freezy

From the source that was listed, the info in that chart is at least 12 years old. I agree, we've progressed quite a bit since then.

There's an excellent article that goes in depth with this which can be found here: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/12/03/071203fa_fact_specter

All the sources mentioned above plus Eurekalert. I also subscribe to RSS feeds from NASA, JPL, NSF, various universities, etc.

You would most certainly get burnt. Imagine a cube that radiates -70c inside the cube and a sphere inside this cube that radiates out towards the inner surfaces of the cube. Since hot moves to cold, all the heat radiated from the sphere would move towards the cold surfaces. Ideally, these would cancel each other out in the sense that a thermometer would measure 0c in the ambient air. Nonetheless, temperatures would remain hotter closer to the heater and colder near the radiating inner-surfaces of the cube. This is why you would still burn your hand. If you placed your hand halfway between the heat source and the cold source, you should, ideally, feel 0c.

It seems that we have come to very different results from our separate calculations. I'm quite sure that my calculations are the ones in error. If you would be so kind, I'd appreciate corrections. (or at least if you could show your work so I can see where I went wrong) I'd appreciate it!

My favorite music is Bossa Nova and Samba. Joao Gilberto, Astrud Gilberto, Elis Regina, Gal Costa, Os Mutantes... I also love classic rock, reggae, jazz, classical, and electronica. I like some rap, but generally can't stand country (though some of the old country is good; circa 1940's).

Indeed, Trig is great for measuring objects' heights. I like the stick method. I have not encountered that one before, but it's a great way to estimate the height of a tree. A rougher estimation can be obtained with absolutely no external instruments, just the body and brain. Can you figure out how?

There seems to be a bit of confusion as to what the final outcome would be. I recommend looking at http://this link on the Twin Paradox as it deals precisely with this issue. Using the numbers from the OP and the reciprocal of the Lorentz factor, we get: From Earth's inertial frame of reference: [math]t=2d/v =2*5/.9999999999 =10.000000001 [/math] So everyone on Earth would note that the trip took about 10 years, which would be expected, traveling that close to the speed of light. From the pilot's rest frame: [math]t'=\sqrt{1-v^2/c^2}[/math] [math]t'=\sqrt{1-(.9999999999c^2/300000}[/math] [math]t'=0.0000141421...[/math] [math]0.0000141421*5=0.0000070710[/math] (time for one way trip with length contraction) [math]0.0000070710/.9999999999c=0.00000000002[/math] (the amount of aging the pilot undergoes, one way) [math]0.00000000002*2=0.00000000004[/math] (round trip aging) So the pilot aged about 0 years. The pilot would essentially be the same age as when he/she left whereas everyone on Earth would have aged 10 years. Everyone on Earth would claim that the pilot was gone for 10 years. The pilot would claim that it took him/her no time at all to make the trip. Checking the clocks, it would show that neither is lying, thus the paradox. (I'd appreciate it if someone would check my calculations )

I highly recommend this list. I have used it quite often. http://gristmill.grist.org/skeptics

Thanks iNow. I get this strange feeling that we've met before.

Indeed it would be a terrible loss. The folks at Amphibian Ark are trying to prevent this from happening. I agree with both skeptics that posted above. We (humans) would not suffer terribly from a loss of amphibians, other than the lack of biological diversity. To see the effect of their absence, one has only to go to an ecosystem that is naturally free of amphibians and look for the creatures that have filled that niche.

Hello fellow Science afficianados! I just joined and wanted to introduce myself. Let's see...I'm 30 years old and live in Atlanta. I have a BS in Freshwater Ecology and my current occupation is in the field of Ecology. I'm interested in Ecology (duh), Astronomy, Cosmology, Biology, Environmental Studies, Physics, and just about anything to do with Science. I'm also into computers and music, specifically, making music on my computer. Err...Can't think of anything else, but if you want to know more just ask.