Gilded

I recall this being discussed in multiple earlier threads... Anyway, your weight does indeed decrease as you approach the center. At the center the net gravitational force is 0, so you'd be weightless. No stretching happens.

There's a saying in Finland that goes something like "A name doesn't make a man worse, if the man doesn't make his name worse." Sure this is inconsiderate, but so are a lot of things that parents impose on their children.

Bleh, that's something I might've done even while in full health though. Thanks for the correction. Yep, I got it now. [math]\gamma = \frac{1}{\sqrt{0.0199}} \approx{7.089}[/math] Thus [math]KE = (\gamma -1)mc^2 = (\frac{1}{\sqrt{0.0199}}-1)mc^2[/math]

Since life is about letting everyone else do everything for you... Heh, well, I'll guide you through it. [math]\gamma = \frac{1}{\sqrt{1-\frac{0.99c^2}{c^2}}} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{1-0.99}} = \frac{1}{0.1} = 10[/math] [math]KE = (\gamma -1)mc^2 = 9mc^2[/math] There, this very simple equation describes the energy needed for a velocity of 0.99c. Now you just plug in the mass. For example 1kg to 0.99c requires... uh, about 808.88 PJ (petajoules). That's quite a bit, for example Tzar Bomba, the most powerful nuclear weapon ever detonated, released 50 megatons or 209.2 petajoules of energy. This is why "relativistic kill vehicles" are awesome. I'm suffering a mild 37.5ish C fever so I might be completely botching up even these kinds of calculations, so some verification might be nice. Actually my result (808.88 PJ) is quite a bit higher than the convenient 547 PJ given in the Wikipedia RKV article but at least it's around the same orders of magnitude. Oh well.

Annihilation refers to the collision of a particle with its antiparticle converting them to photons or other new particles due to opposite quantum numbers. I'm assuming that in this context you mean particle decay. At least one difference is that it doesn't require the interaction of another particle to transform into a new particle as the it's unstable by itself, where as annihilation can happen with stable particles.

Light Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation to be exact. Same thing with "maser" (Microwave Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation).

The rotation of the Earth isn't perpetual motion, it's gradually slowing down.

I wonder how long it will be before McDonald's etc. start making fluorescent bacon/ham burgers.

Fireflies rely on bioluminescence, what we have here is just fluorescence due to the green fluorescent protein. I'd imagine making something chemiluminescent would require a significant amount of genetic manipulation. But yes, it would be awesome.

Either way the scenario presented here isn't just limited to law enforcement.

Cameras (practically everywhere) outside are pretty much equal to someone stalking you, which is considered a crime in many countries. Someone with access to the camera databases can find out where you live, work, shop etc.

Heat is the flow of energy from one system to another and can't happen without some sort of carrier. Not to be confused with temperature, which describes the average motion energies of single particles within a system (but it also is a property of matter and thus can't exist independently).

I have no idea what you're talking about but I was mostly referring to vacuum energy.

There is no perfect vacuum. Space has a certain energy and properties associated with it, so it isn't nothing. Nothingness is an abstract philosophical concept.

Also, welcome to Rivendell!

Phi, I'll ascertain; here, obtain a sugar cane, as this gain of the arcane is inhumane to maintain! At the end of one's reign one remembers Mark Twain and the... legerdemain? Just a mere grain? Should I explain? No! To be sane, bah! It's so mundane! Reaction a chain, proceeding to Maine, it just makes me feign in a golden bright vein, you just can't restrain. Truly, you should sustain your champagne campaign with the methane, or soon you'll be old just like McCain, being profane in a hut in Ukraine and doing cocaine and some Rogaine. Dangerous terrain, but I'll entertain in this gluebox domain, and thus will remain.

Btw by doing the test you allow those jobdiagnosis.com guys to sell your personal information to third parties, so you might want to just make something up.

They take X-ray pictures, they look at X-ray pictures and they use their medical expertise to explain to the patient whether the picture displayed a broken pelvis or a toy train in the rectum. Unlike some other medical professionals they don't necessarily drive a BMW encrusted with diamonds, and are rarely seen sleeping on a pile of gold coins. Here's a fairly good job description: http://careersadvice.direct.gov.uk/helpwithyourcareer/jobprofiles/profiles/profile444/

I can assure you that very finely divided aluminum powder will react with even cold water, sometimes heating up enough for ignition to happen.

"Stool Still?" Is that the one about global constipation?

Welcome back and congratulations. I was kind of wondering what that weird seismic activity was about, first near Tokyo Bay and then at Grand Cayman.

Hmm. What happens to information in a black hole isn't quite clear, so this is highly speculative. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole_information_paradox

That's more cosmology (and straight up quantum mechanics) than chemistry. We don't have a complete theory to describe black holes, we aren't sure what causes certain anomalies on the cosmic scale (dark matter, accelerating expansion) so there's a lot we don't understand, and thus it is a tricky subject. About the splitting, it isn't exactly a plausible scenario, first of all since we're already (seemingly) down to fundamental particles. Actually, the idea was featured in the recent game Fallout 3, but then again it was the ideology of this sort of crazy doomsday cult. However, what I find more interesting and plausible are the theories about there being a new universe at the end of each black hole. For example Lee Smolin has proposed this I recall. As to whether people seem repulsed by talking about science to me it seems more like they're bored. I often use scientifical logic (mention some quite rigid and tested laws and principles etc.) as best I can, perhaps more on the philosophical side with people who aren't that science oriented.

The question was about a sparrow, which is a completely different animal that rarely carries coconuts.

I did a Finnish equivalent (one that I've done a few years ago as well) and the proposed jobs are mostly science, technology and art oriented. Meteorologist (bleh), analyst (gah), critic (meh), media designer, mathematician (NOOO!), translator (bah)...