CaptainPanic

Your question is not clear. We cannot answer questions, if we don't understand the question. It seems you ask for a simple electric circuit. Something like this. But I guess that's too simple?

Eric555, our rules say that you must stay on topic. Also, our etiquette encourages people to make sense. So far, because there is no topic at all, the logical result is that this thread is entirely off topic. Also, you don't make sense. So, please start making some sense.

Personally, I have little trouble with the following explanation: it's a combination of surface friction and shear stress. But I admit that the maths can be pretty terrible. Imagine your solid surface. Imagine that the fluid around it (air/water/something else) is made up of layers. Obviously, as with all integrations, these are infinitely thin layers. Due to friction, the first layer that touches the solid surface will move with nearly the same speed as the solid itself. This layer will move the next layer of air as well, and that acts on the next, and the next, etc... These nice layers can become unstable, which is called turbulence. And the mode aerodynamic a design is, the less air is moved. As you move forward, you don't want to continuously agitate new air, while leaving air behind that is still moving. Getting all that air to move costs a lot of energy. I'd be curious to hear how you use angular momentum of point particles... I've never heard of it used in aerodynamics (but then again, I'm not the expert).

There are two separate issues here: 1. Finding out which of your own posts got rep 2. Finding out who gave you that rep We should not confuse these three matters, and we should evaluate these as two separate issues. 1. Personally (so, speaking as a member, not staff) I agree with the position of several others here: it would be useful to see which posts received the rep, both positive and negative. With such knowledge, it becomes easier to focus on your own strengths and weaknesses... 2. It is only useful to find out who gave you the rep, if you know that member a little better. So, it's pointless for new members, but possibly useful for people who have been around for a while. If we would have names with the rep, then I propose that we also allow the rep-comments again, like we had a few years ago. However, in my opinion (as a member), point 1. seems more important at the moment. Just my 3 cents.

Well, this one is solved. It's fake. Flying Dutchman blijkt Lying Dutchman: filmpje inderdaad hoax That's a Dutch newspaper headline, but I think there are enough English words for most of you to understand what it means. The creators of the youtube movie admitted that it was a joke, meant to inspire people. They said so themselves on Dutch TV, in a particularly popular show at prime time.

! Moderator Note rajakrsna, you have been warned before (here, and here) that soapboxing/preaching is prohibited on this forum. Thread closed.

True. It looks like he's going in a simple straight line... except for the aerial camera shot, where there is a pond to the right, trees straight ahead and just lots of objects to avoid in general. For such a flight, you want to have some sort of control. Do you think controlled flight can be achieved with just a few actuators, Wii controllers, a gyroscope, a human brain, and some flappy wings? Even the Wright brothers decided to have a rudder, and some flaps of some sort (surfaces that can move to adjust flight). And they had a much simpler structure (no flapping), and also a very short flight.

There is plenty of bonding going on in distotics, and it is generally agreed that it can get quite hot as time goes on. Also, as time goes on, movement increases. But very often, bonds are broken when it gets to closing time, showing that these are indeed quite weak forces.

Yes, but in all fairness, that has very little to do with the Bible. A lot of other ancient people thought the world was flat as well. The topid of the thread is a couple of correct predictions from the Bible. I never read the Bible, but think the right way to go is to at least point out (with reference) where the bible predicted that the world was flat. Personally, I think the last bible quote (isaiah) is a little vague. To stretch out and spread does not necessarily mean an expansion like we see in the universe... although it could mean that. Linguistically, I think it can also mean spreading like a table cloth over a table. Any comments?

That's only valid today. If you read that tomorrow, then it's already yesterday.

Both events occur in the same year after 221 years. For event A, which occurs every 13 years, that will be the 17th time it occurs since we started counting. For event B, which occurs every 17 years, that will be the 13th time it occurs since we started counting.

First of all, a mainstream Dutch newspaper claims it's real. Second of all, some other website already claims it's fake (note that the newspaper linked to the claim that it is fake). These are Dutch guys (funny language, isn't it?), and the newspaper gave some more background on the invention: A free translation of what I read: - It's not human powered. The creators publicly agree that a human's arms are not strong enough. - It is powered by modern lightweight actuators (linear electric motors). - The flapping of the arms is because the actuators are controlled by two Nintendo Wii controllers. - An HTC phone is used as a gyroscope, and it is hacked so it can receive the info from the Wii controllers. But with only two wings, no flaps on the wings, and no tail, I have no idea what it would control. Personally, I am not yet completely won over. I have three issues: Control Without any tail, or flaps on the wings, or a method to change the pitch of the entire wing, there is no control. Speed vs. wing size The speed in the video seems much too low for such small wings (the aerial shot, looking at the ground suggests the speed is about 5 m/s). Human powered aircraft have flown at such low speeds as well, but they had much larger wings. Crappy video The video is crappy, shaky, and someone is blocking the view at the exact moment of landing. FFS, buy a tripod, and keep everyone out of the way. Also, invite the media. Until then, I call it fake.

If reward would be counted as a function of (1) money, (2) freedom, (3) an interesting job, (4) flexible working hours, (5) a flexible job description and finally (6) a huge sense of pride about what you're doing... Then scientists might be among the best paid people in the world. But it is not. It's counted as money only. And I agree, we deserve more money.

! Moderator Note DrRocket, it would be most appreciated if you respect the standard rules of politeness. If you don't have the patience to explain someone why their post is actually wordsalad in your view, using polite words, then it might be a nice idea not to post at all. Also, it is obvious that many people need to "learn some physics". It is probably the primary reason why those people come to this forum. As long as they interact and learn, we welcome those people. questionposter, please just report a post if you think it breaks the rules, instead of replying yourself...

Ah, so you just need more hits (hits that are on-topic) in your search? Searching on [anticancer effect of micromeria barbata] will give you a certain number of hits. But searching for [use for micromeria barbata] might give different hits, and still be useful. Or look at the most famous authors in the field, and just look up some other their other publications - they might be on topic too. (note: I am no expert, and I have no clue what micromeria barbata means!). Keep searching, and do not forget to refine your search, if possible. For example, scifinder (it's a program, not a website), will allow a very broad search, and then to specifically include or exclude certain keywords from that search, if you get too many hits.

hypervalent_iodine is correct: even if the research was publicly funded, the bastards at Elsevier (publishing company) and other publishing companies get the paper, and put a copyright on it. The copyright is then somehow not owned by the author, or the institute/company where the author works, but by a completely different company... And they make everyone pay for it... essentially turning tax funded research into a product. Anyway, that's my little rant. Let's get back on topic. There are good search engines, like sciencedirect.com, which are online. If this particular one is not suited for medical literature, then I am sure there are others. You should at all times be able to search for papers. Getting the .pdf is a different matter, and often means you have to pay. Many institutions have automated that though. My experience is that the search is the hard work... and if you study to become a scientist, you'd better learn searching yourself.

Yes, it would lead to a significant saving in energy. If you do the same vertically (keeping the rooms closest to the roof also colder), it would reduce heat losses even further! It is so efficient, that I am surprised you don't know it. In Norway, I think this is used already? The only reason not to utilize the principle to an extreme, is that people want windows (which must logically be on the outer wall) in their living rooms. In many Scandinavian houses, the (wood burning) heating and chimney are built in the middle of a house, for the same reason as you wrote. If they would be built in the outer wall, the heat losses would be higher, and you would have to burn more wood to achieve the same effect.

I guess this thread was very urgent... my goodness, now that there's a place to write it, the poetry comes out in a hurry! Btw, nice poem Lala - did you write that yourself? Personally, I've gone up to, and over, my coffee optimum. I'm in a freefall on the other side of caffeination... wonder how deep I can fall. Only dinner can save me now.

I think the problem is very simple: in the USA, the poorest people receive less healthcare, because they can't afford it. Other countries often have a nationalized system where everybody receives healthcare, regardless of income. So, the problem is not that the US has bad doctors/hospitals/equipment/medicine. It's probably among the best in the world, if not the best. The problem is that certain people have only limited access to it, because insurances and hospitals are all privatized. Disclaimer: I'm no expert, I did not research it, and I have no links to back this up. Seems common sense to me though.

Are we talking "practical" (modern-day technology, and a budget that is maximum 50x the world's GDP), or are we talking "theoretical" (sci-fi, and unlimited budget/energy)?

Oh, crap, now I see the problem you're in. Thanks for the clear explanation. Well, those religious organisations got you all by the b*lls, then, don't they? It's a fantastic fallacy that they present: the need to have a religious law, to uphold the religious freedom.

As always, I totally fail to see why this discussion is being held? Don't you Americans have the Freedom of Religion? Isn't the freedom of having birth control a part of the religion called "atheism"? I mean, it's not like the left wing is forcing birth control onto the religious right... why take it away from the left? What the religious right is essentially saying is that there shouldn't be any religious freedom. Instead, everybody should live like the Christians. (So, essentially, it's religious law... the American version of the Sharia).

Thanks for rephrasing! If you can send a probe (=satellite), your could do certain types of analysis: the radiations from the planet (e.g. UV, normal light, infrared) tell a lot about the composition. It might even be possible to do that from earth! Actually, I am thinking about how you could analyze (chemically) the atmosphere... but all I come up with is something like a micro GC, which is often used for pollutants - but not very well suited to analyze everything in an atmosphere. To be able to chemically react the atmosphere of a planet, and turn it into something else, it should not be at equilibrium. For example: on earth, there are things that can react: plants and air --> fire --> CO2, H2O and heat. So, it is not at equilibrium. If the atmosphere is at equilibrium with everything else on the planet, a reaction is gonna be really difficult. But if the planet does not have any planets yet, maybe we could bring plants there - they might change the atmosphere... and move their atmosphere away from equilibrium.

That's all quite shocking! Is the US (or at least a number of states) turning into a fundamentalist religious country? What's wrong with those people? Can't they see that this is just the same as the Taliban is doing in Afghanistan? It's nothing but religious oppression! But then again, nobody in the religious states cares about the opinions of a Dutchman anymore. We have been dismissed as murderers of elderly people in the media, by the Santorum camp. (And when confronted with the fact that they used fabricated data, and plain lies, the spokesperson of Santorum did not answer). My feeling about this is like with a natural disaster: I mourn for the victims. But at the same time, I am fascinated by it.