DrP

That is a specific question that QM experts should answer... I personally do not know but would assume that it is a pretty good model. We can mathematically model almost anything... standing waves on a string, for example, or the depletion rate of a chemical during a reaction over time. Real maths accurately describing or modelling real life physical observations.

Nature is pretty quantised - so yes maths applies... you can count and add things (exact numbers of molecules in systems).. things decay at certain rates which obey or follow mathematical forms. Maths is everywhere and I do not have time to list some of the many many examples of maths being found in nature, but look around and you will see examples.

Hi MonDie, Are you sure you aren't just getting better each time you go out? I uses to run and it is suprising how quick you can improve your 1 and 2 mile times.. If you were starting by doing sub 7 min miles, then you can very quickly get that down to close to 6 mins. Also - if you can run it in 12.50, then it is not unreasonable for you to be able to run a single mile in 5.30. You times will vary depending on your state of mind, general fitness in the day (tiredness and hydration levels play a part).. but if you haven't ben running too long and you keep at it then can see some seriously quick reductions in your mile time. Good luck with it all any way. I should get back into some it for sure! P.

Good question Ex, I am not totally sure. I can take a guess though.... these systems are only meant to compliment an existing system, as you stated, the can be hooked up to your current hot water supply to pre heat it - thus you do not need to heat the water as often..... I would guess that in the cases where you might get freezing pipes that a convection current of moving water around the system as a whole would keep it free from freezing... although it does seem kinda counter intuitive on days like that as you are actually loosing nett energy by warming the pipes..... Maybe you can cut off the system and drain the loop that goes outside on such days where freezing/energy loss would be a problem... What do you think? So in short then - just an idea - you could have the outside loop as an optional addition which can be switched on and off by a ball valve - it shouldn't be too hard to drain or refill. (and this could be automated pretty simply to drain and refill when the temperature is right)

I do not know what the 'best' layout would be.. and I am not sure what it is exactly you want.... but I wrote a tech pamphlet once for a firm that was selling installations. Not sure if this is what you want, but here is what I know (which might not be that much..) For optimum heat transfer they used copper pies painted black which had been flattened to increase the surface area of the pipe exposed to the sun. The pipes ran zigzag through/on a black metal backing board which further helped absorb heat and transfer it to the pipes.

Pretty much every ounce of that new age claptrap has always turned out to be complete rubbish. The people that pedal it come across as really nice people.... which means they are either really stupid (as they believe their own crap) or just con artists (being nice to con you)..

and someone who has a level of competence higher than most, but cannot afford college due his family background goes without then? Is that what you are saying? Shame on all that think that way. I listened to a preacher from the south of the USA the other year and he preached that Jesus would not support welfare and the lazy should get off their backsides and work. BS - he is SO far detached from reality in his lucky, privillaged, 'blessed' life that he just judges everyone who has a hard life as lazy.. that stinks, Jesus would slap him round the face.

I have never called you elitist - I said that the viewpoint was elitist.. oh, tell you what - don't bother - if you can't get your head around that then I can predict the conversation will be confused and will go round in circles and you will feel like I am attacking you personally, which I am not. READ what I said! I said the view point was elitist NOT that you were... but as I said (repeating myself) - if you can't even grasp that then I am out. Bye. In your example with you and Joe, I agree, Joe made a mistake... Do you think that 3 of his kids should pay for that mistake then? What about Alfonse? Alfonse has only 1 child, but he lives in a really crappy area and his parents were idiots and ass holes - they blew all their money on drugs. Alfonse can't afford to send the 1 child he has to any college. What happens here? Does Alfonses child go without because his grandparents were fools? The argument is basic...

It is an elitist view that people should have to pay for their own education - yes. How do you expect the poor to pay for it? And don't say loans - the lower classes and the poor will not take out large loans (yea - they will seem large to them, even if they seem small to you) as they do not want the HEAVY oppression of the debt overhanging them for years to come - most might not have a daddy with enough cash (or any for that matter) to pay their way for them through uni. So your suggestion that the poor should not have their education paid for them by the tax payer IS an elitist view that screws over the poor. Stop twisting things? Who said anything about picking sides? What are YOU on about!? I never said the rich were the problem.

Well have to differ - of course taxes should pay for it otherwise those from lesser background will suffer... but fine, keep your elitist views and screw the poor over then, who cares!

QUOTE SWANSONT: "electric fields and magnetic fields lumped into the same area of study" I though it was Maxwell that done this with his equations? Mathematically at least.

we used to have free tuition here... but now you need a small loan to get you through.. I am a big fan of taxes to pay for college (for those that qualify through merit at schools, not just 'everyone'). Why should only the rich get an education? It should go to those that deserve/are capable of it regardless of their families wealth.

Doing a bit of reading, that peak at 3000 is probably O-H as it goes.. and the one at 1250 is probably also O-H. The peak at 1100 could be the aromatic? So with the O-H's and the C=O and an aromatic I still reckon something similar to benzoic acid. Here is some info - the spectra at the bottom of the page is benzoic acid - it looks quite similar with peaks at the same places. The proportions of the peaks are a little different, but that is probably because the y axis is shorter/aquashed. http://www.4college.co.uk/a/wm/infrared.php it says, for benzoic acid: An O-H group is present in the molecule (identified by the region between 2500-3300 cm-1) Absorption between 1680-1750 shows that a C=O is present. Absorption around 1300 cm-1 again shows the presence of an OH group. Absorption around 900-1100 cm-1 could be due to the benzene ring or to the carbon-oxygen bond of the acid grouping. ...all of which, seems to be going on in your spectra - except - the BP of benzoic acid is 249.2... So maybe another carboxylic acid of some kind. OK then, how about Isoamyl acetate. It is supposed to smell like bananas and it has a boiling point just over what you described. It has a similar IR spectra too: http://orgchem.colorado.edu/Spectroscopy/specttutor/ex5.html "Carbonyls show up in the region 1760-1665, and specifically, saturated aliphatic esters from 1750-1735. Sure enough, there is a band at 1743 indicating a saturated aliphatic ester. There is a possibility that the compound is has both a ketone and an ether group instead of an ester, however, the band at 1743 indicates an ester instead of a saturated aliphatic ketone. You can also see bands in the region 1300-1000 which can indicate the C-O stretch." Sorry it's all a bit late for your lab now. Let us know what it was when you find out.

At first glance - the peek at around 3000 usually represents an aromatic ring iirc.. that will let you know there is a benzene/aromatic ring in there at least. Can't help much more than that as it has been a very long time. ;-) Check the peak at 1750 - that one might tell you something too. 1750 might be a C=O of some kind.. Maybe a carboxylic acid? Benzoic acid even? Yea - the peaks at 1100 can depict a C-O bond too - so looking like it could be a carboxylic acid of benzene. Not sure about the big peak at 1250 though... :-/ let us know what you come up with. OK after more reading, if it is aromatic then the peaks that are at 3000 would be the sp2 CH stretches and they will also need to show a C=C aromatic stretch somewhere between 1400 to 1600.

Speaking of light... how can it be night time on one side of the planet and day on the other if it were flat? It would be night everywhere then day everywhere. 'Course it's round! ;-) lol.

I like the game and used to play the facebook tournaments and things... was fun, but I wasn't that good at it. I got ALOT better after playing with some friends at uni that were in the county and even the national teams.. They taught me some tricks and more about things to look for and how to adapt a better defence against good players. I never beat any of them - lol. I played a lot with other friends over the years and used to beat them all the time... I taught them what I know and then they started beating me, lol... when I asked them what tactics they were using they refused to tell me... which I found most unsporting as I spent months teaching them all I know about the game up until that point. lol. I quite liked the speed chess games as you have to think fast and can easily miss things and the game only takes 2 mins (I miss things anyway, so having to think fast and decide is a good way to play). I think these were listed as 'Bullet Chess' games. Anyway - yes, I like chess - wish I was better at it though. ;-)

It is irrational and pretty dumb - there are clearly MANY ways in which mathematics is applicable to the real world... so many equations that model precicely what happens in reality. Most equations are set up to reflect what actually happens - so by default are applicable to the real world.... Philosophers just like to argue semantics and go round in circles.(As do trolls)

Girls like their men tall and rich... I have a good personality, I am attractive and fit, very talented and intelligent, extremely modest and I have a BIG secret that girls seem to like ;-) ... however, girls don't go for me straight away because I am geeky, short, scruffy and no where near rich. lol. Tall and rich is the key I have been told.

It depends on which party the American votes for.

I tend to conceptualize the ideal woman more than men. ;-) I would imagine though that you would not be able to have an ideal man as an all rounder... The ideal shot putter and the ideal marathon runner for example have very different traits.

SB - Look at the history for the make up of the atom from JJ Thompson through Bhor to modern day theories.... JJ Thompson's model of the atom (plumb pudding theory) was genius - he was the first to accurately describe the atom as a mix of positive and negative parts which were separate... He had the pudding as the negative field and the plumbs as positive cores... He was right! His model was very good - it more accurately described what an atom was like than any other theory that went before. He KNEW that it wasn't the absolute truth of the matter and that someone else would take the 'truths' he had learnt or observed and expand his model further. He was not wrong. Then Bohr came along... and so on. you know Niels Bhor was right - absolutely right when he realised that JJs modal was not correct and could be improved and he built a better model. If you can't follow where this is going then you might as well pack up... As with Newtonian gravity being replaced with GR - there maybe a better theory which better describes reality one day, but we don't have it yet. I don't know what that chip on your shoulder is all about, or what tripe lectures you have listened to that knock science, but I would advise that you re-read this entire thread and see that many of your points just come from a position of ignorance. That is fine - but listen and learn. Regards, P.

Touche John, but that is OT not NT so I recon it's Judaism rather than Christianity. ;-)

Tar, I agree - I actually like the teachings of Christianity and some of both our cultures are based on it... (some of it sucks though - like diminishing women and the not being able to have sex unless you are married BS that I inflicted on myself for years - what a dumb ass) - but to say your country was founded purely on it isn't true. It was founded on theft, murder, pilliage and genocide... where are the indigenous people now? How many are left and what say do they have in anything that goes on at all? This was only a few hundered years ago too - lol. Founded on Christian values my hat! It says "do not lie" - Your biggest problem is here revealed - You can't stop lying to yourselves.

QUOTE..".....concern for our fellow man without the religious right" Are you saying then that there is no concern for our fellow man without religion? You may need to be scared of the threat of hell to make you concerned about others... A lot of people have a staunch moral code without some imaginary universal dictator to threaten them into it.

what has their religion got to do with anything? Religion and politics are supposed to be seperate