Phys-L List Archive (by Thread) of October, 2009

Search Archives

• Re: [Phys-l] Phys-l Digest, Vol 56, Issue 21, Julie Quah
• Re: [Phys-l] Memory and how it works, John Clement
  • Re: [Phys-l] Memory and how it works, Jack Uretsky
    • Re: [Phys-l] Memory and how it works, John Clement
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: [Phys-l] Memory and how it works, Bernard Cleyet
    • Re: [Phys-l] Memory and how it works, John Clement
      • Re: [Phys-l] Memory and how it works, Jack Uretsky
      • Re: [Phys-l] Memory and how it works, Bernard Cleyet
  • Re: [Phys-l] Memory and how it works, John Clement
    • Re: [Phys-l] Memory and how it works, Jack Uretsky
  • Re: [Phys-l] Memory and how it works, John Clement
    • Re: [Phys-l] Memory and how it works, Jack Uretsky
      • Re: [Phys-l] Memory and how it works, John Clement
      • Re: [Phys-l] Memory and how it works, LaMontagne, Bob
      • [Phys-l] induced emf and induced current, carmelo
      • Re: [Phys-l] induced emf and induced current, LaMontagne, Bob
      • Re: [Phys-l] induced emf and induced current, carmelo
      • Re: [Phys-l] induced emf and induced current, LaMontagne, Bob
      • Re: [Phys-l] induced emf and induced current, Philip Keller
      • Re: [Phys-l] induced emf and induced current, Brian Whatcott
      • Re: [Phys-l] induced emf and induced current, carmelo
      • Re: [Phys-l] induced emf and induced current, LaMontagne, Bob
      • Re: [Phys-l] induced emf and induced current, LaMontagne, Bob
      • Re: [Phys-l] induced emf and induced current, LaMontagne, Bob
      • Re: [Phys-l] induced emf and induced current, Chuck Britton
      • Re: [Phys-l] induced emf and induced current, John Denker
      • [Phys-l] Static vs kinetic friction, John Clement
      • Re: [Phys-l] Static vs kinetic friction, ludwik kowalski
      • Re: [Phys-l] Static vs kinetic friction, Joseph Bellina
      • Re: [Phys-l] Static vs kinetic friction, Bill Nettles
      • Re: [Phys-l] Static vs kinetic friction, Brian Whatcott
      • Re: [Phys-l] Static vs kinetic friction, John Clement
      • Re: [Phys-l] Static vs kinetic friction, Edmiston, Mike
      • Re: [Phys-l] Static vs kinetic friction, Bernard Cleyet
      • Re: [Phys-l] induced emf and induced current, Bernard Cleyet
      • Re: [Phys-l] induced emf and induced current, John Denker
      • [Phys-l] emf, voltage, potential difference (was induced emf...), Edmiston, Mike
      • Re: [Phys-l] emf, voltage, potential difference (was induced emf...), Edmiston, Mike
      • Re: [Phys-l] emf, voltage, potential difference (was induced emf...), John Denker
• Re: [Phys-l] Holographic Dark Energy in Induced Gravity Trying Again, Brian Whatcott
  • Re: [Phys-l] Holographic Dark Energy in Induced Gravity Trying Again, Jack Uretsky
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: [Phys-l] Holographic Dark Energy in Induced Gravity Trying Again, WC Maddox
    • Re: [Phys-l] Holographic Dark Energy in Induced Gravity Trying Again, Jack Uretsky
• Re: [Phys-l] Peer instruction in an online setting: evaluation results?, Richard Hake
• [Phys-l] Berkely idealism revived, Bob Sciamanda
• [Phys-l] Aerodynamics for beginners (includes false lift theories), Bernard Cleyet
• [Phys-l] Toying with Domestic Waste Heat Recovery, Brian Whatcott
  • Re: [Phys-l] Toying with Domestic Waste Heat Recovery, John Clement
  • Re: [Phys-l] Toying with Domestic Waste Heat Recovery, Bernard Cleyet
• [Phys-l] Master Violin Materials, Brian Whatcott
  • Re: [Phys-l] Master Violin Materials, Michael Edmiston
    • Re: [Phys-l] Master Violin Materials, Brian Whatcott
  • [Phys-l] Master Violin Materials - Erratum, Brian Whatcott
• [Phys-l] Energy Efficiency, the Jevons Paradox, and the Elephant in the Room: Overpopulation, Richard Hake
• [Phys-l] how not to do thermodynamics and Legendre transformations, John Denker
  • Re: [Phys-l] how not to do thermodynamics and Legendre transformations, Edmiston, Mike
  • Re: [Phys-l] how not to do thermodynamics and Legendre transformations, Carl Mungan
    • Re: [Phys-l] how not to do thermodynamics and Legendre transformations, Bob Sciamanda
    • Re: [Phys-l] how not to do thermodynamics and Legendre transformations, John Denker
      • [Phys-l] spin ice monopoles?, Mark Sylvester
      • Re: [Phys-l] spin ice monopoles?, Brian Whatcott
      • Re: [Phys-l] spin ice monopoles?, Chuck Britton
      • Re: [Phys-l] spin ice monopoles?, Polvani, Donald G.
      • Re: [Phys-l] spin ice monopoles?, John Clement
      • Re: [Phys-l] spin ice monopoles?, Jack Uretsky
      • Re: [Phys-l] spin ice monopoles?, Stefan Jeglinski
• [Phys-l] Static vs kinetic friction, Carl Mungan
  • Re: [Phys-l] Static vs kinetic friction, Bernard Cleyet
• [Phys-l] lead brick, Anthony Lapinski
  • Re: [Phys-l] lead brick, Joseph Bellina
  • Re: [Phys-l] lead brick, John Mallinckrodt
    • Re: [Phys-l] lead brick, trappe
    • Re: [Phys-l] lead brick, Brian Whatcott
  • Re: [Phys-l] lead brick, Edmiston, Mike
    • Re: [Phys-l] lead brick, Bernard Cleyet
    • Re: [Phys-l] lead brick, trappe
  • Re: [Phys-l] lead brick, Bernard Cleyet
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • [Phys-l] Lead Brick, David Willey
    • Re: [Phys-l] Lead Brick, Bernard Cleyet
      • Re: [Phys-l] Lead Brick, physgoff
• [Phys-l] DATA, FACTS, LAWS, THEORIES, ludwik kowalski
  • Re: [Phys-l] DATA, FACTS, LAWS, THEORIES, John Clement
    • Re: [Phys-l] DATA, FACTS, LAWS, THEORIES, ludwik kowalski
      • Re: [Phys-l] DATA, FACTS, LAWS, THEORIES, Hugh Haskell
      • Re: [Phys-l] DATA, FACTS, LAWS, THEORIES, John Mallinckrodt
      • Re: [Phys-l] DATA, FACTS, LAWS, THEORIES, Hugh Haskell
      • Re: [Phys-l] DATA, FACTS, LAWS, THEORIES, ludwik kowalski
      • Re: [Phys-l] DATA, FACTS, LAWS, THEORIES, John Clement
      • Re: [Phys-l] DATA, FACTS, LAWS, THEORIES, ludwik kowalski
      • Re: [Phys-l] DATA, FACTS, LAWS, THEORIES, John Clement
      • Re: [Phys-l] DATA, FACTS, LAWS, THEORIES, ludwik kowalski
      • Re: [Phys-l] DATA, FACTS, LAWS, THEORIES, John Clement
      • Re: [Phys-l] DATA, FACTS, LAWS, THEORIES, ludwik kowalski
      • Re: [Phys-l] DATA, FACTS, LAWS, THEORIES, John Clement
      • Re: [Phys-l] DATA, FACTS, LAWS, THEORIES, James McLean
      • Re: [Phys-l] DATA, FACTS, LAWS, THEORIES, John Clement
      • Re: [Phys-l] DATA, FACTS, LAWS, THEORIES, M. Horton
      • Re: [Phys-l] DATA, FACTS, LAWS, THEORIES, John Clement
      • Re: [Phys-l] DATA, FACTS, LAWS, THEORIES, LaMontagne, Bob
      • Re: [Phys-l] DATA, FACTS, LAWS, THEORIES, Philip Keller
      • Re: [Phys-l] DATA, FACTS, LAWS, THEORIES, Jack Uretsky
      • Re: [Phys-l] DATA, FACTS, LAWS, THEORIES, John Clement
      • Re: [Phys-l] DATA, FACTS, LAWS, THEORIES, Bernard Cleyet
      • Re: [Phys-l] DATA, FACTS, LAWS, THEORIES, ludwik kowalski
      • Re: [Phys-l] DATA, FACTS, LAWS, THEORIES, John Clement
      • Re: [Phys-l] DATA, FACTS, LAWS, THEORIES, Brian Whatcott
      • Re: [Phys-l] DATA, FACTS, LAWS, THEORIES, John Clement
      • Re: [Phys-l] DATA, FACTS, LAWS, THEORIES, Brian Whatcott
      • Re: [Phys-l] DATA, FACTS, LAWS, THEORIES, Bernard Cleyet
      • Re: [Phys-l] DATA, FACTS, LAWS, THEORIES, ludwik kowalski
      • Re: [Phys-l] DATA, FACTS, LAWS, THEORIES, John Clement
      • Re: [Phys-l] DATA, FACTS, LAWS, THEORIES, John Clement
    • [Phys-l] Arbitrariness of definitions, Chuck Britton
      • Re: [Phys-l] Arbitrariness of definitions, John Denker
  • Re: [Phys-l] DATA, FACTS, LAWS, THEORIES, Woolf, Lawrence
• [Phys-l] Breaking a wine glass, John SOHL
  • Re: [Phys-l] Breaking a wine glass, curtis osterhoudt
    • Re: [Phys-l] Breaking a wine glass, Bernard Cleyet
  • Re: [Phys-l] Breaking a wine glass, Brian Whatcott
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: [Phys-l] Breaking a wine glass, David Craig
• [Phys-l] DATA, FACTS, LAWS, THEORIES, Kyle Forinash
  • Re: [Phys-l] DATA, FACTS, LAWS, THEORIES, John Denker
    • Re: [Phys-l] DATA, FACTS, LAWS, THEORIES, carmelo
      • Re: [Phys-l] DATA, FACTS, LAWS, THEORIES, John Denker
      • Re: [Phys-l] DATA, FACTS, LAWS, THEORIES, carmelo
  • Re: [Phys-l] DATA, FACTS, LAWS, THEORIES, Jack Uretsky
  • Re: [Phys-l] DATA, FACTS, LAWS, THEORIES, ludwik kowalski
• [Phys-l] Holography and Cosmology, Spinozalens
• [Phys-l] Unbalanced Electrical Bridge, Brian Whatcott
• [Phys-l] Fwd: [tap-l] Edmund Scientific pushing pseudoscience, Bernard Cleyet
  • Re: [Phys-l] Fwd: [tap-l] Edmund Scientific pushing pseudoscience, John Clement
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • [Phys-l] Fwd: [tap-l] Edmund Scientific pushing pseudoscience, Bernard Cleyet
• [Phys-l] College Teaching and the Development of Reasoning, Calvin Kalman
• [Phys-l] bladeless fan, Anthony Lapinski
  • Re: [Phys-l] bladeless fan, LaMontagne, Bob
• [Phys-l] Fwd: [narst] FW: Re: Phil Scott talk, Joseph Bellina
• [Phys-l] Fwd: [tap-l] Breaking a wine glass, Bernard Cleyet
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • [Phys-l] Fwd: [tap-l] Breaking a wine glass, Bernard Cleyet
    • Re: [Phys-l] Fwd: [tap-l] Breaking a wine glass, bennett bennett
• [Phys-l] Orlando workshop on video capture and analysis, Pat Cooney
• [Phys-l] Herman Daly's Ecological Economist View Contrasted with the Traditional Economist View of Lawrence Summers and the World Bank, Richard Hake
  • [Phys-l] Innovation and Exponentials (was Herman Daly's Ecological Economist View ...), Brian Whatcott
    • Re: [Phys-l] Innovation and Exponentials (was Herman Daly's Ecological Economist View ...), Bernard Cleyet
• [Phys-l] accurate numerical solution of equations of motion, John Denker
  • Re: [Phys-l] accurate numerical solution of equations of motion, John Mallinckrodt
    • Re: [Phys-l] accurate numerical solution of equations of motion, John Denker
      • Re: [Phys-l] accurate numerical solution of equations of motion, John Denker
  • Re: [Phys-l] accurate numerical solution of equations of motion, Rick Tarara
• [Phys-l] Poll shows fewer Americans "believe" in global warming, Marty Weiss
  • Re: [Phys-l] Poll shows fewer Americans "believe" in global warming, marx
  • Re: [Phys-l] Poll shows fewer Americans "believe" in global warming, LaMontagne, Bob
    • Re: [Phys-l] Poll shows fewer Americans "believe" in global warming, Rick Tarara
      • Re: [Phys-l] Poll shows fewer Americans "believe" in global warming, LaMontagne, Bob
      • Re: [Phys-l] Poll shows fewer Americans "believe" in global warming, marx
      • Re: [Phys-l] Poll shows fewer Americans "believe" in global warming, Bernard Cleyet
      • Re: [Phys-l] Poll shows fewer Americans "believe" in global warming, Shapiro, Mark
      • Re: [Phys-l] Poll shows fewer Americans "believe" in global warming, marx
      • Re: [Phys-l] Poll shows fewer Americans "believe" in global warming, Jack Uretsky
      • Re: [Phys-l] Poll shows fewer Americans "believe" in global warming, LaMontagne, Bob
      • Re: [Phys-l] Poll shows fewer Americans "believe" in global warming, marx
      • Re: [Phys-l] Poll shows fewer Americans "believe" in global warming, Shapiro, Mark
      • Re: [Phys-l] Poll shows fewer Americans "believe" in global warming, marx
      • Re: [Phys-l] Poll shows fewer Americans "believe" in global warming, LaMontagne, Bob
      • Re: [Phys-l] Poll shows fewer Americans "believe" in global warming, Brian Whatcott
      • Re: [Phys-l] Poll shows fewer Americans "believe" in global warming, Anthony Lapinski
      • Re: [Phys-l] Poll shows fewer Americans "believe" in global warming, marx
      • Re: [Phys-l] Poll shows fewer Americans "believe" in global warming, marx
      • [Phys-l] use of lgarithms, LaMontagne, Bob
      • Re: [Phys-l] use of lgarithms, John Mallinckrodt
      • Re: [Phys-l] use of lgarithms, LaMontagne, Bob
      • Re: [Phys-l] use of lgarithms, John Denker
      • Re: [Phys-l] use of lgarithms, LaMontagne, Bob
      • Re: [Phys-l] use of lgarithms, Brian Whatcott
      • Re: [Phys-l] Poll shows fewer Americans "believe" in global warming, Jack Uretsky
      • Re: [Phys-l] Poll shows fewer Americans "believe" in global warming, Brian Whatcott
      • Re: [Phys-l] Poll shows fewer Americans "believe" in global warming, Bernard Cleyet
      • Re: [Phys-l] Poll shows fewer Americans "believe" in global warming, M. Horton
    • Re: [Phys-l] Poll shows fewer Americans "believe" in global warming, Marty Weiss
      • Re: [Phys-l] Poll shows fewer Americans "believe" in global warming, marx
      • Re: [Phys-l] Poll shows fewer Americans "believe" in global warming, Marty Weiss
      • Re: [Phys-l] Poll shows fewer Americans "believe" in global warming, Jack Uretsky
      • Re: [Phys-l] Poll shows fewer Americans "believe" in global warming, John Clement
      • Re: [Phys-l] Poll shows fewer Americans "believe" in global warming, Jack Uretsky
      • Re: [Phys-l] Poll shows fewer Americans "believe" in global warming, Jack Uretsky
      • Re: [Phys-l] Poll shows fewer Americans "believe" in global warming, Brian Whatcott
      • Re: [Phys-l] Poll shows fewer Americans "believe" in global warming, Price Daniel S.
      • Re: [Phys-l] Poll shows fewer Americans "believe" in global warming, LaMontagne, Bob
      • Re: [Phys-l] Poll shows fewer Americans "believe" in global warming, marx
• [Phys-l] Hawking required to step down; Green steps up., Bernard Cleyet
• Re: [Phys-l] Poll shows fewer Americans "believe" in global, warming, Kyle Forinash
  • Re: [Phys-l] Poll shows fewer Americans "believe" in global, warming, ludwik kowalski
• [Phys-l] Physics minor for Biology/Life Science majors, Joss Ives
• [Phys-l] education web site, Anthony Lapinski
• [Phys-l] history of the internet, Anthony Lapinski