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 (), 39 guests, and 2 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
Top Posters(30 Days)
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 7 of 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
O
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
O
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
YOUR ANSWER ABOVE DISAGREES WITH YOUR PREVIOUS ANSWER "THE LIGHT WAS FOLLOWING THE BEAM AND BEING DEFLECTED".

So have you gone to individual atoms emitting spherical emission as your answer?

Extension question is light a wave or a particle, both or none?

That is after all the question, and your answer is a little light on detail smile

So how does our colored electron beam work and then how do things like laser cooling work. Your answer for laser cooling ages ago had photon particles hitting into the atoms.

You are the only one who can answer these, and you have been trying to drag me in to this classical physics stupidity for about the last 20 posts .... SO NOW DISCUSS IT.

Now suddenly you have gone all quite just when it got interesting ... or are you a bit off color laugh

Paul, you seem to have a problem when you don't have me to argue against smile

If you are going on I suggest I give you the simple kiddie experiment we use, which gives you no place to hide. You are left with only a couple of options and they all have consequences. Let me know if you want it.

So are we done with this classical physics trash now? Can we move along to something more intelligent. As I said the whole discussion was waste of time and effort, and we end now at "do re me" because that is all we could ever end at.

Last edited by Orac; 03/10/16 01:58 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
Quote:
YOUR ANSWER ABOVE DISAGREES WITH YOUR PREVIOUS ANSWER "THE LIGHT WAS FOLLOWING THE BEAM AND BEING DEFLECTED".


no it doesnt dissagree.

the sphere of light can be deformed by gravitational
or magnetic influence as evidenced in the green laser video.

a focused beam of light is a oblong sphere of light that
has been deformed due to the influence of gravitational
or magnetic influence.

so the emitted light spheres are deformed in the electron gun
due to magnetic influence the same way that the path of the electrons are deformed by magnetic influence.

the shell of the light sphere interacts with the gravitational
and magnetic influences that it encounters in its environment.

I cant seem to think of a proper example to use to describe
the motion and acceleration of the environmentally influenced shell of the light sphere.

think of the thin shell of a extremely elastic rubber balloon.

the balloon is filled with a slightly compressed gas and
the gas supports the shell of the balloon so that the shell
forms a perfect sphere.

the gas molecules inside the balloon interact with a magnetic field.

when the argon gas in the electron gun emit a sphere of
light due to the interaction with a electron in the electron stream the gas molecules in the balloon are accelerated
by the magnetic field in the electron gun and the individual
gas molecules inside the balloon are accelerated according to the intensity of the field resulting in a oblong sphere of curved light.

Quote:
So have you gone to individual atoms emitting spherical emission as your answer?


the only way that light can be emitted is if a atom emits the
light , and light is a sphere.

Quote:
Extension question is light a wave or a particle, both or none?


the wave that is used to describe light is most
likely simply a means of description that describes a single
flash of light emission from the moment of the flash of light
emission up to the maximun intensity of the flash and down to the moment that the flash has passed by.

the above description includes the lenght and intensity of a single flash of emitted light as the shell of the sphere
of light passes a single point within a time range.

a particle of light to me says a perfectly straight line
and since I am hardheaded and strickly classic for now
I'm going to go with particle until I find a better word.

Quote:
Now suddenly you have gone all quite just when it got interesting ... or are you a bit off colo


unlike yourself orac I am a human being that requires
sleep , so try to keep you panties from getting so
wadded up in knots when I leave for a few hours to sleep.

you should have your programmers insert a timer function
to turn your program off for a few hours a day to avoid the
lonelyness that you seem to be experiencing.

cry




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
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
O
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
So a laser is just a really really really stretched ellipse so it just looks like a line??????? I am trying to understand you here.

Originally Posted By: Paul
so try to keep you panties from getting so
wadded up in knots when I leave for a few hours to sleep

I really don't care about any of this I already know the problems no matter what logic you use we will come unstuck. If we don't you just solved the biggest problem in classical physics and what ultimately is wrong with it. I win anyhow as I will write it up, credit you and we collect the Nobel prize and we split the money and glory smile

The point you keep failing to understand is I am open to any answer so long as it makes sense, and you can convert me and I am on your side wink

You need to explain another thing to me does the power of your sphere of light work?

Let me describe a setup:

We have an atom that produces a single photon flash (its called a single photon source) and you are saying the flash spreads out as a sphere like a radio wave, I think. Now in a circle several meters away I have 20 photovoltaic cells (solar cells) around in an even ring each the same distance from the photon flash facing directly at it.

So an icosagon each of the 20 points on the circle has a solar cell facing the single photon source in the middle


Now do each of the 20 cells register a voltage 1/20th or less of the value compared to if I had the source right close to the single photon source?

The voltage of a solar cell is directly proportional to the power of the light hitting the cell and it is instant so I can understand how your power of the sphere emission works.

As you can probably guess I already know what happens here (this is a classic university experiment), so be careful get it wrong and your theory is dead smile

If you want to do this experiment at home (to check the universities) I can give you the radio wave version which behaves exactly the same as what we do here with light. It drives the kids nuts when they are shown the experiment because it only makes sense if you adapt things.

Last edited by Orac; 03/10/16 04:16 PM.

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:
So a laser is just a really really really stretched ellipse so it just looks like a line??????? I am trying to understand you here.


no no no , I was talking about the way a sphere of light
would behave inside a electron gun.

a laser would only allow light to escape out through the
light emission end of the laser.

and laser light is simply focused intensified light
so a light sphere would behave the same way as a sphere of light would outside of the laser.

Quote:
Now do each of the 20 cells register a voltage 1/20th or less of the value compared to if I had the source right close to the single photon source?


isnt it 6kW / day 1300 watts / hour ( 5 hour day ) per
square meter solar irradiance ... from the sun?
the strongest solar pannels today are apx 150 - 200 (watts)
per apx square meter.

the efficiency of a photoelectric cell is apx 1/7th of the
possible energy from the sun.

but they are getting better.

so if the light in the center used 8 kW / day and the achieved
light irradiance was 6kW / day per square meter and each of
the 20 photocells were 1/20th of a square meter then the photocells might register a total of 175 watts / hour or 8.75 watts / hour each.

Quote:
The voltage of a solar cell is directly proportional to the power of the light hitting the cell and it is instant so I can understand how your power of the sphere emission works.


solar cells are no where near that efficient , if they were
I would fill the inside of a clothes closet with a few
solar pannels and put a 500 watt lamp in it and power
the rest of the house with it...

BTW , you can keep the nobel prize but I will be wanting the
money.




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
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
O
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
You changed the experiment so lets add more detail to bring it to what we are after.

i) The room in which our setup is in pitch black.
ii) The cells are producing zero volts obviously there is no light at all.
iii) Each cell is connected to a storage oscilloscope because we are going to have to measure fast.
iv) Our photon source in the middle turns on for one pulse every 10 minutes. This is like you you flicking the dimmest light globe on and off once really really fast in 10 minutes.

Our oscilloscopes will record the response of the solar cells to that one photon every 10 minutes.

The power equations in your post above you refer to are MACRO laws for continuous power situations. Like all such laws you can bend and violate them if you understand what they are really measuring which is what we are trying to do here. Those laws are correct by the way for the macro situation with normal setups but you can bend them with special setups.

We are interested in the behaviour of one photon (the smallest flick on/off) of a light pulse we can make.

So given our complete dark setup what will the oscilloscopes of each cell see in response to the single photon emission every 10 minutes.

Whats your prediction? Our money awaits if you can get it right.

To help I will tell you what doesn't happen which is the logical expectation based on the MACRO laws. Naively we (perhaps it's just me when I first saw this) would expect all the 20 cells to record a fleeting fast voltage spike settling back down to zero as the room goes black again. You might also expect if you took the panels closer to the source you would get higher fleeting voltage spike recorded by the oscilloscopes on each of the 20 cells as you would expect the power to be higher.

HINT THAT IS NOT WHAT HAPPENS ... our macro laws don't work in this situation. As I said there is a fun version you can do at home which shows the same thing which I will discuss in a minute.

The thing the experiment throws up is what is wrong with the macro laws and what are they based on. I am strictly avoiding giving you any answers just giving you the results for you to work with the raw experiment results with no interpretation. I really want my money if you can solve it.

Last edited by Orac; 03/11/16 08:43 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
the experiment will work the same way as a home style
solar pannel will.

the larger collection area the larger the amount of
light energy the collector can collect and process into
electricity.

you didnt say what the size of the collection area
of the 20 photo cells was.

and you didnt say what the efficiency of the photo cells
were.

you didnt say what the emission energy of the photon was.

you didnt say what the distance from the light source
to the photo cells was.

you didnt say that the experiment would be performed
in a medium free environment.

without knowing all of the above I can only say that
light would propagate to the photo cells.

assuming that the photo cells used can pick up
the single flash of light and trigger some electrical
circuit.

I can also say that if you had 20 light activated
cameras they each should record the same amount of brightness
of the photon flash if they were all a set distance from the
photon flash.

or a thousand / million / billion miniture cameras mounted to form a sphere around the flash.

if there is a flash then they should all record the same brightness visible from the set distance to the light source.

so knowing that then if you know the amount of energy that
one of the single photo cells on the cameras produced to trigger the electrical circuit then all you need to do is to multiply the amount of energy collected and processed by the
photo cell x the number of cameras you used.

shocked









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
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
O
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
And yet that isn't what happens smile

The cell sensitivity is set to the level of the one flash that is about all you need to know. Each panel just has the ability to "just" register the flash. The rest of your stuff is window dressing and detail we need not worry about.

Yet when the flash happens exactly one will see the flash and only one not all of them.

It's funny weird hey .... if you have one panel that is more sensitive it will see the flash more likely than the others. If you move one panel slightly closer it will see the flash with increased likelyhood.

The best way I can explain it in layman terms is in some ways it is like lightning. All the cells have the same potential to see the flash but the moment one reaches a point that it does see the flash all the energy seems to go to that cell and there is only enough energy to register on one cell.

The result here is known and done by thousands of students every year and that is what happens. It shows the breakdown of the macro laws and your answer above is the one we all initially think should be the case and indeed I thought the same should occur.

Would you like the home experiment with RF so you can do it and see the behaviour on RF?

Last edited by Orac; 03/11/16 01:26 PM.

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:
The cell sensitivity is set to the level of the one flash that is about all you need to know. Each panel just has the ability to "just" register the flash. The rest of your stuff is window dressing and detail we need not worry about.

Yet when the flash happens exactly one will see the flash and only one not all of them.


LOL , very convienient! wink

a thousand pictures say a single word.

a billion pictures say the same word only louder.



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:
The best way I can explain it in layman terms is in some ways it is like lightning. All the cells have the same potential to see the flash but the moment one reaches a point that it does see the flash all the energy seems to go to that cell and there is only enough energy to register on one cell.


you dont actually believe that do you?

what your saying is that all the light vanishes as soon
as the one cell detects the light... seriously?

so now we have a light sink that sucks all the light
energy into a single photo cell... its amazing to me
how advanced experiment rigging has become.

tell me , what was the purpose of the experiment?

and so that I can experience the wonders of this
certain impossible phenomenon would you mind telling
me the common name of this experiment?





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
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
O
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
Well try it yourself at home all you need is a phone and some flashing led phone tips from your local phone store or any device that harvest RF power from the signal.

http://www.neatstuffusa.com/cellular11/Flashing_Antex.html they are a few bucks from any phone store accessory store.

Stand the phone up and move one of the tips in just close enough so it glows. Try each tip individually and make sure they glow at this point.

Now at this point if you draw a circle around the phone the power at that distance should be the same at ever point on the circle and test each tip works at each point on the circle.

Now the problem put another couple of tips on the circle anywhere you like you will get a surprise they wont all light up together.

The phone simply can't power all the tips and only some will stay on. Try any one individually and they will power but it simply can't lift too many because although the RF emission spreads out spherically the moment you start drawing power something happens and our spherical emission collapses.

The purpose of the experiment is simply to show you the behaviour which you need to explain. If we measure the field it does indeed spread spherically and you have the possibility to draw power at that point. The problem becomes when you actually start to absorb the transmission power.

Normally the transmission power is far greater than the power we draw but here we are investigating what happens if there isn't enough power.

I am not trying to convert you or convince you but simply show you what happens. It's a problem nobody has been able to solve using classical physics because your laws change, collapse or vary or something.

This has nothing to do with belief it is what happens in easy to demonstrate experiments and we know the issue it is the power.

That is why when this collapse happens it's easier for science to consider that the light was a particle that flew directly to the detector and that is why classical science has the particle behaviour of light. I won't defend it but that it's what historically they did to explain the behaviour.

Originally Posted By: paul
what your saying is that all the light vanishes as soonas the one cell detects the light... seriously?

Ok I would say the emission pattern changes I wouldn't say the light disappears. Lightning does somewhat the same thing if I had to compare it to something, it starts a sheet of voltage but once it breaks and produces actual energy it goes in a totally emission characteristic. Why does lightning hit a particular tree or building and not another.

Repeating these are experiments done on multiple forms of EM waves they all behave like it and not something that I have a choice in believing ... it happens repeatedly in all experiments.

Last edited by Orac; 03/11/16 02:16 PM.

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
perhaps the RF harvester is causing the RF sphere to
collapse because of the consumption of the RF at the
location of the RF harvester and this causes the remaining
RF sphere to undergo a frequency change.

have they measured the remaining sphere to see if it has undergone a change in frequency?

Im assuming that the RF harvesters only harvest a certain
RF.






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
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
O
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
Originally Posted By: paul
perhaps the RF harvester is causing the RF sphere to
collapse because of the consumption of the RF at the
location of the RF harvester and this causes the remaining
RF sphere to undergo a frequency change.

have they measured the remaining field to see if it has undergone a change in frequency?

The frequency is unchanged but the field collapses in the RF case it looks like the RF harvester is directly connected to the antenna by a direction link or antenna even though the antenna is unchanged.

Now obviously something similar must happen to light which is nothing more than an EM wave itself.

Originally Posted By: paul
Im assuming that the RF harvesters only harvest a certain RF.

The RF harvesters are very non frequency sensitive they are coils and a few diodes in the form I gave you. Google phone detectors they are basically homebrews of the same thing.

Measuring the result is easy coming up with a theory of why it happens is a little harder.

You can also know when the collapse will happen just follow the conservation of energy. The moment you try and draw more power than what you have available it collapses.

None of this has anything to do with QM by the way this is all very classical and there is no answer to it under QM we can simply describe the effects easier. So I can put maths around it but not tell you why it happens it just does.

Last edited by Orac; 03/11/16 02:27 PM.

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
that is weird !!!

so distance matters , how about if they stagger the
radius distance of each harvester from the phone?


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
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
O
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
Originally Posted By: paul
that is weird !!!

so distance matters , how about if they stagger the
distance of each harvester?

Yeah its weird that is why it drives people nuts.

Staggering and moving things around does change things different ones will light up etc but there is only the obvious patterns. The more sensitive ones will tend to light and the closer ones will tend to light.

In the case I gave you with the cells and the single photon we control the hell out of everything and the cell is actually a single photon receiver and still the result is somewhat random.

You were right with the spherical emission that does happen and the macro laws do work at a macro level.

The upshot here is the human eye absorbs the power of emissions so when you get down to really low levels like we are talking no two people or detectors can see the same photon there just isn't the power. The human eye BTW needs to absorb 6 to 8 photons to register light we even measured that by somewhat dubious experiments ... not going there.

I should also say that using QM you can claim you can observe a photon without destroying it but it is a bit of trickery and doesn't help with the problem outlined above.
http://www.nature.com/news/photons-detected-without-being-destroyed-1.14179

Last edited by Orac; 03/11/16 02:42 PM.

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:
The RF harvesters are very non frequency sensitive they are coils and a few diodes in the form I gave you. Google phone detectors they are basically homebrews of the same thing.

Measuring the result is easy coming up with a theory of why it happens is a little harder.

You can also know when the collapse will happen just follow the conservation of energy. The moment you try and draw more power than what you have available it collapses.


ok , so this happens with RF.

does that also mean that this would happen with light?

ie...

if there were a gazillion earths set in a sphere around our
sun would this mean that only a few of the earths would
absorb the light from our sun?


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
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
O
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
Originally Posted By: paul

ok , so this happens with RF.

does that also mean that this would happen with light?

ie...

if there were a gazillion earths set in a sphere around our
sun would this mean that only a few of the earths would
absorb the light from our sun?

Very well done .. you are one of the few I have ever seen get that straight up.

Yes the prediction would be if you stuck enough solar panels or things slightly closer and more sensitive than us to the sun then it could dim it. The number is massively impossible but the thought is it might be more interesting to try on a light bulb and that process is underway. So the question is can you dim a light bulb by simply having lots of observers each absorbing photons. The observers being cells we can also easily turn on and off by covering them and the dimming would easily be measurable.

Whether it works like that or not is unknown because we are talking scale here. Lightning bolts only grow to a certain size and width they are constrained by something. Whether this effect holds in the macro scale is a completely other story.

I can see you get the problems it opens up and you will see reports on this stuff over the coming years. We never thought to try these large scale things until we worked out what was happening with the micro scale stuff. For my part I am dubious it works like this on large scale I think there is some sort of limit like with lightning and these are micro effects.

Some like Tesla clearly believed the effects could be made macro and I think we now understand what he was trying to do even though we know his theory was slightly wrong. Myself I need proof of macro scale effects of this stuff.

Last edited by Orac; 03/11/16 03:10 PM.

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
I think the thickness of a lightning bolt is constrained
by the vacuum it causes in the atmosphere as it vaporizes the air particles once the connection has been made from ground
to cloud or visa versa.

so perhaps there is something in the charge sea that lends
itself to be the connection between the phone and the RF harvester that completes the circuit and collapses the sphere.

ions?


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
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
O
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
Originally Posted By: paul
so perhaps there is something in the charge sea that lends itself to be the connection between the phone and the RF harvester that completes the circuit and collapses the sphere.

ions?

Yeah we simply don't know you are clearly thinking along the same lines as science that there should be some measurable detail.

It has frustrated us since 1980 when we first confirmed the photon behaviour.

Last edited by Orac; 03/11/16 03:16 PM.

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:
the thought is it might be more interesting to try on a light bulb



heres a group experiment that could be performed in a
stadium.

get everyone to look at a single light bulb glowing
in the center of the football field and see if the light bulb
goes out... LOL

now get them to blink in unison ...

what do you think?


and take a survey of how many people could see
the light , there should be a set number of people who
could see it.

given that our eyes should absorb a given amount.

if you have a light source
located at the center of a small sphere the entire
inside surface of the sphere should absorb the light
and heat up if it were painted black.

and reflect the light and not heat up because of the
light if it were painted white.

Im thinking that the color of the light of the harvester
might be interfering with the RF transmitted from the phone
have there been any test to see if it is the light on the
harvester that is causing the other harvesters to not
light up ...

wire the lights away from the circle or block the light
so that the harvester light can not interfere with the RF
signal.

just pickin a straw.

Im going to think about all of this for a few hours and
hopefully it wont drive me crazier than I already am.

meanwhile Im going to have lunch.

Im thinking there may be a way to set up the light
experiment to get all of the photo cells to register.

so Im going to think of a way to do it.



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
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
O
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
Yeah we have jokes like that as well smile

The numbers in reality are 100K people in a stadium only absorb 600K-800K photons per second and 8W light produces 2.4E19 photons per second .. just so you can see the scale and why it would not work even if the micro prediction held.

My favourite is see a watch pot really doesn't boil because you steal all the energy laugh

I like you think the effects probably don't survive to macro scale but it would be nice to know what controls the cross over exactly.

Last edited by Orac; 03/11/16 03:44 PM.

I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.
Page 7 of 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

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