PV Gap

Julian Said:

IF you could rewrite DC comic history(story lines)what would you change?

We Answered:

1. Barbara Gordon would've never got shot by the Joker, thus still allowing her to be Batgirl

2. Batman's "death" in Final Crisis would've never happened (we all know he's not really dead anyway...."Death Of Superman" anyone?)

3. Martian Manhunter wouldn't have been killed in the same series

4. DC wouldn't be trying to bring back Barry Allen as the Flash (I know characters get brought back in comics but c'mon....Barry Allen's been dead for like 25 years! Just let Wally keep being the Flash)

Raul Said:

The mysterious world of the controversies surrounding the peripheries of the sphericity of our Solar System?

We Answered:

Have I found my theory? That opens up about a million more questions about interstellar medium in comparison to the existing accepted theories on the books currently. I have been pondering a new idea about the creation of our star and solar system. Much of the existing theories make mention of mass collapsing by its own gravity. This idea is the most basic and simple theory in regard to interstellar medium. My point is that existing gas and dust collapsing by its own gravity would take way too much time and extends way beyond the said birth date of the universe, which is still a very questionable theory of 13.5 to 14 billion years old.

I say it would take more than 100 billion years for a star to form by gas and dust on its own gravity. 100 billion years is key here as it is said to be the age of the most ancient dwarf stars which by modern theory cant exist, well not yet at least. But what if, by chance, outside forces of unknown immeasurable ages have everything to do with the creation of stars and planets? What if we had a combination of events which triggered the existence of the our system? Perhaps a shock wave from a supernova swept through or maybe not? Maybe an ancient star swept through an existing void and twisted everything up creating a giant coriolis effect speeding up the creation of our star (Kinda like the opposite swirling when something moves through deep surface of water creating two differential whirlpools). Lets say it did happen and it created everything we see in our solar system. Could it explain the 22 year cycle pole shift on our Sun? Could it explain the clockwise motion of Venus while the other outer planets rotate counter clockwise (Mercury "Still")?

It would not be unusual to mention the orbit of the strange babyonian object said to traverse this system every 3600 years follows the same path inbetween Earth and Venus? Two planets with opposite rotation? Merucry still and cold without rotation (A moon of dust revolving around the Sun?) The unexplained 22 year magnetic field flip of the sun and the milky way galaxy's counter clockwise rotation? All the other planets or rotating counter clockwise in a sea of darkness.

If we were created by a fast moving object colliding not only with the existing dark matter existing here during that time, but also the darkness which held all the gas and dust together in the once believed vacuum of power which is now denied, What else could have stirred us up in this giant melting pot? Are we sitting on top of it? Why is it said earth also may flip its polarity (Still Unexplained) Where we left behind by a binary star which returns in a giant intergalactic orbit? Anything is possible is it not? Now that I have answered with more questions, please, tell me what you think.

Hope this spin is entertaining to you.

Holly Said:

Obama calls for a new generation of nuclear energy?

We Answered:

I'm not quite sure what your question is; could you clarify?

I don't see anything inappropriate about Obama endorsing nuclear power. The reality is that if we want to continue to have an industrial civilisation we will need to move from a fossil fuel energy base and economy to a fission fuel one. The US is rather late in coming to that realisation and it's not clear that you get it yet.

Meanwhile, other countries have been going forward with nuke developments. I'm sure you are aware of the situation in Canada, France, Japan and Sweden with nuclear programmes that are decades old. You can add China, S. Africa, Argentina, Korea, Singapore, and Taiwan. As the US is maybe pondering the nuclear option, several other countries are going forward with commitments, probably motivated by "no coal, no oil, no choice" considerations.

And nuclear technology is not a 2 guys in a garage thing, it is Very capital intensive and regulatory (for obvious safety reasons) intensive that is comparable to aerospace or semiconductors. We're not talking about Silicon Valley start-up economics. For a country to develop a viable nuclear power industry, there will have to be significant government support.

So, yes, I think it is reasonable for Obama to speak in support of nuclear power. And I think it would be more appropriate if the US were to develop a rational energy policy, for nuclear and other sources.

Or was your question about whether it is in Obama's political interest to be associated with nukes?


p.s. re the nuclear waste problem, it is really a non-issue. Spent fuel rods can be recycled to yield more fuel as plutonium either through processing or with a heavy water reactor as part of the normal operating process. Even in storage, nuclear waste is not a big issue because the volume is minuscule compared to the waste from fossil fuel products. I really don't know why Americans (and many others) believe that nuclear waste is such a killer problem, except of course ignorance of basic science.

For real, there is far more radiation (and carcinogenic and teratogenic substances) emitted by coal burning plants than ever from nukes.

Evelyn Said:

History of Earth's orbit and Solar flux?

We Answered:

I did the math once, and wish I still had that information on hand, because I do not wish to go through it again. But essentailly, the sun loses about 0.1% of it's mass over a 1 billion year timeframe at this rate. (I think that was the right percentage, it might have been 100 million years though, I don't recall the exact figures... I'm sure someone better at gravitational physics will correct my numbers if I am not recalling them correctly. This would create a very negligible change in a planet's distance from the sun, via Kepler's Laws, as the sun is nearly all of the mass in any planetary orbit around it.

The heating of the sun by far outweighs the ever so slowly increasing distance.

<ADDED>
Although, something else that is interesting, slightly off topic, but loosely correlated...

"The increasing AU."

Perhaps we need a better model of gravity than Newton or Einstein?

http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0508047

Julie Said:

i need help with a thesis statement for L.A.?

We Answered:

Your thesis statement is a quick-and-dirty summary of your viewpoint in the paper.
Here's a helpful resource:
http://www.campusgrotto.com/how-to-write…