DrP

I have never seen any evidence to support this claim. There has been plenty of science around that deals with the photon for over a hundred years or so. How do you explain the photoelectric effect if photons do not exist? Or the propagation of light for that matter?

If I knew that then it would no longer be u.

If it has been identified then yes.

When a metal is heated the atoms vibrate faster. This faster vibration can impede the smooth flow of the electrons free to flow through it. (afaik). Just looked it up: https://www.quora.com/Why-does-the-resistance-of-a-conductor-increase-with-an-increase-in-temperature Although the electrons move faster... so do the molecular vibrations, causing more collisions with the electrons... so kinda like I said. There is probably a more detailed explanation somewhere, but that's all I got for now.

Then it can't work in space then can it, as there is no air.

Couldn't the same be said about absolutely anything at all? Here is my teleport device attached. You step in box 1 and come out of box 2. What do you think? It uses quantum uncertainty and paired particles spooky action at a distance to achieve the teleportation. (I'm not saying that it is possible in principle - just that if it was improved it would be amazing). I am not saying that it is possible - but if it was improved upon then I am sure it would be better than it is now.

It means that you were stating the obvious when you said it wouldn't produce antigravity and that your comment was superfluous. I was being sarcastic. So how does this suppose to work in space? I think we will need to look to more modern and technologically superior ideas for propulsion through space. I'm no expert though - Maybe I am wrong and this is the future of space travel. If it is then I am definitely missing something.

So how do you drive the saucer in the first place?

You don't say. If what works? - I'm lost. What is it's propulsion system?

I thought saucers were for the ion lift type drives... maybe I'm wrong. What is the proposed drive mechanism again? - Surely not that thing in the vid, lol. It certainly isn't going to power a saucer to fly... and I am not sure WHO would consider that contraption in the vid an 'antigravity' device.

to add also that your 'Christian pastor' is going to be biased about facts. Whatever you present to him he will look to circumvent the facts presented to him to make them fit with his world view. He will tell you not to read or listen to people who are not Christian so you will only get a biased one sided view of the discussion. You should look at both sides of the argument. Here is Dawkins cutting open a giraffe to show some actual physical evidence of poor design/evolved physiology that has clearly evolved and would never really be designed in such a way.

Well considering that 99% of the animals that ever existed are extinct (exact figure needs confirming) - it isn't surprising that most of the animals that live today 'came about' around the same time period. I doubt it was 'at the exact same time' as claimed by the pastor in the video... as if they 'poof' suddenly appeared by magic all at the same instance. See what the actual paper says rather than his twisted misinterpretation of the paper maybe.

Fashions are trends and they change and move with the times... I guess 'Fashion Sense' would mean an ability to gauge the current trend and be able to fit in and move with it. I once wore a shirt style (lumberjack) for so many years that it went out of fashion and then came back in again. I remember wearing a pair of filthy ripped jeans for a couple of years at uni... then all of a sudden everyone was wearing them just the same - I swear I started that trend, ;-) lol.

As different surfactants vary in their effectiveness you would have to have a fudge factor in the equation for the specific system I would think. It will also depend on what is being suspended. You will need to do some tests to find the optimum concentration you require for stabilization of your suspension experimentally like String Junky suggested I would think - sorry. Maybe someone else will have a better idea but I doubt it.... if there are equations (which there probably are somewhere) then they would be for ideal or know systems... I think you will have to try what String suggested and try a range of tests with incrimental increases in the surfactant amount untill you find a level where the suspension is stabilised. I think you will need to trial ammounts you need for your system... maybe start a half a percent and increase in half percent intervals up to a few percent.... see which best stabilizes you emulsion/suspension and 'zoom in' to that concentration and repeat the tst around that concentration with 0.1 % variations above and below your best res result from the first test - something like that. I searched around to see if I could find anything better and it seems that we are on the right track... there is a discussion about selecting surfactant conc below I found and it suggests similar things to what we have discussed here. I hope this helps. https://www.researchgate.net/post/What_should_be_the_amount_of_surfactant_required_for_emulsion_polymerization https://www.google.co.uk/search?source=hp&ei=jp72W43qF8zfgAaQ4IvIBw&q=calculating+surfactant+requirements+for+suspension&btnK=Google+Search&oq=calculating+surfactant+requirements+for+suspension&gs_l=psy-ab.3...1725.19740..20925...0.0..0.226.4057.42j7j1......0....1..gws-wiz.....0..0j0i131j0i10j0i13j33i160j33i21.W8D1Qg9yIHU

I think the particle size will depend more on the level of aggitation when stirring the system. The surfactant then will stablize the droplets in suspension.... you will need more to stableise the smaller drop size I think, but the act of putting in the extra surfactant wont make the droplets smaller to begin with. If the oil is less dense than the water then it will float, yes.

The amount of surfactant molecules needed will also depend upon the droplet size of the oil. The mixture isn't like a solution with molecules of oil in the water... it will be droplets of oil suspended in the water. The smaller the particle size then the larger the total surface area of the droplets and the more surfactant needed to keep the suspension stable.

Also depends on the job. Quality Control positions are usually open to people with A-Levels or lower - no degree needed even. Health and Safety officers don't seem to need a science degree from the ones I've seen in my career (although I always thought it would be useful if they did) - they get training on the job. As Klaynos suggests, maybe the man was talking about academic positions or top research posts - in which case - of course they go to the highest fliers. .... and if you want to work at NASA, ITER or JET or for a Formula 1 racing science team, for example then yea, it's 1st class degrees only I think (or it used to be) and helpful to have a relevant research postgrad degree. It depends on the position you want.

I think it would depend on the surfactant used in the washing up liquid, it's concentration and it's critical micelle concentration or something like that. I wouls guess at somewhere between 0.5 and 2%... but that is a total guess *Plays 'Blue Danube music for synchronised posting*

It has probably been moved into the other highjack spin off thread from this one. Didn't the Holy Spirit tell you that? I thought it was supposed to be an omniscient god. If that was the case then why would it let you make such an embarrassing error when you are supposed to be a witness for it?

What is the chemical structure of the main ingredient that makes the pill? What does 'vital energy' reduce down to as a substance that goes into the pill? You might get help designing a test.... but you might not get taken too seriously if this 'vital energy' pill is nothing but a sugar cube with your 'power' and love projected at it. Whatever test you do on whatever substance you should see a base placebo effect.... it is important not to confuse this placebo effect with the thing actually working.

You are welcome. Let me know if you need distributor names for those companies... although you should be able to find that out by calling and talking to them. Explain your needs to them and they will suggest products in a range that you can look at. Good luck.

It's a story. The title Mathew Mark etc.. are part of the story - it was written way after their deaths according to historians. You can't quote the bible as evidence of biblical 'facts'. You can - but you'd be thought of as an idiot in any debate. I don't think you are a liar. I used to believe the same as you. I am a scientist though and eventually you will see (or not) that the book is the thing that has lies in it, not your heart. There ARE discrepancies in the book and errors.... which wouldn't be there if god was the being that the book claimed him to be. The truth will set you free ;-) The truth that world religions are born out of man's superstition. Drop the fear in your life that you have of hell and it is a weight lifted. Do good things, be kind, generous and lovely... you don't need an imaginary friend to make you do good things... like Dumbo didn't need his feather to fly. Drop the moronic lies from an old book of myths and go out and do some good in the world. The book is so clearly out of date in places.... which it wouldn't be if the 'prefect' god of the book existed. There is no anger towards something that doesn't exist. Much of the anger felt towards Christians by atheists I believe is frustration - frustration that someone can fall for such nonsense and trickery. Be honest to your self... warm feelings in your heart are not evidence of anything spiritual. What evidence do you have for god excluding the bible, which, if you are honest - is a joke if you mean it to be taken seriously in the modern world. PS - if you do one day see that it is total bunk like many do.... PLEASE keep the love in your heart.; That feeling you get of the holy ghost filling you with love and joy to empower you to go into the world to do good things.... KEEP THAT! Please... but you don't need to believe a load of nonsense myths to be able to take love into the world. God is love (Book of James.... can't remember the verse).

If you are in the UK I can direct you to some suppliers for products that come from some of the companies you mentioned. What sort of quantities do you want and what products? Do you have an estimate for what you will need annually? If you need to do this via pm then do so - give me your contact details and I could have reps from some of those companies calling you tomorrow to discuss your requirements.

OK - I'm guessing you will get reaction of the iron with the water, the acid and the peroxide as 3 separate reactions taking place in the solution. If this is already done to make a certain product then maybe the products react further to give something else... you put Iron Hydroxide as a chemical formula in your starting product, so presumably this is a product from the reaction with the peroxide maybe. You might get a reaction from the acetic acid and the peroxide too - I think it forms an equilibrium between the acid the peroxide and something called peracetic acid. Maybe this reacts with the iron. If you know the exact end product I could maybe balance the equation. As it is - I am sorry - but I don't think I know exactly what reaction is favoured. I might try googling it later if I get time. what is the resulting solution supposed to do?

Dig a 2 and a half inch foundation. ;-)