Jump to content

swansont

Moderators
  • Content Count

    47126
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    113

swansont last won the day on June 11

swansont had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

7594 Glorious Leader

About swansont

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://home.netcom.com/~swansont

Profile Information

  • Location
    Washington DC region
  • Interests
    Geocaching, cartooning
  • College Major/Degree
    PhD Atomic Physics Oregon State University
  • Favorite Area of Science
    Physics
  • Occupation
    Physicist

Recent Profile Visitors

150997 profile views
  1. that last one is probably illegal irrelevant Government workers take an oath, but some don’t take it seriously This can’t be a serious proposal Some positions require lie detector despite them being famously unreliable These can’t be taken seriously Clearly Less stressful and less boring seem to be contrary goals. Even stuff forbidden by the rules will happen.
  2. Heat is energy transfer (or, colloquially used, it’s thermal energy), and the strong interaction is essentially a force, described above by MigL. Not the same category. Furthermore, when nucleons bind to each other, this represents a release of energy. Helium-4, for example, must give up about 28 MeV if formed from free protons and neutrons, and you would need to add that much energy to break it apart. So your conjecture has an energy creating an energy deficit. Doesn’t work.
  3. The volume is 1 liter. The issue is how you got there, because as all these posts point out, there are multiple valid interpretations. But assuming it’s a proper HW question, one can reasonably discard interpretations that are unsolvable.
  4. Aren’t they mixed together? So you have 0.2 moles of K, 0.4 moles of Na and 0.6 moles of Cl?
  5. Common typo for “of” which is how I read it. Clarification needed.
  6. Bond777 banned as a sockpuppet of Moreno
  7. Saw this on twitter and it reminded me of all the folks who say the titular phrase. Just missing the technical details.
  8. Lots. More time to do other things. Fewer files on your computer. Lower expenditures for tissue.
  9. No, it can’t. The elapsed time depends on their relative speed. This is one reason why you are getting the wrong answer. Assuming the earth is at rest is a horrible approximation.
  10. You didn’t provide evidence of this, and need to, and also show they are maximum under the same conditions. The moon in between the earth and sun moves in one direction, the moon on the far side of the earth is moving in the opposite direction. Because the earth is moving, one is in the same direction of the earth’s orbit, the other is in the opposite direction. This will affect the duration of the eclipses. It’s not simple geometry, as if the earth was stationary.
  11. ! Moderator Note You were told to not re-introduce this. As Ghideon notes, your result is wrong; this should lead you to first investigate to find errors in your model. for example, 7.5 minutes is the longest solar eclipse ever calculated. It’s not typical, nor is it a constant. It depends on multiple factors. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_eclipse A total lunar eclipse can last up to nearly 2 hours, but it is similarly not a constant I’ll leave this open to allow discussion of errors in your model. But any further insisten
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.