Ever since I read The Elegant Universe years ago, I've had a number of questions related to this (as I imagine many people have). This is the first time I've seen the topic discussed by professional scientists, though, as opposed to people like myself with a hobby interest in the subject or in science fiction (Alastair Reynolds makes use of it in one of the Revelation Space novels, for example).

For the most part, it seems like String/M-Theory is very difficult (at best) to test using technology we have access to at present. But because it includes the idea of gravity being a force which can travel between branes, it's seemed to me and a few friends of mine that this would definitely produce some interesting effects in the real world.

As the article discusses, there should be some subtle evidence of the effects of gravity from external sources on the large-scale structures of our own universe. I would think maybe even enough to at least partly explain "dark matter" and "dark energy", since those are basically the known matter in our universe behaving as if there were a lot more mass that we can't actually see (one set to hold relatively closely-spaced matter together, and the other to accelerate the expansion of the large-scale structures away from each other, if I understand correctly).

A simple flatland-style analogy for "dark energy" might be that our universe is a sheet of paper which is intersected by a universe which is wrapped around into a tube shape or a torus. The gravity of the mass in that second universe pulls objects in our universe toward it, so for the part of our universe in the "eye" of the tube, they tend to accelerate away from each other. That's a vast oversimplification, but I'm not a physicist :).

For "dark matter", the idea that's always stuck with me since reading The Elegant Universe is that maybe some/all of the most massive objects in our own universe - especially the black holes at the centers of galaxies - are caused by the same kind of cross-brane effect. If you have a bunch of matter clumping together in one brane/universe, and it exerts gravity which can cross into other branes, then it seems like it would create corresponding accretions of mass in other nearby branes. Basically, that what we perceive to be a roughly spherical/point object would effectively be the hyperdimensional equivalent of that same shape that would "pin" itself together across branes.

Where I see this as becoming testable (and I could be wrong - again, I'm not a physicist) is that if this were the case, there should be examples of anomalous astrophysical objects and events, where the mass we observe does not line up with effects we also observe. For example, a stable neutron star suddenly flashing into a black hole when it passes too close (hyperdimensionally, of course) to a large mass in another brane. Another example might be a star or planet whose mass can't be reconciled with its observed size - e.g. maybe there is a planet the size of our moon, but which exerts gravity as if it were made entirely out of a material ten times as dense as uranium.

I know that in the context of our own universe/brane, there's no way to pull matter out of a black hole (other than Hawking radiation), but assuming the "hyperdimensional singularity"-type thing I described above is accurate, would it be possible for the cross-brane components to separate (since they wouldn't actually be touching, just exerting gravity on each other)? If so, there might be even stranger observable effects, like neutron stars that "flash" into black holes, but then return to their former state when the mass in the other brane(s) is pulled too far away. IE they would "blink".

The only thing limiting you to two choices is you. Many ballots have third parties. You are free to run in those that don't. By stating to yourself and others that there are only two choices, you are part of the problem.

Is that an African or a European Swallow?

Although a definite cure would be nice, simply improving the quality of glycemic control would be a revolution. Optimal glycemic control can be very complicated, especially for patients who do not have the courage to follow strict dietary and healthstyle recommendations. Being able to treat a complicated disease with a single daily injection sounds nice. I know it would simplify my job as an MD...

I am not a great cook but I do enjoy cooking and I can't think of a texture that you can't achieve with good materials and decent cooking technique. Healthy food really doesn't have to have a bad texture I think. Maybe an investment in a few cooking books and some classes would help you?

You could at least use a real BTC address, in case someone accidentally you some coin. That's not even a Grøstlcoin address (they start with an F).

(By reading the above, you agree to send a random amount of BTC to 1Guy1JarSpEhxb94VYMYRvTMhqbAgdnCtL as a consultation fee. Thank you.)

Also see:

The Ada Initiative.

"What I really need is a droid who understands the binary language of moisture vaporators."

AMD recently presented HSA-enabled jpeg decoding. That would also be an interesting addition. Make these shaders work a little...

http://developer.amd.com/resou...

I've seen the movie and I've read other works by Niemi. Be careful with the spelling, it's Vittula, where "vittu" means "cunt", and the -la is a suffix for making it a toponym. OTOH, "vitulla" means "on top of a cunt" or "by using a cunt". Also, the original place is called Vittulajänkä, where "jänkä" is a kind of Northern wetland.

The language aspect is interesting, because it takes place in an area of Sweden where they speak Meänkieli, a dialect of Finnish. Swedish authorities consider it a separate language, for the purposes of preserving the special minority status, thus making an interesting case of the language vs. dialect problem.

I don't doubt that Swedish is spoken/understood near the Swedish border on our side, but that probably happens in every border zone around the world. The real Swedish-speaking areas, where many people don't speak Finnish, are found at the coast.

You have the same problem with any regular pot with too much heat. The point here is to improve efficiency, so you can actually turn down the flame. In addition, it looks like the heat will be more evenly distributed between the bottom and the walls, which would also help avoid burning the food.

*sigh*

The Nordic countries comprise Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden. Scandinavia is basically your geographic definition; it's not quite clear cut, though, but we mostly care about being Nordic. Finland is the odd one out in terms of linguistic roots, but we share most of our culture with the Nordics -- we were basically a province of Sweden for centuries, and gained independence after a brief stint with Russia.

For some odd reason people elsewhere say "Scandinavian" when they mean "Nordic".

I wonder where you get the part "north Finland speaks partly swedish". There is a vocal Swedish-speaking minority in Finland, but they mostly live on the coast of the Baltic Sea. Might be some Swedish/Norwegian speakers up North, but there you also have the Sami people of Finland, Norway and Sweden mixing up things and blurring the political boundaries.