Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.


The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online Now
0 members (), 301 guests, and 0 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
Top Posters(30 Days)
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 3 of 5 1 2 3 4 5
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
P
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
P
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
Originally Posted By: orac
everyone else worked it out


I really enjoy it when you say things like that orac.

I find it entertaining when you try to cover up your faults
by claiming more and more falsities and including others into
your additional false claims.

orac , I dont see anyone else claiming that light does not transmit through a medium in this thread other than you , even the link that pokey put up does not claim that.

even the title of the thread suggest that you dont even
believe what you are claiming.

Originally Posted By: title of this thread
Transmission of light thru a media


knowing that , wouldnt it be more factual for you to say that you are the only person in the universe that worked that out?

so the real mystery is why you think the way that you do and who are the "everyone else" that you have now become?

whistle

Quote:
You have my sympathy Paul ... sorry it must be hard


what must really be hard for a QMtard such as yourself
is when someone like myself shatters your fantasy QM claims.

all the proud boasting and clique back patting comes to
a screeching halt.


3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.
.
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
P
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
P
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
orac, heres where your chain of thought became blurred.

Quote:
So I thought there is something wrong with these numbers how can they be quoting absolute speeds without telling me the thickness.


I was so certain they had to be wrong I searched for the answer to the question how thick a piece of glass, air and water is required to completely stop light travelling thru it.


the thickness of the medium does not matter as long as
the atoms in the medium are constant throughout.

so if your medium were 10,000 km long as in a fiber optic cable the light still passes through it , and the length of
the optic cable would determine the speed at which light transmits through it.

due only to the photon emission delay.

and delays due to temperature.

you somehow assumed that when a photon excites an atom in the medium and a photon was emitted by atoms in the medium the light would eventually stop completely if there were enough atoms in the path of the light.

but you forgot that photons are emitted at or above the speed of light.

so there is no slowing of the light there is only the delay
of photon emission.

ie..the number of interactions in the medium determine the
degree of slowing of the light ( photons , electromagnetic waves).

the temperature and density of the medium is the key to
slowing light.

your main problem was that you neglected that photons are
emitted at or near the speed of light.

even the last photon in the media that excites an atom before the atom emits a photon is traveling at or near the speed of light and the emitted photon that exits the medium is traveling at or near the speed of light.

when the light leaves the medium it is traveling at the speed of light.






3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
O
Orac Offline OP
Megastar
OP Offline
Megastar
O
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
As you asked a semi intelligent reply rather than the usual science beat my god up garbage I will answer


Nothing we have said contradicts anything you have said except three MAJOR corrections

1.) There never is an above the speed of light EVER.

2.) The light wave passing thru the media is an EM wave it is electromagnetic in nature and it is reacting with the electrons in the media which are electric in their nature. This is the interaction you somehow can't see smile

3.) There never is a particle, light is a wave, the historic particle nature of light was largely conceived to understand manifestations of the light in the charge clouds in the media.


Density, temperature and anything else that effects the movement of the electrons in a media will effect the speed of light. Nothing we have said changes any behavior of light from the classic sense other than there are no particles.

I am sorry Paul to make us wrong you would have to show us a particle of light because that is the only thing we have changed from everything you believe above .... get it that's the only difference we don't have photons as particles we have photons as little wave packets.

If you want to believe there are little particles of light because it somehow makes you sleep better with your GOD then knock yourself out. The problem is there are a number of situations you will simple not be able to explain like Electrically Induced Transparency and the ability to stop and store light etc.

The old science story of lights wave/particle duality we simply removed the particle bit from the story because it is actually unnecessary and misleading. So in any old science text which talks about a photon particle replace it with the words "photon wave packet" and you would be more correct and nothing from the original will have changed.

I should also add it is a little easier to accept how a wave gets absorbed by an atom than it is to have photons as a particle ball which gets absorbed and then suddenly disappears??? and then suddenly comes back again. That whole explaination always more than a little naft the old now you see it now you don't ball I think went out with the idea magic was real.

Last edited by Orac; 09/24/13 12:56 AM.

I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
P
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
P
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
well its a good thing that I havent mentioned a particle then
orac , but you have mentioned particle 11 times in this thread
and the word particle has been used 11 times in this thread
before this post that is.

so I suppose that all you wrote about particles suggesting that
I was saying that light is a particle must have been erroneous
like everything else you write.

Quote:
2.) The light wave passing thru the media is an EM wave it is electromagnetic in nature and it is reacting with the electrons in the media which are electric in their nature. This is the interaction you somehow can't see


light is a electromagnetic wave just like I said it was.

but light doesnt pass through like you say it does , photons
are absorbed by atoms and then the atoms emit new photons.

light is not a continous wave that passes thru a medium.

besides you say that the light doesnt even exist in the medium.

Quote:
1.) There never is an above the speed of light EVER.


even though we were discussing the speed of light in a
medium I suppose I should have said the photon is emitted
at or above the phase velocity of the medium ( the speed that light can travel in the medium ) instead of saying the photon is emitted at or above the speed of light.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_light#In_a_medium

Quote:
It is possible for a particle to travel through a medium faster than the phase velocity of light in that medium (but still slower than c).







3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
O
Orac Offline OP
Megastar
OP Offline
Megastar
O
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
haha you really don't get it do you if it worked that way there are obvious problems .. remember that's where the story started laugh

Moving media would cause light to move with it ... I THINK YOU EXPECTED THAT FROM MY CHILDHOOD EXPERIMENT .. I know naively or perhaps stupidly it was what I expected because I got told that story too. Being right or wrong is not the driver for me Paul understanding it all is something you never seem to get but then my world isn't dependent on being right science just corrects what it had wrong along the way.

In my head when I was playing with the centrifuge what I was imagining was waiting for the particle to get absorbed by the atom its momentum altered slightly by the centrifuge and it leaving at a new angle. You describe the same strory and expected the same result and it is logical you would expect it BUT it doesn't happen smile

If the story is true how does the photon keep an absolute sense of direction in a moving media???? To do that you need something weirder than QM you need a particle with an absolute sense of direction smile

I have seen a really really bad way to attempt to solve this by QM which is to claim the QM momentum is different to normal momentum and the QM momentum is maintained and when it resumes it's original path. Why that fails is QM doesn't allow absolute frames and you measure momentum in EXACTLY the same way as classic physics otherwise the two theories are incompatible.

The bigger issue is the absorption of atoms is at very very specific frequencies so how do media get broad spectrums. On solids like glass for example you can make up a story that the lattice has a wide resonance etc .. and that's what we used to do.

The problem is air has no lattice and it is a media and it slows a wide range of frequencies of light ..... the story now makes no sense.

If it worked the way you (and old science) describe then air should slow only very specific frequencies those that match the atoms of the gas ... surely you see the problem here observation doesn't match theory.

I will leave the faster than light phase shift stuff for now because that doesn't change the mechanism and you will suddenly find you are about to drop into another hole with that.

I really don't give a rats what you believe Paul I am past caring what a religious lunatic thinks so I am not going to try an convince you of anything, but fair to say if you view light as only a wave then you are not a classic solid worlder and in fact you agree with QM irrespective of what you say (First BEC exist, now wave behaviour we will convert you next) laugh For my part I am on the side of what can be shown and what makes sense and in this matter science had an impossible position it made no sense which is why a great many scientists were looking at the problem culminating in the final answer.

The huge issue you have from any other proposed answer comes from Electrical Induced Transparency you now have to explain how we are stopping the atoms absorbing and even reflecting light in some manner that remotely makes sense.

The whole reflecting light thing would actually be interesting to ask you how reflection works, we used to avoid talking about it like the plague especially partially reflective surfaces because it makes no real sense under the absorbing photon story so I would be interested how you see reflection of light working. In science we used to always switch to light being a wave because it is hard to make up a story of how a particle could suddenly change direction (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reflection_(physics)) note the sudden drop of absorption and particles even though many of these reflections are in a media such as air smile

Last edited by Orac; 09/24/13 05:47 AM.

I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
P
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
P
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
orac

Quote:
If the story is true how does the photon keep an absolute sense of direction in a moving media????


perhaps its frequency matching orac.

try this out

first the atoms electrons are excited by adding energy to
the atom causing the electron to move from its ground state
to a higher orbit around the atom called the excited bound state.

electrons orbit therefore the frequency of the electron
and the frequency of the EM wave will only match at certain points in the electrons orbit.

lets say this point is when the electron is at a 90 degree
angle to the atom as observed by the EM wave.

thus the electron becomes excited , emits a photon and
moves to a lower orbit.

the photon that is emitted would be emitted in line with the EM wave.

because when the photon is emitted that would be the vector
that the photon would assume at the moment of emission , like a rock being swung around in a orbit on a string when the string is released.

Quote:
The bigger issue is the absorption of atoms is at very very specific frequencies so how do media get broad spectrums.





the same as above , only the different frequencies of the
light in the spectrum will match the frequency of the orbiting
electron at angles higher and lower than 90 degrees.

the vector of the photon emission will vary according to the
position of the electrons orbit at the moment of photon emission.

thus causing the separation of the different light wave frequencies in the light spectrum.

ie...the frequency match will occur as the electron approaches
90 degrees or passes 90 degrees in its orbit.



3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
O
Orac Offline OP
Megastar
OP Offline
Megastar
O
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
That's a lot of if buts an maybe but at least you are actually thinking how to make it all work smile

By getting rid of the particle nature of light like you did, and thinking about broader interactions with the atoms and electrons, science and your view aren't that far apart.

There is however the reverse problem of spectral absorption lines. Air for example has quite a lot and our good friend laser cooling relies on the precise absorption of only specific frequencies.

You also haven't touched how we get Electrically Induced Transparency.

A theory has to cover all observations and results not just the one it likes and thinks it can match.


I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
P
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
P
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
Quote:
That's a lot of if buts an maybe but at least you are actually thinking how to make it all work


and I've been thinking a little more about it because I found
a problem with it.

the spectral separation worked fine during the first interaction
which vectors the photon off course , however the next interaction would vector the photon , and the next , and etc...

so you end up with a curve of light vs a straight line of light which may never exit the medium.

so heres how I fixed it.

first off I think of an instant as a slowly moving set of events that occur during that instant , there never is a single frame because each frame can be divided into a set of frames and each of those frames can be divided into a set of frames, etc...etc...theres no end.

1) energy is added to the electron.
2) the electron moves outward from its ground state.
3) heres my proposed fix , as the electron is moving outward from its ground state , each orbit around the nucleus brings it further outwards because its angular velocity is increasing.

the light wave encounters the electron while the electron is moving outward.

this encounter occurs again and again as the electron
is moving outward increasing its orbital radius , then when
the frequency of the light wave matches the frequency of the
outward moving electron at a 90 degree angle to the light wave the two waves line up , this stimulates the electron and the resulting vibration of the electron instantly slows the electron drastically * causing the energy contained in the electron to be ejected resulting in the emission of a photon , and the loss
of angular velocity of the electron causes the electron to move back to its ground state.

the new photon is emitted in the same direction as the photon
that was absorbed by the electron.

this removes the curvature noted above and causes the separated light waves to travel in a straight line through the medium.

that works for me for now , and its classical.

proposing an explanation of the initial vector of light
waves at the boundary of the medium will be my next project , I will need a few hours to think about it.


note:

the energy that was given to the atom that caused the electron to move outwards is not recovered , that energy is transfered into the medium as heat.

the added energy of the electron due to its angular velocity before the frequency match is not recovered , half of that energy combined with half of the energy of the light wave is transferred as heat into the medium because of the
vibration and slowing down of the electron.

energy is conserved.
momentum is conserved.
its all classical physics.

Quote:
causing the energy contained in the electron to be ejected


* by slowing the process down even further I realized that
as the electron is slowed down the incomming light wave
becomes compressed within the electron , building up in
intensity while the electron slows , which may be why a photon is emitted.





3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
P
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
P
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
Quote:
proposing an explanation of the initial vector of light
waves at the boundary of the medium will be my next project , I will need a few hours to think about it.


now Im faced with common knowledge that light waves
travel in a single direction such as the below image.



my interpretation of a light wave would be more like the below
image only the image is in 2D not 3D



we can see light when we look at a laser beam from a angle
so its obvious that the light that we see is reflected light
and is no longer a part of the laser beam.

because the light that we see is moving away from the laser beams direction.



this will take longer than I initially thought , I am finding
more and more problems and trying to sift through them.

maybe tomorrow.






3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
O
Orac Offline OP
Megastar
OP Offline
Megastar
O
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
Meanwhile in our QM fantasy we continue to push the new understanding

(Scientists create never-before-seen form of matter)
http://phys.org/news/2013-09-scientists-never-before-seen.html


I really liked the layman version for what we in QM called mixed state interactions, in this article

Quote:

"When the photon exits the medium, its identity is preserved," Lukin said. "It's the same effect we see with refraction of light in a water glass. The light enters the water, it hands off part of its energy to the medium, and inside it exists as light and matter coupled together, but when it exits, it's still light. The process that takes place is the same it's just a bit more extreme the light is slowed considerably, and a lot more energy is given away than during refraction."



I know Paul these experiments and results don't exist we make them all up laugh

Last edited by Orac; 09/26/13 12:26 AM.

I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
B
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
B
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
Looks like a new medium to pass light through.

http://www.laboratoryequipment.com/news/...amp;linkid=http


There never was nothing.
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
O
Orac Offline OP
Megastar
OP Offline
Megastar
O
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
Haha never thought of that Bill S. A medium built of light to pass light thru ... however off the top thinking about it no charge cloud (electrons) so it shouldn't react very much different to two laser beams fired thru each other.

It would actually be a weird medium I need to do some calculations and thinking on it, I will see if we could quantify some expected behaviors. I saw an article on the properties on Astatine .. let me see if I can find it

http://phys.org/news/2013-09-scientists-theorize-properties-fleeting-astatine.html

It will be even worse than that but an interesting exercise.


One of the more interesting things I am surprised they didn't try was to pass the combined photons thru a solid media like glass and see if it remained bonded or does it separate.

Last edited by Orac; 09/27/13 01:50 AM.

I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
P
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
P
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
more problems, Im still thinking about it though.

actually I figured it out several days ago , Im just pondering
if I should say anything.

given the destructive nature of scientist.


3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,209
N
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
N
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,209
Paul

Exist on more very simple fact


light ----> e-----C--------e <----Light

Important is direction and absolute motion ( medium )


atom looks very similar to solar system 20 km/s (ellipse )




A point = Apparent point
VERY IMPORTANT Animation !!!

(click) > animation expain apparent point


In my home I measure different brightness ???
The reason was aisotropy Transmission of light thru a media??

or Camera joust register different resistance
madium give resistance to light ( 30 km/s is important ???)




first test
> http://youtu.be/XF_npmQ8kGY

first pictures ( brightness - photoshop 10 histogram) west ( -30km/s ) and East (+30 km/s )
> http://youtu.be/O9k-zidfJZg

today I don't know why but below picture = good explain what we can do after repeat my test in home


??????????????????




Last edited by newton; 10/02/13 12:24 PM.
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,209
N
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
N
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,209
MEDIUM give anisotropy resistance to light ?


light ----> Medium ---Vo--> <------light

what is it Vo ?

Air and Earth ?

Eath is moving in the univerce 20 km/s 220 km/s 30 km/s ???

Can we measure different resistance of Air ??


?????????????????????????????????????

??????????????????????????????????

first test in home (POLAND 2012) ???
> http://youtu.be/XF_npmQ8kGY

first pictures ( brightness - photoshop 10 histogram) west ( -30km/s ) and East (+30 km/s )
> http://youtu.be/O9k-zidfJZg

CAN WE MEASURE VELOCITY ? = different resistance of medium ?

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-zD3SHCNAlkE/UK8ogrlmPiI/AAAAAAAAAPk/LqngqVuepwI/s1600/e1.JPG


HOW TO CONFIRM MY IDEA ???



Last edited by newton; 10/02/13 12:57 PM.
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
O
Orac Offline OP
Megastar
OP Offline
Megastar
O
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
Good luck with Paul ... you deserve each other ... the thought of it created my humorous moment for the day, like a bad scene from dumb and dumber all we need now is the owl laugh

Please both of you join up and expand science I really really want this!!!


Last edited by Orac; 10/03/13 03:08 AM.

I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
P
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
P
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
Orac

LOL

I cant figure out what these guys are saying either.

theres some sort of communication barrier or something.

they may be right , I just cant immerse myself in it.

because I dont understand what their trying to say.

I can just imagine how I would sound to them in their
native language were I to attempt writing to them in their
native language though , so I hope they understand that.

and I hope they dont think that Im picking at them.


3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
O
Orac Offline OP
Megastar
OP Offline
Megastar
O
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
Probably like I do .... My English is still pretty average, it has improved a little over the years smile

Went to go to the library today and it's closed because of government shutdown so I am bored !!!!!!

The shutdown affected you at all?

Last edited by Orac; 10/03/13 06:27 AM.

I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,209
N
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
N
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,209
Apparent point ???

>>> Important link

Please add to above animation one picture




please think about famous Newton's gravitation equation
Important is apparent distance !!!???

Are You able be 100 % sure that You are moving or the Source is moving ? YES !!! nothing is relative

Please study below graph Level of signal is very important
( Red/Blue shift it is not only one information that You can measure ) signal started in point 1 but Earth registered singnal in point 4 ( WHERE WILL BE POINT 4 after 6 months ???)







Newton's gravitation and distance ???
real distance is not important !!!
Importnt is apparent distance !!!


Not exist distance e---r1---C--r1---e

inside abslute coordination system
we have

e----C---------------e ------220 km/s ---->


electron feel forces from place where signal started not from real fresh atom's center position Reason is absolute motion
Electron way around atom center = ellipse ! not circle



Story of the image => http://io9.com/the-first-image-ever-of-a-hydrogen-atoms-orbital-struc-509684901


********************
GALLILEO below paragraph is right now in each books physics
***********************************
" Galileo postulated his relativity hypothesis: any two observers moving at constant speed and direction with respect to one another will obtain the same results for all mechanical experiments (it is understood that the apparatuses they use for these experiments move with them).
This idea has a very important consequence: velocity is not absolute. This means that velocity can only be measured in reference to some object(s), and that the result of this measurment changes if we decide to measure the velocity with respect to a diferent refernce point(s). Imagine an observer traveling inside a windowless spaceship moving away from the sun at constant velocity. Galileo asserted that there are no mechanical experiments that can be made inside the rocket that will tell the occupants that the rocket is moving .
The question ``are we moving'' has no meaning unless we specify a reference frame (are we moving with respect to that star'' is meaningful). This fact, formulated in the 1600's remains very true today and is one of the cornerstones of Einstein's theories of relativity."

*****************
Marosz we can describe each motion respect to apparent point
Apparent point = Virtual point it is not object BUT this point is very important for many experiment and test that we can make inside own coordination system that is moving( constant V)

How to start very long travel and not use so many fuel
( my small daughter told me dady please stop and wait ...)

If we will statr rocket opposite to main Earth velocity arrow
( absolute velocity ) the rocket will slown down or STOP ( Earth and SUN will be continue own constant motion )

*******************************

Light ----> MEDIUM(air) ---30km/s--> <-----LIGHT

light ---> e------C--------------e <----light

First test in Poland



first test
> http://youtu.be/XF_npmQ8kGY

first pictures ( brightness - photoshop 10 histogram) west ( -30km/s ) and East (+30 km/s )
> http://youtu.be/O9k-zidfJZg

HOW MANY AIR WILL GO LEFT AND HOW MANY AIR WILL GO TO RIGT



WHAT ABOUT Hz ( VIBRATION TEST )




Last edited by newton; 10/03/13 06:57 AM.
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,209
N
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
N
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,209
ORAC
when You feel pain please think About STARS smile







EINSTEIN FIRST DEMAND ?

GRAVITATION = CONSTANT ACCELERATION


MAROSZ (ME) PLEASE SHOW ME BODY INSIDE THE UNIVERS THAT HAVE CONSTAN ACCELERATION

CONSTANT ACCELERATION = THAT EXIST INFINITY SOURCE OF ENERGY
( NOT EXIST PEPETUM MOBILE aslo INFINITY SOURCE OF ENERGY NOT EXIST !!!! )

GGRAVITATION = CONSTANT SLOWDOWN ???
ALSO IT IS IMPOSSIBLE BECAUSE EACH BODY WILL STOP

CONSTANT ROTATION ? ( we can recognize different between rotation and gravitation ) figure skating and the law of conservation of angular momentum

MODERN PHYSICS NEED MANY NEW TEST AND PEOPLE WHO ARE OPEN
NOT CLOSED !!!

Last edited by newton; 10/03/13 08:15 AM.
Page 3 of 5 1 2 3 4 5

Link Copied to Clipboard
Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users
Sponsor

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact UsokW
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5