• 60 seconds and one minute aren't really the same?

    60 seconds and one minute aren't really the same?

    Best answer: Sometimes one is faster
    Has nobody thought about the Speed of Dark
    Or the Speed of Thought which has to be faster
    Like 13.8 Billion Light years in a blink of an eye
    Analyse that if you wish
    Best answer: Sometimes one is faster
    Has nobody thought about the Speed of Dark
    Or the Speed of Thought which has to be faster
    Like 13.8 Billion Light years in a blink of an eye
    Analyse that if you wish
    63 answers · Other - Electronics · 2 weeks ago
  • Can you give me some information about Jupiter?

    I can't find information anywhere, and my report is due tomorrow!
    I can't find information anywhere, and my report is due tomorrow!
    72 answers · Astronomy & Space · 2 weeks ago
  • Is there really a neutron star heading towards earth in the year 2080 or 2087 please answer?

    Best answer: NO. There are no neutron stars within 20 lightyears of the Solar System. And why, with eight planets, 179 moons and who knows how many dwarf planets and asteroids, Earth would be singled out. Strictly nutcase nonsense
    Best answer: NO. There are no neutron stars within 20 lightyears of the Solar System. And why, with eight planets, 179 moons and who knows how many dwarf planets and asteroids, Earth would be singled out. Strictly nutcase nonsense
    24 answers · Astronomy & Space · 2 weeks ago
  • What is the difference between the telescope and the microscope?

    Best answer: Both need to produce their image at a workable distance from the objective lens. With the telescope the object is near infinity so the image is near to the objective lens' focal point. With the microscope the object is placed close to the focal point so the image is near to "infinity" relative to... show more
    Best answer: Both need to produce their image at a workable distance from the objective lens.
    With the telescope the object is near infinity so the image is near to the objective lens' focal point.
    With the microscope the object is placed close to the focal point so the image is near to "infinity" relative to that.

    Hence short focal lengths close to the object for the microscope, long focal lengths close to the image for the telescope.
    Otherwise the geometry and design are identical.
    13 answers · Engineering · 2 weeks ago
  • I’m a junior doctor. I was at the pharmacy earlier and saw a pharmacist hand a group of boys two bags filled with codeine cough syrup...?

    It was very dodgy and appeared very secretive. And I know that no one needs that much cough syrup and no doctor would even prescribe that much to anyone. So I know that there was some weird deal going on and they’re using it for recreational purposes. I minded my business but now I feel like I should have had a... show more
    It was very dodgy and appeared very secretive. And I know that no one needs that much cough syrup and no doctor would even prescribe that much to anyone. So I know that there was some weird deal going on and they’re using it for recreational purposes. I minded my business but now I feel like I should have had a word with the pharmacist. Did I do the right thing...especially because I’m a doctor so I know it’s not right?
    29 answers · Law & Ethics · 2 weeks ago
  • Is it true that the astronomical telescopes on the ground can only observe visible light and radio waves from outer space?

    Best answer: In general terms, yes. Only a limited range of electromagnetic radiation can get through Earth's atmosphere clearly. Infrared and ultraviolet get through less well, and X-rays and gamma rays even less well than them (just as well as they are dangerous to life) There ARE infrared telescopes on the ground but... show more
    Best answer: In general terms, yes. Only a limited range of electromagnetic radiation can get through Earth's atmosphere clearly. Infrared and ultraviolet get through less well, and X-rays and gamma rays even less well than them (just as well as they are dangerous to life) There ARE infrared telescopes on the ground but it's like looking through fog, so it's even more vital than with optical telescopes to put them high up on mountains to be above as much of the atmosphere as possible.

    So for the best view, yes, you need to put your telescope on a satellite.
    9 answers · Astronomy & Space · 2 weeks ago
  • I have a space station creating artificial gravity via linear acceleration. how would you use momentum to find the stations fuel consumption?

    Best answer: To maintain 1G of gravity, you have to accelerate at that rate. if the mass of the craft is m, then you need to apply a force F = ma where a = 10 m/s² if you continue that for t seconds, d = ½at² d = ½10•t² = 5t² meters traveled work = energy needed = Fd = ma(5t²) = 10m(5t²) = 50mt² that tells you the energy... show more
    Best answer: To maintain 1G of gravity, you have to accelerate at that rate.

    if the mass of the craft is m, then you need to apply a force F = ma where a = 10 m/s²

    if you continue that for t seconds, d = ½at²
    d = ½10•t² = 5t² meters traveled

    work = energy needed = Fd = ma(5t²) = 10m(5t²) = 50mt²
    that tells you the energy needed.
    velocity = at = 10t
    momentum = mV = 10mt

    If you are just throwing reaction mass out the back at velocity V₀, then the momentum of the fuel thrown out the back is m₀V₀
    m₀V₀ = 10mt
    so the mass of fuel used is
    m₀ = 10mt/V₀

    To try some numbers....
    if you have a craft mass of 10000 kg, a time of 3600 seconds (1 hour), fuel velocity of 1e8 m/s (1/3 of light, pretty extreme)
    then mass of fuel would be
    m₀ = 10mt/V₀ = 10•10000•3600/1e8 = 3.6 kg
    this is for every hour.

    at some point, the mass thrown away would become a significant portion of the total mass, and the equations would change.

    or course you would reach relativistic speeds at some point so the equations would change. v = at.
    to reach c/2, t = 1.5e8/10 = 1.5e7 seconds or about 6 months.
    6 answers · Physics · 2 weeks ago
  • I am interested in being a large animal vet, but I do not want to work with animals (livestock) being used and bred for food?

    Best answer: Get your basic degree, then move on into 'exotics' so you can work with zoo animals. Or focus on working with wildlife.
    Best answer: Get your basic degree, then move on into 'exotics' so you can work with zoo animals. Or focus on working with wildlife.
    7 answers · Zoology · 2 weeks ago
  • What to do if I took 40 Advil.?

    Best answer: Throw up.
    Best answer: Throw up.
    16 answers · Medicine · 2 weeks ago
  • Compare the size of Eris to Pluto?

    Eris: 2326 km Pluto: 2377km find relative difference
    Eris: 2326 km Pluto: 2377km find relative difference
    11 answers · Astronomy & Space · 2 weeks ago
  • Carl Sagan or Snooki?

    17 answers · Celebrities · 2 weeks ago
  • Has there been any cases of poisoning from honey, if the bees have collected nectar from poisonous plants such as nightshades?

    Best answer: Yes. Honey made predominantly from rhododendrons is very toxic as it contains grayanotoxins,. It can result in "mad honey disease." Human death is very unlikely.

    The pollen of oleander is also toxic and can lead to toxic honey.
    Best answer: Yes. Honey made predominantly from rhododendrons is very toxic as it contains grayanotoxins,. It can result in "mad honey disease." Human death is very unlikely.

    The pollen of oleander is also toxic and can lead to toxic honey.
    6 answers · Botany · 2 weeks ago
  • Is it inaccurate to report the weight of a sample to be <0.00 grams? (chemistry lab)?

    i was weighing a very small sample of a compound that i produced from an experiment. when i weighed it on a top-loading balance, it did not read at all and it just showed 0.00g my fault for not using a more sensitive balance but with the data that i have, would it be inaccurate to say that it weighs <0.00... show more
    i was weighing a very small sample of a compound that i produced from an experiment. when i weighed it on a top-loading balance, it did not read at all and it just showed 0.00g my fault for not using a more sensitive balance but with the data that i have, would it be inaccurate to say that it weighs <0.00 grams? or should i say <0.01g? i just don't want the <0.00 grams to be mistaken as a negative number when i'm just trying to say that it may have weighed 0.005 grams or something.
    11 answers · Chemistry · 2 weeks ago
  • Math math math?

    Best answer: 100(80-60)/80
    2000/80
    100/4
    25%

    "Screen shot fot solutiom please"
    are you serious? you have the answer
    Best answer: 100(80-60)/80
    2000/80
    100/4
    25%

    "Screen shot fot solutiom please"
    are you serious? you have the answer
    9 answers · Mathematics · 2 weeks ago
  • Is universe or are universes?

    Best answer: In efforts to explain by natural processes alone the design and fine-tuning evident in the cosmos, still others turn to what has been called the multiverse, or many-universe, theory. According to this hypothesis, perhaps we live in just one of countless universes—all of which have different conditions, but none of... show more
    Best answer: In efforts to explain by natural processes alone the design and fine-tuning evident in the cosmos, still others turn to what has been called the multiverse, or many-universe, theory. According to this hypothesis, perhaps we live in just one of countless universes—all of which have different conditions, but none of which have any purpose or design. Now according to that line of reasoning and the laws of probability, if you have enough universes, eventually one of them should have the right conditions to support life. However, there actually is no scientific evidence to support the multiverse theory. It is pure speculation.
    18 answers · Motorcycle Racing · 2 weeks ago