BhavinB

Based on your diagram, X~17.84 ft and Y~9.04 ft (or the other way around...both answers are correct). The key is to note the two similar triangles.

How are you checking to see if there is current?

The article doesn't say anything about the change in life expectancy of AIDS patients, or a measure of their lifestyle (or normalcy). Without science, AIDS patients would be AIDS victims within years of infection. This article is just another sign of someone not realizing how difficult some things can be. He just wants fast and free, now!

Skeptic, What is your explanation for the sudden increase in mean temperature from 1860 to 1940 then?

To say you've spoken to an opposing expert doesn't make his comments invalid. I haven't seen you provide all the evidence either. All you've said is a few comments to support warming, then say you've spoken to someone who is on one side of the debate and therefore you are right.

Is there no argument on this fact? I thought climatologists were still unsure of exactly how much warming CO2 causes. Not that it doesn't cause warming just that we don't know if its the primary cause. Correct me if I'm wrong on this.

aren't there limitations to the radio spectrum a specific antenna can emit? Like a really really long wavelength would need a massive antenna right?

lol...getting a new car with a smaller engine is more expensive than changing your driving style. But I totally agree on the small engine concept.

You could use taller ratios, but realistically people just need to change their driving style to get a noticeable improvement in MPG. Don't ramp up from stop very fast, if you have manual try coasting to a stop (with the clutch down), use higher gears for cruising, etc. I used to get 25 MPG on average from a 1995 V6 Ford Mustang. In those days, 5th gear was my best friend.

Manufacturers have charts of specific efficiency versus RPM for all engines they make. To do what you say, we'd need to take the RPM that has peak efficiency (and has atleast say 60 hp), then design a CVT (Continuously variable transmission) such that it keeps that RPM for the majority of speeds up to 80 kph. Unfortunately, there are many engineering hurdles to doing this...mostly in the design of a capable CVT.

You can treat the activated carbon as an ion-exchange system. So if you knew what the brown stuff was, you can pass some other gas or liquid through the carbon which binds with the brown stuff strongly. This would clear it out. I remember using activated carbon (a while back) to remove Se & Te from sulphate solutions and then clearing it out with water.

I would think that any career in medicine research would require a strong rooting in statistics.

I saw something like this on Discovery. Someone was researching a really big buoy that rises and falls with the waves that pass by it. Its connected to a stationary generator which takes it vertical motion and converts that to electricity. Didn't catch anything on how much electricity it'd make.

I checked up the topic of gravitomagnetism on web of science...seems there are a bunch of people researching and publishing on the topic. Not sure if they're all on diverging perspectives....just that there is legit stuff going on.

lol...there's an identical thread about this that was just made by Bascule.

Well, knowing that its made of NAND gates tells you nothing. You can then argue that he was actually wondering whats inside the NAND gates. The main point I forgot to mention was once you figured out the states and how each state migrates to another state, you can model it completely with NAND gates (with can be modeled completely by CMOS transistors)

You might want to look at something called a 'Finite State Machine' which I believe is a method used to model and create CPU's. The basic idea is to model the CPU as a black box with certain inputs and certain outputs. Plus you agree that the box can be in a certain number of finite states. You draw these individually and show what the processor does to the input at each state. Example: if the CPU is in a idle state, and if the input is the 'add' command and two 8-bit numbers, the CPU will add them and go to a 'completed state'. The output of the 'completed state' will be the answer. This simple example doesn't give justice to typical, extremely complicated CPU's with thousands of states. I don't have enough time to look for information, but if you don't find anything useful on it, I can find sites later.

^^ supposedly the collision between membrane strings might have created the universe as we see it and we're in one of the membranes. But ofcourse all this is untestable. Rather there is no evidence that we can detect anything from before the 'big bang'.

Sisyphus only said it might appear stronger. But when it comes down to POWER as your question asked, the measure is mW (If the method of characterization is your eye, then you don't even need 5 mW to damage someones sight let alone 300 mW) Compare this to the age old question...what weighs more? 100kg of rocks or 100kg of feathers.

The higher the mW (milliWatts), the higher the power of the laser. So the answer is the green laser.

There are digital transmitters and receivers you can buy. Coupled with a digital microcontroller like the PIC series from Microchip, you can make a pretty versatily I/O system. Just google it and you'll find what you need.

They come about due to Maxwell's Equations. These are 4 equations dealing with how electric and magnetic fields behave. Together, they bring about the rules that those vectors you mentioed are right angles to each other.

Don't take it too personally Tom, he obviously thinks UC National Labs is the center of the universe and probably got rejected by them.