npts2020

Well, two areas of research involving hydrgen bonding I can think of off the top of my head include hydrogen storage batteries and drug delivery systems, I am sure I could come up with more.

Well, I would go so far as to state that in that theoretically perfectly rational individual there would be no meaningful distinction between morality and ethics. Now applying this to real world individuals..............soon as we can get those pesky humans to comply with the scientific process......maybe......

If the balloons are merely external pressure you will get squashed. If the balloons are microscopic in size (like air molecules) and exert pressure in all directions the question is not as clear cut. Submariners, divers and others often are subjected to many times normal atmospheric pressure with little negative effect, they don't get squashed anyway. How high could you stack ballons before gravitational effects were negligible? Can someone survive those pressures? Seems to me the only way you could be squashed is if you could somehow stack enough balloons on top of someone so as to only exert pressure on them and not the air they are breathing and even in that case I would have to see some proof that the force exerted would be enough to do any more than make the unfortunate subject unable to breathe.

* Boron impregnated plastics have been used as neutron shields, so overcoming shielding weight, imo, would be less of an achievement than significantly scaling down the cooling system for a reactor enough and still be able to perform useful work with it. It would certainly require a radical departure from any current reactor design and probably fuels. insane_alien you just described Tetsuo the Iron Man perfectly.

Isn't at least as likely that the information was accessed and leaked (if that is what happened) on behalf some media representitive as anyone from Obamas campaign?

One of the things I find interesting in this discussion, is the notion that socialism consists of "subsidizing the poor". On the face it is probably true, the notion that you should help someone less fortunate than yourself is socialist. However, who here is willing to argue that one should exploit that less fortunate individual to the maximum extent possible in order to enrich themselves, which is the logical extreme of capitalism? The main argument for socialism is that every human has some rights; food, water, shelter, basic medical care, opportunity for betterment, etc. The main argument against socialism seems to be that somehow everybody is going to be equal and able to live in exactly the same manner regardless of ability to contribute, not at all what it is about in my opinion. What socialism would do is guarantee some minimal level of existence for any citizen. We can argue about what minimal level is acceptable but I doubt many people would say that no help needs to be given to anyone. Personally I have no problem with the government helping anyone for a short period of time but those asking for longer term help need to have more government intervention in their personal lives in order to solve the problems. In order to recieve long term help, people should not be allowed to continue living in the same manner with only a vague hope that they will somehow change and this type of socialism should be soundly rejected. Long term recipients should be doing schooling for a not only a productive occupation but also things like hygiene, nutrition, personal finances, and interpersonal relationship skills. They should also be undergoing psychiatric evaluation and drug or alcohol counseling if those factors have bearing on their condition. Recipients should not be doing things like taking drugs or alcohol, living above a subsistance lifestyle, having more babies, and engaging in nonproductive activities. These lists are not meant to be comprehensive but only to give an idea of some of the considerations for any sort of socialist program and a general idea of the form of socialism that I think could be positive for the vast majority of us. I will climb off the soapbox now and leave it for the next person.

Then you agree that in a rational individual, there is a strong correlation between morality and ethics?

Martin: The clarifications are nice and help toward having a more exact understanding of what is being talked about. Cosmology is, imo, a very interesting subject that really goes to the heart of what science is all about, describing the world around yourself from observation and experiment. Many things are universally well defined and understood from this method but more than a few are not. Who has ever seen a universe created to know if there was time before it? We are getting close to being able to see the creation of our own but I am skeptical as to how definitive the findings from things like LHC and W-MAP are going to be. The exciting part of these projects to me is that they will almost certainly rule out some if not all but one of the scenarios. But isn't that the fun of cosmology, wild speculation, within the limits of applying what has been observed and is known to be true?

I believe that to be the case. If one cannot act ethically within their own moral code it is usually called hypocrisy and would infer to me that there is something lacking in that persons moral view. Firstly, I thought you were talking about anyone in general taking him for treatment but even if we only consider doctors, wouldn't it be a violation of personal ethics to take an oath that you knowingly couldn't live up to? Would it not be immoral to take up a profession that contradicted your own ethical world view (eg. a doctor who knows he would not treat a homosexual)?

CaptainPanic: You could power your entire country with a walkman............for maybe an attosecond.

Well, cosmology (and much cutting edge science as well) is by its nature speculative and imo impossible to discuss without some resort to speculation. Personally I know so little about time that I haven't decided whether it is an intrinsic property of the universe or a completely artificial human construct or even if one or the other matters. However, with my meager knowledge of the subject, I would speculate that time extends well beyond human perception, seemingly infinite, but not so in fact. How's that for waffling? SamWalker: Run along now. Don't forget your pitchfork and torch on the way out.

Thanks for the clarifications. I really have no concrete opinion about time before the big bang even though I don't particularly like the idea of infinity applying to the real world. However, IMO if you obviate time before then, some sort of explanation of how time comes into existence is desirable. Is time finite in one direction only, both directions or not at all?

Americans just have lots of laws. Most felonies are drug related and the majority of them never go to trial as the offender will "cop a plea" or agree to plead guilty to a lesser offense without a trial, eg. a drug dealer may agree to plead guilty to possession with intent to distribute instead of going to trial for running an ongoing criminal enterprise (the penalties vary state to state but the later will recieve a harsher sentence in almost every case). In other words you take a lighter sentence or take your chances on a trial. Considering well over 80% of adult Americans have done an illegal drug sometime during their lifetime........well you get the idea. IMO the "war on drugs" is far more about making money than helping anyone. Kinda makes you wonder why the rate isn't more like 1 in 10 huh?

I think a better discussion would be what is the best mix of socialism and free markets. For instance, why is it necessary to have a profit motive for things like banking, basic health care, or insurance? I don't think anyone here is ready to give up government altogether but if its job is to look out for the citizenry what kind of interventions are needed to do this and to what extent?

Hitler is a poor example in this case because in a world where the accepted protocol for imposing your will over an irreversibly intransigent opponent is by killing him, I fail to see how letting him die would be unethical. Also I don't believe that ethics has much to do with thoughts, only actions and as you say usually involving other people. Isn't it unethical to do that which you yourself consider to be immoral (by lusting am I not being both immoral and unethical if I am in fact being either)?

I kinda like the U.S.ofA. but I can think of a few I wish would emmigrate. Trouble is that no other place would likely accept them.

Good discussion. One thing I would definitely call finite is our ability to percieve and understand the universe.

So you are claiming either no time exists before the beginning of our universe or that time was created with our universe? On what are you basing this?

In some states you have to go so far as to petition the governor for re-enfranchisement and may still be turned down then.

CaptainPanic: In the primaries during the spring (different dates for different states, hence the long time for deciding between clinton and obama) you may only vote for your own party candidates with a couple of exceptions (virginia allows cross-party voting during primaries, most don't). Sometimes people do exactly what you describe and vote for the worst of the other party but the numbers generally are supposed to be insignificant. In addition to president every 4 years, every member of the house of representitives must run for re-election every 2 years and senators every 6 years (or about 1/3 of the senate this year). Depending on your state and locality you may be voting for someone for everything from governor or (state) supreme court judge to prothonotary or town council representitive. Then you have ballot initiatives which may number from zero to a dozen or more and address almost any topic you can imagine government being involved in. Ballot initiatives generally only allow a yes or no vote. All of these things will be on a single ballot but you are not required to vote on everything (or even anything, there have been blank ballots turned in) but you may still only vote for one person for each vacant office (otherwise they disqualify your vote). Ballots will list the names of the candidate for any party, even third parties, that has met requirements for being listed (usually just collecting enough valid signatures on a petition) but you may also write in the name of anyone for any office if you wish to do so. I have never heard of a write-in candidate winning anywhere but the smallest of jurisdictions and under exceptional circumstances. I hope this brief summary helps.

Pangloss: The director of ACORN was on the Diane Rehm show on NPR yesterday and said that all of the members of their organization ever convicted (I think she said 6) of voter fraud were done so with the help of ACORN. The interview was quite interesting and she really took the man claiming voter fraud to task over lack of evidence for his claims. I don't doubt that everything possible is being done to try to "rig" the election but if it was ACORN doing it I would think the case would be much more straight forward and easier to prove, considering the number of people and methods involved. john5746: It has been done before and will probably happen again. Get caught though and you will go to jail. BTW ID and voter registration cards are easy enough to fake if required.

Can unethical behavior ever be considered moral?

If you can figure out exactly how energy is not conserved, you may have the basis of a perpetual motion machine. Personally I like the laws of conservation of energy, momentum etc. They fit the observed phenomena soooo well.

First learn about reactors and reactor configuration, that will give you an idea of minimum size and weight requirements to sustain a fission reaction. Afterwards you can work on miniaturization of other components. It was quite an engineering feat to make a usable one small enough for a submarine. I am not one to often call things impossible but in order to achieve anything close to what you are talking about, it will require overcoming technical hurdles that have confounded others for decades. BTW submarines already use HEU so you will not gain much from further refining.

Catharsis: You have begun to try to understand something that scientists still are researching aspects of. Don't give up if you can't understand everything at first, it is not as easy as watching "Ameican Idol" (not to imply that you do). The concepts you are asking about are important for understanding many areas of science.