Jump to content

All Activity

This stream auto-updates

  1. Today
  2. Eh, if we want to go into details here, the warrant was not wanted for the robbery charges: Now this was a minor point, but social media have been blowing characterizing him as violent robber fleeing from the law, which is a bit of an exaggeration. It is also unclear why he did not appear in court we do not know whether he intention was to actually evade arrest. As iNow mentioned, this is also something regularly happens especially when black men are killed is to find culpability in the subject. The big issue here is that certain sources, such as Fox seemingly are not beyond putti
  3. Perhaps more apropos: Shouldn't we ensure due process for every one of our citizens before we allow agents of the state to put them to death?
  4. I must have missed something. When did we "totally disregard the responsibility of the 'victim'"? Shouldn't we let the justice system play out first before we accuse them of doing a shoddy job?
  5. When we look only at the specific circumstances of individual situations, we sometimes miss the decades long trends they feed. When we focus on individual trees, we sometimes forget they exist in a much larger forest. This isn’t happening to white people, and that’s not because white people are less violent or committing fewer crimes. This isn’t happening in our military or in our fire departments or even in our libraries and grocery stores. This is happening with our police. Regularly. Recurrently. Ridiculously.
  6. This incident was in no way comparable with the G Floyd incident. G Floyd was killed while he was in custidy; D Wright was attempting to flee arrest, on a no- show warrant ( $100000 bail ) of having taken about $800 from someone at gun-point, because he didn't want o go to jail. NOT because he feared for his life. The officer, K Potter may have been stupid in drawing the wrong weapon, but because this is now so political, she will probably get more jail time than the two girls who nonchalantly killed the Uber Eats driver a few weeks back. This is not justice when we totally disregard
  7. Yesterday
  8. Did you try using the Henderson-Hasselbalch equation?
  9. If you had liquid hydrogen in outer space, you could configure it's evaporation to produce thrust, if that is what you are asking. It would not be a very efficient use of the "fuel" but with no oxygen available it might be the best "McGiver" available. It's not free lunch, the entropy of your system increases. You still have the latent heat of fusion to work with, as a source of energy. Just make sure to save some of the hydrogen snowballs produced...throwing them might give you more thrust.
  10. Consider a spherical cow, sliced thinly and pan-fried.... Maybe we should reach out and ask them to join? Open a thread about how beefy science has become in the 21st century and they'll just HAVE to respond. I think that's the problem they have with Neal; they prefer steak, and Tyson is a big name in chicken. Just sayin'.
  11. +1 for the effort but any discrepancy in the scale readings from what they would be due to simple calculations of Newton's laws will no doubt be due to the idiosyncrasies of the scale, assuming the test was otherwise accurately performed. In both cases described it should drop...after it rises first. You simply cannot elevate from rest without some force acting with greater force than your weight, nor lower from rest without the net force being lower. Either would violate conservation of momentum.
  12. I just found it interesting ( and funny ) that some social media rep at Steak-Umm ( of all places ! ) had the insight to correct N deGrasse Tyson in such an eloquent and 'truthful' fashion. Seems someone at Steak-Umm is well versed in the scientific method.
  13. Read his book, "Hyperspace" about the possibility of higher dimensions, in an effort to unite quantum mechanics and GR...Interesting read, although it has been around 15 years? since I did read it.
  14. Michio Kaku was the "pop-star" that got me interested in science discussion, but it quickly became clear that the woo kept his name bouncing around far more than his scientific rigor.
  15. Personally, I quiet like Neal DeGrasse-Tyson, not that such a subjective opinion, has any real bearing on whether he was right or wrong. Physicists such as Neal, Brian Cox, Brian Greene, Bill Nye, Richard Dawkins, Lawrence Krauss, the late great Carl Sagan, have done much to bring science to the masses. On that they should be supported. Yes sometimes their brevity in describing something may by some, be labeled as "pop sciencey", but by the same token, I would remind those few of the words and narrative of the following, that I have posted a few times before. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q
  16. I would give him a break, @MigL, although I see your point. The word "truth" is perhaps not the best choice --sociologically--, granted. But, Number of times Feynman uses the noun "truth" in the Feynman Lectures on Physics: Volume I: 5 Volume II: 6 Volume III: 9 Number of times the adjective "true" appears in the Feynman Lectures on Physics: Volume I: 128 (one of them in the composite word "untrue") (at this point I stopped counting) The difference is these were not tweets. If you think about it, there are two ways in which you can present sc
  17. I had to look up the Armstrong Limit, so I've learnt something as a result of your post. So thanks for that. 🙂 But this limit is, specifically, the pressure at which water, not any other liquid, boils at 37C, which is the temperature of the human body. The relevance of the Armstrong Limit is solely to do with the survival of human beings at high altitude without a pressure suit. It does not tell you anything about other fluids, or about boiling at other temperatures. Also, you get no energy from something boiling. You have to put energy in, in order to make it boil, because the Late
  18. p3 = ((pnp^2 + x^3) / pnp) – ((pnp + (x^2 / (pnp^2 + x)) * pnp)) p5 = (pnp^2 + x^3) / pnp + (x^3 / pnp) where N = pnp for computer computation Given equations p3 and p5. p3 is equal to p5 a distance of N. Since N is the distance subtracted from p5 So, p3(x_semiPrime)=0 and p5(x_semiPrime)=N That is y=0 at an x equal to the smaller semi-Prime at p3. And at p5, y=N. Knowing the above, p3(x) = p5(x+N) so p3(N)=p5(N+N) since these equal the derivative of those should also equal p3’(x) = p5’(
  19. Boiling does not produce energy. Liquids will boil at low pressure if they possess enough energy to change phase at the temperature they have. e.g. at 0.5 atmospheres, water boils at ~80ºC. At 0.25 atm, it's about 60 ºC. Keep getting lower and it will boil at room temperature. What is a hydrogen-powered steam engine? Are you boiling hydrogen, or making steam?
  20. Prof Reza Sanaye has been suspended for repeated thread hijacks and instances of arguing in bad faith. (we have a low tolerance for appeal to conspiracy, among other things)
  21. I see. Thanks for clarifying that you’re arguing against a strawman. I never claimed nor suggested that presidents can’t INFLUENCE legislation.
  22. Hey Everyone, newbie here. I'm aiming way over my head here, but was wondering about something has been bugging me all day. At 70000 feet ( 21km) passed the Armstrong Line fluids start to boil, due to the atmospheric pressure, producing steam and therefore energy. Now, its like -56C° at that altitude and possibly colder in the Mesosphere. Does Liquid Hydrogen create enough energy once it has reached the Boiling point of -252C°? Even though liquid hydrogen has low energy density, and has high specific energy. Could a plane with a fully pressurised cabin, something larger
  23. +1 Thanks for the response I was hoping someone would try it as I have never put anything on youtube before. It did say something about private and then something about waiting a day whilst it 'processed' when I asked to make it public. That dfay has now passed. But I really don't know what I am doing so welcome all the help I can get.
  24. Unfortunately the video doesn't seem to be public, was that intentional? When I click the link YouTube responds with: "The video is unavailable" "This video is private."
  25. And , as I explained in my four previous posts , a US president DOES have the ability to influence legislation. It is NOT as kid-plain as you are claiming that legislation is under NO influence from the president . . .. .
  26. I read a good Vox article that points out how a relationship between Hollywood and various police departments basically allowed the police in the US to frame themselves ALWAYS as the protagonists. TV shows and movies hire police consultants who've been able to edit scripts they didn't feel reflected true procedure, so what we think we know about cops has been shaped by cops ever since Jack Webb and Dragnet. Prior to that, the police struggled with an image of corruption and buffoonery.
  1. Load more activity
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.