CPL.Luke

I'm pretty sure the probability at a high school level goes to 100% , but that there is a better way to do the probability than that, because it is possible to roll a dice an infinite number of times and never hit a 4 (unlikely though) I was reffering to one dice I think my idea violates the whole independant events in statistics though

it would most likely take far more energy than the star could produce to make the sphere in the first place.

what frequency of microwaves would be best absorbed in hydrogen? Any textbook with more information like this would also be apreciated also does this change with different isotopes of hydrogen?

couldn't you technically model a dice with memory tendancy? for instance in 6 rounds it is almost assured that you will get a 4, unfortunatly I think that violates the whole independant event thing, but it might work

would you apply to say a range of prestiege?

that idea has been around for a long time and considered by nasa quite often, although it takes a ship the length of the golden gate bridge in order to keep the astronauts from getting sick however in a sphere the top and bottom and the rest of the shere except the area perpendicular to the axis of rotation (don't know a better way to say that) wouldn't get gravity plus in the end if you have the tech to build this thing you have the tech to create artificial gravity, and heck you probably have the technology to get more energy than a star produces in its lifetime. out of curiosity how much energy would it take just to move all that mass into an orbit of 1 au melt it all down smelt it and then make a sphere out of it. My guess more energy than a star produces in a billion years.

danny I think what your reffering to is what swansont refferenced in post #61 where a light pulse entered cessium gas and then the (check me on this) leading edge of the wave becomes the peak. this gives the impression that the light entered the cessium before it actually did, giving the impression that light traveled faster than c

also when chuck yeager broke the sound limit bullets had been doing it for hundreds of years :/ It was well known that it was possible, just difficult. Just like the space elevator

didn't they find that the workers who built the parymid weren't slaves (sorry its far to early o make a joke)

great points jdurg although you can't really say a vaccuum is cold

also GR left the door halfway open to the possibility of faster than light travel

hmm, I was able to do the same thing for a while. (I freaked someone out once by repeating it something like 20 or 25 times) all it was was watching the coin closely and I was able to catch the side that was going to land face up more clearly than the side that landed face down. I think it was just because the coin was slowing down in its rotation till I caught the right side

I think blike just described the percentage system with what we recieve as our GPA (grade point average) in CT and I believe most of the country, a student recieves either a letter or a percent grade for each of his assignments. These are eventually averaged out at the end of the semester or quarter to produce a final grade. This is given in terms of A's,B's,C's,D's and F's F's qualifying as anything below 60% (sometimes 65%) C is seventies, B is 80's etc. now to some up your average grade, your grade is summed up as a GPA which is as Blike described it

when I googled it without quotations I got only results that were located at firefree.com. With quotations I got only 3 meaningless results, I was unable to succesfully navigate any of the site for the companies that they mention in order to find the report if you could link the report you found it would be appreciated also if the report you found is dated from 1997 doesn't that tell you something about the fact that this stuff isn't used everywhere and therefore can't be as effective as they claim for instance there website tries to make the users make the connection that if firefree 88 was in use at the WTC then the towers wouldn't have come down :/

sorry I meant more that without special relativity, the lorentz contraction is a meaningless equation in this debate, I know that it has everything to do with it in special relativity

yes, but that is irrelevant in why nothing can go faster than light

I would find an extra source other than the manufacturers web site I know of several magnetic bracelets that are "scientifically proven" to cure cancer I also know of certain companies that put cocaine in soda's and marketed them as cure-alls but also who said that it did glow?

yeah, I thought that it would be best to simplify that from the mathmatical version (of which I am well aquainted) herme3 thats why your calculator gave an error message. also the lorentz contraction is in and explained in the theory of relativity it is useless in itself

what tests showed that? if your reffering to the ones here http://wcco.com/specialreports/local_story_310181624.html the fire retardant paint is only capable of slowing the fire, and considering that the fires were started without the use of an accelerant the odds are the fire wasn't hotter than 600 degrees I would also imagine that in there "extensive testing" they only tested the paint applied over a material that had a high temperature tolerance like steel, if it truly could insulate against those temperatures as is claimed I think it would make a far bigger splash than it has. The space shuttle tiles also insulate by having a very high specific heat and also conducting heat poorly. if it were an efficient radiator it would glow :/

no you can use infinity anyware (infinity)(1)=infinity

the theory of relativity provides the perfect equation for this problem and to illustrate the problem here you mean this F = dp/dt = q(v × B + E) I don't see how that could possibly help demonstrate the reason for why nothing can travel faster than the speed of light better than einstein's theory of relativity, unless you want to attempt to derive relativity from that. also einstein didn't create relativity in order to dispel etheric drift in fact he claimed to have never read the results of the michaelson-morley experiment. He created it to explain mechanics in terms of maxwells equations instead of in newton's work, similar to what string theory is trying to do with QM and GR. he also subsequently used it to explain magnetism

yes, its ion propulsion, cassini went to saturn on it

no, look at the formula for instance 1/0 = infinity (simplified from math jargon) jsut solve it and you will see, its all in algebra 1level math

actually two things nasa is exempt from the restriction on freon they just made a conscious effort to comply with the regulations and freon has a proven effect on the ozone layer, and by your logic they should take away all of the regulations on smog emissions from factories because open pete fires produce a bunch of it to. there are probably several reasons why nasa hasn't produced good procedures for repairing the underside of the shuttle, one of them would be the what can you do about it argument. There are thousands of things that can go wrong n a shuttle mission, the computer could fail- or any other one of the millions of parts on a shuttle. To plan for each of these would be nearly impossible. Not to mention the fact that no space flight has ever had a safety procedure for a heat shield failure back on topic though the fire proof paint that you mention probably only does its job by being heat tolerant up to about 500-600 degrees, and then serving to seal the wood from oxygen. You have not shown any evidence to suggest that the paint is actually a good insulator against heat as well.