I though mythbusters proved that this was impossible.
They even reported their findings to the president.

and VIM should pay interest retroactive to when they incorporated the feature, which will be a lot since that goes back even further than the patent.

i have one of these: http://www.homeorganizershops.com/PHL-1R.html

the rack is 16 sq ft but bulky stuff hangs over the edge so it probably frees up about 20 sq ft of garage floor space altogether. i took my time on installation (6 hours maybe) to make sure it was really solidly attached. i put some interlocking foam floor pads over the wire rack so smaller stuff doesn't fall through. i have one of the old hand crank ones, but you can get motorized these days.

He's ranting about magnetism, but you're ranting about him.
Just an observation.

We should unionize

No thank you, I prefer to remain ionized.

I overheard one physicist refer to it not as observation or measurement, but rather *amplification*. If the information about the property (position, momentum, spin, whatever) is amplified to a larger scale than the original property (e.g. neurons firing, pencils moving, printer printing, beam of light moving in a different direction), only then does that collapses the uncertainty.

If the information is merely transferred to another particle without amplification (say, by bumping into it) the uncertainty remains and the information can be un-transferred in the usual weird quantum way.

the fools who laughed at my patented 17-stroke engine will rue the day!!
bwa hahaha!

Counterexamples: a steam engine is an engine but it is external combution and often powered by coal or wood. Trebuchets were often powered by rocks hoisted by ropes. It's still an engine.

I would simply read "engine" as a pronoun for whatever energy/motion device the writer happens to be talking about at the time. If the writer asserts that some alternative to 4 stroke petrol/gasoline is not an engine, they are ill-informed and abusing their aforementioned pronoun privileges.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engine#Terminology

I find your argument very polarizing.

HEY what would be awesome is a 3D color display of the cars, pedestrians and roadway ahead of my vehicle.
that would be awesome!

i don't know what kind of irony this is, but about two hours after i made the above post i got a message from one of my employees that her brother had been in an accident caused by a young lady who was texting and driving. one of the other victims of the accident was a motorcyclist who was very, very badly injured.

sigh.

1. Telephone companies can and do routinely trangulate from towers or use GPS-enabled smartphones to establish the position of a cellular phone. It's not rocket science to integrate those measurements over time and obtain the velocity of a cellular phone.

2. Add some code to phone company messaging servers that disables sending and receiving of text messages while the mobile phone is in motion.

3. New phones should have some code that notices the situation and disables reading old messages and typing new messages in advance. Perhaps they won't allow you to dial anything but 911 or even receive calls unless you have bluetooth.

Yes, this means that we take away some convenience to be safer. Yes, the phone companies won't make as much money. I'm sorry. People are behaving like children and we need to take their toy away.

there really isn't any punishment that will dissuade context-dependent behavior like this. people just aren't smart enough to grasp that it's okay to send texts, and it's okay to drive, but not both at the same time. that just doesn't fit into their heads. hold on a minute i have to make this left.

because the word contains the derisive term "ho".
duh!

my personal preference is that we use up foreign oil while it's still relatively cheap. when it hits $500 barrel, then maybe we should tap into offshore wells and sell some back to OPEC for 20x what we paid for most of theirs.

in the mean time we should probably focus on perfecting blow-out preventers.

just mah opinion.