NFUN

Calm down K^2. Wedge, part of the problem with quantum mechanics is that 1, nobody *really* understands it. One can know the mechanisms and the math, but there's always that veneer of quantum weirdness that eludes explanation. Anything you've heard about probabilities and uncertainty* is just a result from one interpretation of quantum mechanics, the Copenhagen Interpretation, but there are other entire viewpoints on what's going on down there. As a result of this, we have problem B, that it can't adequately be explained to laypeople in a way that really is accurate. You might think you know some aspects of quantum physics, but, as K^2 said, you aren't trained in it and only know a rough, simplified explanation. In third grade I was taught that there were no numbers lower than zero (I called BS on this, but my teacher was insistent), and in 8th I was told it was impossible and pointless to square root a negative number. For what I needed to know these explanations were enough, but they weren't *right*. K^2 or another particle physicist could try to dumb-down their field enough for you or another layman to think they understand, but at the end of the day they'd likely have to make too many sacrifices for the explanation to be accurate or really anything but unnecessary false knowledge. *DISCLAIMER: I am not a physicist, and any statement I make is made out of ignorance and the illusion of knowledge I will be elucidating later.

Doesn't really answer his question. Science is pretty good at explaining the 'how'. The 'why' takes a bit more work. We'll get there eventually. We might already be there, but that probably takes several years of grad school to properly understand, QED and QCD and such. Or, you can use Pratchett's catch-all explanation for stuff like this, which is "because quantum".

You sure NASA has already done the moss study that the MossSat folks are doing? I'm pretty sure their experiment is unique.

They aren't going to the Martian moons or any other body. They are sending a moss-filled Cubesat to LEO to study.

This is probably my favorite website of all time.

A couple ball bearings must have fallen off.

Can you post a screenshot?

Slyandro, I summon thee! And grey goo won't happen. If it could, bacteria would probably have done it already.

Close...not really. I'm feeling @e of pi. It was easier to navigate to than Endermens.

No, the quote goes "Lighten up, Francis". Don't know where you got Danny from.

If you want to launch things with decouplers really quickly, just do this. It probably won’t work with heating, however.

The downshot here is that after reading diagrams like that (or articles) it's difficult to think coherently and one's mind feels fuzzy.

The weight wasn't significant. One only had to be on the forums for a few months or have like 50 rep to have it maxed out at 5. I only get less than 5 points of rep given to me once or twice. It's interesting that in this system, which has a less detailed reputation system that it rates your rep in your profile. You and I both have 'Excellent' reputation. You have 800 more points than I, there are so many lurkers.

The thing is, they aren't. In the general forums, the most recent posts are mine, yours, a post or two five minutes ago, then no posts until half an hour ago. There are a couple recent posts in the other forums, but it isn't unusually active. Or maybe people aren't posting that much.

I've started getting 502 errors again. Hopefully this is just a kink with the new software and will fix itself soon.

[quote name='Mad Rocket Scientist']But, if you make nanobots out of a planet, then you still have a planet, just one arranged into lots of nanobots. If you want to destroy a planet, look here: [URL]http://qntm.org/destroy[/URL][/QUOTE] Way ahead of you. 7 minutes ahead, to be exact.

According to [URL="http://qntm.org/destroy"]this[/URL] obvious completely accurate and not-at-all tongue-in-cheek source, nanotechnology will [B]*not*[/B] destroy the Earth, for the same reasons [B]Vanamode[/B] posted above.

[quote name='ZetaX']This cannot be answered without more information on how it is done I think. You want to change angular momentum, which is conserved. Hence you need to put it somewhere. It should be like with specific impulse: you can either spend more energy or more reaction mass. You could calculate the exact angular momentum, but that will not give you the energy. For example, you could try to change the axis by shooting packs of rock into space. Theoretically, even a single rock the size of your fist would suffice, but you require absurd amounts of energy then. Or you could somehow abuse the moon or the sun (those, followed by the planets, are also what mainly influences the tilt in real life) for it, which gives you much more reaction mass to work with, leading to significantly lower energy usage. if you can somehow tie the entire Milky Way to this, then the energy probably becomes laughable (but to actually get there you would probably require absurd energies again). By doing a very very precise prediction you could maybe abuse the chaoticity of the system to just throw a rock into space now and then wait for a billion years for it to do all the work itself.[/QUOTE] You wouldn't be able to calculate the energy of Earth's rotation (I/2*omega^2)?

Without reading the OP nor the thread, I'm going to go ahead and say 'Yes'.

I might be mistaken, but I think I remember that some nuclear bombs had ways to be deactivated from the plane in case the bomber wouldn't have time to escape the blast.

-32 Negative for nihilism. People have won before, what's the point? Let's set the world on fire, it might be fun to watch.

4. It's kill or BE killed.

Here comes Sin...

17 *bangs pots and pans loudly* Wake up guys!