Switch off at the socket?

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
[email protected] wrote:


"J G Miller" wrote in message
news
On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 10:53:01 +0100, Norman Wells wrote:

You require absolutely extreme conditions for it to happen.

No you do not.

On earth, you will only find it happening in nuclear reactions.

Not true. Just you repeating it ad nauseam does not make it so.

You have been given examples of how it happens outside of nuclear
reactions, and even a link to a government sponsored science site
where it states categorically that a car with increasing velocity,
and thus increasing kinetic energy, increases in mass.

If I sit on the moon, the car will have increased mass on one side of the
orbit to the other, that doesn't mean it actually changes its mass as
anyone standing next to it will be able to confirm.



That's because they are stationary with respect to the car. If they were
measuring from somewhere else, it would.

You dont understand vectors either..

I do, you don't appear to though.
The car doesn't have different energy just because I move but it does have
different mass according to your use of Einstein's e=mc2.

The car doesn't have different energy just because I move but it does
have different mass according to your use of Einstein's e=mc2.

Doesn't E=mc^2 onlu apply to items at rest?

You need to divide by sqrt(1 - v^2/c^2)

On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 18:03:36 +0100, Norman Wells wrote:

there is no reason whatsoever to assume that pure carbon in the form
of charcoal would work in any similar way.

Yes there is. Read some scientific papers on the adsorption of CO2
by active carbon eg

http://www.sciencedirect.COM/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B7W6T-4M6SGRN-9&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&_doc anchor=&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVer sion=0&_userid=10&md5=87da7237d2f2cab28c62974b62ad 2ebe

but before you do that, you really need to learn some basic surface
chemistry / physics.






In fact it all seems rather unlikely to me. But
who am I to criticise what the greenies say is the truth?

J G Miller wrote:
On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 18:03:36 +0100, Norman Wells wrote:

there is no reason whatsoever to assume that pure carbon in the form
of charcoal would work in any similar way.

Yes there is. Read some scientific papers on the adsorption of CO2
by active carbon eg

http://www.sciencedirect.COM/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B7W6T-4M6SGRN-9&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&_doc anchor=&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVer sion=0&_userid=10&md5=87da7237d2f2cab28c62974b62ad 2ebe

but before you do that, you really need to learn some basic surface
chemistry / physics.

I'm well up in those things already actually.

What you need, though, is to appreciate the difference between activated
carbon and sticks of charcoal shoved in the ground.

Do come back when you do.

J G Miller wrote:

Is it not the case that without the Hoover Dam, the bright lights of
Las Vegas would not be possible?

I went on a tour at the hoover dam aged 14 and one of the things the
guide said was that Vegas didn't get it's power from them and "They pay
a pretty price for those pretty lights".

It was nearly 30 years ago though, so it may be different now.

On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 22:43:31 +0100, Andy Furniss wrote:

It was nearly 30 years ago though, so it may be different now.

Actually it appears not.

According to the site http://home.clara.NET/darvill/altenerg/hydro.htm

QUOTE

When it was first built, the huge "Hoover Dam", on the Colorado river,
supplied much of the electricity for the city of Las Vegas; however
now Las Vegas has grown so much, the city gets most of its energy from
other sources.

UNQUOTE

See

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nevada_Power_Company

for details of the power plants that do generate power for NV Power,
the utility company that provides power to Las Vegas.

So the Hoover Dam did make the bright lights possible in Las Vegas by
first providing power to the city and fostering its growth, but by
the time of your visit, the city was no longer using Hoover Dam as
a power source.

On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 05:48:23 +0100, "Enzo Matrix"
wrote:

Bill Wright wrote:
"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
Adrian wrote:
English is the de facto international language.

One thinmg taht did come over

That sounds more like Esperanto!

Mi esporas ke kiam vi venos la vetero estos milda.

Could you send for the hall porter? There appears to be a frog in my
bidet.

On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 23:10:19 +0100, mcp requested:

Could you send for the hall porter? There appears to be a frog in my
bidet.

According to http://www.kafejo.com/lingvoj/auxlangs/eo/tradukilo/
that would be

Povi vi sendi por la halo porter tie aperi al esti a rano en mia bidet.

I think that the original

"Mi esporas ke kiam vi venos la vetero estos milda."

means "I hope that when you come the weather will be mild."

On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 18:08:26 +0100, Norman Wells wrote:

Sorry Norman, very deeply sorry that you haven't the brain and
certainly not the patience and humility to even begin to
understand
even Newtonian physics..let alone anything else.

I understand them very well, thank you.

Trouble is Newtonian physics, as a model, doesn't fit modern
observations. Einstien came up with the General and Special Theories
of Relativity, they fit a a bit better. Then along comes Quantum
Mechanics which, as has already being pointed out, doesn't fit with
Relativity. Both models do fit the observations so as they don't
support each other they both must be "wrong" somewhere. Hence the
current quest for The Grand Unified Theory.

Norman, I suggest you wander off and do some in depth reading about
the advancements in the scientific theories relating to Quantum
Mechanics that have taken place in the last 30+ years. You appear to
be stuck in the theories of 50+ years ago.

--
Cheers
Dave.

On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 16:39:42 +0000 (UTC), J G Miller wrote:

You've just described nuclear fusion. There's not much of that
happening in your immediate environment (apart from the large
furnace
about eight light-minutes away).

No I have not.

If the electrostatic force of repulsion were not overcome by a stronger
force then matter would not exist.

And that force is the Strong Nuclear Force:

http://aether.lbl.gov/elements/stell...ng/strong.html

--
Cheers
Dave.