swansont

I don't find that to be true at all.

Yes, the field amplitude, or strength, changes with time and position. I don't think you'll get much argument that there's a lot we don't understand about the universe, but the nature of light is fairly well understood, and there isn't a lot of basic research going into it. Exotic stuff, yes. I may be off base here, but it seems that you want a short and simple answer that meshes with everyday things that you observe with the naked eye - where waves are waves and particles are particles, and never the twain shall meet. QM isn't like that. But that doesn't mean it's not well understood.

Diet soda, usually cola. Usually Pepsi, though I'll drink Coke if that's all that's available. Occasionally Dr Pepper or Mt Dew. I hate coffee. Yeccch.

My take: Apple made marketing mistakes in the early days. They make the hardware and the operating system, while Microsoft just makes software and has deals in place with manufacturers who make the boxes to make things that will run windows. That gave them an edge in getting into the business market, since the boxes were commodities and could be made cheaply. There's a saying that was prevalent a few years back - "Nobody ever got fired for buying IBM products" - they were a known entity; they weren't going bankrupt anytime soon, which is not something you could necessarily say about almost anybody else. And they made machines that ran DOS and then windows. Not mac. So business people could buy IBM PCs without getting into real trouble, even if they weren't the best product. Nobody knew that mich since it was a relatively new product. Apple eventually let others make hardware, but ran into quality and compatibility problems, similar to some problems that plague PCs. This hurt them more, and MS grabbed more of the market. Apple eventually stopped licensing, and went back to making all of their stuff. But once MS had a large part of the business market, they got most of it because of compatibility issues. Years ago, especially, computers didn't play nicely with each other. People started buying home computers, and got what they used at work. More market share for Windows. So now, if you're writing a game (or really any) program, you tend to do it for the large fraction of Windows users, rather than the small fraction of Mac users. Maybe you port it to the Mac afterwards. But there aren't that many programs that run only on a Mac. The best product doesn't always win. Quality-wise beta is better than VHS, but VHS won the videotape market. because Sony was too protective of beta and it didnt get widely adopted.

Two guys, standing at night on a bridge after having had a few pints, both decide to relieve themselves over the side. The first, in an attempt to impress, says, "Water sure is cold." The second replies, "Yeah. Deep, too."

Seconded. There is no "second law" for information theory.

How much and in what form? It's present in low concentrations in many rocks, such as granite. You even have a small amount in your body.

That's often overstating it, once you look carefully. Yes, a bare-bones PC is cheaper, but if you are going to get comparable hardware, the price isn't all that different. Several people have boasted to me how cheap their PC was, and then went on to tell me about the good sound card, video card and CD burner they added, without having taken the cost into account. And those are things that were already on the 'expensive' mac. The last PC I bought at work was a few hundred $$ more expensive than the Mac I have at home, because I actually included those extras ahead of time (and it wasn't my money).

And CO2, being heavier than O2 and N2, will sink. Any specifics you want to share?

I second that. This is supposed to be science. "I dunno, but it's true" doesn't cut it.

That's the kind of thinking that Pons and Fleischmann had. The reality is that no, you aren't going to get nuclear reactions with chemistry - there are a few orders of magnitude difference in the energy scale between the two.

I don't, about the logistics. Each team points their mirrors toward one target, as identified by the commander. You can see the reflections, and correlate them with your own mirror - if you aren't aiming correctly, you move the mirror. No trig involved.

No. A bunch of mirrors made to approximate a spherical or parabolic mirror acts as a lens.

Why glass? Polished gold or silver make pretty good mirrors.

The electric and magnetic fields oscillate, in accordance with Maxwell's equations. The frequency is the rate at which those fields oscillate.

As a gas, yes for deuterium. I imagine as a hydride as well. Tritium also forms a gas.

The electrons do, but not the photons.

IIRC Compton scattering is consistent with particle behavior.