See here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang_nucleosynthesis Current theory is that nothing stable beyond lithium was formed from the big bang itself. The unstable stuff quickly decayed into hydrogen, helium, or lithium.

According to F=ma, an object with negative mass would accelerate in the opposite direction of an applied net force. It's hard to visualize what that would mean... you try to throw the negative mass baseball and it goes the opposite direction you expect? How would it do that without going through the back of your hand?

Beyond arguments about when a jury *should* be allowed to find someone not guilty, there is the practical matter that they *can* do so without having to defend their decision to anyone. For better or worse, a jury can acquit for any reason. In the USA, once the acquittal is read aloud and the judge bangs the gavel, as far as I know, the defendant is protected from double jeopardy, even if the jury acted on a whim. The debate about the limits of a not-guilty verdict therefore carry no legal weight; only possible persuasive weight for future jurors.

I wish the percentage were smaller. If you make your voting decisions based solely on TV commercials, please stay home on election day. Let those who pay attention make the grown-up decisions.

I certainly understand your sentiment. I wonder where you will go as an alternative? Even if a competing service "refuses to back down", how can you be certain that your messages are not being intercepted? In this day and age, I think we all have to assume that anything we didn't encrypt ourselves is being read by somebody.

Electron volts are a unit of energy, not temperature. Those two are different physical quantities. For example, a test tube of liquid and a bathtub of liquid can both be the same temperature, but the bathtub holds more heat energy just because its mass is larger.

This is known as "tyranny of the majority", and is terrifying to people who care about the rights of minorities and individuals. The "state's business" needs to be limited by a constitutional framework so that do-gooders and ignorant masses are kept from crushing any random eccentricity that rankles their sensibilities. Not that regulating TV commercial loudness is an example, but I had to respond to this odious assertion.

I'm sure the constant threat of their government funding being cut would NEVER affect their critical coverage of said government.

I have never liked the idea that the US federal government can regulate content of public airwaves. By the same theory, it could regulate speech in newspapers that are delivered on public roads. Oh, but there's that pesky First Amendment that explicitly forbids that. Too bad the founders didn't know about electromagnetic waves.

Try building one of *these*: simpler, much smaller, works very well for me: http://tvantennaplans.com/ Tip: mine works fine without the reflectors: it is just the board and coat hanger wires. I ran a coax from the TV up into my attic, where I have the antenna hanging by a nail.

Does using such an auto-correcting keyboard make it harder to type correctly when you move to a "normal" keyboard? Something bothers me about devices that train me to make more unaware mistakes.

Rush Limbaugh does sound like a doofus when he tries to talk about science, but he is no racist. He consistently agrees with Dr King's ideal of judging people by the content of their character, not the color of their skin. Rush agrees with and supports people who agree with his political viewpoint regardless of skin color, and opposes those who disagree in like kind. A man who had a problem with black people would not let Dr Walter Williams guest host his show so often, would not interview Justice Clarence Thomas on his program, etc. It saddens me that politics has become so polarized that it is considered normal for people who never listen to Rush Limbaugh to "know" that he is a racist, plus get modded funny based on that smear.

Actually, in the second amendment, the "militia" is what is regulated (kept under control), to promote the security of a free state. The "people" are recognized to have a right to keep and bear arms, so that the "militia" (the armed forces controlled by the government) don't get out of control.