HRS

I think I will. If I do, I'll take some pictures with my phone and post them

After six months of having a screen protector, it fell off. Two days later, my phone fell off a table and hits the floor and now has star-like crack. Well more like half of one. It's on the side of my screen. Replacing my phone is not possible as it is not under warranty (my foresight is lacking), repairing it costs just as much of the phone itself apparently for my model, I decided to get screen crack filling resin and a new phone protector. However, most of the cracks do no go down to the touch sensor, and are only hairline cracks. They did not occur where I type or would minimally use the screen. Could I use a watch chip/scratch resin to fix the smaller cracks to prevent them from spreading, added with the screen protector? Or are there any other agents which could fulfill this task. I am aware that the screen requires the touch capacitive sensors. The largest part of the crack though is on the glass, but just off the screen on the .1 inch border.

The questions and debates on this forum never ceases to amaze me.

Satellite phones are rugged and used for businessmen going on safari for the most part, and run about the same as a regular cellular communications phone. Why are there not any companies seeking to integrate satellite communication phones in the same fashion that cells are today, technologically and economically (i.e. touch screens, contracts)? Are there any difficulties in infrastructure or ability that are limiting in this development?

Basic quantum question. Not even really at that. Wave mechanics perhaps. But when photons and electromagnetic radiation strike a material and cause the emission of an electron because the radiation is at the proper frequency, would this be an atomic example of resonance frequency? Or even, to an extreme, an example of resonance disaster?

I have never heard of masers before. Fascinating I will have to look into them more thank you

Thanks but I should have been more specific in that my inquiry was to nonphysical communications, such as future theoretical space communication networks, or at the least space probe communications. Though that does remind me that mass amounts of information can be transmitted through light. Though would there be a difference between the light being contained within fiber optic cables with total internal refraction and the light in lasers being transmitted to a theoretical satellite or probe?

I remember reading about a new form of communication where lasers are used in place of radio waves with one of the proposed applications being transmissions between space probes and such. For one it would not be faster. But would it be more accurate? Could it carry more information than radio? Why or why not?

The cage divers use to observe sharks on occasions are in essence Faraday cages. If you ran a current through them, would it attract sharks because of their ability to sense electrostatic discharge? Or would they ignore it because of their other senses not noticing any disturbances? Just an idle curiosity.

To scream off the nanotech bandwagon as it drives by this conversation, there is a proposed method for destroying cancer cells using a "nanorobot." Proposed. Some of you likely have heard of this, and probably have a better, more technical grasp on the scoence. The concept is to inject little nanobots that are set to attach only to cancer cells specifically because of certain qualities specific to the patient and the cancer, and attach to them (I believe by an electrostatic signature specific to the cancer cell). They then would basically inject the cells with bee venom to kill cancer cells. They would hypothetically inject thousands into the system in treatments. All propsed of course but hopeful. This hopefully would be more effective and make certain cancers have an extremely higher survival rate.

Thank you very much that should be very helpful. Although the circuit you posted is a little different than what I wish. It had several different tunes. Though I do find it very helpful. But judging by that circuit, could I substitute R1-8 for a Resistor Substitution Box and be able to play a very large variation of frequencies? I'm not looking quite for something along the lines of a musical instrument, which this circuit emulates.

I understand the magnetic principle behind the working of speakers and microphones. I am just inquiring into the circuitry sense of it. I am pre-designing a project where I would require a very basic speaker where I could modify the frequency at which it plays. Old speakers from headphones or computer speakers would probably be the primary source, with a homemade resonance chamber for my purposes. In order to modify the frequency though using a "basic" circuit, I was wondering about the configuration of this. Would it be accomplished with a variable resistor, an oscillator or timer, and a speaker, on the most basic level? (With batteries, resistors, switches and LEDs to taste of course) EDIT: Change in oscillator requirements

I am planning on using some online schematics to make my multimeter also convertible to a gaussmeter. One DIY page said I could find a Hall Effect Sensor in CD ROM and DVD players. Where might this be located in the players? We have a few old DVD players so I suppose I'll extract the motor, laser, variable resistor dials and some other things too.

Ah, I suppose I needed to be talked to like an child to get it. Thank you.

I get the analogy: The contents inside shake with it. Analogies often work so much better. Sorry if I seem to bypass your points but I suppose I'm making deductions from somewhere I need not.

Great. So I understand that the P-waves race ahead and shake the foundations of buildings, causing in some destruction based on flaws in the materials and construction being exposed by resonating energy from the waves. Also, if the oscillation of energy is correct in frequency, it can result in "resonance disaster." Am I correct in these assumptions? If not please correct me.

Ah I see where I made my mistake thanks.

So, to selectively take out a small part of your explanation, the cause of destruction by the P-waves is more a factor of the force of the wave colliding with the buildings than it is any other factor? Perhaps it has more to do with impulse then, and less with the actual mechanics of the wave (except velocity)?

Quick seismology question: What properties make P-waves, specifically, destructive? Is it a combination of frequency, speed or amplitude? Or is one factor of P-waves specifically destructive to buildings? I realize that S-waves are particularly destructive because the waves move perpendicular to the direction but right now I am interested in P-waves

No just a thought experiment at best. It would seem mechanically impossible to me if you want to form it in a manner like any other longitudinal wave. Perhaps but I couldn't imagine it. I was just imaginining the ramifications of the thought.

But are there physical limitations that prevents longitudinal waves from reaching such frequencies?

Would it, in pure theory,be possible to send a longitudinal wave through a material at such a rate that the waves have a frequency so high that it is comparable to the frequency of gamma or cosmic waves? And what would the result be on that material? I would be concerned about the vibration ensuing would literally tear the material apart in manner similar to ultrasound shattering glass or pulversing kidney stones. Or would the energy transfer and vibrations cause the material to simply heat up?

Time can also be dependent on other senses, though not as strongly as sight, such as the sense of hearing, acceleration, touch, and hunger. Especially hunger. Twenty minutes waiting outside a restaurant is like FOREVER compared to twenty minutes sitting around in general, typing on an online forum perhaps. For instance, deja vu is hypothetically explained by some of our senses catching up to the others, where some perceive the environment slightly ahead of the others, and the mind is just making up the difference. So time interpretation is just based on the species and the individual as well, perhaps with behavioral seeds where some are more patient and time can travel faster for them mentally than for others. Sight can not only be the only indication of time we have. Perception of time also changes with age as well, even after a period of a few weeks (ever wake up just moments before your alarm goes off in the morning?). However, perhaps if you slowed the impulses of the transfer of information to the centers of the brains that process environmental input, it would appear that time is travelling slower than possible. An interesting note: A tumor pressing up against the right part of the brain can also change perception of time as well, overriding the sense of acceleration and sense even. Oh btw, there are more than five senses. Just thought I should mention that.

Not to sound like one of those nanotech bandwagon persons, but you are somewhat overlooking the future contributions of this field. Possibilities and applications include injecting engineered molecules with bee venom compounds that are specifically attracted purely to cancer cells and leave regular tissue alone. Another includes utilizing a ferromagnetic probe controlled by external magnetic fields that can be injected into the eyes and clear up blocked blood passages to cure an ailment which escapes me at the moment. Prosthetic limbs are reaching a very promising point as well. In a recent Popular Mechanics, they outlined prototype contact lenses that measure glucose levels in tears for diabetics and a chip that uses the beating of an artificial heart as a power source for pacemakers such that battery replacement surgeries would be eliminated, hopefully. Not to mention the abilities to cure blindness and deafness which are being neared. But yes, the immediate time is suffering perhaps. But an exciting and incredible new field may be able to solve many of the problems in the medical field today. But it is still in its infancy. Time can only tell if nanotechnology will be as promising for the medical world as some hope.

Hmm... I see the correlation and the observable difference of the passing of time. Perhaps it is not as much of a constant as I thought. Too linear of a perception I suppose. Then time, though, if alterable in a manner similar to the manipulation of the location of matter, when experienced at high velocity (if you have an outside reference point)?