welcome news

Suppose the incorrect defender makes the initial face down lead.

In the club this is usually greeted with 'it's your partner's lead' and the card is retracted with nothing more said.

But under what Bridge law is this allowed?

I'm setting up an office network (or rather appending 3 computers to a network which is already a domain but I don't know how to join the domain).

Anyway I set up the three ip addresses manually as 192.168.10.xxx and a subnet of FF.FF.FF.00.

At first the computers found the printer and installed drivers however today no computer (old ones or new ones) could locate the printer (HP3015P).

Looking at the printer, it's network address is 192.168.1.19 - is the reason it can't be found that the third byte is 1 rather than 10 or is there a more probable reason? When all the computers are on, looking at network connections shows two networks (which I can understand) - can both of them access the printer?

(I removed the other computers leaving the three new computers and the printer / modem as the only connected items and still couldn't connect to the printer - all three computers can access the internet)

I have been creating a page with Javascript embedded and it works fine. I now want to transfer the script and link it to a js file. However when I do this the getElementById function is returning a null value. How do I get it to return an object from the actual web-page?

An example is

document.getElementById("BUYGS").addEventListener("click",buygoldsingle,false); (Firefox)

document.getElementById("BUYGS").attachEvent("onclick",buygoldsingle); (Internet Explorer)

A newly discovered faint asteroid and Mars are observed at opposition. Mars is discovered to be 10^8 time brighter than the asteroid. Assume that Mars and the asteroid are 1.5 and 3.0 AU from the Sun respectively. Estimate the radius of the Asteroid if it has an albedo the same as Mars.

Light from the sun travels 2 AU to get to Mars and Back to earth.

Light from the sun travels 5 AU to get to the asteroid and back to earth.

Do I assume a ratio in areas as 4/25 (inverse square) or 16/625 (inverse quartics) so have to scale up to 25 X 10^-8/4 or to 625 X 10^-8/16

This gives the ratio of radii as 5/2 X 10^-4 or 25/4 X 10^-4 respectively

So which one is correct or neither.

(Mars is 3400Km in radius which gives the radius of the asteroid as either 850m or 2.125Km - both seem reasonable)

Just purchased a pack of Contacts - when checking the label I find that the effective ingredient has been reduced from 120mg to 30mg

Seems an awful lot to cut - or are they just ripping off the customer again. They have added paracetamol - if I want paracetamol I would buy that.

Any idea how to solve dy/dx + 3y = x(y^3)

It doesn't seem to be solvable by direct integration, separation of variables, homogenous or integrating factor.

Suppose you are trying to get a top to spin by applying a force. The top will start spinning due to the torque caused by the force and it will also move in the direction of the force. If the force is applied a distance R from the centre of the top then we appear to have:

F=MA for linear motion A = linear acceleration M = Mass

FR=Ia for rotational motion. a= rotational acceleration I - moment of intertia

But I can't seem able to put them together to explain the top's movements

Any ideas

I am having a small problem: If I have a mass m attached to a massless spring with spring constant k and it extends a distance x then at equilibrium

Force down (mg) = force up (kx) BUT when considering energy

change in potential energy (mgx) = energy stored in spring (1/2kx^2)

These two equations are inconsistent - what am I doing wrong?

A Pythagorean triplet is of the form A,B,C where A^2 + B^2 = C^2 - the simplest example is 3,4,5 where 3^2 (9) + 4^2 (16) = 5^2(25).

Can anyone find me some examples where NEITHER

C-B = 1 - this removes such as 3,4,5 or 5,12,13 - or permutations thereof (4,3,5 or 12,5,13) NOR

C-B = 2 - this removes such as 8,15,17 NOR

A,B or C have cofactors - this removes 6,8,10 9,12,16 etc which are just multiples of simpler triplets

Ln(2) i.e the natural logarithm of 2 to base e is 0.693....

It can be calculated as Ln(2) = 1 - 1/2 + 1/3 - 1/4 + 1/5 ...

However this can be rearranged as

1 - 1/2(1 + 1/2 + 1/4 + 1/8 + 1/16 + ....) which equals 0 [ This is the same as 1 - 1/2 - 1/4 - 1/8 - 1/16 - 1/32 ...] +

1/3 - 1/6(1 + 1/2 + 1/4 + 1/8 + 1/16 + ...) which equals 0 +

1/5 - 1/10(1 + 1/2 + 1/4 + 1/8 + 1/16 +...) which equals 0 + ...

etc - in short for every odd fraction you can group a unique set of fractions to cancel it out

Which makes Ln(2) = 0!

Consider a neutron star - say 13 solar masses that is in a state of collapse such that its radius is JUST larger than the schwarzschild radius i.e. it is on the verge of becoming a black hole. Assume further that this star is in a state of equilibrium i.e. energy radiated away = mass arriving on the star.

Now consider two observers - one is stationary relative to the star and can make measurements as to the radius and mass of said star - and agrees with the above situation.

Now consider a second observer moving at a relativistic speed relative to the neutron star. Applying the Lorentz transformations then the radius of the neutron star as measured is reduced and the mass of the neutron star is increased. Both of these factors would seem to indicate that the radius of the neutron star is now LESS than the schwarzschild radius and that the star should now become a black hole.

Now the second observer changes their frame of reference to be the same as the first observer i.e. stationary relative to the stellar object.

Does the second observer still 'see' the black hole or has the black hole changed back to a neutron star and, if so, how?

Consider three particles (say of mass 1Kg) such that to one of them the other two are travelling at 90ms-1 and 100 ms-1 in the same direction and the one travelling at 100ms-1 slows down to 90ms-1.

To an observer on the first particle the change in Kinetic Energy is 1/2 * 100^2 - 1/2 * 90^2 = 950J

To the observer on the particle travelling at 90ms-1 the change in Kinetic Energy is 1/2 * 10^2 - 1/2 * 0^2 = 50J

Obviously the change in energy could be used to, say heat water - so why would one observer see 19 times as much water heated as the other? This is not a specific relativity problem - the speeds are too low!

Consider an equivalent dynamo / electric motor. Now everyone knows that you can't use the dynamo to power the motor to drive the dynamo - because of conservation of energy.

However what would happen if you put a set of gears on the output of the motor to double the speed at which the dynamo rotates. This should increase the output of the Dynamo - as output is a function of rotational speed - which should enable it to drive the motor etc.

There is obviously a fallacy in the argument - but I can't think of it.

This is the result.

Just to say thanxs for the advice and direct line are going to pay me out in full for the car less the price of the mot so if you get a minute can you post this for me on that site i was on to prove every one wrong and to prove you were right just in case any one has the same problems as me once again John thank you