Lucas

Suppose you have a vector field on R^3 with divergence zero, then I know it has to be the curl of another vector field, but how do I prove it?

For example in Greece tomatoes or apples do not look perfectly round and perfectly red with no bumps etc. You can usually tell the difference between organic produce precisely because they do not look so perfect.

But here in US in large supermarkets (e.g. Whole Foods, Trader Joe's etc) tomatoes, apples, lettuce etc. labelled organic look precisely the same as non-organic ones and just perfect in shape and color. How can this happen? Does organic legally allow for some pesticide use?

Thanks

A cylinder that has height 10, radius 4 and incline at angle 30 degrees. (ie the angle formed from the vertical axis and the side of the cylinder is 30 degrees)

/--------------/

/--------------/

/--------------/

the angle |/ is 30 degrees.

Here's my thoughts: the horizontal cross sections are circles of radius 4 so have area 16 pi. So integrate 16 pi from 0 to 10 to get the answer 160 pi.

What I do not like about the solution is that it seems to be independent of the angle. Is it correct? Or am I missing something here?

Thanks!

We are given the hyperbola x^2-y^2=1. The question is to compute dy/dx and interpret the result geometrically.

It is easy to compute the derivative, but I am a bit confused by what should be the geometric interpretation here. Is it just that the tangent line at (x_0,y_0) intersects x-axis at 1/x_0 and y-axis at -1/y_0, or is it asked to show that it bisects with edges the lines connecting the point to the foci? Or something else?

Any help appreciated.

I'm thinking of visiting for a couple of days next week, but I'm confused with the new law restricting coffee-shop access to Dutch residents...Can I still go to a coffeeshop? And, if not, what's the deadline for Amsterdam local authorities to start enforcing the new law?

Thanks!

Hi, everyone, I am planning to go on a trip to Amsterdam with a friend, and we have found an en-suite studio apartment to rent that allows smoking. Does that mean we could smoke cannabis inside, or would that be illegal and could lead to serious trouble?

I do not intend to cause any trouble, just want to know so that I can behave accordingly. Thanks!

Let's see some examples, shall we?

-Ezekiel 28:24-25, NIV: God predicts Israel will have FRIENDLY neighbors, that its inhabitants will live in SAFETY because he will PUNISH all neighbors that "malign" them.

Wow, THAT did certainly come true... whoever denied Israel is in good terms with its neighbors, or that it is the safest and most peaceful place on Earth to live in?

-Ezekiel 26:7-14, NIV: God predicts Nebuchadnezzar defeating Tyre, and laying it to bare rock and a place to spread fishnets. He specifically predicts TYRE WILL NEVER BE REBUILT.

Tyre successfully held off Nebuchadnezzar's siege for 13 years according to history, after which they reached a compromise, accepting Babylonian authority. Later, they were conquered by a Cypriot king and then by Alexander the Great; however never was the city laid to bare rock. In fact, today it is a major Lebanon tourist center -so much for being laid to bare rock forever and never being rebuilt!

-Ezekiel 29:8-12 NIV: God predicts Egypt will become a "desolate wasteland"; that "the fat of neither man nor beast will pass through it", that "no one will live there for forty years", that He "will make the land of Egypt desolate among devastated lands" and that "her cities will lie desolate forty years among ruined cities".

What of this did ever happen? There is no historical indication whatsoever that Egypt became a desolate wasteland, that there was a time when no man nor beast passed through Egyptian land, or that it was uninhabited for forty years at one time. Nor was Egypt ever surrounded by devastated countries.

-Ezekiel 30:10-12 NIV: It predicts Nebuchadnezzar destroying Egypt, the Nile drying up and the land and everything in Egypt being laid to waste...

Nebuchadnezzar only attempted to invade Egypt once, but Amasis successfully defeated him (source: Alan B. Lloyd, 'The Late Period' in The Oxford History of Ancient Egypt (ed. Ian Shaw), Oxford Univ. Press 2002 paperback, pp.381-82).

As to the last part, there is no historical indication whatsoever of the Nile ever drying up, or the land and everything in it being laid to waste.

-"I will send my terror ahead of you and throw into confusion every nation you encounter. I will make all your enemies turn their backs and run." (Exodus 23:27 NIV)

So God will defeat all of Israel's enemies. History though, says Israel people did suffer defeats...

-"I will establish your borders from the Red Sea[a] to the Mediterranean Sea,[b] and from the desert to the Euphrates River.[...]." (Exodus 23:31 NIV)

Historically, that NEVER happened...

-Ezekiel 28:24-26 NIV, God promises peace and friendly neighbors to Israel. THAT definitely DOES happen today...lol

-"The Lord appeared to Abram and said, “To your offspring I will give this land. ” [...]" (Genesis 12:7 NIV). So here, God promises Abraham to deliver to his children land, which was then under the control of other tribes. This appears in several other places in the Genesis and Exodus books.

Yet, we read in Hebrews 11:13 "All these people were still living by faith when they died. They did not receive the things promised; they only saw them and welcomed them from a distance, admitting that they were foreigners and strangers on earth."

-"For this is what the Lord says: ‘David will never fail to have a man to sit on the throne of Israel" (Jeremiah 33:17 NIV). This is only one of the numerous Bible passages supporting that David's line will go on forever.

History however shows that this line's ruling ended with King Zedekiah, around 586 BC. Some Christians support this prophecy was fulfilled because Jesus was the descendant of David. Even if we ignore the fact that there were still 580+ years between the death of the last King of Israel, descended from David, and Jesus, this claim would directly contradict the doctrine of Jesus being the son of God. Plus,of course, there is the question of the line continuity AFTER Jesus's death, who was apparently childless...

You can find more of such failed/unfulfilled prophecies in the following link: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Failed_biblical_proph... . Please, note though, that I checked each and every one of the passages I quoted, using http://www.biblegateway.com/ as a reference. for the text, and using the New International Version (:= NIV) as the translation for the original text. I did not write down all the quotes, due to lack of space.

So, I am really curious what Christians have to say. If you wish to refute something, please do so based on historical evidence, as it is clearly illogical to defend Bible's truth by referring to the Bible itself...

So, Genesis teaches us that God created humans, and placed them in a place providing them all they needed. They were free, except for eating from that tree (and by extension disobeying him) correct?

So, suppose now you live under a dictatorship, where the dictator provides ALL you need. You are free to do as you please, except disobey him.

How are these two any different? Be careful: I am talking about a hypothetical dictator who would really provide everything for whomever accepted him as leader, only punishing disobedience...

Do you only date based on personality? Would you date a fat/ugly guy if he was nice?

And why are you surprised if your man prefers bigger boobs? Don't you prefer men with longer/wider "equipment"? Would you date a guy who is too short/thin "down there"?

There was an article I read, but I could not find it again... a mentally sane and fully capable adult (I want to make it clear I am not referring to mentally unstable people who could be considered unfit to consent to anything anyways) commits suicide by cutting her wrists and leaves a note with her, stating clearly that she is determined to end her life, and if she calls the doctors at some point ending up in the hospital, it will be just to reduce the pain she feels, not to be saved.

Now this is hardly a news story, but in our case, the doctor actually DID respect her wishes, and left her to die, which no one had done before (she had made several attempts before again). The incident happened in the UK if I recall correctly, and the doctor did not face criminal charges (he based his decision on a law specifying the doctor cannot AT ANY situation enforce treatment on a 100% mentally able individual, even when it goes against the doctor's professional judgement).

So, what is your opinion on this issue?

I am particularly addressing libertarians/liberals (off topic, but what's the difference anyway?), especially people who support controversial positions like legalization of drugs etc, based on the desire for personal freedom.

1) Is this issue any different than, say regulations of a psychostimulant that can cause schizophrenia if abused? If you treat it different, then why?

2) If you accept euthanasia, what makes this any more different really?

DISCLAIMER: arguing based on the Bible or any other religious text, or even more generally, on personal opinions with no justification, are not welcome in this question, if you want to be acknowledged and your answer considered seriously. Otherwise you're wasting both your time, and mine. Thank you!!!

Sorry to ask again, but it seems many dodged the question before, or I did not state it properly. At any case, let's assume, you were born in Middle East, and raised up a Muslim, and very strong believer too (not extremist though, just supporter of Allah etc.). You also have read the Bible as part of your studies, interests, whatever, doesn't matter, and you still chose to support Islam instead.

Assume further that, EXCEPT for being a Muslim, you would be the SAME EXACT person, in ALL other regards.

Seeing as

1)you believed in a false God (according to Christians), had your chance to reject him (you read the Bible) and yet you chose not to

2)Believing in a false God is a sin according to the Bible

3)The only way to be relieved of sin is to truly repent before death

4)You wouldn't repent for believing in Allah before you died (as you really believed in Islam, and thought to deny Allah is a sin)

wouldn't you go to Hell? If not then where exactly does argument 1-4 fail?

Thank you!

I am not asking why we should believe A God exists, I am asking why it should be the one YOU believe in. Why would he not leave evidence that eg the Bible is true in contrast to say the Quran?

I am asking those who use the following argument to defend their faith: if God exists, and you don't believe in him, then you go to Hell, but you've got nothing to lose in the case he does not exist.

What happens if God exists, but he is not the one you believe in? Won't you go to Hell too?

In other words, isn't your religion predetermined based on were you grew up and what your family believed? Wouldn't that show that religion is a societal norm, rather than a conscious personal choice? Since all religions are based on faith, rather than arguments and facts, why would a supporter of a different religion than yours be expected to convert once he was informed of your religion -since in his eyes that would mean his condemnation based on his faith-? Does God punish him for growing up in a different culture?

Look here if you do not know what it is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_MKULTRA.

It's a gross violation of human rights. Surely some heads must have been cut off so to speak...

Say a company manages via completely legit free market processes to gradually "buy out" all of their competition, and therefore has exclusive monopoly on whatever it produces.

Doesn't that defeat the purpose of a free market? Should counter-measures be taken? And if so, what could these be?

Thanks!

I've read online about a US company, called Monsanto, that is suing farmers keeping their seeds on the basis of "intellectual property", because they contain genes developed by Monsanto. At the same time, they've been pushing normal seeds out, which if it succeeds, means every farmer will have to pay them for developing crops!!!

Is this for real? Shouldn't this madness stop? If anything, THEY should pay the farmers, as it is THEIR genes that can transfer to other plants, and people do not want that.

What do you think?

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&...

But they are not for the rights of people they disagree with?

There are eye-witnesses, confessions from Nazi top administrators at Nuremberg trials, and of course real-life evidence. What else could happen in the extermination chambers, disinfection? And what about Jews being 2-3+ millions less in numbers after the end of war? Did they just disappear?

If there was the choice, would you like to live forever (here, in Heaven as you imagine it, whatever, even in Hell :P) or would you prefer to die at some point? Wouldn't living get tiring at some point?