the tree

If you specify that B is a vector on the (x,y,0) plane, then yes. Which you might want to do if you were discussing, I dunno, the something on a flat surface and something airbourne. But exactly which subspace B occupies has to be specified - I think.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0974014/ I wasn't aware of this until I saw a trailer this morning. It's looks visually pretty impressive - what do you guys think?

However, if the paranormal studies departments weren't there in the first place then we would not be able to say so confidently that we've looked for evidence of telepathy and not found it. Also, the existence of paranormal studies departments provided the premise for the Ghostbusters film - something that we can all benefit from in many ways.

pssst - infra-red light just means heat.

Recurrence equations involve about as many techniques as differential equations. But you shouldn't need an analytic solution just for a plot of the system. A simple WHILE loop should generate a big enough set for an interesting plot.

Can you explain that? The results of the double slit experiment are pretty well understood.

It's really not, chord lengths can be derived easily from very basic trig. The chord and the centre define an isosceles triangle which can be divided into two right-angled triangles and it's all trivial from there.

If you've already read it then not that many people are aware the there is a sequel called 'What Do You Care What Other People Think?'.

There was no space before there was any space. See big bang etcetera. (unless by space your talking about the multiverse space - but that's quite another thing) Except that vacuum fluctuations happen all the time. There was no space before there was any space. See big bang etcetera. Meh, entropy increases but there are still the conservation laws. ...then we would be crazy. Well yeah, How Will It End is a pretty well studied question. I think heat death is generally considered to be the most plausible. Then... oh screw it... too much to go through. tl; wish I dr.

If Brief History Of Time was too tricky then take a look at The Universe In A Nutshell - also by Hawkings and largely covering the same content.

Not to mention that it's rarely an individual effort.

So long as those birthday presents don't result in you having to buy more birthday presents.

psssst... I don't think they're coming back.

"Yes, it is."

Not if it only takes one factor to make the idea impossible. No, and no. Yeah, but this is true of lots of things that aren't alive - computer viruses being an apt example. You can think all you like, but science forums have a thing for evidence. Mokele is a research biologist actually - so yeah, he'd be familiar with the idea - but you're just turning it into a complete mess. Do you even know what a sward is? Shifting the burden of proof is both fallacious and lazy. There is a very important difference between fiction and reality.

Yes paraphrasing is indicated with square brackets. And really, that section of your post could be interpreted at "waaah waaah semen scares me" or "I can't imagine being attracted to men". The latter merely states that you are not gay, the former merely states that your a complete wuss. I went for reading that cast you in a more favourable light. If you want to keep your sexuality private and stick with the wuss option, that's fine with me.

No, it's about acceptance. To say that you 'tolerate' someone basically means that you're not going to vocalise your dickishness. Well so the hell what? Just because you're not into something doesn't mean other people aren't. I'm sure you have all your own kinks or whatever would be a deal breaker to other heterosexual guys, sexuality is a pretty personal thing and your not going to find anyone who matches yours exactly. People's favourite positions are hardly a defining factor in their sexual preference - it's also a pretty damn personal question. I'd avoid asking that in public. Gay men like men because gay men are gay. It's not complicated. If you still have the childish outlook that there is ever anyone doing the sex and another person having it done to them then believe me - you're doing it wrong. Clears what up? At best it exposes a lot of ignorance and that you've simply never sat down and actually thought about the subject.

You said 90 days yesterday.

Yeah, I know what you meant. It still seemed a funny phrasing, elephants are already, y'know, pretty big.

As opposed to regular, normal, puppy sized elephants?

Really? I think you'll find a lot more people than you expect have a basic knowledge of Buddhism. The laws of nature and the laws of physics refer to the same thing, basically they are how the universe behaves. If they appear to be broken then that indicates only that we got them wrong - not that we beat them. No, nature doesn't invent, it just does. And humans don't control or implement the laws of nature, they are just a part of it. In fact. Note the following down. Buddha taught that the self - as a discrete entity - is an illusion, which we have come to realise is true. The mind is a product of the brain which just as much a part of nature as the rest of your body, the rest of the contents of your house, the rest of the countryside, the rest of the whole world. It is subject to the same rules and it behaves the same as the rest of nature. Conscious matter is still matter and is not granted any special exceptions whatsoever. There are (as Shakespere put it) more things in heaven and earth than are dreamt of in your philosophy, and some of those things are extraordinary, awe inspiring and beyond our comprehension but they are all part of nature and as such not granted any exceptions. If nature says gravity, the mind cannot argue. If nature says that acceleration requires a physical force, the mind cannot challenge that. If nature says second law of thermodynamics then your mind, my mind, anyone's mind has no power do anything but play along. tl;dr the laws of nature are universal and the human mind is not exempt.

Since we're talking about domains, then I think it's safe to assume we're talking about the transform. Changing domain just converts the equation into another equation in terms of another variable - in short, some problems are easier to solve in one domain than another so having a gadget to jump between the two is pretty useful.

In the case of future, we just need to wait around, that's easy enough.

I think we've given up on establishing exactly why we need a battleship.

It seems a bit trivial to say that environmental factors will have a determining influence on a culture - if anything the negate would be taking an anthropocentric view to an absurd extreme.