CPL.Luke

so, I'm having a hard time with path independance, namely with how do you find the scalar function that your vector function is the gradient of. or G in (nabla)G = f

you need a password to get onto that page

whats invoved in applying to a grad school? specifically for physics.

swansont 3 orders of magnitude between 158000 k and what?

no because water is a chemical compound formed by combining 2 hydrogen atoms and 1 oxygen atom through covalent bonding, this covalent bonding forms some interesting molecular properties (polar bonding) 2 protons and an oxygen atom in the general vicinity of each other is not water, and does not share any chemical properties with water. why would the protons tend to move downward?

first off plasma water can't exist, it will become hydrogen and oxygen. (ionized) sencondly the mantle isn't hot enough to make hydrogen plasma, third even if it was the gas would b less dense than the surounding rock.

however it does make far more sense that the dark matter would be inside the galaxy right?

if he meant the gravity from an atom, then no it has nothing to do with that.

am I the only one who notices that we don't have any members in the middle of the united states.....

may I inquire as to why you want a "portable" one?

its the same concept, in a permanent magnetism the electrons have more angular momentum in one direction than the other, this creates a magnetic field. In an electromagnet the electrons are moving in one direction which creates a magnetic field. In general moving electric charges make magnetic fields, thus there is no distinction between an electromagnetic field and a magnetic field.

that thread sounds like it was kinda funny, can we repost it in the jokes section?

out of curiosity what do these simulations say happened to the rock that hit the earth originally?

'sin't the cerncourier a semi-respectable source though?

it isn't if your sitting on earth watching the ship fly past you at .9999c, it is different if your on the ship.

http://www.cerncourier.com/main/article/45/8/8 General relativity versus exotic dark matter Determinations of the rotation speed of stars in galaxies (galactic rotation curves) based on the assumption that Newtonian gravity is a good approximation have led to the inference that a large amount of dark matter must be present - more than can be accounted for by non-luminous baryonic matter. While there are plenty of attractive theoretical candidates for the additional dark matter, such as a lightest supersymmetric particle (LSP), it is also interesting to look into the details of the calculations that suggest the need for such exotica. Now F I Cooperstock and S Tieu of the University of Victoria have reworked the problem using general relativity in place of Newtonian gravity, and they find no need to assume the existence of a halo of exotic dark matter to fit the observed rotation curves. This is because even for weak fields and slow speeds, well-known nonlinearities change the character of the solution dramatically. The success of Newtonian mechanics in situations like our solar system can be traced to the fact that in this case the planets are basically "test particles", which do not contribute significantly to the overall field. However, in a galaxy this approximation is not a good one - all the rotating matter is also the source of the gravitational field in which everything rotates.

funny thing about that arkain101 is that the final theory never says what its about

alexross, I think you may be a bit mistaken in your belief that computers are expensive, an old pentium 3 based computer could be had for about $100 or less (a pentium two based computer could be had for under $20). While it may not handle any graphicly intensive programs it can certainly run your internet and word processors. as for the price of internet access I believe that net zero can provide a dialup internet access for about $5 a month. anywho on with the rest of the disussion, don't mind the posts that sem to be insulting you. the posters tend to base them off of the assumption (while not necessarily wrong) that you are just anouther one of the recent string of new members who claims that they have a new theory and are right, but lack any mathmatical or physical knowledge.

alexross, if you have work on your theory post an introduction for it. What new equations have you come up with? and for what you will find that there are at least two people on this board who could understand it no matter the complexity, and a number of others who are pretty top notch as well. Since the board preserves your post and you always post your name and adress their should be no problem with copyrights, and furthermore you may find someone who is willing to introduce you to someone. just post what you have. the problem with the posts that you've presented so far is that they all relate to how CQM builds off of something from QM, this is all well and good for trying to get an extension on a paper you haven't started work on...but it doesn't tend to fly with people here.

luciddreamer, problem with taht is that the government can't force all car manufacturers to produce car's with hybrid engines in them. Only way for that to happen is if the oil price rises to the point where it becomes cheaper to spend the extra money upfront on a hybrid vehicle, and save money on gas.

is it possible to make a more up to date standard, in place of the cesium standard?

but its such an entertaining thread, how could you bear to close it?

I would guess it would be less effective, the marines are fast attack forces, their entire system is based off of being able to rapidly project themselves anywhere in the world. while the army is slower and meant to provide a long term force in any area, bascly meant to fight a war. in a great many situations the air force and navy have the same idea as the marines, fast attack power. except completely different intentions. The navy provides a base of operations, the air force the ability toreach out within a few days to anyone iin the world

alexross lucaspa in no way seemed to get angry or any such thing, to presume thta he did so is to invite an angered post. just a copule of things I noticed (I don't want to go point by point on this one (far to long)) as a general warning, if you find yourself thinking that the government is trying to keep your idea down.... you may want to see someone you assume that the particles you speek of are in meters, I have yet to here of a textbook that works without units, can you give me the name of the textbook? remember that some technology works on QM now, so you must think about any theory you make as building off of it rathe than starting anew, to alleviate "inconsistencies" as far as your concerns on the scientific community refusing to here your claim you should take a look through the threads that debate creationism. Scientists don't have the time to go out and shoot down every crackpot out there (in no way trying to say you are one) so the community created a system of peer review so that they would only have to go out and debate people who weren't crackpots. bottom line is that, unless you send a paper through peer review...no physisist is going to take his time and talk to you out in the open and get your idea off the ground.

keep in mind that the cost of living in other countries is far lower... some parts of china have an average income of under 1000 dollars (western china to be exact), compare that with the US's average income of 40k and you can see why the cost of maintaining a military in china is far less. also consider that the cost of manufactureing equipment is far less in other countries, China doesn't have to pay nearly as much for x military item as the US does. ^the two above analogies can be applied to most other countries.