StringJunky

The Cap'n set the bar quite high because it's easier to bring down than raise...as he said before elsewhere it's not set in stone. It's good that he's being flexible and not treating it as an inviolable principle like he's shown for you. ......I see nothing nothing wrong with letting people be exceptions if they ask nicely...but woe betide them if that trust is misplaced. Because of the nature of these particular subforums and the kind of people they can attract (Drive-by Trolls) and the damage they cause, unfortunately, these levels of admittance are necessary IMO and I would like to see those boards become a permanent fixture..the whole breadth of human endeavour and thought is covered now....it looks great. I will say though, it's very sad that like minded sensible people have to endure this restriction at all..perhaps a better filtering mechanism will evolve with time.

Mr Skeptic...This is what I do. Your question prompted me to ask on the Adblock forum about a filterset that allows only text ads but as yet no response..will post when I know,

Glad you diagnosed it quickly. I faffed about with a new one with similar symptoms and I got an error code that indicated mechanical shock..probably been dropped or banged somewhere. FYI in future it's always best to get the specific diagnostic tool for that make of HD..they all produce one. It's funny, but I've just been warned against the WD Green HD because I was told they were rubbish...problems! If you can, ask if you can spend a bit more and exchange for a WD Blue which was highly recommended by a couple of geeks for reliability...I'm sure they'll do it for you. I think you only get what you pay for.

Here's the Western Digital Diagnostic software link: http://www.hddoctor.net/hard-drive-diagnostic-softwarewestern-digital-data-lifeguard-diagnostics/

When an opinion based discussion reaches impasse and is composed of a volley of repeated assertions it's time to stop because after that it can only become emotional...as evidenced many times. The easiest thing to do if someone is steadfastly not seeing it your way is to desist from saying any more...the conversation has reached it's conclusion...and everyone, readers included, takes from it what they will. In this type of discussion I think we need to get rid of this idea of 'winning' an argument and see it more as an exchange of views. Must every conversation here be so adversarial and a battle of wits? I think a well supported opinion does carry more weight but who or what is the arbiter? Because there isn't one it shouldn't be participated in from a point scoring competitive perspective.

I take your point and you are right in the context of this whole thread but it was this bit I was addressing' date=' albeit unduly narrowly and I see now, in hindsight, not the OP's intention: [i']I spoke out against the "Modern and Theoretical Physics" section of this forum on some occasions, the main reason being that apparently no one knows what the title means.[/i] (first bullet point).

Do you not think think Modern and Theoretical Physics is the umbrella term for the rest and should in fact be the forum header and not a subforum?...it seems to cover everything.

Wouldn't it be easier and purer to buy it or is it the actual process you need to know for your education? What purpose do you have for it...if you provide more detail as to its final spec (concentration and purity) someone might help you?

The correct term for this event is the Spring Equinox, which is when there is equal day and night...the Solstice is when the day is at its longest (mid summer) or when the night is at its longest mid winter) I think I read somewhere it was hypothesised that the odd angle of the Earth's rotation was caused by a very large Mars-sized object glancing off the surface of the very young Earth causing it to spin at that angle of axis. Don't know the answer for the apparent discrepancy in times.

With respect to people not versed in Physics...when they think of Theoretical Physics they probably really mean 'Novel' Physics.as in untried, untested or speculative. One additional subforum you don't have that might be useful is Applied Physics: Applied physics is a general term for physics which is intended for a particular technological or practical use. In my uninformed opinion, Modern and Theoretical Physics is basically meaningless....the other subforums cover it.

Sounds like MENSA.

Some crop seeds and fruit seeds need vernalizing to break their dormancy...they need to be put in a moist medium and chilled for a couple of weeks or so. Just a guess, but I think many Northern Hemisphere seeds have evolved to stay dormant until after a period of frost so they don't start growth in adverse conditions reducing there chances of completing their lifecycle.

The curvature in the space time geomtry is so slight and beyond the limit of our capabilities that it's measurably negligible leading us to think it's flat, as in an infinite Universe, when in reality it might be curved-A curved line would appear flat over an infinite distance from our point of view wouldn't it..is that the kind of idea you are getting at?

It puzzles me too. If the Universe has a flat geometry what overall shape does it have if we could, hypothetically, look at the whole Universe from a distance based on current data? How would a computer model view its outward appearance?

That's a good point you raise and I'm sure the Mods will be mindful of this negative strategy if they come across it. My post was not intended to challenge you...only share my viewpoint as a contrast. The more data points the Mods have the better they can make this forum and hopefully pre empt any problems that may arise...like you've just contributed in you last post. Amongst all the expressed opinions a balance lies.

I think the site needs to have this policy like this. There are plenty of sites of a purely Philosophical/Religious/Ethics nature for people to go to. Discussion in these areas on this site should be really discussed by people with a scientific bias/interest and viewed from that perspective so that there is some discipline consistent with the rest of this forum. If they allow people that do not have this general interest in science it would most likely cause insurmountable problems with those that do. I think this filter of 100 posts is necessary to keep the purely religious that have no scientific interest or attitude away. Those 3 extra sub fora are like nice little extras for people with a scientific leaning to venture into as required and I don't think they are intended to be the mainstay of the site populated by people with no primary interest in science. One could argue, of course, that having a more relaxed policy towards entry in these fora would attract purely religious types who might then become enlightened to the scientific process and that would be great but it's an extremely risky strategy in my opinion...my gut feeling says it wouldn't work. A high required post count forces a new poster to familiarise themselves with the methods and attitudes that are required on this site before they can engage in that type of discussion on this site. That's how I see it.

I live about 15 miles from where that UK earthquake occurred which was 5.3...it's enough to rattle everything noisily like you get in supernatural movies llike the Exorcist but not enough to send stuff jumping around...pretty spooky especially with it being a very rare event. I turned the TV on immediately after to see if there was any news about it and was very impressed by the speed which the US Geological Survey pinpointed it's exact position and magnitude...less than 5 minutes to get on the news Tremors of magnitude 6+ must be pretty scary and disturbing as well as potentially destructive to structures. Magnitude 5 is disturbing but not unduly destructive...that's if it was that strong where I am. I don't envy your location Rickdog...it must be hard to deal with mentally...being vulnerable to such powerful natural forces. Most of us in the UK can't imagine what it's like to be constantly reminded of our mortality and vulnerability to Nature on a frequent basis like you are.

That's a good point.

Here's a link to electrostatic filter material...don't know what the air resistance is like though: http://www.electrostatic-filter.com/choices.shtml

If you don't have a use for it...don't use it. Ignore it and let the people that do want that utility make use of it. It's not difficult. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged They are not circle jerking..they are trying to lay good foundations by setting a good example on how it should be done.

Exactly...not every conversation needs to be of an adverserial or combative nature. Sometimes people want to mutually explore ideas without fear of judgement...LET, not MAKE, the person come to their own conclusions from what we OFFER them Let Philosophy and Religion be that place. The. fact is BILLIONS of people ARE religious and it doesn't help the cause of science by being fundamentalist in attitude ourselves....a corrosive and critical attack style only puts them on the defensive ..then they are lost to science. I'm not religious but I have no problem with the way the Mods want it to be run. The full rigor of the Scientific Method can be maintained in the proper science forums without being compromised by the presence of P&R. Quite often, scientific discussions veer naturally into metaphysical or philosophical territory and I think people should have the 'sandbox' of P&R where they can test there ideas and beliefs with each other cordially and see where it leads...without necessarily trying to PROVE anything, but still coming to an agreeable conclusion, or without leaving the person who's sharing and testing a metaphysical or philosophical idea feeling negative about the experience when their idea doesn't work out logically under the spotlight of mutual discussion. With the Science Forums we have the place for evidence-based dialogue and in P&R we now have a place to explore the whys and foundations of personal or societal beliefs without necessarily measuring against a rigid scientific 'yardstick' or methodology if it's not appropriate. If one can't make the necessary attitude adjustment in the P&R forum, don't go there...it shouldn't be seen as a gladiatorial arena like the rest SFN if that's not the the spirit or intention of the OP in a particular thread there....simple. When in Rome do as the Romans do.

This is the UK Food Standard Agency's take on Aspartame: http://www.food.gov.uk/safereating/chemsafe/additivesbranch/sweeteners/55174 According to the review, in the estimations from different studies in Europe you can consume 14 cans a day containing the stuff for all your lifetime and experience no adverse effects...as long as you don't have PK as already mentioned. The amount allowed in any given foodstuff is determined by how much people use that foodstuff in normal circumstances so going over the recommended daily intake is unlikely. I reckon 14 cans a day safely is a rather generous margin and anyone consuming that much everyday is probably going to induce other problems unrelated to Aspartame.

A constant accurate figure is not possible because the Earth's orbit round the Sun is elliptical, therefore, the time it takes light to reach us varies at any given moment in time to the next. The eight minute figure is probably a ballpark average of the nearest and furthest distances in the Earth's orbit to the Sun. http://www.physicalgeography.net/fundamentals/6h.html

It's a programming language. Euphoria stands for: End-User Programming with Hierarchical Objects for Robust Interpreted Applications http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphoria_%28programming_language%29

Sayonnara: You might bring in a new set of posters that have expertise and/or a strong interest in Earth Sciences if that subject had a designated home where it was concentrated as opposed to scattered willy-nilly all over the different boards. At the moment that subject is nothing more than an orphaned afterthought discussed predominantely by seasoned posters here that know how this place is laid out. Any practicing or aspiring Earth Scientist passing through might easily miss any threads pertinent to their interest because it's not specifically categorized in a prominent position like the other sciences. You reap what you sow.