The Rebel

If its based on the old A-Z then yes these have been available for time. I am always using http://www.streetmap.co.uk to plan my journeys.

If you're interested in aerial photos then try http://www.multimap.com I believe the photos were shot using a helicopter that traveled the UK, and compiled a map of britain using the photos.

You want brits to be thought of as eccentric people with emotional issues, suppressed by their wives and with a fetish for giving beats to people from Barcelona?????

There are quite a few films that portray us badly but there are just as many if not more that portray us well. For example how cool is James Bond??? and with British films getting more recognition than ever (italian job, trainspotting, bend it like beckham, bride and prejudice, lock stock, snatch, etc.) I don't think a small scene in die hard will do much harm.

I should think they see lots of TV over there too, including music artists, etc.

In short, it is the mean angular velocity.

I say mean because most orbits are elliptical such that the velocity changes depending on the radius at each point.

And you believe the official figures?

 

Millions of people on 'invalidility benefit' are not counted as unemployed' date=' the actual number of people 'economically inactive' is sky high.[/quote']

 

When will people learn that no statistics can be trusted ay? Everything any party says are just vote grabbers. All joe public can do is fend for themselves in personal victories.

 

My vote goes to a hung parliament causing a coalition government.

http://www.geocities.com/bushatbooker/ ???? Probably debateable, but then all contentious stuff usually is.

Take what you will from:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1522987.stm - Deployment to middle east 1 week before 9/11 attack

http://www.thedebate.org/ - website questioning the ideas of the war on terror (Iraq and Afghanistan)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/newsnight/4354269.stm - Secret US plans

http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/21535/ - Secret US plans

http://www.gregpalast.com/opeconthemarch.html - Secret US plans

http://smh.com.au/articles/2002/10/06/1033538848021.html?oneclick=true - Foreign Policy Agenda

http://www.mapsofworld.com/world-top-ten/world-top-ten-oil-reserves-countries-map.html - Top Oil reserves

I can't deny I'm suspicious but there is no way of coming up with the answer as there will always be conjecture.

As to pro-antiterror campaigns suggest 9/11 and the history of al-queda, saddam, etc. be looked at.

Have fun.

Sounds like the microbes that are naturally swiming around your eye, going across your line of sight.

Here's a couple more FYI

AAMOF - As A Matter Of Fact

AFAIC - As Far As I'm Concerned

AFAICT - As Far As I Can Tell

ASAP - As Soon As Possible

BAK - Back At Keyboard

BBL - Be Back Later

FAQ - Frequently Asked Questions

FYA - For Your Amusement

FYI - For Your Information

GTG - Got To Go

ISP - Internet Service Provider

LMAO - Laughing My Arse Off

L8R - Later

OIC - Oh I See

TTFN - Ta Ta For Now

TY - Thank You

WB - Welcome Back

YW - Your Welcome

I had a slighter different interpretion of WTF PHI

Here we are

http://mechanical-eng.mme.tcd.ie/~clyons/calibrations.pdf

Any instrument technician should be able to tell you (or someone that's had some instrumentation training) measuring instruments of this kind are not exactly linear.

If you plotted the output of a measuring device against the known input, you'll find that the graph will be sort of exponential but curving off at the top. A bit like a culmulative frequency curve, not sure if there's a formula for it.

There is section of this curve however that is more or less linear which is where the instrument is calibrated to by adjusting its "span" and "zero".

In essence the scales will only work within their range on the display.

Just a quick tip I've found when I feel a bit close wanting to meet the "porcelain throne", is to suck on an ice cube. And when you think its really close just clench on the ice cube a bit more. I don't know why but whenever I've had too much, this little trick has avoided any embarassing projections.

And if you order the right drink you'll never be far from one.

Hmmmm, takes me back to the days of my HNC eletronics . . .. last year.

The 1st question has three choices to solve it, Norton's theorum, Thevein's theorum or Superposition theroum.

The 2nd seems easier, as its simply ohms law. The power of the generator is given by its emf * circuit current, the dissipation rate is how much the resistance dissipates, and the chemical rate battery emf * circuit current.

Efficiency is the power taken by the load (battery) divided by the power supplied by the source (generator)

the equations shows them equal

I can't see this.

The flux is emitted in all directions like a light bulb. This flux acts onto a surface area to give luminance. Its, if you like, a measure of how much light is received from a radial source.

The intensity is more linear in that it looks at how much "energy" there is at a given distance away. In this case the r refers to the distance from the point source. The formula should actually be I = L / {4 * pi * d^2}. The 4pi indicating where the steradian is.

The formulas are used in different concepts, the 1st is as it is received on to a surface, the 2nd is how the source is perceived at a certain distance.

Chalk and Cheese clearly even is it is both about light.

It means inverse tan. Another way of writing it would be

theta = 2 * arctan(h/2d)

also

d = h / {2 * tan(theta/2)}

Did the first tell you the object was assumed to be at rest?

 

Knowing the assumptions present in a derivation is very important' date=' as it indicates when the resulting equation is and is not valid.[/quote']

 

 

It used the model of a photon being emitted from one side of a box and being absorbed at the other. It went along the law of moments route.

 

I've actually just found a small paragraph further on in the book that states "For particles large enough for their rest mass to be significant, we need to use a more complete expression" which they call the momenergy formula.

 

I guess you shouldn't judge a book by one page

I still think the answer to a) is -40N

The acceleration between the two surfaces is 2ms-2. So the answer to a) is 20kg x -2ms-2 = -40N

I agree to the workings of b) and c) however. Only my answers would be

b) Net force = 720N, Force F = 760N

c) a = 7.6ms-2

v^2 is porportional to height, so v is proportional to sqrt of h

So a drop that is 1/2 the other, it will finish with a speed of sqrt 1/2 the other.

For the second question: Use s=ut + 0.5at^2 for a varying t, remembering that Ted's acceleration will change direction when 0 = u^2 + 2as

Its from the formula Torque = rotational inertia x angular acceleration.

Picture the pendulum at a slight angle, the force acting down is mg, so the force along the length is mg cos theta, and consequently the torque force is -mg sin theta. So, [math]T = l * -mg sin \theta[/math]

Angular acceleration is simply the second derivative of the angular displacement [math]\frac{d^2\theta}{dt^2}[/math]

Rotational Inertia = [math]ml^2[/math]

So . . . [math]lmg sin \theta=-ml^2\frac{d^2\theta}{dt^2}[/math]

which rearranged becomes [math]\frac{d^2\theta}{dt^2}=-\frac{l}{g}sin\theta[/math]

Simple Harmonic Motion is defined by [math]a=-w^2x[/math]

If we assumed the angle to be small, [math]sin\theta=\theta[/math], the pendulum would obey SHM, otherwise it doesn't.

An example would be if we increased the angle to [math]\pi[/math]. The pendulum would just drop and not obey any form of SHM. (unless the length is a spring)

Ok then, take an object of mass 7e10kg that has a radius of 10km.

There is a good 400m between the object and the schwarzchild radius.

That's the area of interest.

Lots of comments about the outside of a black hole and what happens just beyond the event horizon.

What happens when the black hole is smaller than the Schwarzchild radius?

Is anything transmitted, energy or otherwise between the black hole and its event horizon? What would be its surface temperature then?

So, stars are alive then?

There's always one ain't there.

ok then, is born, grows, reproduces and dies

Isn't life simply something that is born, grows and dies.

A table does not grow, it doesn't die, it remains a table, therefore is inanimate . .. lifeless.

A tree grows and can die, as do plants, animals etc.

That's my perception of life

No this wasn't to do with refraction. It was 5-6 years ago I picked this book up and I can't remember what its called or who its by, it was just QED stuff.

It talked about how light reflects and transmits on front and rear surfaces of a glass block. For example 4% are partially reflected of the front surface, leaving 96% to transmit to the rear surface, which in turn reflects 4%. I was doing A-level physics at the time and so I'm fairly certain it was not relating to basic refraction stuff.

It also mentions particle-wave duality and refered to photons as wavicles. It was good because it focused on light itself as a whole, instead of pin-pointing specific areas of physics.

I'll see if I can find the book and spend some time reading it, maybe then I can get a better understanding of answering the concepts in my post above.

The answer is so simple yet I can't figure out a way of calculating it algebraicly, unless I'm missing something stupid.

Are you refering to Young's two slit interference experiment alongside the principles of superposition?

I can only really look at this in terms of thinking of two speakers punching out sound waves. A compression of air + a compression of air would equal a greater compression of air and vice versa.

I find it difficult to imagine how light "cancels" out though.

Another interesting comparison with sound is "Beating". If you plot a sine wave for a red wave and a green wave you get beats with the frequency of a yellow wave.

I've heard that the life span of plasma screens are pretty small compared to CRT. That you may have to fork out to get it recharged / repurged. Anyone heard this?