Sensei

Sounds like helmet manufacturer spam.. I used to 1000+ km on bike per year, without any really serious issues. Just two worth having helmet, just to not have some little scratches.

Nobody in this thread has been publishing his own theory as far as I can see. What michel123456 said in #2 post is rather objection, than theory. The most famous neutrino scientist of the world (the most of physicists know his name, so I will skip it), when I showed him couple years ago my applications which are analyzing the all data of 3142 stable and unstable isotopes (my own database), instantly wanted to have my applications, to use by whole university.. As it's immediately showing and sorting which materials, which isotopes of which elements, are the best neutrino detectors... (and which isotope is stable, and which is unstable, and decay by which mode) Command-line early version was presented in this thread: http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/83451-radioactive-decay-and-information-split-from-what-is-real-in-physics/?p=808149 I wrote similar apps, for fusion, radioactive decay and neutrinos, basing on the same database. How it compares to your achievements as 'professional scientists'.. ? I could send 10 patents for new neutrino detectors in a day, if I would like to.. You must be really young. Quantum physics student? They're sometimes under incredible, god-fearing influence of professors. Whatever professor tells, is treated by them as absolute truth. Undeniable and not questionable dogma..

String theory has not been proven. Not even experiment confirming it has been performed. What physicist BELIEVE really does not matter. No matter what is name of him/her. Matters what physicist can prove or disprove. Performing the real experiment, not on white table. But the most of time these people doesn't even know of decay modes of particles.. Nor can list them.. Comparison completely failing. Silly comment. You must use your own theory formulas with the real set of data to be sure result matches with reality.. That's what differs them from 'uneducated internet trolls', that skip this stage. No matter how professional you are, you're limited to set of experimental data, especially if you're not experimental physicists. You must rely on data provided by 3rd party people. If they will make error while calculation, you will get wrong data. And all calculations basing on them will be also wrong. The thing is any professional does not know what he/she does not know. New experimental data could completely disagree with established knowledge. Imagine you are early XX century scientist. Atom was thought to be indestructible. You learned it in school. And then somebody finds out it's not true. It can annihilate. It can decay. etc. Your whole understanding of world is smashed.. For the most of people such turn around 180 degrees is very hard. As they used to what they learned.

Imagine we have "world" that's 2D array 2x2 fields. Possible states are: 10 00 01 00 00 10 00 01 And mixtures of these. Now we have frames going from: 10 00 it's changing to 01 00 it's changing to 00 01 it's changing to 00 10 Then everything repeats. Somebody observing it above, will say "1" is moving in circle. Time in this example is index to frame, one full set of states. Let's make it a bit harder: 3x3 array 100 000 000 let's assume that "1" can move only by one row/column, in 1 frame/time unit, then jumping from above frame, to frame: 000 000 001 would be violation of our "law" of speed limit. But if it's 000 010 000 Then 000 000 001 No speed limit law is violated. State in one frame changes to state in other frame. If you're looking at video/movie, nothing really moves on the TV/cinema screen. Just different frames are drawn one by one 50/60 frames per second. If player software will be randomizing index to frame, movie won't make any sense. The same is with 2D/3D games we play on computer screen. Do these players-3d objects, actually move? They jump from one location: x += vx * delta_time; y += vy * delta_time; z += vz * delta_time; x,y,z is player position vx,vy,vz is player speed in m/s delta_time = time taken to render single frame in s (for proper synchronization, how fast/slow computer is generating frames) Photons from event are send in the all (or one direction in minimum). And if they're absorbed by detector (f.e. eye) we see what happened. If event emitted just one photon, and you absorbed it, then nobody else will know about this event, only you. Conservation of energy, conservation of momentum, speed limit. etc. Thing that will happen in future, didn't released photons during event yet. So how do you want to see it? That depends on interpretation. See above pet explanation of frames-all possible states to build. Does frame 10 00 always existed, or it started existing when I wrote it on keyboard? ps. It can be interpreted this way. Regardless of my personal opinion about the subject.

You also didn't give answer for unanswered questions like what is mass, what is energy, what is elementary particle. Every time you came up with "theory" in thread, it's easy falsifiable. Like the last time, when I just gave example of annihilation, and your model failed.. In science we analyze set of data, and try to figure out how to predict outcome the next time we will see the same event. Somebody see trace in Cloud Chamber, and it's behaving differently than known particles, it's spinning in reverse direct in applied magnetic field. And makes different number of circles. And calls it pion+ or muon+ for instance. See how it's decaying, and new traces coming from it after couple circles.. Analyze what are these particles, what are their charges, what are their rest-masses, what are their other properties. You have not bothered to build such device when it cost fifty dollars!!! Start analyzing set of data. And make prediction basing on them. Until you learn physics, you won't know what we do know already.

No, you need to: - learn how to use quote function in posts, - learn how to make Latex equations in posts, - learn physics. To do first simply write [ quote ] stuff to quote [ /quote ] (without spaces). Your posts discourage everybody from reading because it's so hard to read them without proper quoting. To do second simply write [ math ] equation in latex [ /math ] (without spaces). And read Latex tutorial f.e. https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/LaTeX/Mathematics Or use Latex editor.. This will make easier to read and understand equations. To do third, I gave you link with plentiful materials to read.. Did you read all physics history database?

Fission doesn't produce isotopes that we want or need. It's producing plentiful short living radioactive isotopes. That are generally dangerous to environment.

There is large difference between them: - Apple designs iPhone, and iOS is their own product, 3rd party companies, Chinese are producing it. - Samsung is electronic company designing Samsung Galaxy Sx etc. and producing them by them self, but operating system, Android is licensed from Google. 3rd party company. Apple can add anything they want to their product and OS, as they have direct control over operating system and device. Samsung is not in such luxury position. They're limited to what Google will give them. Personally I have Samsung Galaxy S5. Apple has some nasty politics for 3rd party applications developers. Google have much better. I can host my own Android application on my FTP server (with HTTP), and then visit that website from device, and app will be installed without any problems. Without any bothering either Google/Samsung companies. For spy-aps like f.e. GPS moniting app for truck transport company, it's the only way, as Google Play Store disallows apps that gather data without knowledge of user of app (truck driver).

Slightly derailing your original thread: why not use balloons.. ? As long as it's less dense than surrounding atmosphere, it'll be flying and gathering data much longer than any airplane, or rocket.. You don't want to spend time flying couple years, spending billions of dollars, just to arrive and find out engine does not work.

The question is for how long water has to increase its level. If it's minutes, hours, and locally (not entire worldwide) tsunami is way to go. It could be created by collapse of volcano or mounting into sea, causing massive movement of water. As well as hit by object from cosmos like meteor or comet. Search YouTube for "tsunami caused by landslide". There are some recorded on video. Increase of temperature and melting ice is so slow that everybody, or at least the most of people would be able to escape it.

If you're on board of space ship, and hit object with well known force, it'll accelerate object. Object that has large mass, will be accelerated to smaller velocity. Object that has small mass, will be accelerated to bigger velocity. Search google how is measured mass of atoms in mass spectrometry.. Say you have particles all with charge -1e, and masses m1=0.511 MeV/c^2 (electron), m2=105.66 MeV/c^2 (muon-), m3=139 MeV/c^2 (pion-). If you accelerate them using electrodes with well known potential, smaller rest-mass particle will be accelerated to higher velocity. Gravity can be ignored.

Helium-2 is extremely unstable isotope: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotopes_of_helium#Helium-2_.28diproton.29 Do you really carefully rethink it.. ? Are you aware that neutron decays to proton, electron, and anti-neutrino? [math]n^0 \rightarrow p^+ + e^- + \bar{V}_e + 0.782 MeV[/math] Your theory instantly violates Lepton number conservation.. If neutron is up,up,up,e-,e- and after decay one of e- is emitted, then proton would have to be up,up,up,e- since then beginning.. ??? IMHO you don't know quantum physics enough to know the all decay modes of all particles.. Concentrate on filling this gap.

You probably don't know, but fusion of two protons produce positron and neutrino, and release 420 keV energy... [math]p^+ + p^+ \rightarrow D^+ + e^+ + v_e + 0.42 MeV[/math]

Explosion turns solids to gases, or liquids to gases. While breaking solid in parts, like breaking cup, newly made parts generally remain in the same state of matter. However some atoms can change state on the edge. f.e. meteors are melting in air while passing by atmosphere. They change state because of enormous energy.

It's not heat. It's conversion of internal energy (bonds between quarks, atoms, electrons and molecules), to kinetic energy of newly produced parts. Unbroken cup has one momentum for entire object. They act like one piece. After breaking each broken part has its own momentum, and flying in its own direction. Better illustration is quantum physics, fusion or decay of atom. f.e. Uranium-238 at rest will decay to Thorium-234 and Helium-4 with decay energy 4.267 MeV (in this case converted to kinetic energy of Th-234 and alpha particle, majority to alpha). Reverse of this process would be shooting alpha particles at Thorium-234 target to receive Uranium-238 back.. Chemistry equivalent experiment: we have KNO3, Sulfur and Carbon, all solid, after ignition they turn to gases, the better adjusted amounts, the more gas, and the more powerful explosion. Reverse of it would be turning these gases back to solid state KNO3, Sulfur, and Carbon from CO2, SO2, etc. But if you would catch all these gases, they would loose all their energies, in kinetic energy originally owned, and cool down, so they wouldn't be able to. Compounds are in lower energy state than they were initially, prior explosion.

If they asked for grams, like you said above... ...they cannot accept answer in moles.. Units don't match. Right. Proportions, any kind, wouldn't be given with units.. to get 0.006 mol you multiplied 0.01177 mol * 0.5646 = 0.006645 mol But you should multiply initial mass: 4.32 g * 0.5646 = 2.4389 g or from moles: 0.01177 mol * 207.2 g/mol (Pb mass) = 2.4389 g Ratio 0.5646+0.4354=1 is of course from mass of Pb / total mass, and mass of Br/total mass. Unitless.

100 W = 0.1 kWh/h * 24h * 30d = 72 kWh/month Here we pay $0.165/kWh. Which would be $11.87 for all the time running light bulb. Why don't you simply put metal with high resistance to water, it'll be like heating element, or heating element by itself, like for making tea ($2 cost or so). You could control amount of energy simply by adjusting where is wire plugged to 2nd end.

Michel, iceberg, or snow, is not made of the same particles. It might looks similar for human imperfect eye, but it's not in the same configuration.. If you would be able to assign identifiers to each particle of water (or any other), you could trace where they're going and where are in the cyclic process the "next time".. And every snowflake is unique. In the case of cup, there is only one configuration of broken parts, where they fit, and were they where prior breaking.

DrP voted for Isoamyl acetate, Imatfaal and hypervalent iodine for Isobutyl Acetate. There is easy way to check which is true: by its melting point. Isoamyl acetate has −78 °C, and Isobutyl Acetate has -99 °C. Using dry ice will make one of them solid? Or liquid nitrogen will be needed? ps. N2Microbes, you need to use IR spectroscopy, or you can do whatever you like to identify compound? I would burn it in controlled environment, to produce CO2 and H2O, and measure amount of gas produced.. Butyl acetate has BP at 126.1 °C, and RI 1.3941, closer to measured values. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butyl_acetate

If h2 and h3 are absolute, not relative (unlike your original post) then [latex] 2V= \frac{\pi r_2^2 h_2}{3}[/latex] and [latex] \frac{9}{4}V= \frac{\pi r_3^2 h_3}{3} [/latex] are true.. You never said that 2V is difference in volumes between the smallest cone and middle.. "If we use V as the volume of the bottom cone, then middle cone is 2V and the outer (largest) cone is 9/4V. " so I assumed Vsmall=V, Vmiddle=2V, Vouter=9/4V

Right. Shouldn't be here [latex]2V= \frac{\pi r_2^2 (h_1+h_2)}{3}[/latex] ?? Shouldn't be here [latex]\frac{9}{4}V= \frac{\pi r_3^2 (h_1+h_2+h_3)}{3}[/latex] ?? According to this info h2 and h3 are partial heights: "h3 - from the top of the outer cone to the top of middle cone h2 - from the top of middle cone to the top of bottom one h1 - from the top of inner cone to the ground"

That's up-side-down quantum physics... More mass-energy from decaying smaller mass-energy particle.. ? That's instant violation of energy conservation.. f.e. muon is elementary particle in Standard Model, but the all particles mass-energies it is decaying to, are smaller than rest-mass of muon, 105.66 MeV/c^2. f.e. [math]\mu^-\rightarrow e^- + \bar{V}_e + V_{\mu}[/math] [math]m_e = 0.510998928 MeV/c^2[/math] The all known particles ALWAYS decay to particles with less mass-energy than they have prior decay, to conserve energy..

Do you what me to foresee your future? You will be banned soon from this forum..

The best file explorer was Directory Opus 5 for AmigaOS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directory_Opus (before v5 it looked like GUI-like Norton Commander, forget these versions) The all explorers built-in Windows are really crap, in comparison to it. I really miss DOpus 5, whenever I have to do any file manipulation on my disks.. DOpus exists for Windows since v6. But it's somewhat different than v5 Magellan. This feature to call batch operation on selected files seems interesting around 11 minute of video. Also cool to see preview of .txt file after hovering file by mouse. Heh, after opening file by some process, and trying to delete file, DOpus is showing which process locked file, so you know what to shut-down and then retry delete.. Cool feature..

Resistors have color code printed on them. Check what is nominal value of it this way.. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_color_code (or Google "resistor color code") Multimeter can be damaged. I have one such showing wrong measurements. It was destroyed by too high voltage.. Or battery can be exhausted. Replace it by fresh one, for a moment, to see whether there is difference.