ydoaPs

CDarwin is clearly ignoring my cow hypothesis. Therefore, I must be correct. Global warming has nothing to do with us; it's all about the gassy cows.

You can't forget about all the methane from cow farts!

I didn't pick out the picture until after I wrote the text It is. Too bad I live in New York and it will start snowing soon.

How small of balls are you thinking? I remember(I think it was on Bill Nye the Science Guy) someone did that and they had to use the whole town.

Have any of you done any Castorboarding? Castorboards are like skateboards, but completely different. They are really two boards connected by a spring-loaded torsion bar. Instead of having four wheels on trucks, it has one castor(makes you wonder where the name came from, eh?) on each board. So, it looks like a two wheeled skateboard with shopping cart wheels. I thought it would be really hard to use and would seriously injure me, but it was pretty easy. Once I got on(that's really the hardest part), it was pretty easy. I've never snowboarded or skateboarded, but I hear that it is more similar to snowboarding than skateboarding. I have a Ripstik. The only other brand I know of is the Wave.

So, that explains why Americans are super-healthy and Australians are sick all the time!

BobbyJoeCool, you answered yes, they are incompatible. Would you mind explaining your position?

Martin, why wouldn't other frames have similar concepts? Can you not derive those equations for other frames and get similar concepts?

By evidence, they are wrong. Where are their actual studies?

I'm guessing that since the motion would be different for each frame, the critical energy level would also be different. So, would the different values of energy in different reference frames necessarily be exactly offset by the difference in expansion in the different frames, or is there a possibility that two reference frames could have two endings for the same universe?

So, you're saying there is a preferred reference frame?

This is a pseudoscience site trying to hock magnets. It is the same type of stuff that swansont was talking about above. http://www.magnetlabs.com/labs/equation.html even seems to suggest the existence of magnetic monopoles(which, IIRC, is wrong considering [math]\nabla\cdot{B}=0[/math]) and even a NEUTRAL POLE! Wow. I just read their article on how to tell the difference between North and South, and apparently, they can't even do it.

I was responding to the OP in which an expression was to be used as a function.

The sixth sense is smell. You have to be lucky to get that one.

That isn't a parabola; it's an expression. However, y=2x2-3 is a function, so it can be graphed(and it is a parabola). Make a chart of values with two columns(one side is x, the other y). Choose some x values and then plug them into the equation to get the y values. Some values you definitely should chart are the x-intercept(where y=0) and the y-intercept(where x=0).

Does any form of free will not need to rely on causality? I mean, there must be an output(be it a thought or an action) which is caused by the mechanism of choice which is ultimately caused to occur do to whatever input was given to whatever is choosing.

Energy is conserved in a reference frame, but the amount of energy is not necessarily the same for each frame. One can see this with a simple thought experiment. There are three balls(one red, one blue, and one yellow). The red and blue balls are at rest with respect to each other, but moving with respect to the yellow ball. From a reference frame in which the yellow ball is at rest, the red ball has the energy from mass, but since the red ball is moving, it also has kinetic energy. Now, let's move our reference frame to one in which the blue ball is at rest. The red ball still has the same energy due to mass, but, since it is at rest relative to the blue ball, has no kinetic energy. The red ball has more energy in the reference frame of the yellow ball than it does in the reference frame of the blue ball. Thus energy is dependent on the reference frame and is not conserved from frame to frame. Mass, however is the same in every frame of reference. If we consider the three balls as a system and use the same reference frames, we get different values for the total energy of the system. In the reference frame in which the yellow ball is at rest, there is a certain amount of energy in the system from the mass of all three balls and the kinetic energy of the red ball and the blue ball. In our other reference frame, we have the energy from the mass of all three balls and the kinetic energy of just the yellow ball. If these three balls were are that the universe consisted of, the universe would have different amounts of energy depending on which reference frame you are in. I've read in pop-sci books that there is a delicate balance of energy which decides the fate of the universe. If the total energy of the universe is above a certain value, gravity beats the expansion in the long run and the universe contracts to a big crunch. If the total energy of the universe is less than this critical value, then the expansion beats gravity and the universe expands forever. Is it possible that in one reference frame the total energy of the universe is above the critical value, but in another reference frame, the total energy of the universe is below this value? In effect, I'm asking if there could exist two different reference frames in which each has a different ending for the same universe?

Does anyone know about this book or the theory behind it? I think I'm gonna add it to my wish list and get it once I get a bit more calculus knowledge.

It's been a while since my last physics class, but I think I know how to do it. P=QA, right? I don't have a chart of nuclides handy, so I can't do the calculations. Can you tell me what a random chunk of Uranium gets?

Americium is radioactive; it doesn't need a catalyst to generate heat.

It's been a while, but I think: 1xa=a 0xa=0 a+b=b+a

OP says algebra, not calculus.

What do you mean solve it? If you want it solved for C, it already is. [math]C(t)=\frac{1.5x}{100-x}[/math] If you want a numerical answer, you'll need a value for the percent of people participating. If you want a graph, I think it's a hyperbola. Write the entire problem statement and we'll see if we can help. By the way, we HELP with homework; we don't do it for you. If you want someone to do your homework for you, you've come to the wrong place.

But Physia wants to know about CLOSED old threads. I doubt (s)he has the ability to open threads after they've been closed.

Have you heard of this thing we call the Internet?