coke

matter source? well you're going to get antimatter anyways because positrons are antimatter! light photons can be split up into positrons and electrons by a thin gold sheet, then positrons and electrons can be seperated by magnetic coils, see the link i gave above...natural radioactive decay is another option, but really its both less effective and requires exotic radioactive isotopes that have to be synthesized..

Here's how a computer would create any random number generator from a 2 number generator (and the 2 number generator is mechanical in the processor, i guess) Because I'm sure most of you know thats how numbers are written in binary in the first place... i.e. 7 is 111. or 00000111, same thing. 0,0,0 -> try again 0,0,1 -> return 1 0,1,0 -> return 2 0,1,1 -> return 3 1,0,0 -> return 4 1,0,1 -> return 5 1,1,0 -> return 6 1,1,1 -> return 7 That would have efficiency of 8/125, or 6.4%.... after 3 runs. I guess the tree's method is the best possible efficiency, it gets 84% chance, as he said, after 2 runs. And 2 runs is the minimum, seeing as 7 > 5^1, but 7 < 5^2 Sisyphus... if you are going to try to hide a failed mechanism, at least make it appear functional! say sum of first attempt + second attempt, throw out 8-10.

did you see a little devil jumping on top of you? that sleep paralysis link is not the first place i've seen that idea... (i also saw it in 'a thousand ways to die')

Well making fun of someone who's gay is like making fun of someont who's fat or uncool... It's not in essence racism or anything like that, but still it's not very good. Although idk, where I live, I really don't see people who are obviously gay get made fun of... maybe it's cause I live in California, lol. And ok, I'm sure there are a lot of manly gay people, in the sense that they are agressive or strong or whatever.... I meant it more in a masculine sort of way. And this applies more not to the 'bears' if im guessing what you mean correctly, but the other ones.

lakmilis are you ever going to tell me and jake what pun was not intended? come on, we're dying to know what pun was not intended... I don't understand either. Was this the pun you didn't intend? And John' date=' I don't get what pun was not intended in that comic either! Here's a bad pun from one of the threads... I'm dating a chemist, something something what do I do? Hahaha hilarious. Let's make this thread about puns.

You know what i think is very probable? Say you create an account at some site...i.e. here where they ask for an email and you need to login with a password... I'm sure a large percentage of people would have the same password for the site as theire email. Say a person from the site can find out that password, and check your emails. I think most people have like 2 or 3 passwords, and they just use different ones, undoubtedly repeating... I reccomend always never using the same password as your email, though, as I described above it will be very easy single step...

Ah, how upsetting... Not that its not a perpetual motion machine, but how I missed the first few words of the article... "Powered by sunlight..." That's acutally a very good idea, there aren't really any good ways to convert CO2 into hydrocarbons... Set up a couple factories for this processing, and you've got things going! Just use a nitrous oxide fridge to condense CO2 and then run it over these nanotubes... efficient? profitable? probably not, but maybe someday...

I think the poll results are fair- no smoking in public streets but in any building, it is the propery owner's right to decide... Sorry for my outburst, Inow, I really did get the impression you're an anti-smoking nazi... should have read the post before where you said you used to smoke... I smoke very little, no more than a couple cigarettes a day... but if you are only allowed to smoke in your house, you won't be able to show off how cool you are when you have a smoke in a public place... (lol, no just kidding) It does bother me how it really shortens your respiratory endurance while running, but come on at this age who runs anyways? I think really smoking bans are just so you don't like stand there and blow smoke in people's faces, or everybody having to smell your smoke at a restaurant...

Well the only reason why smoking wouldn't be allowed is the pollution- however pollution outside is much larger from cars and their exhaust- gasoline doesn't exactly burn very clean either and can make just as bad second hand smoke. So, I disagree iNow. The pollution from cars is much larger and the combustion occurs at high temperature and creates several nitrogen oxides which are much more poisionous. There is really nothing from secondhand smoke that's not in that type of pollution. What are you afraid of, 0.001 mg nicotine you accidently inhale when walking by a smoker? Is it going to get you addicted?

Yeah thats an interesting idea in itself... Very good laser, would ionize any matter by contact into a plasma I'll probably have to try that someday- strong laser making positrons, organized by several coils, and burning through anything... I think in that context, the positrons would be even better at burning through things than the original laser...

This I don't get about antimatter- its clear how electrons and positrons annhilate each other, and say an atom of matter would annhilate an atom of antimatter. But say you just have a positron ray (thank cap'n for this idea) and you fire it at say a block of metal, what will happen? Would the positrons annhilate the electrons and leave a bunch of protons, that with no chemical bonds would just seperate into plasma? That's a good idea for a lightsaber!

So does that mean that picture in post 18 is how a magnet works or not? Or only an electromagnet works that way? It would be nice if a simple field could confirm that electrons are repeled from pole, without having to take lorentz or other forces into account... Forget about the motion. The particles in first two sketches have motion is suppose (i'm aware they travel at 99% speed of light), but not in any organized direction, as they would with perhaps a cyclotron or like in the CRT picture. Well see, the magnets are in different orientation such that all the + poles face the center... They should all repel positrons, only thing is maybe the field will somehow get screwed up, because as swansont said there's no place for the poles to meet up or something... I found a quote on another thread that sounds similar to my sketch: That large tank sounds very similar to this idea...except it uses solenoids, of course... but its less interesting with coils because there are a lot of ways you could do it with them- for one keep spinning around in a cyclotron indefinitely. Plus they require quite a bit of electricity

Well from what I understand, magnets and electromagnets work have a field like I drew in the picture below... The coils in particle accelerators work this way, there are a series of coils, precisely timed to attract the positrons or electrons or whatever with the poles being on the axis that the particles are traveling...and not having to be perpendicular. And from what I understand, solenoids make a field that behaves the same way as permanent magnets, no?

wait a sec... so these laser diodes work like leds without requiring a lens? by using some similar pump mechanism (simulated emission)?

Sure it will, why not? Look at the picture below: it's a cathode ray tube (source) and those are electrons running through it, in a near vacuum. You can see the small black permanent magnet in the right upper corner, its repeling the electron stream, causing it to curve downwards... So, there's one example where a magnetic pole does repel a charged particle. I don't see how it's any different with positrons.