iNow

Here's a nifty little link across which I just stumbled: http://filer.case.edu/sjr16/advanced/extras_particlephys.html Be sure to click the link to see the real meat of the page. .

Go make yourself some popcorn, get a highly caffeinated soda like Jolt, and enjoy. Here ya go: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Introduction_to_special_relativity Animations: 1. http://www.upscale.utoronto.ca/PVB/Harrison/SpecRel/Flash/MichelsonMorley/MichelsonMorley.html 2. http://faraday.physics.utoronto.ca/PVB/Harrison/SpecRel/Flash/TimeDilation.html 3. http://faraday.physics.utoronto.ca/PVB/Harrison/SpecRel/Flash/LengthContract.html 4. http://faraday.physics.utoronto.ca/PVB/Harrison/SpecRel/Flash/ContractInvisible.html 5. http://faraday.physics.utoronto.ca/GeneralInterest/Harrison/SpecRel/Flash/Simultaneity.html 6. http://faraday.physics.utoronto.ca/PVB/Harrison/SpecRel/Flash/TwinParadox.html 7. http://www.upscale.utoronto.ca/GeneralInterest/Harrison/Flash/ClassMechanics/Foucault/Foucault.html 8. http://faraday.physics.utoronto.ca/PVB/Harrison/GenRel/Flash/Precession.html

It would probably be beneficial for those discussing this to first agree on a definition of energy. You can see, after just a handfull of posts, great amounts of disagreement on the specific questions, much of which I think would be ameliorated by first agreeing on a definition.

Hi Athiest, I'm not sure how much you do or do not understand, so I might wind up explaining parts you already knew. Sorry if I do. The y-axis shows the number of cases of schizophrenia (for each 1,000 participants measured) found in the study. The x-axis shows number of times the participants in that study reported using cannabis. The trend implies that, as cannabis use goes up among participants, so does the likelihood of schizophrenia. The chart was taken from the following study: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=2892048&query_hl=15 This team also did a follow-up study in 1999: http://www.springerlink.com/content/yaal2jhavu8kqta5/ Be cautious looking at results in any study though. Some of the studies really only show that schizophrenics frequently use cannabis, and correlation does not prove causation... So just be sure to read closely what you see. I am personally confident, based on what I've read and personnally experienced, that frequent use is associated with greater likelihood of schizophrenic episodes. I hope this helps.

I'm reluctant to think that you'll appreciate this answer, but I suggest Robert Pirsig did a fine job of it.

Okay... so what's your question? Online essays about what?

Well, it's definitely an interesting question, however, I'm not sure how one would answer it with any certainty. First, there are SO MANY factors involved that, at best, you could get an average. And... to get a meaningful average... one would need to test hundreds (if not thousands) of isolated brains to see how long they would live. That's just it though... there's not a whole lot of people rushing to sign up to have their brain extracted from their skull to benefit the science of "determining how long a brain can survive." Also... the brain is but one piece of a very complex central nervous system. Cut off from the rest of it's parts it's just a lump of gray convoluted matter. I'd advise against worrying much about the religious scriptures which themselves are speculations of human minds, however, I concede it's a rather interesting question. To reiterate, I cannot impress upon you enough that the true answer is... it depends on too many factors to make a reasonable guess, and empirical data is rather lacking.

Well, I recognize that we're WAY up to post #25 already, but you may wish to look back at post #19. It's a lot to store in short-term memory, so I won't be too hard on you about it.

Did you bother reading the thread before you posted in it? I'm not against smoking. I smoked for 5 or 6 years daily. I got sad when my bongs would break... Hell, I would name them, and would widdle pipes out of vegetables and soda cans and the most random crap. However, this doesn't negate the fact that there are heaps of evidence that the effects of smoking herb can lead to schizophrenic episodes, and higher incidence of psychosis later in life.

Additionally, look up trichotillomania. It seems to be more common in individuals who are not as socially active (where proximity is the key factor... clearly posting here is social, but does not involve tactile stimulation from another being).

Depends on one's genetics, nutrition, and environment. Think of cancer. Think of Alzheimers. Think of living near a smoke stack. Think of being born to parents who are brother and sister. It depends on a combination of factors. That said... yeah, the brain doesn't have to deal with so many toxins and, although metabolic, really just needs some glucose, oxygen, and electrolytes and it's pretty happy. The brain also tends to be "the last to die." http://www.chw.edu.au/parents/factsheets/brain_death_and_organ_donation.htm?print&colour&sch

Well, technically, the BBC just recapitulated what the NYU site said, but you're welcome all the same.

The way our society and culture have been positioned, "being a scientist" is a bit like "being a reader." Most everybody knows how, it's just that some people enjoy it more, do it more, or have specialites moreso than others. The fact that you're here posting suggests that you, too, are a curious being who wants to learn and share. Nothing wrong with that, eh? (btw... very cute head shot. )

Here's another: http://www.nyu.edu/public.affairs/releases/detail/1668 Read more of the article at the link above.

This link has about 30 of them. Maybe you'll find it there. http://www.schizophrenia.com/prevention/streetdrugs.html And for the folks who don't like reading much, you can get some video feed here: http://abc.net.au/4corners/special_eds/20050321/default_3.htm

For a note from the SciAm editors on Duesberg, see this: http://www.physics.smu.edu/pseudo/AIDS/SciAmPerspectivesMay2007.html'>http://www.physics.smu.edu/pseudo/AIDS/SciAmPerspectivesMay2007.html http://www.physics.smu.edu/pseudo/AIDS/SciAmEdNoteMay2007.txt'>http://www.physics.smu.edu/pseudo/AIDS/SciAmEdNoteMay2007.txt And for an all around fun time, watch the spanking which occurs here to he and others of similar ilk: http://www.physics.smu.edu/pseudo/AIDS/

It's useful to remember that, in science, there is no such thing as absolute fact or certainty. What you have is a collection of evidence, taken in different settings and contexts, repeated over and over by different reseachers. The evidence often implies specific outcomes with a high degree of certainty, and in the case of HIV -> AIDS connection, the connection is overwhelming. However, it's always possible that new evidence will come along the next day to disprove everything currently thought. Note that the video you linked provides zero alternate information that counters the mountain of evidence currently available to us which is indicative of the fact that HIV causes AIDS. Maybe it comes from kissing frogs, eh? Or unicorns from the dark side poking you while you sleep?

I agree. Wu-Tang Clan lost ODB back in '004. I will state that you cannot stop terrorism with more killing. There are too many heads of the monster to cut off. Terrorism is only stopped by leading in such a way as to sway hearts and minds to your side. Easier said than done, I recognize that, but I stand by my claim all the same.

No worries at all, mate. Thank you also for the fine explanation above.

Compares how? By length? By topic? By setting? By time period? By some subjective property like readability or enjoyment?

Is it possible that it could be both... that there is overlap in definition/use?

So Bascule, your point about HP is that the books are crap, yet you've never read them?

Are you truly asking a question shygirl, or are you trying to make yourself feel superior to a group of people who enjoy discussing such topics? If the first, then please use words. We're not here posting on our cell phones, so it seems rather unnecessary 2pst w txt spEk. The folks here are more about l33t anyway, but the point is to be legible to any readers from any country (it's especially challenging if English is not a first language... proper language structure allows the maximum number of people to understand you). If you're trying to feel superior, then I'd suggest the best way is to truly spend some time learning about the universe, and sharing that knowledge with others, so we as a species won't die out due to a lack of ability or coherence. Btw... I didn't mean that in the quantum sense. I'm a lot more fun in person and after a few margaritis. Don't take it personally.

Farsight, I've read your "Energy Explained," "Charge Explained," "Mass Explained," "Money Explained," and "Time Explained" posts elsewhere, and whlie you are a very good writer (presenting ideas in a friendly, informal, readable style, with lots of neat pictures), your "explained" topics tend too frequently to have multiple inaccuracies. This, my friend, does not help your awesomeness. Please, keep up the good work. However, please don't disregard existing data which is contrary to your presentations either.

Wow dude. I'm not a big fan either, but I'd f*&k you up if you shot my girlfriend. Perhaps extremism is a sickness unto death.