aman

Since we light buildings with 60 cycle flourescent lights, we are actually being strobed 60 times a second and in the dark 60 times a second. I have a doorway 8ft high by 3ft wide and I rig it so a 2" metal bar drops from ceiling to floor spanning the doorway on a chain drive in the walls. Then the bar returns up behind as another drops in front connected to the same chain. With 24ft of chain in the loop and about a 1000 rpm motor and gearing I could have the bars drop from ceiling to floor in less than 120th of a second. I could time it so the bar only dropped in between strobes. Wouldn't an observer see an empty doorway but experience an invisible wall of steel? Just aman

I know in cloning the life is in the host cell but the instructions are removed and replaced to build upon. I tried doing research on the components of a host cell once the DNA is removed and we are beginning to understand the chemical process of energy storage and usage leading up to replication. If we took a snapshot of where these chemicals were at one instant and reproduced them in a separate tiny membrane bag and introduced DNA, would it be creating life? Maybe with a little electrical jolt to get it started or a presssure of excess ATP to get the chemical reactions going. I was just curious if we are getting that close. Just aman

I can see why they use a cat picture. Cats can disappear when you look for them, appear suddenly and interfere, and cause damage worth two cats. Photons at least have the potential to be useful since the article shows they are willing to be trained. Just aman

I imagine the limiting size factor would be in the power of the detonator. As we get smaller more powerful explosives to detonate around the plutonium, the less plutonium we will need. At least that is my understanding of it. They probably used something like TNT in the early bombs and needed lots of it. Just aman

I wasted my time reading this when I coulda been seeing what was under the rocks in my back yard I'm just extremely curious in more ways than one. Just aman

In the crazy way people are brought up in the world, we drag along a lot of garbage ideas of our true natures. Sometimes it may be in the form of strong inhibitions. It probably isn't healthy to remove the inhibition but I think it sometimes helps to take the edge off them. The problem is that the same people can't stop at an optimal dosage. The spiritual search is another good reason as you suggested and may help some people but we've all heard the rantings of those who couldn't stop at an optimal dose and got way too close to "God". I've got nothing against drugs but I think people still don't have enough self control to self medicate and so are better off satisfied being nerdy productive people. Just aman

We can breath a fluid saturated with O2 so we don't really need "air". Maybe the FDA would classify the fluid as a drug. I know that natural ingredients in health food stores are not classified as drugs and air is one very natural ingredient. Just aman

UFO's hide in contrails all the time, maybe Mulder should check into it. Otherwise it was just another pretty sunset effect. Just aman

Air could be considered a drug if it is pharmaceutically manipulated and administered. Still it seems just semantics. Just aman

I see it works for plants but I forgot there is no exchange of carbon from CO2 in the air to the body. I'll go back to taking my medication, sometimes my Mom said she could handle both of me being crazy but drew the line at both of me being stupid. Just aman

Your right, H2O, stupid question cus it was getting late, I hate apologizing the next day. A person tending peat fires for his entire life might seam older than he was since the CO2 would be higher in C12 ratio. Just aman

I like to picture it with the analogy of a movie screen. When you first approach the speed of light you flatten relative to an outside observer. If you shine a light ahead near C it is like the character on the screen is shining a light ahead, still flat to the outside observer but moving at the speed of light to the movie character. Does my analogy make sense? Just aman

Sometimes my 2 cents is only worth 2 cents. Back in physics in the 70's I used to feel awkward because I was the only student in the class who didn't get what the teacher was trying to point out and I usually stopped the class long enough to let everyone know it. I'm harmless and try not to offend anybody with my ignorance, but it seems I've been tasked to share it sometimes. Thanks for clarifiying Saya. Just aman

That all made me ponder the question, if you were raised on polar ice melt from 100,000 years ago for your entire life, would your bones show signifigant difference in carbon dating? Just aman

If dreams are written down and documented, then you have proof. When I gamble in Vegas I often say I "knew" I shoulda done that but I didn't. Even though I've already lived and spent my winnings in my head. Write the stuff down and document it if it is really true. Good luck. Just aman

I understood it as rest frames are the same relative to time only to each single observer. I don't know of any other case except if there are no observers maybe. Maybe? Just aman

If you look at the poles of a rotating mass, that should give you an idea of what the surfrace at the equater would look like without spin. Just aman

Besides me with great intelligence, good looks, and wisdom, I know of five other people in the world who are normal. Everybody else is handicapped. Just aman

Its hard to imagine the frame of the entire universe adjusting to my time machines coordinates. The frame seen by our conscience mind shouldn't have any effect on the destination. Physics would have to move us distances. Two time machines, one on land and one on a moving ship both go back through time 1 week. I can see the land travel explained by your same rest frames but the ship would be a lot harder to appear on in the past because it moved which goes back to the fact the Earth moved and the land rest frames must be different also. At least that's how I see it. Just aman

Dogs, porpoises, and octopi have all exhibited behavior which seems to be dreaming. If they have enough brainpower to experience running, barking, or swimming, then our dreams could easily be a great deal more technically correct. Also if talking in sleep is relative to dream speed it would seem we dream at about normal experience speed. People who lucid dream are able to fly and run at incredible speeds. There doesn't seem to be any physics boundries in dreams. Just my observations. Just aman

I've done some google searching and absolute zero seems to be the state where an atom loses transferable energy but still maintains enough energy for its own identity. If that is true then less than absolute zero would need to be reached to collapse an atoms integrity. Just aman

There's a big difference in freezing rigid plant cell walls and expandable animal cell walls. Forensic pathologists have been fooled in the past about time of death if a body is frozen for a period of time. This is because there is very little apparent physical damage as long as there is no freezer burn. Just aman

Being omnivorous also helped. We can pretty well find something to eat just about anywhere. Just aman

If the calculations are for one pool of water, it may take eternity, but if you calculate pools of water over a planet simultaneously, then the odds get a lot better. There's a lot of molecules and energy reactions happening at the same time on the surface of a planet. Just aman

Our section of the galaxy might have a better chance of solar systems like ours since this area had the right mix of circumstances at least once we know of. There are some places real unhospitable to suns like ours with stability and proper elements. Just aman