Thales

That or calculate the difference in weight between the amount of air you displace vs weight of the amount of helium used to displace it. The resuling difference will yield the net amount of weight you can lift. Temperature can effect the measurement though, but other than that it is a simple bouyancy calculation.

The laws of physics being the same for all observers this observation is neither startling nor unexpected. Also given our perspective of the cosmos is firmly embedded inside our galaxy, making statements about the absolute similarity between our galaxy and any other is based on errorneous assumptions.

Such naivity is the basis of hate and destruction in this world. I was not talking about an internet forum but a public realm of discussion. One hopes that your views are not widespread, although it seems all to apparent in todays ever increasingly stubborn world that such hope may indeed be misplaced.

A recent article in new scienctist illuded to the fact that setting up irregular 'islands' of differing metallic materials was an efficient way of inhibiting the movement of phonons while not hindering the movement of electrons. Thus enabling a temperature gradient to be maintained in metals and produce substantial voltages from what was formerly labelled 'waste heat'. This is a major advancement in physics as it means many reactions from photovoltic to chemical reactions and even convential means of electricity generation will be able to yield higher net power outputs as a result of harnessing this effect to create electricity via heat output. Just thought I would share my excitement, as combining this technique with forms of fuel cells and decentralised power generation may indeed hold the key to solving the looming energy crises.

I'll second that one Dave. Thanks Martin!

Freedom fighters fight for freedom, not murder children. There is no justification for their actions and anyone who thinks so should seriously re-assess their position.

Got punctuation? Please edit your post and re-read it to check it makes sense. Even the worlds best cryptographers would have difficulty decyphering that one. Oh and its Albert Einstein. Note the capitals and spelling. He certainly deserves that much at least.

Light has no acceleration/deceleration because the speed of light is constant. the illusion of its speed changing in differing medium is to do with phase velocity. Do a quick google for futher information.

Arguing the rights of any human may help. If parents are hindering the childs life and developement for a reason that is unjustifiable in the eyes of an objective observer, help and support should be provided to that child. If the parents feel that this impinges on their cultural or religous beliefs then perhap educating the parents and child as to why what they are doing is not only morally reprehensible but also socially unacceptable, may aid in at least minimising the amount of harm the parents can do to the child.

Any electronic device that sends and recieves information wirelessly can severly reak havoc with planes avonic equipment by inducing noise into vital wiring in the shell of the aircraft. My father is an avionics engineer and explained it to me. Many people don't think its a problem but the risk is there so it'd be unwise, to say the least, to be gambling on it regularly by letting Joe Blow use his equipment on every flight. As for the whole consipracy theory, its a maybe but an incredibly unlikely maybe at that. Sure there is the debate that it has done alot to aid the Bush administration but can you imagine the implications if a paper trail led to even one member of the government? Even the best covert operations people in the world would find that hard to cover up.

Actually its a little off topic but the standard Kg has no relevence in nature and is an enitriely man made measurement. There is nothing that defines a kg other than the weight that sits in the musuem somewhere in france. Oh and jordan, as far as I'm aware once the Hurricane hits landfall it isn't sustained very long as the warm tropical water that drives it is no longer present. It is an interesting question though, I'll see what I can find.

Perhaps. I think that others lack of interest in the stems from where society(both political and social) places it on the rungs of importance. Thats kind of why I thought having a thread subsection, maybe under the grouping of other sciences, would at least inspire some passionate debates on what we are doing and how to undo it. I am indeed passionate about it but I don't belive there is a relevant section currently on these forums which such things could be placed.

Just out of curiousity, what is the relevence behind some of your nicks. I'm sure some of you might not have a particularly meaningful one but I find the multitude and varity of nicks quite interesting. My nick, Thales, is the name of the man many historians consider to be the 'founder' of science. At least thats how Aristotle saw it naming him the 'father of natural philosphy'. He was an Ionian(pre-greece) and was reknowned for his pursuit of almost every area of science. While I respect and admire this man, I in no way compare myself to him as that would be egotistical to say the least. I do however share his passion for all things scienctific and thats why I'm here What about yourselves?

Atomic density plays a significant role I'm reasonably sure.

Blowing up planes constitues terrorism in my book. As does killing hostages but we are all entitled to an opinion. My post about a forum of discussion was intended to point out that their can be a diplomatic resolution to this and other crisees. That if there was a formalised platform in which ideas and suggestions could be voiced and genuinely considered, people would feel less inclined to set up these violent rebel organisations in the first place. And the ones that are already in existance would find it difficult to maintain support if there is a realistic diplomatic approach being adopted that is embraced by the general public. Sure it may not provide independence overnight but one of the main reasons Russia opposes Chechen independence is because a Chenchen government would starkly opposed the Kremlin on almost all issues as a matter of principle. Breeding a culture of brotherhood, rather than futher polarising opinion, is the only hope any opressed region can have from escaping the dominate power. Occupying Chechnya holds little, if any, economic benefit to Russia and being occupied does little for the Chechens themselves(obviously). If the issues facing the people and the government could be discussed, that wonderful word: compromise, might be achieved. It just seems a darn sight better than shelling townships from afar or shooting children. If there is no voice for rational thought, it is unlikely to be heard over the sound of gunfire and the wails of mourning parents.

Suicide is selfish.

See thats where I disagree. The realm of enviromental science includes many subsections that could be discussed. Stuff like electronics and pyrotechnics is very specific.

Not enitrely true. There is a threshold level needed to not only trigger the firing of neurons pre-optic nerve. There is also the threshold of detection in the visual cortex. I very much doubt a single photon would trigger a conscious recognition of the light source.

While I don't know the reasoning behind the decision to remove the stats page i applaud it. Stats tend to fuel spam posts as people try to clamber up the 'ladder', which would detract from the general level of professionalism that I believe should be maintained in order to keep this site an interesting and informative trove of knowledge/ideas/opinions and questions.

Well thats fair enough I suppose. Although I still think its justifiable for it to have its own section. Its a very important part of our world that all too often falls between the cracks.

Thats the problem with terrorism. You can't wage war on a country to eliminate the few people who are out to cause as much death and destruction as possible. I would be more than suprised if they even reside in Chechnya. If you punish the Chechen people for the actions of the violent seperatist movement you just fuel the motivation to maim and kill more Russian citerzens. If you begin by educating the masses, in both countries and provide a forum for reasonable discussion about the issues at hand, one where emotive impassioned pleas can be voiced and considered, one where the peoples will can be understood, it goes along way to solving the problems which are the root cause of terrorism. That being a lack of voice for the impoverish majority who have been opressed by the wealthy minority. That and investing in the infrastructure of these run down regions. One of the main reasons the Chechens seek independence is because their region is largely ignored when it comes to government investment, sowing the seed of hate and resentment that spawn themselves in these most hobbilbe displays of inhuman action.

I must say I'm rather disappointed by the response(or lack there of) to this request. I would consider the environment to be one of the issues which will dominate global focus in the next generation, as they try to come to terms with the damage we've done since the industrial 'revolution'. It would be a great place to discuss how future energy production can be economically implemented as well as discussing the pro's and con's of the options currently presented to us(ie. nuclear vs renewables etc). Seeing as this site may well harbour a few leaders of tomorrow, I would of thought it opportune to discuss the long term future of humanity.

You can't invade a country to weed out seperatist rebels. All that will do is fuel more resentment and give the rebels more convincing arguements for recruiting more 'foot soldiers'. The key is education and investment. Not violence.

The origins of relativistic jets ejected from the polar regions of neutron stars? or Stellar evolution and its impact on planetary formation?

There are many theories pertaining to the limitations on environments which can/do support life. The main problem with all of them is that we don't have any example of life other than our own immediate experience and based on that, we make assumptions about the ease in which complex life can evolve in varying environments. I think the main arguement for a small rocky body vs a jovioan giant in terms of their ability/limitations for supprting complex sentient beings is one of scale. To have a large biological entity, say one which could hypothetically exist on Jupiter, would require for one a much more stable environment. Gas giants are notorious for their turbulant atmosphere's, which would hinder the stablity and indeed limit the opportunities for molecules to 'dwell' long enough adjacent to each other in order to 'try' the various combinations and indeed 'figure out' which ones are stable. Another arguement against the existance of life on large gaseous worlds is the amount of energy needed to evolve life in such atmosphere vs the amount of energy recieved from the host star. Because it is thought that gaseous giants tend to grow in the outer regions of solar systems(with a few exceptions) they recieve much less sunlight per square cm and therefore have less energy available to them to actuate the required reactions. Finally there is the question of scale. One can assume that sentient beings on these larger worlds would be larger themselves. To evolve to this much larger size and maintain the complexities required for conscious thought would require enormous amounts of energy, energy that without some as yet unknown orgainc reaction, is simply not available in the cold desolate atmosphere of the Jovian world. Its based primarily on conjecture because at the start I pointed out we have no other examples of life, to study its robustness, in what to us seems like extreme conditions. Small rocky bodies the size of earth have alot of things balanced perfectly to create the stable, but not too stable, enviroments to harbour the complexities of biological evolution as we know it.