ydoaPs

The world is only 6000 years old?

No you didn't. For triangle ABC with side AB=3 and AC=4, what is the length of side BC?

[20:50] <Gilded> All your LiOH, NaOH, KOH, RbOH and even CsOH are belong to us

No. You still use 1kg.

E=mc2 uses rest mass, and the full equation is E2=m2c4+p2c2. E=mc2 is a simplified case which assumes you are at rest with respect to the object you are studying.

The barrow is a composite object(it is made of atoms). Since there is no absolutely rigid material(see spinning an infinately long rod), there would be a pressure wave through the material composing the barrow when the motion is initiated. One atom moves with respect to the others which then moves the adjacent atom et al until the entire object is spinning.

And the whole thing about reptiles lacking a neocortex.

One of these days, I might become a mod.....I haven't killed enough people yet, though.

[23:29] <UnintentionalChaos> I dont want admin necessarily, just hammer-swinging duty [23:29] <javagamer> In all honesty I think Sylar would probably make a pretty good admin, UC too

Then we have to rewrite everything.

That's a great idea. I agree with you up until the end. Yes, my argument can apply to doctors as well. In fact, it should. Any place where unrestricted capitalism kills is a place where unrestricted capitalism should not be. period. Also, we're talking about drug companies here. However, restricting the profit of drug companies and doctors would reduce the prices making socialized insurance even cheaper. I'm not talking about completely removing profit; I'm talking about limiting it. I think bacule's idea of a reward system would make up for any lost motive.

I'm assuming they're thinking of it as a sort of winch. Draw a picture based on that idea and you should be able to solve the problem simply enough with some basic reasoning.

IMO, pharmaceutical companies should have a legal limit on their %profit. There's no reason I can see for people to suffer and/or die because a CEO wants a new Lexus. Sure, they need to cover cost of production and R&D. However, they do not need to have an extraordinary standard of living; they want to have an extraordinary standard of living. Is the fatter wallet of the CEOs worth the suffering and death that result from the lack of ability to afford the medicine? I don't think so. Thoughts?

I don't follow. It seems that you're saying theology is more legitimate than philosophy, because they just make stuff up. How is starting with more assumptions better?

great post

If you're not just interested in ripping people off, you can start with the Talor Series and see where you can go from there.

Unlike where I am and most of the places I've lived in the past few years, my home actually has those one things....hold on......we learned about them in school......what are they called.......oh yea, seasons.

You can think of it the same way, except slightly different. dx and [math]\partial x[/math] both represent infintesimal change with respect to x, however, the difference lies in how they relate to the other variables. dx treats them like other functions(see implicit differentiation) whereas [math]\partial x[/math] treats them like constants.

I didn't expect this response from FOX "news".

More from the talk page: For those that don't know, Andy is the owner/founder of Conservapedia. It seems clear that he's not exactly sure what bias is: Very well put, Karajou. Stated another way, conservatism is freedom from liberal bias. A conservative Bible is one that is 100% free of liberal bias. Not 50% liberal bias, not 10% liberal bias. 0% liberal bias" Merged post follows: Consecutive posts mergedA note regarding quality:

I thought he was upset about this part: "Kaku talked about the solar cycle on Fox News on Thursday."

We got rid of the religion section for a reason, people.

so is your face!

The Religious Wrong Right? Fox News?

o.O Fox is fair and balanced....especially Bill's show- that's the no spin zone!