npts2020

I have nothing to back this up but I would think the strongest field would either be at the edge of where the core becomes molten or halfway from there to the center, not in the exact center. Where is the strongest field in a bar magnet? If the core is what causes our magnetosphere could it not be modelled like a spherical bar magnet?

snp; You should definitely put forward any ideas you have. There are people here who can either show you where your ideas are in error or help refine them into coherence. I have found the review process to be typically fair, if sometimes harsh. Be prepared for a lively discussion if you are proposing anything novel to current understanding. Good luck to you, sir. IMO advancement of knowledge is a worthwhile pursuit for anyone not struggling with basic survival.

I don't see why anyone would be surprised by this, after all it was the same profligate greed and disregard for consequences that got us here to begin with. IMO most of the current consternation is a result of the derivative market more than just real estate troubles, although the two are very interrelated, especially since credit default options (CDO's) make up a significant part of the derivative market. Essentially, a derivative allows you (usually a large corporation) to borrow money against assets, frequently being leveraged to 90% or more. Now you have asset values, especially real estate, being depressed, making the degree of leveraging even greater. Everything is still ok as long as the vast majority of derivatives are not being cashed in. The kicker comes when the companies backing the derivatives go into default themselves. A typical derivative is backed by anywhere from about 30 to 100 companies but if a certain number of those companies (as few as 12 on many) go into default the derivative is considered to be in default. Only a little over 100 companies underwrite virtually all of the derivatives worldwide. Some of the ones already in default, WaMu, Lehman Bros., Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae. Additionally, there are up to 35 more of those companies in financial trouble enough to be considering bankruptcy, mergers, downsizing or other drastic restructuring. A few of these companies are GMAC, Ford Credit, AIG, Citicorp, Goldman Sachs. If as few as about 20 of these companies end up defaulting for any reason, as much as $500 trillion in wealth could be basically flushed down the drain. One could say that that wealth never really existed to begin with but the fact of the matter is that it will have to be accounted for in some manner IMO deflation and devaluing of the dollar being the ultimate accountant. Now, if you want a concrete definition or "too big to fail", check out what companies are underwriting this market and are in trouble, those are the ones too much in debt to be able to afford to let fail. BTW the derivative market is one of the least regulated financial markets in the world......hmmm.

I would take issue with the notion that the atmosphere or ocean are the *primary* cause of the lag. In order to have net warming you have to recieve a certain amount of sunlight each day. That means that after the winter solstice (I will use Canada as my reference for seasons) the Earth is still cooling, until it reaches a point where there is net warming each day. Read carefully iNow's second reference.

What? Open a bottle of wine and not drink it all! Why that's sacrilege.

Just curious. Why would one want to freeze wine when it keeps so well in the bottle?

Feet first with arms and legs crossed and toes pointed downward. I have done this from at least 25 meters (once). Finishing the plunge was rather exhilirating but I wouldn't recommend doing it for entertainment.

I think he (GWB) was only referring to profligate consumption. That way of life requires no other freedom or ethics than to be able to consume.

The auto manufacturers would be ok if the economy made a u-turn fairly soon and oil stayed cheap. What are the chances of both those things happening? IMO about the same as the flying spaghetti monster showing up and taking over the world. Firstly, I see no reason why an economy, leveraged to the point ours is, will suddenly turn around when the underlying reasons for the problem have not been addressed. Secondly, if it does turn around, the price of energy (especially oil) will go right back up to where it was a couple of months ago and beyond.

Carbon sequestration is barely out of the "proof of concept" phase and has never been used on any scale for a long period of time to actually see if it works the way we think it should. If coal is going to be used over the long term it may be necessary to use it. I just think there are far better options insofar as they are cleaner, more sustainable, and close to the same price (maybe even cheaper if you don't count carbon emissions as zero cost).

Does anyone know for sure how or why the ballots get "challenged" to begin with?

Carbon sequestration is the best hope for the coal industry but it is similar to radioactive waste disposal for nuclear plants in that the harmful product will be around for many years and require constant monitoring. If there were no other options, this might be an acceptable situation but there are literally dozens of less environmentally destructive options: wind, solar, geothermal, tidal, piezoelectric to name just a few. This is the direction we need to be looking, IMO.

So failed we are only going to give them $17.4 billion. I hope if my company ever fails I can get a few billion $$$$ from Uncle Sam too.

Changing to wind power can happen much faster than most people think, especially if you can put a soon to be unemployed auto sector to work on it. I have recently read (I will try to find the source) that grids the size of Australia, U.S., or E.U. may not even require storage for backup. The same authors say that a grid the size of the British Isles is approaching minimum area required for no backup but probably would not be 100% dependable. I wonder where tidal generation rates on their scale, I didn't see it mentioned?

Or you could take the parents' line......'cause I said so.

So consciousness=existance? If I am sedated for an operation, does that mean I cease to exist for a period of time?

My mathematics prowess is abyssmal but I will take a stab at this. Axiom iii only states that "a" will appear at the beginning of any string of numbers it is in. Axiom iv further implies there are no strings of numbers without an "a" in them by stating "a" is always at the beginning of any string.

Bouncing lasers off of the moon and measuring time to do so is how we get the most accurate measurements of the moon and its orbit.

HOLLYWOOD. Bah humbug. (It was a pretty good movie though)

Penury, calorie?

It seems to me you would have similar effects to a diver rising to the surface too quickly, decompression sickness (bends). Divers often have many atmospheres of pressure pushing on them and have to resurface slowly enough to allow equalization from inside the body. I would think jumping out of a spaceship would be similar only not as extreme due to less pressure change. Other things like temperature, lack of anything to breathe, and radiation would have far more effect IMO.

Yes, I can now see why you had questions about what I said.

Well, in America you and your wife can incorporate or form a church simply by filling out appropriate paperwork. (Expect the IRS to be watching if you ever accumulate substantial assets or cash flow).

Yep. This is basically how skin grafts are grown for burn victims.

I misunderstood exactly what a thermite reaction is, thinking it applied more generally to burning metals. The point about the airplane still stands though. Firefighting protocol on an aircraft carrier says to get a burning jet overboard ASAP before it burns its way through the decks, the fire would be hot enough to melt steel.