Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 12/10/18 in all areas

  1. 2 points
    I'm not sure of the relevance, but I just looked at a £10 note which states "I promise to pay the bearer on demand the sum of ten pounds." If I redeem the promise at a bank I'll be given a note with "I promise to pay the bearer on demand the sum of ten pounds." Money, to governments, is basically an I.O.U. note which will never be redeemed. I don't think the idea of taking the same percentage of everyone's cash income is better than the current bad system. It would be even easier for rich people to (in effect) avoid paying tax through legal but dodgy companies or investments.
  2. 1 point
  3. 1 point
    If I may wade in a bit here. Both of you are somewhat correct. RTS,S/AS01 is indeed a vaccine that is toward the end of the development pipeline. It is the only one to pass Phase III and next year it will be rolled out. It is distinctly different than how we consider standard vaccines, which includes efficacy (less than 40%). It is also limited to children and infants (so it could not be used for adults going on vacation, for example). The reason why it is being used at all, is essentially due to the massive risk of malaria, coupled with a complete lack of alternatives. I.e. one could consider it a an emergency vaccine of sorts. Also, it is only available within a pilot project in selected areas in Africa where Phase IV will be conducted.
  4. 1 point
    Nope. Plenty are triggered elsewhere https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_human_hormones So, you are basing your idea on something that's known not to be true. You can stop now.
  5. 1 point
  6. 1 point
    Countries already do this effectively. If you increase the total money supply you make your debt easier to pay. They used to just decrease how much gold the currency was worth. Was really kind of pointless though as it was ultimately still based on trust. It does tax everyone holding the currency in the process as their buying power decreases. Unfortunately is a regressive tax falling more on the less wealthy. If it becomes too much people will stop holding and buying that currency and that is what can cause the problems we see in hyperinflation. Situation ends up outside of Government control.
  7. 1 point
    They actually already do. It's called psychology and sociology.
  8. 1 point
    "a peak short-circuit current of ~33.0 nA and a peak open-circuit voltage of ~2.14 V, " Even under the conditions where you might maximize both simultaneously, that's 66 nW. You need 30 million of these to generate an amp, which could then charge up your 2000 mAh AA rechargeable battery in roughly 1 hour, assuming 100% efficiency. Bingo!
  9. 1 point
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperinflation ”Those who cannot learn the lessons of history...”
  10. 1 point
  11. 1 point
    Maybe you need to study the basics of economics, then you would know that the fatal flaw in this argument is.
  12. 1 point
    Tri-atomic molecules can stretch and bend, or waggle, in such a way (asymmetrically) as to "resonate" with infrared wavelengths. Di-atomic molecules can't move in such a way, always constrained to move symmetrically. Search: co2 vibrational modes animation. I know there are you tubes of Prof. Denning, doing his 'waggle dance' showing how CO2 absorbs heat, using his head as the carbon and his upraised fists as the oxygen. Or just search 'infrared CO2 waggle' online. “The symmetric stretch is not infrared active, and so this vibration is not observed in the infrared spectrum of CO2.” ~
  13. 1 point
    I know this may be controversial, let alone unethical, and I am in no way an expert in this topic yet I want to know if it is possible. I watched this dog cloning video (credible, i know right?) where they used DNA from a dog's skin cell (as they phrased it) and integrated it into an egg cell where DNA has been removed. I was just wondering if it would be possible, if not now, in the future, to create a child made from two same sex parents. As of now I've only contemplated two male parents as far as my knowledge can grasp, yet I feel like if it could happen the events would be something like this: The DNA in the egg cell is removed and replaced by genes from a sperm with an x-chromosome from parent A [which I don't even know if it is possible to identify which sex chromosome a sperm has without damaging any genetic information], then the egg may undergo IVF with sperm from parent B, if there's any chance that egg cell is functional after being remodeled. The egg would of course have to come from another female yet none of her genes will be passed on if in any case this will actually work. I know this is a very questionable discourse but I would like to think someone somewhere here has the answer and I would love to entertain it may they prove me incredibly wrong or partially agree with what I think is possible. I hope to satiate my head about this topic so I can finally rest. Thank you.
  14. 1 point
    > it is only important that the country behaves as a native, and not as a stranger, then the value will not flow abroad. So, does that mean your idea depends on human beings altering their behavior? Secondly, although you are presenting the technical implementation details of your idea; isn't the idea itself essentially political? That is, normative. "What should be," rather than based in what actually is. Thirdly, by contrasting native behavior to stranger behavior, are you arguing for some form of nationalism as opposed to globalism? As you know, this is the core issue of the day. It's what the Yellow Vest riots in France are about.
  15. 1 point
    I'm just doing this. The car really makes a lot of unnecessary movements, because of which it is more difficult to understand. Not a very good example. About the model. There is an article from Wikipedia, in which it is written that this phenomenon is formed and established during a sharp drop in the helicopter. (This is the same as a sharp movement of the plate up. Only the top is kicked.) But there is no explanation for what principles this happens. Whirlwind is still an open question in science. Or at least on Wikipedia: Air vortices can form around the main rotor of a helicopter, causing a dangerous condition known as vortex ring state (VRS) or "settling with power". In this condition, air that moves down through the rotor turns outward, then up, inward, and then down through the rotor again. This re-circulation of flow can negate much of the lifting force and cause a catastrophic loss of altitude. Applying more power (increasing collective pitch) serves to further accelerate the downwash through which the main-rotor is descending, exacerbating the condition. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vortex_ring I can not imagine how I can describe this phenomenon mathematically. I can only say that the vortex is formed due to the properties of the substance and lasts by inertia. How is my theory worse than the theories of other scientists who called all that they could not understand as dark matter? My theory is even confirmed experimentally. But I think about how this happens. I assume that the air in a quiet state (without taking into account the Brownian motion) can be represented as particles that are at equal distance from each other. At the same time, the forces of attraction and repulsion between them are balanced and such a medium is completely homogeneous. Can this be applicable to air to simplify?
  16. 1 point
    Q-reeus and beecee have both been suspended for three days for not being able to lay off the personal jabs at each other.
  17. 1 point
    Boil water (or heat to a safe temperature if it needs to be lower than 100C) and then stand the tank in it, with no ignition sources around...blow or vacuum vapours. Or maybe water-cooled disc cutting. Another idea might be to stick a vacuum cleaner hose inside with the machine on whilst cutting.
  18. -1 points
    That is just some of what he said. Here in the full post. I already mentioned a few things that bothered me about his remarks. Here are some additional things: Here Tyson reminds us (the reader) he is a celebrity by referencing the flattering chore of taking pics with thousands of people. He then goes on to point out that the women waited nine years to come forward and basically blames her for the whole things be saying what he "would" have done "had" she reacted differently. Tyson acknowledges the women notified him that she felt he was inappropriate and even resigned over the matter. Tyson claims to be sorry yet prefaces the encounter be stating she freely chose to come in and he had even mentioned another place she could go. Tyson finishes by noting that they had hugged. It comes across to me as obtuse. I quoted the whole portion here because there is a lot of shade tossed around. Tyson opens by pointing out how difficult Grad school is and how hard he worked. He then references have several girlfriends. Saying one of them he was intimate with a few times but there was no chemistry. After that Tyson begins tossing shade. First he recalls seeing her pregnant "with who I think was the father by her side". To me Tyson is trying to imply it may not have been the father and muddy the water. Tyson then states she had dropped out of school. Another meaningless detail. He follows by saying he "nonetheless" wished her well. By using "nonetheless" Tyson is saying that in-spite of her being a pregnant drop out accompanied by who knows who he was still nice to her. Ugly stuff. Next Tyson mentions his fame "visibility level" to imply motive then proceeds to basically call her stupid writing about stuff he saw on her blog. Tyson doesn't need to be on social media doing this. He could have made far simplier remarks via a publicists. Instead he took to the more proactive platform of FaceBook. I think this sort of response is beneath him.
  19. -1 points
    Neil DeGrasse Tyson has been accused of sex misconduct by 3 women . Tyson denies any wrong doing. I personally find Tyson's response troubling. In a social media post captioned with a photo of 2 faceless figures pointing at each other Tyson wrote of the damage which can be done to a reputation when one is accused, referenced the need for evidence, and questioned why anyone would believe him. Tyson is a very intelligent person. I think the image he used purposely invokes the spirit of he said vs she said to imply the whole situation is a nonstarter of sorts. Tyson further diminished his accusers voices by talking about the need for evidence. Then ends the post with what I consider to be a bit of sarcasm by asking why he as the accused should be believed. Questions designed to position himself as the real victim here. I am disappointed by his response. Has anyone been following this story? I placed this in politics because Tyson referenced himself as a public servant and most of the other similar discussions regarding sexual misconduct have been political.
  • 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.