just another thing to think about....
you think a gallon of gas is expensive?
doesn't run on water, scope, or whiteout, or god forbid, pepto bismol or .
So, the next time you're at the pump, be glad your cardoesn't run on water, Scope, or Whiteout, or God forbid, PEPTO BISMOL or
NYQUIL!!!!
Yes, but then, it wouldn't work that way, now would it?
And all of the above items you don't consume in doses 20 gal at a time, now do you?
Crap.
OT kinda, but now I'm upset.
That line:
"We all want the same thing. To be loved and heard."
It sounds SO FAMILIAR. Like, there is a song with a very similar lyric. Not the same, I think, as googling it has found me nothing. AAARRRGHHH!!!
Anyone got any thoughts?
most elements on this earth were made inside stars.
stars fuse the lighter elements into heavier ones.
stars, in turn, are born from hydrogen clouds, generally called nebulae.
Another point....the 'neat' thing, if you will, about fusion explosions is that they are scalable. With a fission bomb, you can control the yield a *little*. Not much, though, as the amount of matter to create a 'critical mass' (which is more of a function of density to matter) is fairly fixed depending on what material you use.
Now, fusion bombs, on the other hand. Keep in mind what causes the massive explosion is the enriched hydrogen atoms (deuterium) fusing together into helium uncontrollably. The more hydrogen you have, the greater the energy released. And it scales fairly linearly. IE, you could fill a city block with deuterium, and set an atom bomb in the center of it, and the resulting energy released would flatten, oh, say, the eastern seaboard.
Which is why hydrogen bombs would (theoretically) be VERY desirable for 'rogue states' to have. With the same weapon core that would be 'merely' an atomic bomb, they can add deuterium to it and as much as they have, they can build a bigger and bigger 'nuke' using the same, single, atomic bomb core.
most elements on this earth were made inside stars.
stars fuse the lighter elements into heavier ones.
stars, in turn, are born from hydrogen clouds, generally called nebulae.
Fusion bombs are quite a bit harder to make
Actually, really not that much harder at all. It's essentially the same principle as the less powerful fission bombs - compress a lot of matter together rather quickly. The most powerful atom bombs have the enriched material in a sphere, with not enough density to set off an uncontrollable chain reaction...at least, as large as the sphere is. You surround it with plastic explosive wired in such a way as to create a perfectly focused blast to the center of the sphere. This, obviously, compresses the enriched material to the point a fission explosion occurs. This is an 'atomic bomb'.
(very simplified explanation) You pretty much just take this core of an atomic bomb and encase it in a much larger, very, very dense shell inside which you put your deuterium. The atomic explosion in the center superheats the deuterium in a fraction of a second to the millions of degrees that a stars core has - the temperature needed to start nuclear fusion. Essentially, you make a very short lived very small star over a city. As you can imagine, the effect in an atmosphere is....quite intense.(/very simplified explanation)
Nuclear fusion - both as a weapon and a power source - creates many, MANY times more power than fission does. All 'nuclear power plants' today are fission plants. The first atomic bombs were fission bombs. We now have fusion bombs (the so-called 'hydrogen bomb'), and are working on fusion plants, as well. The potential for power from it is unparalleled. Plus, no nasty nuclear waste from fusion, either, so...bonus!
why doesn't a fusion reactor with its 100 million degrees K produce gamma or other photonic radiation that melts the magnetic coils
Well, what happens is these very powerful magnets keep the plasma suspended so that it never makes contact with the coil. In theory. Problem is, to date, this type of fusion just doesn't look like it will pan out. It takes more power to run the magnetic coils than the fusion reaction generates. Thus, the so-called holy grail of 'cold fusion' - fusion power that generates more energy than it uses.
Not so much a problem, there are obviously a LOT of other ways to get fusion. But, so far, all attempts have failed.
It is a problem that will be solved, and when it is....well, the world will change. Seriously. Think how much power a nuke plant generates now. Multiply that by a hundred. And the reactor uses water as fuel. And generates harmless helium as the sole by-product. Suddenly, every oil company everywhere goes out of business overnight. The middle east? Who cares!
Just imagine....
Edited by - Xander on 13 February 2003 17:34:55
several years ago there was a pop song that came out, and there was some american indian singing on the background/chorus, and i can't think of what song it is, anyone have a clue???.
.
ven
Johny Preston in 1959:
http://www.rockabilly.nl/lyrics3/r0054.htm
(c'mon, took me like 2 seconds on google)
As an aside, someone mentioned Robbie Robertson above. Now, THAT is some music worth picking up if you can. Very nice.
subject shoulda tipped you people off!.
couple of weeks back, i was busy winding up my evening at a gay nightclub near my home in johannesburg, when across the room i notice this drop-dead-gorgeous woman sitting there with her obviously gay friend.
so i stare at her a bit, get some eye-contact going, and i reckoned i was making some decent progress!
He still wound up giving me his number so we could 'hang out' next time I was in the City. *PUKE*. Not cool.
That does seem a little on the remarkably narrow-minded side.
Is a person's gender more important to you than them as a person?
an evolving faith .
does the president believe he has a divine mandate?
http://www.beliefnet.com/story/121/story_12112.html
Jesus instructed his disciples to "take the sword" and "food pouches" on their second missionary tour.
Those instructions were given at the last supper, before his capture. They were not related to any 'missionary tour' but to the evening to follow.
In any case, I can't understand how you misunderstand his words.
Pete was interfering with Gods will for Jesus
But did Jesus say "Put away your sword for now, for those who interfere with gods word are not helping?" No! He said "Put away your sword" Period. Followed by "For those who live by the sword WILL DIE BY THE SWORD.". Not much room for interpretation there.
He is saying christians should be pacifists. That is what he is saying there.
He made wips and beat out all the merchants
And, if scripture is to be believed, the same man will return to earth and wipe out all human governments and false religions. Or, alternatively, allow people who don't follow him to burn in hellfire forever. Whatever. The point is, what the 'son of god' does should not be taken as a literal example of what christians do when he commands otherwise.
According to the bible, the fight against evil is HIS fight, not man's.
I mean, how many times can you be commanded to "Put away your sword" and "Return evil for evil to no one" and "turn the other cheek" and his "kingdom is not of this world" etc, etc, etc and you still DO all those things and think you are christian?
an evolving faith .
does the president believe he has a divine mandate?
http://www.beliefnet.com/story/121/story_12112.html
But does this Scripture teach that under no circumstances one is to defend himself? Certainly not.
Quite the contrary - it most certainly does. If the son of god on earth is not to be defended, what right do you think you have to decide you are more important than that?
And you then proceed to take a scripture out of context to defend your position:
Based on Luke 22, the implication is clear, that Jesus didn't raise a bunch of idiot disciples
Wrong, read the verse again:
36 "But now," he said, "take your money and a traveler's bag. And if you don't have a sword, sell your clothes and buy one! 37 For the time has come for this prophecy about me to be fulfilled: `He was counted among those who were rebels.' [1] Yes, everything written about me by the prophets will come true."
38 "Lord," they replied, "we have two swords among us."
"That's enough," he said.
As you can plainly see, he was instructing the disciples to BRING SWORDS so that he could LATER DEMONSTRATE THEY SHOULD NOT BE USED (re: the cutting off of the ear).
Unless you REALLY think Jesus meant for 2 swords alone ("that is enough"?) to be able to defend all his apostles and disciples in their travels?
What is was ENOUGH for was to prove a point - specifically, that swords SHOULD NOT BE USED BY CHRISTIANS TO DEFEND THEMSELVES.
And, what does John 18:36 say, as clear as day?
36 Then Jesus answered, "I am not an earthly king. If I were, my followers would have fought when I was arrested by the Jewish leaders. But my Kingdom is not of this world."
I don't know, but it seems pretty clear what he is saying.
our school, plainview elementary in ardmore, ok, is having a science fair.. the fair will be held march 25, 2003.. .
i am a fifth grader and my little brother, reid, is a second grader.. we decided to work on this project together.
are keeping track of how many e-mails we get back, and what cities, states,.
that might be considered internet terrorism
I don't think they consider it that yet, but it is definately illegal.
i read this in today's philadelphia inquirer, and i completely agree with it.
anyone else care to read and comment please.
posted on tue, feb. 11, 2003jane eisner | president bush's religious language may be heartfelt - but what if it's also exclusionary?.
Remember, this is the man whose father stated that atheists shouldn't be considered American citizens.
I guess it runs in the family.
