iNow

No. http://eosweb.larc.nasa.gov/EDDOCS/Wavelengths_for_Colors.html

My despair regarding the US populace only deepens. Here's yet another depressing story regarding the sorry state of American thought: http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/09/04/obama.schools/index.html?iref=mpstoryview The White House found itself on the defensive Friday over what would ordinarily be considered the most uncontroversial of events: a back-to-school speech to the nation's children. <...> "Thinking about my kids in school having to listen to that just really upsets me," suburban Colorado mother Shanneen Barron told CNN Denver affiliate KMGH. "I'm an American. They are Americans, and I don't feel that's OK." "As the father of four children, I am absolutely appalled that taxpayer dollars are being used to spread President Obama's socialist ideology," Greer said. "The idea that school children across our nation will be forced to watch the president justify his plans ... is not only infuriating, but goes against beliefs of the majority of Americans, while bypassing American parents through an invasive abuse of power." <...> "The goal of the speech and the lesson plans is to challenge students to work hard, stay in school and dramatically reduce the dropout rate," an administration spokesman said. "This isn't a policy speech. It's a speech designed to encourage kids to stay in school." White House officials noted that Obama's speech, which will be available for anyone to view on the Web on Monday, is not unprecedented. President George H.W. Bush delivered a nationally televised speech to students from a Washington D.C., school in the fall of 1991, encouraging them to say no to drugs and work hard. In November 1988, President Ronald Reagan delivered more politically charged remarks that were made available to students nationwide. Among other things, Reagan called taxes "such a penalty on people that there's no incentive for them to prosper ... because they have to give so much to the government." Charles Saylors, president of the national Parent Teacher Association, said the uproar over Obama's speech is "sad." I tend to agree, but I'll go one step farther. This is more than "sad," it's batshit crazy, and it needs to stop. "I'm an American. They are Americans, and I don't feel that's OK" ... for my president to try to help motivate my child to stay in school and receive a decent education. What are your thoughts? Is the President out of line, or are his critics tilting at windmills?

MDJH - You can google the "trichromatic theory of vision" to learn more. Here's a quick wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trichromacy It has to do with the cone cell photoreceptors in our eyes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cone_cell http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_vision

I made an error above, and meant to say wavelength where I said frequency, but... either way... The poster of that other thread was just a silly kid trying to look clever. When all was said and done, he meant that the sky is darker at night than during the day, and was all proud that he'd "pulled one over" on us. It was just a waste of time and server space in the end. As for your questions about aliens, I have no doubt they would experience the sky differently than we do. After all, even other animals who evolved right here on earth experience it differently... even your domestic dog or cat will not see the same thing you see... Which is why we use the wavelength when discussing it in physics, since that is consistent and measurable and will be the same regardless of who or what is doing the measurement.

The color of the sky can be measured by different observers to have the same frequency of light... a specific nanometer. Ergo, it's color is no longer a subjective classification determined by observers, and is instead an objective measurable quantity that will not differ... regardless of who performs the measurement.

Again, I want to be cautious about some of the negativity I sense in the above, but also wish to take a moment to briefly challenge it. Since so much of religious practice comes from social custom, and from learning/teaching from our parents, I really do not think it's fair to suggest that all religious people are mentally ill. Now, trust me, I'm not one to be kind to theists, but I also try to stand up for accuracy and truth, and it's simply untrue to assert that religious people are mentally ill. It's not as if they are running around claiming to be Napoleon. They simply engage in a tradition which has been reinforced socially, and strongly ingrained in their minds during childhood. While belief in god does demonstrate many aspects of delusion, religious practice itself is not on the same footing since it's more about social custom and sharing of stories from trusted elders and parents. Again, though... This is not the topic of this thread. If anyone desires further comment on this particular tangent, please open a new thread to do so, or I will request the staff move your posts on our behalf via the Report Post feature. Cheers.

Indeed. Well said, Jill. Describe how to measure this supposed phenomenon, and from there we can run tests. Before that time, you may as well be saying that purple unicorns fly from your shoulder to mine to transmit thoughts. Describe the process. Describe how it can be measured. Perform the measurements. Then, and only then, can you begin to see if there is a phenomenon as a result of the process you have described.

You will be assimilated. Resistance is futile.

It probably causes autism.

Thank you everyone for your interest in this topic, and for sharing your thoughts. I do, however, have one request. Please remain clearly focused on the science of belief and why it may have stayed with us humans for so long. By focusing on the science, we can have an interesting and mostly objective dialog about the topic, all while not offending people who themselves hold belief, and (perhaps more importantly) without breaking the rules of this forum regarding religious discussion. So, please... Keep contributing, keeping sharing information and thoughts, but let's avoid comments regarding religious people, whether they have mental disorders, and similar lines of thought. The intent of this thread is to explain, via evolutionary processes, why so many people believe in deities and why so many people are religious. Thanks!

A DoJ investigation into torture is also a political process, and if investigations are allowed for fellatio, then investigations should be allowed for torture and potentially serious breaches of law. I facepalm every time you equate investigating a blowjob with investigating the torture of prisoners in direct contrast to the Geneva Convention, and how you try to brush it all aside as mere political theater. I say again.... The long view is that our laws need to mean something.

Curiously, there was a special on the PBS program NOVA:Science Now just this week. Here's the link: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/teachers/programs/3410_01_nsn.html To the right of the page, you can click the link to "Watch the video online." Also, I haven't reviewed it for accuracy, but the link below seems pretty detailed and accessible: http://www.memory-key.com/NatureofMemory/sleep.htm Either way, check out the NOVA program, too. Enjoy.

Yeah, but there is a giant difference between "not fully explained yet" and "science cannot explain." Implicit in the second is that science cannot... ever... explain something, and that's just silly. BTW - Sleep is restorative for muscles, and also heavily involved in the consolidation of memory and experience. In short, sleep allows us to prevent new stimuli from being perceived while the brain reorganizes itself. Every morning when you wake up the structure of your brain is quite different than the structure of your brain when you fell asleep. There are many ideas that are not "fully explained," but that does not mean that science cannot explain them. I'm confident you agree, but I'd venture to guess that there are many others reading this thread who think otherwise.

http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showthread.php?p=511448#post511448 This off-topic, totally irrelevant, often wrong posting has become somewhat of a trend with this threads creator.

If s/he is on the staff, then yes. That is what s/he is here to do. They moderate the boards. Regular members cannot delete posts, but a mod can when they are unrelated to the topic.

Precisely. The aforementioned (more complex) equation (which is not a "special case"): [math]E^2 = (pc)^2 + (mc^2)^2[/math]

Explainable by science.

It's the starch.

Even if it's not spam, the thread title alone makes this worthy of deletion since it's plainly untrue.

Just to be fair, it actually WAS obvious to you since you got the answer right away with no help from others. You just needed confirmation to feel sure, which is perfectly okay.

Just to be a bit pedantic, the comments made above by you guys are only accurate if you're referring to a standard horizontal-axis turbine. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_turbine#Horizontal_axis However, once users begin referring to vertical-axis turbines, multiple blades (and sets of blades) not only helps performance, but is pretty much required to achieve any output. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_turbine#Vertical_axis Regardless, you're quite correct about the horizontal-axis turbines, and your explanations are clear and simple, so thanks for that.

I swear to Thor, we're being bombarded with 50-kiloton thermostupid above. If you guys want to improve yourselves, and truly learn and educate yourself about reality, then please ask questions and our community will help you to attain answers. However, if your sole intent is to run around like a bunch of spastic children spouting ridiculous nonsense that makes you look like paste-eaters and would cause your parents to be ashamed, then please go away.

There is no ether. When one says "c" they are using it as a constant. It represents a real number which does not change. It's just a variable... Like when you do algebra and represent a quantity with "x." The only difference is c is a constant representing the speed of light, but it is just a number, and has zero to do with ether. Also, you referred to moving toward or away, and the effect you describe is known as the doppler effect. While the frequency of the light will be shifted due to the doppler effect, it's speed will be unchanged. You are trying to apply classical mechanics to light, and unfortunately that's not how nature behaves.

IMO, the "long view" is that laws need to mean something.

Holy crap.