CaptainPanic

Where I live, cops usually write parking tickets and tell me to get off my bike when I'm in a part of the city that's for pedestrians only. I think what you describe is better for war, not for patrolling in a peaceful city. And war-robots are being developed right now. In other words: Robocop shoots more bullets in 5 minutes of a movie than a normal cop in all his/her career. I prefer a friendly face on the streets. Being a cop is not very dangerous (over here). It's better to automate (and spend money) on the really dangerous jobs, such as road/construction workers and window cleaners. I'm not with you.

It's horribly difficult to point out a single dominant species in a world where we have a thing as an ecosystem: many species working together, and one simply doesn't survive without the other. In my previous answer, I have interpreted the question as: "What animal is most likely to develop space flight if humans were to go extinct?". Surely, humans are unique at least on that point.

Let me be the first to say that I like the old logo because: 1. It's not the first thing I see on the site. 2. It contains both the name and a common symbol for "science": the orbitals. 3. It's in the same colors as the rest of the forum. 4. This forum (science forum) has a name that's easy to remember, and therefore doesn't need to direct anyone's attention towards a logo. People will remember us anyway. In short: it takes an effort to even notice the logo. Which is great, because the website looks calm and scientific. It's inviting and will focus any member/ guest to the contents rather than to the *bling*. We already have avatars which are being noticed, and adding a logo that needs attention will make it hard to focus in the important bit: the actual posts. My 2 cents: if we're changing the logo - add the ".net" somewhere, because that's the only part of the name that's difficult to remember.

I don't understand. You want to add ozone to glycerol? I think it will just burn. I recently found out about a company that uses (purified) glycerol to feed a steam reformer to form synthesis gas (H2 / CO) which is then used to form bio-methanol. I hope I understood the process correctly, because intuitively I'd expect that you could go for a more direct reaction from glycerol to methanol, perhaps in 1 step. Oh, while I'm writing a post in an ethanol-fuel-gel thread anyway... This particular thread was sort of hijacked and became a glycerol thread. But the other ones weren't. Can anyone explain me why we have 3-4 different ethanol-fuel-gel threads? Why do people want this gel fuel? ...

lol. Not sure what's the point of this thread, but I'll just add another link: Have an article about increased viscosity of water in a magnetic field: http://scitation.aip.org/getabs/servlet/GetabsServlet?prog=normal&id=JAPIAU000100000006066101000001&idtype=cvips&gifs=yes (That link is relevant to this thread because an MRI scan has a very strong magnetic field, which then increases viscosity of all the water (and blood) in the body of a patient. It's just a small increase though.

Sorry for not being very helpful, but you're basically asking us to completely design two machines? Do you have any specific questions? It seems to me that you have figured out the car already (you have a source of energy and you know how to convert it to spin the wheels)... so no question there? My only advice is: reduce weight wherever you can. About the airplane. I am not sure about this sail servo. It's a nice idea, but I get the feeling it's a bit heavy. But if it needs to fly, I would start with finding an old RC (= remote controlled) airplane. Then remove the engine, and probably also replace/redesign the propeller (because I doubt you'll reach the rpm that the old engine did, if it's a real RC airplane with engine). But without any specific questions, I could talk forever and still give no relevant feedback.

There's not much to discuss here... perhaps that's why people remain silent? I mean, if you base a design or research on a single paper... you're taking a risk. Peer review is not the same as repeated experiment. Peer review isn't even always a critical review of methods, results and conclusions. (In addition, the amount of papers that are published seems to increase exponentially (I have no reference for that), so possibly the amount of time spent on a paper is less nowadays than in the good old days?) Often there is no way to check results, and you just have to assume that it's correct. It depends on how important the data is for you as a researcher (or what the effects might be if the data is wrong). The point of this thread reoccurs in many shapes and forms. And it's a good thing that on this forum, most (if not all) aspects of scientific thinking are treated every now and then: This thread is about realizing that all you read might be rubbish, or might be quality. You need to evaluate this. Then there's the "open mindedness" thread... What is an open mind, and who has one? Then there's the constant asking for references. What's your source, what's its value? Did you even understand it correctly? We talked about proof: what is proof. We discussed about new theories, new explanations for observations, which aren't always backed up properly. Etc. Etc. All those points, together with this thread, have an overlap. A scientific education teaches you how to deal with these topics.

I can only give my personal opinion here, but I like the size of this forum. At work, I am already focussed on 1 specific topic, so the fact that this forum is broad is a feature that's important to me. It keeps me sharp, and forces me to rehearse stuff I learned a long time ago. We have experts in many fields, which is very interesting. It's big enough that it's not quiet, and every time I login, there is something new. In addition, the size of this forum enables me to follow and contribute to discussions that last more than 1 day. On other forums, you can post 1 reply, and the next time you login, the discussion moved on another 100 replies (which you should all read, if you wish to reply once more).

Umm... you might just open the box? Lift the lid? Use the key? Alternatively, some heavy tools might help to open the box? I mean, it's just a box - how difficult can it be?

Squid and/or octopus 1. They seem very smart, and are known to adapt to an environment. They observe, learn and adapt. 2. They have not 2 hands, but 8 tentacles (or 8+2=10? Never really figured it out... it's a blur of tentacles). But as far as I know, they don't use tools... yet. 3. They look like aliens from sci-fi movies, who have warp drives and are generally more advanced than us. Alternatively, I'll go for elephants, for 4 reasons: 1. They're quite smart. Or, at least they have a remarkable memory. 2. They have a trunk which they can use like we use our hands. 3. They're group animals, and communicate a lot with each other. 4. The more obvious choice for chimps is too boring and logical. But I don't see us humans give up just yet.

If Mars had an atmosphere full of oxygen, and methane was still present, then I'd tend to agree that something is going on... possibly something biological. Since Mars has an atmosphere full of CO2, which isn't going to react with methane, the stability of methane is understandable. Methane is produced biologically over here, because a lot of reactions to form methane from other hydrocarbons and/or other organic components have a negative Gibbs energy of reaction: meaning that they will proceed under the right circumstances. That also means that it can be formed somewhere else... I like the comparison that John made a few posts back, about the iron and blast furnaces. Perhaps a better comparison is sugar to CO2 and water. Most sugar on earth is consumed by biological processes and turned into CO2 and water. However, this reaction will work in total absence of anything living. You can just burn sugar.

I found an unopened beer in my fridge, but it was empty. I therefore concluded beer was invented by the guy who came up with quantum tunneling.

I live in a safe and friendly part of the world, so I never had a pepperspray, but I'm assuming that some propellant (check the part under aerosol spray) is used like in a deodorant can. Shaking a can (or a bottle of e.g. cola) might cause an increase in the pressure locally in the liquid, which in turn can influence the equilibrium between gas and liquid. This will not exceed a certain maximum level. The can is certainly designed to withstand the max. pressure. If you leave the can for a while, (if the pressure went up at all), the pressure will reduce again. The pressure will not build up until it blows up. Same with cola: shaking might increase the pressure, but it's totally impossible to make the bottle explode. (In fact, I believe that it just reaches equilibrium faster, and the pressure is not higher than a certain maximum level which you would also reach with enough time). The pressure, on average, will remain constant, at its equilibrium value... which is the vapor pressure of the solvent (often butane or propane or something like that). This vapor pressure is only temperature dependent, and absolutely not "shake-dependent".

My guess is that it was put there by somebody... First of all: not everybody who opens a grave is a grave robber and/or archaeologist. Not every grave robber needs to leave a mess when they're done. Perhaps these grave robbers closed off the tomb again, or perhaps they didn't even steal anything. How did they know it was unopened?

Did you consider to use Google to answer your questions? A google search on "current positions planets" gives... well... information about the current positions of the planets. The very first hit is a good one. And on that website you can also fill in the date of 2012. http://www.fourmilab.ch/cgi-bin/Solar/action?sys=-Sf And planet X? Come on, what do you think yourself? There are plenty of amateur astronomers... such a big thing would not remain hidden from the media... There is no planet X. As long as humans have been talking to each other, they have told each other that the end is near. Very few of them were actually right... But a few were. At this moment, there is no real evidence that life as we know it will come to an end in 2012. But something might happen. Ask the people who were hit by the tsunami in 2004... Or those hit by the earthquake in china in 2008. Disasters happen. And it's more than likely that something will happen in 2012... and it's highly unlikely that it will be a global catastrophe.

Umm... yes... indeed Thanks! I used Google as my calculator, and messed it up in copypasting, causing Google to give me the wrong answer. It missed a dot, and I blindly and stupidly copied the answer, and then proceeded to claim that 463 is less than 11. I guess I didn't score a lot of points there.

What you mean is to make a sling shot kinda elevator. That only works if you achieve the escape velocity of the earth, which is 11 km/s. The surface of the earth, at the equator, rotates with: 2*pi*6.378*10^6 / (24*3600) = 463 km/s, which is not nearly enough (luckily for us).

I saw a documentary about why no (or at least less) prehistoric stone tools are found in the East than in the West: People might have used bamboo to make tools. Apparently it's relatively easy to create an edge on bamboo because its fibers are nicely parallel. Disclaimer: I cannot retrieve the name of the documentary, and I never tried this myself. So, I have no source.

That makes sense for salt: Goggles are standard in a lab. Salt will eventually dry your skin: therefore gloves are needed. Perhaps not if you are making an omelet, but if you work with salt for 8 hrs/day, I really suggest gloves... And if you ever had any sweat in your eyes, you know you want to be able to wash your eyes. If an eyewash station is suggested, and you work with salt, you might also read that as: have the possibility to wash your eyes at a toilet. "Eyewash station" is simply the over-powered emergency version of the toilet sink. However, it does not suggest use of a fume hood because table salt does not evaporate at all... MSDS suggest all safety precautions that might make sense, but will never suggest anything useless. Therefore, reading a MSDS will give you an insight into all the possible dangers, and the effects that these can have on you and others around you. Regarding methanol: Search for the TLV value (Threshold limit value) See whether the TLV value for 15 minutes, or for 8 hrs will be applicable (you have to decide that for your own safety) Then check the vapor pressure of methanol at room temperature. Do a simple calculation to turn the vapor pressure into a concentration, and compare it to the TLV value. If the TLV value is significantly lower than the vapor pressure, it's best to work with methanol in a well ventilated room, or better: in a fume hood. If methanol enters the body through the skin, this will be specifically mentioned in the MSDS. If you splash the methanol on your hands, you can do 2 things: - wear gloves - or better: change your equipment so that it doesn't splash anymore!

E)* None of the above, but D comes closest. The vapor pressure of water is low at low temperatures. This is indeed related to the velocity of water molecules in the gas phase. But explaining it as "easy" is a weird choice of words. And as pointed out earlier (by D H), we need to know whether we are discussing relative or absolute humidity. I believe that the most widely used definition of "humidity" is in fact the relative humidity. Since there is ice present in (almost) every freezer, we might conclude that the gas phase in the freezer is in fact saturated with water. After being closed for a long time, it will be at equilibrium. The equilibrium state with ice present will be the saturated state, which means that there is in fact 100% (relative) humidity!! It's therefore very moist in a freezer, and it's impossible to evaporate sublimate any water.

I'm not sure you can transport it across the cell wall (can an expert please tell me if it's possible to find ATP outside a cell without destroying a cell??)... and therefore I'm not sure you can even get it to an electrode. If you plan to destroy the cell wall anyway, then you might as well go for "combustion". You burn it with air, generate heat, make steam, and run the steam turbine or steam engine. Connect the generator, and done

Assuming that it's possible to build a THC gene into an oak tree - why is this interesting at all (apart from just the theoretical question)? Why would you want to make a tree out of one of the fastest growing plants in the world? Cannabis produces more biomass per hectare (per surface of land) than an oak tree... I fail to see the point or turning it into a tree, especially an oak. In addition, most cannabis (or better: hemp) is used for its fibers... and oak trees have really lousy fibers. Oak is good for furniture. In fact, any other tree (poplar, beech) is probably better for producing fibers. In other words, if you want to get stoned, use Cannabis. Nature did its very best in creating that plant - we cannot improve it by copying its genes into other (less effective) plants. If you want hemp: same thing. Hemp is already optimized. If you want furniture that contains THC, go see a doctor.

That's the thing - we don't even have pennies over here... Now, you could say it might work with a euro cent coin (or even the 5 cent coin)... and you might be right. But we also don't have Taco Bell.

*sigh* Funny, but I do feel like I just wasted my time a bit.

You can only format a disk, not the computer. I'm not working in IT, but imho, a computer is the processor which does all the calculations. You cannot format that... just not possible. A harddisk (or USB drive, or even an old floppy) can be formatted. This will wipe all information off that disk, and will install a fresh new filesystem (note: a filesystem is absolutely not the same as an operating system). If your operating system (Windows, Ubuntu or something like that) is on that disk, it's gone afterwards... and you will not be able to boot your computer anymore. All your files, movies, music etc, that was on that disk will be lost forever. The only solution after that is to install an operating system (Windows, Ubuntu etc). If all goes well then you'll be able to boot again afterwards (but you still lost all other data). My advice therefore: if you're not sure what the hell I was talking about: don't format your computer. Formatting is one of those "advanced" options that are only for "experienced users".