jean-de-la-lune

I have plenty of mail notifying me about 'new questions' which are in fact old and 'resolved'

Do you have the same problem ?

The results of the experiment using containers with/out co2 and lit by heat lamps is unrelated to GHG radiative absorption, see http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Ak0_R...

So is there something better on the market ? Please give explanations and refer to detailed texts in your answer , not to YouTube kind of hocus-pocus.

Two identical, open top, plastic containers are lit by identical heat lamps. Probes shielded from direct radiation are placed close to the absorbing surfaces at the bottom of the conainers and monitor the temperature. When steady state is reached (27.5 C in the experiment reported) CO2 is added into one of the containers. Temperature immediately starts to rise and reaches 34.5 C in about 700 seconds and then progressively drops. This has been used as classroom demonstration of the GHG effect of CO2, however, it has no connection with it. Why ?

(sqrt(2)-1)^n =sqrt(m)-sqrt(m-1)

However, you are not allowed Newton's binomial expansion beyond (a+/-b)^2

That is, find all solutions of a+b+c = 2006, with a,b,c in N* without double counting.

(e.g. 2003,2,1 and 1,2003,2 are not to be counted as different solutions.)

I don't specially care for BA but it is irritating to see so many answers not rated by the asker and rated by incompetent or malevolent voters (or people who care only for accumulating points)

I have a lot of examples of completely wrong (or stupid) answers chosen as best even though other were correct.

If YA wants to have more than a mostly junk record, shouldn't they suppress the rating by voters ? And when askers don't care for choosing, withdraw points untill they would be turned out.

Examples:

Modulus Argument Complex number?

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Aid2K...

Two answers. The author of the 'best' says explicitly he doesn't know what Mod-Arg form is. I gave the answer. Clearly dishonest on the part of the (one) voter

********

What is the incompatibility between General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics?

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AtI0M...

'Best' got two votes for an empty answer saying that GR wants a precise position to any given point (!) and Qm is a realm of probabilities. Makes qm incompatible with everything else in physics. We were 2-3 to strive to give detailed answers.

************

Anyone good at combination?

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AnSrG...

The 'best' does not answer the question. Apparently doesn't understand it.

Also this was completely dishonest on the part of the vot

**********

Centripetal Acceleration?!?

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AsTvM...

'Best answer' completely wrong. Answerer mistakes 6cm for .6m. + another technical error.

**********

Gambling game between A and B?

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AsHFQ...

We were two to give the right answer. Two people voted for 'best' who didn't know the conditional probability formula to be used, made some calculations with Excel and produced a completely wrong numerical answer.

*********

Why light can exist even after its source is gone?

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AmK5d...

No explanations other than 'it is due to the nature of light' by 'best' who got two votes though we were several to give explanations for zero votes.

And so on and so forth...if people rate the answers to their own question, I don't question even though they sometimes try only to make fun of the answerers, but these stupid votes make the whole record fishy.