Hal.

If there is graphite there , it may or may not be what I am describing and observing . I would have thought that graphite has a greyish shine like a pencil , though a shine will be affected by the colour of light that has been bounced to your eye and some pencils are also made of materials that have all the look and none of the content of graphite . What I am observing are possibly metals of the colour of copper and zinc , whether they be copper or zinc or none of them . On the assumption there is graphite , could the extra motion energy be attributed to it's combustion as compared to normal coal ?

Dekan , BASIC is alive and well and some people are keeping it alive by making modern versions of interpreters . There are a lot of BASIC resources on the web , good and bad , I find that I have to look at quite a few to find a version that is useful and that works properly . I won't recommend a version because I think if you want a good version you must install many on your computer to find a few that suit you ( 20 / 1 ) .

Recently , I put some coal on the fire and noticed an unusually high frequency of popping sounds and sparking with the expulsion of small pieces of material . I examined some unburnt coal and saw what appeared to be thin metallic layers , of the colour of copper and zinc , on the surface of some pieces . I also snapped some pieces and there are layers of these metals , assuming they are metals , in thin layers like pages in a book . The momentum of a typically ejected piece seems quite high compared to usual and I was wondering how the metals and the coal were interacting with the air to give these results . Any thoughts ?

Equality is also lacking in the number of positive votes one may make compared to the number of negative votes one may make . Is there a mathmathical bias in favour of positive votes to make people look good and feel happy , because when you have used your negative votes and have no other option , you are then more likely to make a positive vote ? But , could it also be an example of the world in general , where those with slightly to extremely radical views are manipulated into receiving only part of the vote of the populace while others receive the majority and thus have manipulated the voting system for their own means ?

I explained my meaning clearly from my first post , thus , you make less sense than previously .

As a side issue , does anyone know how much of an electric shock a typical cow can take before it's a dead cow ?

I thought that this sounded a little similiar to that movie of Mr. K. Reeves but then I thought , isn't there a piece of text accompanying the end of the film which clearly states that the film is indeed a work of fiction . On the assumption that there is , surely any person proposing a theory can't be proposing fiction , unless of course it is shown to be so .

Dr.Rocket , you said my personal definition is worthless in the world of mathmatics . It's not . You fail to understand how my view is equally as reasonable as any upon consideration . This , doubtless , is all I can expect .

DJBruce , my views include your views and a linguistic variant non standard mathmatically in nature with a mathmatical interpretation for the purpose of exploration of alternatives . not posted in order . Dr.Rocket , my little world is the same little world that is the little world of your little world . My mathmatical world is not the same mathmatical world as the mathmatical world that is your mathmatical world .

Define the rules to make the conclusion . I defined mine for mine .

So , DJBruce , the first example you give is consistent with one of my meanings , unless there is something I don't see . So , on I'll proceed to the second meaning . You say I give a meaning to ' and ' which is described by ' or ' . I know what you mean and I would follow this rule if that was clear to me mathmatically . But , the questions of the original poster and my example are not in math language . They are in english . That is the point of what I say , when I say that there is another meaning for ' and ' . These questions are not put to those being asked in a form that would be seen in Electronics , Computer Programming etc , which is why I see the alternative . It is a point of view , a different interpretation of ' and ' .

I'll give an example of the use of the word ' and ' which shows an alternative meaning which is what I am taught to see if I can and include it as a possibility . This example is the same type as that of the original post . So , now there are two . In the group of numbers from 1 to 10 inclusive , Write down the numbers which are less than 3 and greater than 8 . Using one meaning of the word ' and ' I would write down no numbers . Using another meaning of the word ' and ' I would write down 1,2,9,10 Inclusive or Exclusive doesn't matter in the case of the original post , but that is a different point than the meaning taken , when taking one meaning of ' between ' as compared with taking another . What I'm saying is that I'll consider my math to include both meanings when I see the word ' between ' used , if it is unclear to me which to take .

How many numbers lie between 11 and 1111 which when divided by 9 leave a remainder of 6 and when divided by 21 leave a remainder of 12? I think that the meaning of the words ' between 11 and 1111 ' should be made clear . I think the meaning in english can be , 11 to 1111 , inclusive or exclusive of 11 and 1111. Also the word ' and ' can have possible different uses where , 1 , it means the numbers which satisfy both conditions , 2 , it means the numbers which satisfy either the first or the second conditions .

Contraction of the tubular copper due to loss of heat is only one thing that is going on . The ice in the tube wanting to expand is another .

Is Hygroscopicity just one example of a general phenomena where different materials can take other materials from the Air ? For example , there is Argon in the Air . Would this general phenomena be seen in the case of Argon by using materials which can take Argon from the Air and if so , what is the name of the general phenomena ?

I didn't say that slaves did the work without technical input . There was obviously somebody around to say , move that an inch over here or move that an inch over there . They weren't the muscle though . I've seen hundreds of megalithic tombs and stone circles and tried to think how they could be aligned to sunrise and sunset and moonrise and moonset ( I'm not a professional ) . I've seen 50 ton stones on top of 400 metre high hilltops and there is no obvious place nearby where they could have come from . You have my appreciation and thought , I just wanted to get the ball rolling .

I'll hazard to state that , I could draw a few circles and lines to intersect in simple ways and before I know it , there would be a lot of Euclidian geometry theorems applicable to the situation . The converse of this statement which I would ask about , is , if I apply a lot of Euclidean geometry theorems to this situation , will I just finish with a few circles and lines that intersect in simple ways and thus , that is the way that they were originally selected 5000 years ago , nothing complicated , just simple ? .

Architects and Engineers did not build Stonehenge just like Donald Trump did not build Trump Tower . Stonehenge was built by slaves ( IMO ) .

If , hypothetically speaking of course , I wanted to sell various elements and chemicals and use USPS and didn't pay attention to shipping regulations , while not living in the U.S. , what would happen to me ? This should not be taken as and is not an admission of any intention not to follow shipping regulations .

Is OP in love ?

Does anyone see a mass production ' Kevlar ' and ' Carbon fibre ' industry around the corner ( this side of the end of the century ) ?

My teenage english schooling sometimes required the memorization of short passages of shakespeare and of poetic literature . If that piece of work of Rigney was memorised by me , I would probably still remember it in 11 years time , once I recall it a few times before 2022 . I doubt , I could have a Eureka moment in 2022 of saying this piece of work and thinking it is my own because it would be very difficult to forget totally after memorisation and then ' reinvent ' it . But , if somebody happened to give math expressions which explain a way of thinking and I temporarily remember these like RAM in a computer , at that time , I think it could be very likely that at some time in the future I could suddenly wake up and have my Eureka moment , where being the nature of math , I start with an expression I've seen before , but honestly don't remember this and after attempts deriving mathmatical solutions , I finish with the same result I saw before . Isn't ignorance of plagiarism no defence ?

Here I am , browsing the net , enjoying the reading , subconsciously absorbing the multiple thoughts encountered . Let's say that in 11 years time I suddenly wake up on a fine day and go , Eureka ! . I've just had a brilliant thought that explains the previously inexplicable and it's , as far as I'm concerned , my contribution to world knowledge . But unbeknown to me I've just regurgitated the forgotten ramblings of a long since forgotten poster from here and now . Am I commiting plagiarism if I genuinely think this is my work or would I possibly independently be discovering something worthwhile ?

Can I say , these bolts do not exist to me as a physical problem that requires a solution . They are from the web and when I saw them a good year ago , I thought they were very interesting . Everything is helpful , everyone can take their own views .

Every one of us was a foetus in a womb . Every one of us has a soul , whatever that may mean . So , when did your soul start ? , was it in that place called the womb ? , your soul ! , you ! , when did you begin as a spiritual entity ? , have you any memories of being there in that womb ? , concentrate ! , think ! , remember ! , recall ! , no ?.