Bender

Adding such is trivially easy, but why would you?

Anyone who can access your tank has your keys and can simply drive your vehicle to his home where he can easily open the additional lock.

3 hours ago, ScienceNostalgia101 said:

This year's California fires reminded me of this subject. California's a state that seems to be on fire especially often.

 

I've since come up with another option. What about, instead of pipes, a large container, with a base and walls, (and maybe a roof) to boil the water? If they could make it thick enough to withstand the heat, would it be more practical to use the boiled water directly (cooking, coffee, etc.) or to put a hole in the roof to force the steam through it to turn a turbine?

No.

5 hours ago, Harikrish said:

The Bible proves even God evolved over time.

From sending a Giant  flood to destroy the world to sending Jesus to save the world.

The part of the flood and the parts about Jesus simply had different authors and were made up/written in a different time period.

5 hours ago, rgnyldz said:

My theory is that actually our eyes are faulty and the blurred state is actually our default state of the eye.

The default state for me seems to be seeing distant objects sharp.

Our lens only changes focus and nothing else.

I guess you could make some fancy design lamp, but the same design would probably be easier to build with LEDs. 

1 hour ago, prashantakerkar said:

Thank you.

I.e Archimedes is generalising the formula for Buoyancy force calculation  in law of Flotation as

F= Density of fluid × g × v

and not 100  which is the liquid constant Rho as mentioned in wiki.

Is this Incorrect ?

F= Rho × g × v 

Should the formula be corrected as mentioned by Archimedes?

Density of fluid will vary from water, oil,milk etc.

Thanks & Regards,

Prashant S Akerkar

 

Rho is the density of the fluid.

Rho is only 100 in some Greek numeral system I've personally never seen before but is utterly irrelevant here.

On 4/8/2018 at 12:33 PM, Brett Nortj said:

This makes him, well, sometimes force himself onto women, which could be called rape

Which is rape. 

4 hours ago, Sensei said:

If you used phone number on some website, which requested for phone number as yet another method of password recovery or authentication, after a while of not using it (i.e. one year), it will be assigned to new SIM, and sold and acquired by somebody else.. Then new owner of number could use this password recovery feature to get new password in SMS and this way to break in to your account..

Very tricky, you would need to be somebody important (or rich), to bother hackers to do something like this..

 

Except that your provider can simply deactivate the damaged sim and assign your old number to your new sim.

4 hours ago, Brett Nortj said:

How does a force that supplies friction provide motion? Friction is a force that supplies growth, nothing more, while magnetism supplies fields of push or pull, of course.

3 hours ago, Brett Nortj said:

The strength of the message to the atoms is greater pushing you forwards as you have more mass.

None of this makes any sense. "Friction supplies growth"? "Strength of the message" ?

Do you perhaps type your answers in some language in Google translate and copy the result literally here?

47 minutes ago, prashantakerkar said:

From how much distance : 1st floor, 2nd floor, 3rd floor ...etc in meters or feet ?

What's the reference point i.e. Height / Altitude?

Distance: something you can measure accurately. Obviously in meter if you use m/s^2

Reference point you determine yourself. Usually where the fall starts.

I have used Tracker to have students calculate g with nothing but a smartphone camera and a ruler to surprising accuracy. To avoid blurry images, you can also roll a marble down a sloped rail and apply some trigonometry to find g.

Drop a ball over an accurately known distance and accurately measure the time it took.

On 28/7/2018 at 7:33 PM, studiot said:

But in Engineering

In engineering, nobody cares about rigorous definitions. What matters is whether it works, not whether someone wants to call some trivially useless cases "finite" or not.

What is the point?

Fitting a curve through 100+ data points is going to produce a complex formula. Much easier to just look at the PSE.

Of the top of my head:

- atomic mass of Uranium: about 238

- atomic number of Uranium: 92

doubling 92 is not within 1 or 2 of 238. Not even close.

I'm going to start reporting you for trolling. Your ignorance in every subject is starting to annoy me.

We could also marvel at the shooter who manages to hit the edge of a sword at that distance.

4 hours ago, Brett Nortj said:

Fossils pre date the time of Christ. The church exists because of cultural relays between people of the time period, where they remembered Christ and observed his teachings. This is why they gather even today to hear the words he shew the world.

The gospels were written by the apostles. There is a document called the gospel of Judas, for example, that was found in a barn somewhere. These must be the basics of his teachings, these 'documents' are references to his being here, and, his message.

The Romans had logs of events, yes? These are likely recorded and preserved by the historians.

No offense, Brett, but you really should read the forum rules before posting anything else on this site. It is required that you back up your claims instead of just making stuff up.

Whenever I see your name pop up, unsupported nonsense follows. Please at least do a Google search to check your "facts" in the future.

You are of course welcome to ask questions to learn.

Why bother? Your provider might ask a small fee for a new SIM, but you might even get it for free.

They will probably try to talk you into a more expensive service, so some care is adviseable.

1 hour ago, MathGeek said:

The problem with a line between the OT and NT as a demarcation criteria is the dozens (maybe hundreds) of times the NT refers to specific events and people originally occurring in the OT narratives.  For example,

The Jews answered him, “Aren’t we right in saying that you are a Samaritan and demon-possessed?”

 “I am not possessed by a demon,” said Jesus, “but I honor my Father and you dishonor me. I am not seeking glory for myself; but there is one who seeks it, and he is the judge. Very truly I tell you, whoever obeys my word will never see death.”

 At this they exclaimed, “Now we know that you are demon-possessed! Abraham died and so did the prophets, yet you say that whoever obeys your word will never taste death. Are you greater than our father Abraham? He died, and so did the prophets. Who do you think you are?”

Jesus replied, “If I glorify myself, my glory means nothing. My Father, whom you claim as your God, is the one who glorifies me. Though you do not know him, I know him. If I said I did not, I would be a liar like you, but I do know him and obey his word. Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad.”

“You are not yet fifty years old,” they said to him, “and you have seen Abraham!”

“Very truly I tell you,” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I am!” At this, they picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus hid himself, slipping away from the temple grounds.
John 8:48-58

So, how would a proponent of an OT/NT demarcation line handle this reference to Abraham?  Jesus seems to be referring to Abraham as a real historical figure.  Does this provide warrant to bring in the entire OT narrative relating to Abraham (Genesis 12-25) or only the absolute minimum required by this NT passage?  In all, there are 76 NT references to Abraham spread over 11 different NT books. 

Also consider that Jesus said:

“But do not think I will accuse you before the Father. Your accuser is Moses, on whom your hopes are set. If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote about me. But since you do not believe what he wrote, how are you going to believe what I say?”
John 5:45-47

So, here we have Jesus upholding both the real historical figure of Moses as well as his writings.  Does this warrant bringing in all of the writings attributed to Moses in the OT or only the minimum required by this NT passage?  In all, the NT refers to Moses 85 times in 12 different NT books.  The NT gives Moses a lot of support both as a real historical figure and as a source of authoritative writings. 

So, I don't think there is a neat line between the OT and NT solving the demarcation problem for Christians providing a clear path on what Scriptures may be regarded as metaphorical relating to creation.  I seem to recall there are also a number of NT references more directly to the Genesis material "theistic evolutionists" often distance themselves from, but I have not had time to look these up and refresh my memory yet.

What dimreepr said.

Obviously, I don't know what individual believers think of individual passages, but whether Abraham or Mozes really existed is not important for Jesus' message and teachings. Referring to them helps to convey it.

6 hours ago, Brett Nortj said:

Ah, professor Charles! So glad you replied... Yes, I deducted that this would mean that the motion is 'pending, per, mutual interactions' if you will?

I have a lawyer... he keeps all my stuff.

So apart from knowing nothing about physics, you were gullible enough to let a lawyer convince you to pay him for it?

1 hour ago, Brett Nortj said:

I don't know what this word is, but I read about it on the net, what the goals were. Then, I applied logic, of course. No, I haven;t sold any, as they are only 'intellectual property.'

Logic is not enough (especially when it is flawed).

Step one: learn physics

1 minute ago, Brett Nortj said:

So you do not see the reason of applying this reference to find the averages of these elements?

I thought the elements come between the gases and the metals? 

Those are the non-metals and the semi-metals. 

9 hours ago, Brett Nortj said:

This is a formula for finding orbital clusters around each element I worked on about a year ago, but, I could not find anyone on the forum to confer with me the ideas presented by myself.

This follows, after the liquids, when metals begin, it takes on a formula.

If you ever played dungeons and dragons, the magician's spell advancement table will show you the amounts of orbitals per level or proton beyond first, of course. This means there is one s orbital, or 'level one spell' at firs level, then, two s orbitals or level one spells at second level, then, a third new type of orbital with those previous ones at level three or with the third metal. At the fourth metal after on the table, there are three s orbitals and two of the second type.

Really helps to consult these games!

Which "liquids" are you talking about? There are only two elements liquid at room temperature, and one of them is a metal.

While there is some similarity in the tables, it is more useful to learn the actual logic of the s, p, d and f orbitals.

15 hours ago, Brett Nortj said:

Basically, friction leads to activity. If we are to observe that without motion, there is nothing, as there are no bonds, then we need friction, supplied by the constant struggle between protons for electrons. This is the fundamental force of, well, everything.

While I nothing on topic to contribute, I want to point out that this part is also completely wrong.

14 hours ago, Markus Hanke said:

Electromagnetism has nothing whatsoever to do with the weak and strong interaction.

They can be unified in the electroweak interaction and all three in GUT.

This in no way defends the post you reacted to, which has nothing to with science in general.

1 hour ago, Moontanman said:

I would almost bet money it has to do with the slow infiltration of your docile sect by the fundies who will stop at nothing to ge their cohones back.. 

I haven't had any luck finding the name of the representative. It has been a decade.

Since creationism wasn't even a thing here back then, I would still put my money on exaggerated political correctness caused by the wording, which can be perceived to be derogatory.

Creationism still isn't really a thing here, except for some propaganda aimed at the Muslim population (which does worry me). The mainstream reaction to creationism is still smug ridicule.

15 hours ago, Brett Nortj said:

This would be the 'density' or 'charge' of the signal. Volts.

The unit of charge is Coulomb, not Volt.

15 hours ago, Brett Nortj said:

I think I will show you what a signal is with classical analogies before I attempt to answer your question, using terms that kids will enjoy and understand, yes?

A signal is a density of energy, and, energy is related to mass. If you carry a massive pulse of energy to another receptor, it will interpret it on it's reception of that 'electrical signal' and then charge the system with the power gauge, owing to the message of the pulse, or, 'logarithm of pulses,' okay? This is like a constant message, in the case of radios, or, cell hones, television signals and so forth from beacons sending this out. This is also found on a circuit board bus, for computers, by the way.

Now, your question owes to time? This would be the 'density' or 'charge' of the signal. Volts. If the signal is tuned to a different frequency, we can discern whether it is radio frequency, television and so forth, of course. This is for reading the signal, if it is too frequent, it will over clock the receptor, for that medium, and be ignored, but, if it is just right, it will be interpreted and used.

What you describe is modulating a signal on a high frequency carrier wave. No Fourier transform required (except perhaps to design or explain/visualise the mechanism).