Bufofrog

Both of those groups were supplied heavy weapons from governments and arms dealers. I never said there would not be terrorists, there always have been and always will be. The military would sweep away any meaningful resistance in short order. If we wanted to stop Al-Qaeda and or ISS in a country (say Iraq) it would not be difficult. For goodness sake no foreign terrorist been able pull off any significant attack on the USA in 17 years.

If every person in the US had an AK-47 the army could still come in an confiscate the guns (or pry them out of their cold dead hands) and there isn't a damn thing the public could do to stop it. The military has tanks, jets, ships and bombs, it is absurd to believe a bunch of clowns with guns are going to stop a determined government. Mass protests would do 10x (unevidenced estimation) the good that an armed resistance could.

My wife is a tea drinker, I myself am a coffee drinker. I have been making tea for her for 25 years. We are from the States so as young people we were raised on crappy tea, and coffee for that matter. Anyway the point is my wife discovered loose leaf Yorkshire Gold tea, which she fondly refers to as cocaine tea because she is addicted to it. I have talked to a couple of 'blokes' from England and they agree that it is a fine tea. Finally to my question - do the tea aficionados here agree or are we just deluded 'mericans thinking this is excellent tea? What are your recommendations for a really good tea?

Mostly correct. The implied assumption in your statement is that all 3 clocks are in the same inertial frame. All that means is all 3 clocks are moving at the same velocity. When you said, "no matter where I went they would all read the same time" is not accurate, I believe. The problem is that you are now implying that you can change your velocity relative to the other clocks and the other clocks will still be synchronized with you, which is not true. Once you change your inertial frame the clocks will not longer be synchronized.

I hesitate to ask, but what is a Redbarron gravity device?

Quite possibly. I would assume the sentience would be quite different from ours since an AI would have none of the drives that we have such as sex, food, physical comfort and others. Wow that was a pretty hard turn off of the subject!

I am not familiar with the work you are doing so I had to look up 'Phase 1 Surveys', it looks like interesting work. The main thing I wanted to comment on is the quote above. I started college for chemical engineering at 30 years old. So from my perspective you are getting into it at a young age.

That I have heard of. I do not have a physics degree so there is LOTS about physics I do not know. I am a chemical engineer by trade (which means I do not know enough to be a chemist or an engineer.)

Interesting, I have not heard of that. I will look it up - thanks!

No, that has not been shown and it does not make any sense as far as I can see. The matter contained in a given sphere can be calculated by: \[\rho \times \frac{4}{3} \pi r^3 = Mass\] What do you mean "a much lower power"? None of this has anything to do with a preferred location... Where is this alleged periodicity? 72 km/s is a velocity, nothing to do with a period. I am not sure what that velocity has to do with anything anyway. The Hubble constant is approximately 72 (km/s)/Mpc. I pick C. C. We are not in a special location and the redshift is a convenient way to determine how far away a very distant celestial object is.

For the second time, would you please present the math that allowed you to accurately predict the Hubble constant. As you said you have already done the calculation so it should be an easy exercise to demonstrate it. This should also satisfy swansont's request and preventing the closure of this thread. I await your reply.

I think the OP should be able to see that creation science is an oxymoron. If you have faith and an unshakable belief in the literal meaning of the bible - then good for you. If you want to use science to prove Noah's flood, or that evolution did not occur, or that dinosaurs and people lived at the same time, then you are doomed to fail.

Alright, let's look at one sentence. This is a grammatical nightmare - but let's try to get through it. "The Big Bang a rapid inflation but then the slow then rapid increase in speed of dark energy" This does not make any sense. Energy is not a substance. You cannot have a bucket of energy - so the idea that energy has speed is nonsensical. "can be explained by the implosion effect the falling shrinking yet growing denser singularity theoretically implodes a rapid initial inflation of all the superheated information at x size then the cooling slowing down then speeding up affect of that information" Information cannot be superheated or cooled or speeded up. hypothetically explained by the initial singularity absorbing enough information energy from the field to have a drastic repulsive bounce effect spherically from the initial singularity by the fact that after x expansion of the matter state the fields either already were There at vastly to greatly x size or expanded much faster and pulls the matter universe layer faster and faster. Sorry but I cannot make heads or tails of this. If you are interested science take math and physics courses while you are in school. Good luck! Putting out ideas like this on a science site before you have understood the basics of science are only going to give you negative feedback. Don't worry about it we all had some funny ideas before we had a solid base in a science education

Question 1 was answered in the second post. Question 2 was answered in the fourth post. Sorry I did not put in the units of miles. Did you want us to plug the numbers in a calculator for you? Question 3 can be answered with the info you have been given in this thread. Did you want us to plug the numbers in a calculator for you? All reputable sources agree there is not nearly enough water to cover the earth - including the article you cited.

That wall of text is too hard to read. I think I will wait for your second or third TOE.

I am not sure what your definition a thick head is, but I think I a good working definition would be someone who asks a question, receives an answer and then asks the same question again. [shrug]

Good job.

Which has been answered. What more do you need? I think based on the answers we can say the scenario of a world wide flood above the height of mount Everest is impossible - there is not enough water to do that. So since it is not possible scientifically, we must say it is only possible with a supernatural intervention by God.

I double-dog doubt it.

You need to balance the equation. I assume the equation you presented is correct except that there are coefficients missing in the equation \[Al_2O_3 + Na_2CO_3 -->NaAlO_2+CO_2\] there are 2 Na atoms on the left but only one on the right. There are 2 Al atoms on the left but only 1 on the right. Finally there are 6 oxygen atoms on the left and only 4 on the right. Can you see a way to change coefficients on the right to make the number and type of atoms on the left and right equal each other? So for a hydrogen oxygen reaction you would have: \[H_2 + O_2 -->H_2O \] which is not balanced. To balance the reaction put in coefficients: \[2H_2 + O_2 --> 2H_2O\]

Sounds intriguing. Could you show the math that you used to accomplish this?

The rainfall would be about 384,000 inches of rain in 40 days. That is simply the height of mt Everest above sea level. That would be a per day average of about 8,700 inches of rain. This would probably require that you empty your rain gauge every day! If you want to make 1/2 of the water come from the fountains of the deep you of course would only need 4,350 inches of rain a day. If you want to know the volume of that water just calculate the volume of the earth (r=3958.5) - the volume of the sphere equal to the height of mt Everest (r=3964.0) Edit: I do not know why religious people try to use science to 'prove' religious stories. It does not work - period. This is religion we are talking about (ferchrisake!) use God to make it work, like this. God made the excess water appear in the form of rain and stuff and then he made all the excess water disappear after the flood. Problem solved....

So you read that a free neutron decays to a proton and an electron in 15 minutes. You have also read that the nucleus of an atom is made up of protons and neutrons. Now for some reason you say you believe the first statement but you reject the second statement. You could have just as easily said you believe the second and not the first. Seems rather arbitrary to me. Why don't you investigate a little as to why these 2 seemingly contradictory statements are true instead of just arbitrarily picking one of the statements as true and the other as false based on nothing?

Boric acid is of course an acid in the form: \[H_3BO_3\] Sodium bicarbonate is a base in the form \[NaHCO_3\] Sodium Bicarbonate is also known as baking soda. This is used in baking, in toothpaste and many other things. It can be used as and antacid when mixed with water. In general it is very safe. However doing something stupid like trying to eat a tablespoon of it could burn your throat, Boric acid is a poison. The most common use is in pesticides. There are home remedies that use boric acid; for instance athletes foot. Seems rather risky to use this product on or in your body in my opinion.

Are you being serious?