CaptainPanic

You should probably define the rotation against the plane of the galaxy or its center, or some other reference point that is fixed. Let me try to explain the problem with your question. My question to you is: do these windmills (click) turn the "same way"? How about these? Or these? From the reference point of the camera, they don't seem to turn the same way. But you will probably say they do. And that only means that the question was wrong, not you or the camera. Btw, even if you rewrite the question, I cannot give you the answer.

If you think that my reponse was a little strong already, you shouldn't have read the 1st version I wrote. I think that insane_alien put it quite right: you're an idiot. Despite warnings from professionals, you choose to continue with your daft plans. If someone breaks a leg, you can take a stick, some duct tape, and fix that leg yourself. Or, you can go to a hospital at 100 times the cost. Which do you choose? And compare that answer to your plans now. We, on this forum, are not protecting the pharma industry, we're protecting you from your ignorance. But if like to have your 15 minutes of fame as a story on the Darwin Awards, then feel free.

You should realize the following: The evaporation of water costs 2.26 MJ/kg, regardless whether this happens in a tumble dryer, in a closet with a fan or anywhere else. So, if you have plenty of heat in your house (warm climate, or because it's summertime) then the 2.26 MJ/kg of heat required are available for free. But if it's winter, then your heating system will provide the energy for the evaporation of the water... the water will evaporate, and the air and clothes cool down because of it. So, it's probably not the fans that need attention, it's the heating. Even large fans require about (max.) 50 W. I have computer fans of as little as 5 W, and a big fan for cooling in the summer of 35 W at home. A quick search online told me that tumble dryers can use as much as 2500 W (!).

The guy makes invalid comparisons. He makes personal attacks on the listeners. He makes a personal attack on the president. He repeats the same empty arguments several times using different words. He ends with a Godwin. As far as I am concerned, he is not worthy of the title of "prof.". Suggestive speech: - Obama sides with Mexico against a US state - Arizona is a great state, because it has great citizens such as Paul Babeu (one example does not make a rule) - the president of the US sides with the other government (Mexico) (suggesting the opposite from the truth, where Mexico just provides information for an internal matter in the USA, with the amicus curiae) - The claims by the US government and Mexico against Arizona are summarized as calling the new statute racist, unconstitutional and "yadiyadayada" (suggesting that racism and the constitution are not very important, and that the government has it all wrong). - It's more important to side with the American people than to uphold human rights (no comment) - Mexicans are called "foreign criminal invaders" (suggesting that they're all criminals) - Instead of protexting the Americans, the government sues the state of Arizona (suggesting that these are two opposite things - that one cannot protect citizens while suing a state) - Obama doesn't just side with Mexicans. He sides with the drug cartels, human trafficers, kidnappers and drug criminals from Mexico, Central and South America, and against the good law abiding citizens of the state of Arizona. (no need to explain why this is subjective) - One particular sheriff has been threatened. (Suggests that all sheriffs are threatened - one incident still doesn't make a rule) - The US federal government sues, personally, the speaker. (suggesting that it's personal - country against innocent citizen) - If you're not mad about this, you're not paying attention" (suggesting that you're not understanding the issue (but the speaker is) if you disagree with him) - It's an attack on all Americans, and not on Arizona alone. (no comment) - The lawsuit is wrong, because a large part of the Arizona statute is already part of the federal law (suggesting that it's a waste of time to check a new law against federal law - although this is (hopefully for Americans) a standard procedure) - When they came for the Jews and the Poles, I didn't say anything because I wasn't a Jew of a Pole... (It's a genuine Godwin! Whoopee! )

There is nothing that will keep the heat out forever... nothing at all. If the outside is 80, no matter what kind of fancy solution you find, the inside will eventually (assymptotically) approach 80 degrees as well. The only solution to keep the inside lower than 80 degrees is cooling. A flow of water or air for example, at the right flowrate, can provide just the cooling you need. Any outlet for heat is good enough. Insulation will merely slow the heating down. A material with variable thermal resistance will also just slow it down, not stop it. Btw, I believe that all materials have a thermal conductivity which is a function of the temperature... although they are not a strong function.

Ah... and it's Mission Accomplished. A bunch of Pakistanis have responded by burning an American flag. So, summarized: 30 people will burn Korans. 200 people on the other side of the planet burned a flag. Wooohee! Now that's news. I'm guessing that the effects of these fires on the climate are quite negligible... and the deathtoll due to burns is, eeh, zero. So I really wonder why I hear about this. Must be someone trying to tell me that the West and the Muslim world really cannot get along. I'll remember to tell my Muslim friends when I see them tonight in the bar. Tsk. We have internet. Unlimited information. But instead of exchanging unlimited information, the entire world discusses some insignificant groups of radicals. (On the bright side, the world must be a pretty safe place if this is the main headline for a whole week).

The problem is that there is a large part of the Western world (also in Europe) who seem to think that the Islam is the root of all evil now. None of these people knew that 10 years ago - but now these people are very convinced. After all, once a month there is a story about a woman being stoned to death somewhere in a Muslim country... the fact that America also kills people - although they use an injection - is beside the point. They're barbarians, and we should insult their culture to make our point! And anyway - it's the Muslims who started with the airplanes on 9/11. Never forget. Such a sad way of thinking... sad, sad, sad.

Invest in research and engineering. Cool space projects and sustainable energy... those are two topics that interest me a lot, and I'd just (responsibly) throw all the money into it. Perhaps keep a million for myself... but since I'd be working on the projects, I would simply get a salary like most other scientists and engineers - a salary which is quite comfortable.

Is any of you playing Starcraft II on a Linux computer (using Wine?)? I'd like to try it, but I would welcome any feedback on how easy it runs. The other reason I don't have it yet is the price. It's 60 euro for the 1st version, no expansions included. It's been a while since I bought games (I usually play open source games, such as TA Spring - or at times no games at all). Leader Bee - if the new starcraft is anything like the old one (and I assume it is), then you must learn a few keyboard shortkeys, especially for constructions (things that you repeat a lot). You must have one hand on the keyboard, the other on the mouse... it'll save you time, so that you can build/spawn and move stuff faster... which in the end means you build more of everything in the first few minutes of the game. Especially in the first few minutes of a game, slowness can be deadly... and even in the old Starcraft, the computer's first and second attack were usually quite impressive.

Exactly! And let's also find out what type of meteorite is the best. I would assume a rather porous structure because it will have a poor heat transfer coefficient, which can perhaps keep its core cool enough during entry into the atmosphere. These are really experiments that need to be done in real... I know of no labs where we would be able to generate the ridiculous conditions that the meteorite will find itself in: traveling about 10 km/s in a very thin atmosphere, which rapidly gets denser and also rapidly slows down the meteorite. The exhaust of a rocket engine might come closest to the conditions. The entry will need to dissipate a massive amount of energy: 1 kg meteor, travelling at 10 km/s has a kinetic energy of E = 0.5*m*v2 = 50 MJ. If the entire rock (assume a Cp value of 1 kJ/kgK) heats up, the resulting temperature is 50000 degrees... But, there are many reasons why it will never reach that temperature: 1. It also heats up the atmosphere, not just the meteorite itself. 2. Ice present will quickly melt, heat up further and evaporate. 3. Upon impact, a crater is formed. That means that kinetic energy is transferred from the meteorite onto the soil of the earth. The question is, whether the inside of the meteorite will actually heat up to a temperature so high that microorganisms die. I'm not in the mood to do a calculation now (because heat transfer in non-continuous situations is really tricky ).

No, but trying to get around a law in itself is not a crime. It just means that the law is not well-defined. It means that the law has a different effect than the one intended. That is not something you can blame on the people who try to get around a law. It should be blamed on those who wrote the law (or on those who did not adapt the law when times changed and a law had to be rewritten).

May I propose that there is a relation between P=NP and vampires? And, that if there is no established relation between those two yet, then undoubtedly 7th will explain that relation for our entertainment in the next couple of days?

So, will you be the one to tell the entire Western world to give up their wealth? Because, to make it all equal, the Western countries must work for the poor countries for a long time - meaning almost everything we produce must go to poor countries, and they won't pay much for it. We'll have no new cars, no improvements to our houses, not even maintenance, no new kitchen, and even less soap to clean the place. Our diet will include much less meat. Our infrastructure will age, and we cannot maintain or improve it. We won't have any new electronics for a decade. And we still work our ass off. And everything made in the poor countries will stay in the poor countries, or we must buy it at a very high price. That means very little coffee. Other types of food we're used to will become expensive. Food in general will become much more expensive. Energy will be very expensive, and we must reduce our consumption of it drastically. If you think that such a plan has any chance for success, then I'd like to hear how you are planning to bring the message to the masses. Last time I checked, we live in a democracy - that's a system where we will vote for anyone who promises us wealth and prosperity. And in case you lived under a rock the last decade or two, I must inform you that people still don't care about Africa, people are still selfish, and nobody seems to care about global problems.

This morning, we had 630 km of traffic jams in our little country which measures less than 400 km north-south and 200 km east-west. (source in Dutch) (Google maps of the Netherlands to see the road network) The reason? Rain. Just normal rain - not even a torrential downpour or a monsoon. Roads were not closed, and nothing flooded. The problem was just people who would normally take a bicycle, or walk to a bus stop or train station now all took the car. In addition, people generally drive a little more careful in bad weather. A normal morning rush hour will have about 150-200 km of traffic jams. How bad is traffic where you live?

I don't know... It depends what the USA (and some allies) set out to do there. Overthrow the old regime - check Defeat forces of old regime - check Make sure that no weapons of mass destruction are aimed at the USA or allies - check (there never were any) Get major oil contracts for industry - check, doublecheck Win hearts and minds of population - not so sure Bring peace - not so sure (still more than 1 attack per week) Bring stability - not so sure (sunnis and shias both seem to have militant groups that don't like the idea of peace) (edit) Install a functioning democracy - not so sure, but I'll give it the benefit of the doubt, since I just read that the Iraqi National Movement is the biggest at the moment. I just read also that 6 months after the elections, the parties still haven't formed a government. Normally, that's something good (policians who waste time talking cannot take any bad decisions), but in a volatile political climate such as Iraq, I think this is fueling instability. You tell me - is this a victory? Personally, I believe it is a victory - simply because the oil companies have contracts, and oil is being exported to the American (and European) oil refineries... and we can continue to pretend that oil was only secondary in importance to the regime change... but we all know better.

That was the original idea behind it. It's not apolitical. The problem is that the economy is no hard science. The theories of economy don't always apply. How our economy works and progresses often depends on the mood of the population. Therefore, both the left and the right can argue that they're the best way forward, and it's in both cases nearly impossible to refute that... It's more political, and less utilistic or practical than you seem to think. Politicians and voters choose a side, and dig in. Arguments and predictions regarding the economy can always just as easily be refuted by the other side. And obviously, since this is politics, arguments are also exaggerated, and made emotional. And of course, most politicians excel in avoiding a straight answer anyway. And then finally, the left and right disagree on some other topics as well and there are many voters who vote on a party because of topics such as immigration, rather than their personal financial safety, which confuses everything even more. (This reply is just to show that we may have a safety net for unemployed people - our political system is still as crappy as most others).

The next step should be to see if bacteria can survive entry into the atmosphere and crashing into the surface of the earth.

Many cultures still have arranged marriages where the couple have never (or not often) met before they get married. Logically, there can be no love, no passion when the couple get married. And it may never happen. Also, monetary or political gain of a family is an important motivation for these arranged marriages. Whatever we think about these "fake marriages", it is important to know that we may be judging more people than those "thousands" of people who try to bypass immigration laws. We may be judging billions of people. I believe that a system that relates marriage and immigration is asking for fake marriages. The real solution is therefore to decouple these. In the Netherlands, immigration of a partner is allowed if a person has enough income. Marriage does not change that situation at all. I believe this makes sense - especially since the minimum income to be allow a partner to get a residence permit is not ridiculously high. It's just 20% more than the minimum wage.

There should definitely be a limit to the freedom of speech. Discimination, insult and other things against entire groups of a population (within or outside the borders) should not be allowed. The ultimate result when a whole group of people starts to dislike or hate another group of people are well-known. Riots, or even war are the sad result. Sadly, our own politicians use these tricks on a daily basis. Freedom of speech is a wrong phrase. What we should be discussing is a freedom of intent. I think it doesn't matter what you say - it only matters what your intentions are when you say it.

An investment in knowledge pays the best interest. The first quote is brilliant. I just wrote a blog post on the same topic... coincidence, honestly! In my opinion, most other quotes are encouraging, or just a good oneliner... they do inspire, but they're too general for my taste.

"No one would miss mosquitoes" was a statement made by an astrophysicist... not a great authority on details of the eco-systems and food chains around the world. But even if there are some animals that live on a diet of mosquitos, it may be worth the price. A consideration though: If we kill many mosquitos, the mosquito predators may suffer. If we then drop the program, or the machine breaks, the mosquitos will be back soon enough... but the predators may never make a come back. It's a kind of mistake that you can only make once.

Fascinating. Personally, I think science completely fails to understand that piece of prose... and in the unlikely event that science ever understands it, I doubt it is interested. But, I liked that part about the vampires though. It says that "women who eat semen everyday will become a powerful vampire". I hope that they're aware of this in the porn studios around the world. Fascinating, absolutely fascinating.

That is (and always will be) a topic for discussion... If you lose a job, at first the government pays you for a certain amount of time, 70% of your last earned income as an unemployment wage. To receive that, a person must prove that they try to find a new job. After a certain amount of time (and still no job), the person will fall back to the levels of income that I mentioned before... and they still must search for a job. (That never stops). It's a funny example you choose. Trash collectors earn quite a decent living. It's a dirty and hard job, so they get decent money. It's paid by the government. Fast-food chains don't receive any government support as far as I know. Quality of life is - well, let's put it like this: I haven't been to any place in the world so far that seemed significantly richer than the Netherlands. Unemployment is at 5.7% now. It went up because of the crisis. It was less than 4% for many years.

I am still not convinced. Can anyone please provide any article or other reference for me to read about this phenomenon? As I understand your explanations correctly, any solution (not just salt in water) at rest would auto-separate, and the separation would only be countered by diffusion. However, I cannot seem to find any reference at all regarding this phenomenon (although that is perhaps because I use the wrong keywords). Assumptions I assumed so far that we start our experiment with a container with water, in which we have dissolved an amount of salt adequate for the experiment. The salt completely dissolves, and no solids are left after the salt is dissolved. The salt is, at first, equally distributed as you may expect after vigorous stirring. Then, with the salt equally distributed, there is no difference in concentration at all, and therefore no difference in density. We then allow the solution to come to a complete rest, so that there is no movement other than the individual motion and interactions of the molecules in the solution. What would be the driving force of the separation, given the situation that I just described? insane_alien, I agree with your remark that, if there would be any separation effect due to a concentration difference, we would have to take diffusion into account as a phenomenon that will counter the separation. But, I still fail to see why there would be any separation in the first place.

Time to talk ethics. Time to look for trouble, and play the devil's advocate. So, let's assume we reduce the mosquito population of the world by 99.9%? Or a 100%? What are the effects, other than 7 billion happy people? Mosquitos are food for other animals (fish food in larve stage, and spider and bird food in mosquito stage). Killing mosquitos might kill off other species as well. And... Eeh... Do mosquitos serve any other purpose other than that they just happen to be part of the food chain? I think that just being part of the food chain isn't good enough. If that's the only reason to preserve the bastards, they can go extinct.