's the main reason people don't like the EU too much: it's going really fast and we don't get to vote about much). However, if a group of people - regardless of ethnicity - want independence, and they can form a new democratic nation that does not immediately start a conflict with its neighbors, then I think this group of people should get independence. And if that happens to be a single ethnic group, then so be it.

Democracy is strongest if the population is well-informed and when there is a wide choice of parties which are capable of cooperating and forming coalitions. It has nothing to do with the strength of the government.

In addition, there is in fact another category for the real junk: the delete button. But for obvious reasons, those threads don't get a lot of attention.

Shall we start off by clearly defining an "Ethnic identity" first? Shall we then define what a nation-state is (just how independent is it)? Shall we then proceed by finding several examples, in all continents (both Americas, Asia, Africa Australia and Europe)? It might seem quite straightforward in the USA where you have the native Americans who have clear origins. It's a lot more vague in Europe where we have loads of groups who are ethnically or culturally different but live in a single country or across several, and who are nearly always intermixed. And I just don't know about the implications of your suggestion in Asia. I think larger countries like India, China, Russia would completely collapse if all ethnic groups would get their own nation-state. World politics would be thrown into complete chaos... and no doubt many wars would break out where the ethnic groups have moved around and were shuffled in the past, or where resources are of interest.

Meh. Mr Skeptic, that is indeed the classical argument against communism. It's nice to get that in the 1st reply. Especially because I disagree. Under capitalism the rich have become far richer than under any commie regime. The only difference is that capitalism applauds such achievements (even if it wasn't through hard work), and it seemed hypocritical under a commie regime. Also, in our capitalist system there are plenty of lazy people who aren't exactly motivated to move up the ladder. They just do their 9-5 job, and rush home as fast as they can, and will definitely not work a single minute extra if it's not necessary. People who turn on a flash-game on the computer when the boss isn't watching, etc. That's quite a similar attitude to what you describe. And in the same time, there are people who choose to earn less to do what they like to do - like myself. So the reward isn't always a good motivator to work hard. Personally, I think that utopia cannot exist because we humans will always desire something else and something new. But a different distribution of wealth wouldn't be a bad idea. Communism is too much to one side (too equal), and our current system is too far to the other side (too unequal). I'd like to move back to some less extreme capitalism.

My Google returns 82,000 hits for feeblemindedness, and 350,000 for feebleminded. So I am not sure what you mean? Anyway, language has its hypes. Today's words will eventually all be replaced by tomorrow's words. Just read an old book (Dickins or something) or listen to an old movie. They use some funny words that were completely normal back then but are replaced by now. Maybe feeblemindedness is slowly being replaced by 'backward' or 'retarded'?

Dutch universities (i.e. Twente university) are generally not too hard to get into at the BSc level (which is where you probably have to start)... but I have no clue about the costs for an American. Probably still cheaper than most US universities. I'd definitely consider it. There is a reasonable chance that they teach in English nowadays - especially the MSc part. You'd have to check that for yourself. They have an extensive English website.

If you drop some sugar into water, it's a suspension. It's not nessecarily super saturated, and eventually the sugar might dissolve. But that doesn't matter. Right now it's a suspension. As the sugar starts to dissolve, some sugar is in solution, and some is in suspension. So whole pot contains a suspension and the liquid phase is a solution. And finally, when all sugar is dissolved, all that remains is the solution. I did not think up these definitions, and I don't see much point in arguing about it. All you need to do is Google for the definitions, or grab any of your school books.

Meh. If swansont removed the link, we might be replying to a spam bot or at least a spammer Damn, it got me.

Not entirely true. The doctors will be discovering how nerves work and in general how the body works. They are the most likely to win some kind of science prize, and publish an article. But it will ultimately (and always) be engineers who get stuff to actually work properly, and to get it sold/given to a larger group of customers/patients. And it's therefore the engineers who I would call the inventors of new products. Anyway, I'm being pedantic (and completely biased, being an engineer myself)

Wealth. Power. I do not know what the world would have looked like by now if the European powers hadn't colonized the world.

What you must realize is that the development of a prosthetic is definitely a team effort. It's unlikely that you can do it by yourself. I'll add a disclaimer that I'm no expert, but some ideas spring to mind. - You're gonna need a neurologist. Someone who started by studying medicine, and specialized in the nervous system of humans. Perhaps also an orthopedist (also a doctor). - You're gonna need a mechanical engineer, to build the actual prosthetic. An industrial design degree (also an engineering degree) can perhaps also be helpful. - You're gonna need an IT engineer to program whatever processors are in there translating the signals from the human to the prosthetic. Typically, teams will be even more broad than that. Hell, you might even study management (not recommended as far as I'm concerned). The main message therefore that I'd like to give you is that you have a lot of options to choose a study. The most important is not the right study (although it helps), but the right motivation during and after the study. You must not give up if you cannot find a job in your field immediately. Make sure that you learn relevant things, and keep trying.

Could you please limit a thread to just 1 conspiracy theory? With an opening post like that, this thread is likely to go nowhere - no offence. [edit] Also, in the Science Forums Etiquette, it suggests that you use a descriptive title for a thread. It also suggests to give some sources.

There is a difference between a suspension and a solution. Solution: no solid particles. All material is dissolved. Suspension: solid particles present. Not all material dissolved.

By the sound of it, you need Windows XP, and an Office 2003. That runs on nearly any old computer... and I agree with your boss that you need to be a lot more clear about why you would need an upgrade of your 'so called technology'.

I disagree. There are cultures (Scandinavia to name one) where it's very common to take the shoes off. That's probably because of the snow that's just outside the door for 4-6 months per year. Farmers worldwide (especially those with cattle) often also take off their shoes, because the ground outside the house isn't too clean. Those people have the fullest right to demand of all their guests that they take the shoes off. It's their home, and therefore their rules. And if someone with a deformation really needs shoes, then that's fine. The host will have to provide a way to clean the shoes to make them suited for indoors. A regular doormat isn't always enough.

It's not a solution if it's not dissolved. If it is still solid, then it's called a suspension. The definition of a solution is a 'homogeneous mixture of two or more substances'. If you have pellets in your water, then you have a solid at the bottom and a liquid around it: it's not homogeneous. Also, NaOH as a solid has different chemical properties than Na+ and OH- dissolved... so if you need the solution, then you obviously need the properties of the dissolved Na+ and especially OH- ions. You only get the separate ions if you dissolve them.

Most people know very well that all our 'official' celebrations are nothing more than an agreement between a group of people, and have little to no astronomic or geographic meaning anymore. Most people know also that our society is only one way to approach the problem of living long and prospering. There are other ways to do that. Previously, the events were governed by the moon and sun... and that made sense. And then the whole world started to adopt a single system, and New Year came quite close (but not exactly on) the Solstice. It's just practical to leave things as they are. But I am happy for you that you also saw the light and realized that all that is 'official' is just an agreement between some people. And regarding the celebrations? Hey, it's just fun to party... and any excuse will do. I also go and watch sports in a pub, and I celebrate a victory: I cheer for about two dozen men running on a field with a ball. I think that's a whole lot more pointless than celebrating an arbitrarily chosen midnight very near the solstice. I know it's pointless. But I like to party, and as I said: any excuse will do.

Yes, that is a way to see it (and that's the way I approach it myself too).

The problem is that the water is really full of debris: wood and other construction materials. You need a decent armor, otherwise the debris in the water will just punch a hole in your waterproof car. Also, the water is very turbulent, and even real ships have problems to stay afloat. You cannot realistically expect to be able to breathe outside air, because your air intake might be under water. I think that tsunami-proof shelters are a better option, either on a hill, or a waterproof bunker of some kind. I don't see why the shelter should be on wheels. If people in their cars (and all other people too) can reach the shelters, then the car is not so important.

Umm... yeah... I may just have put some words into your mouth. Sorry. Personally, I think that this proposal is good. But I also think that such a state-bank for long term projects would out-compete normal banks, because it would ask a lower interest rate, or would even give loans that no other bank would give. It would effectively take over quite a significant portion of the market. That would have the same net-effect as nationalizing some banks. From a political and marketing point of view, I would definitely recommend to set up a new 'investment bank', rather than nationalizing one. Nationalizing sounds very 'communist'. But creating an investment bank sounds very 'capitalist'. And we all know that capitalism is the best.

There was a polynomial. It was a 1st degree polynomial, also known as a linear function. Exponential functions look and behave different.

A linear change would mean: subtracting 8.9 every time. 100 - 8.9 = 91.1 91.1 - 8.9 = 82.2 82.2 - 8.9 = 73.3 Do that 10 times, and you will get to 11.

I assume that you're also in the age-range of about 17, since I read that you have no experience in any bigger FAIL than someone not knowing where Sweden is? I'll agree it's a pretty massive fail. I think you need more experience and more detailed knowledge of some fields of science or engineering to appreciate the really big fails in life. If you encounter a fail where two palms aren't sufficient, this is a good step up.