?

Can someone please just answer a few basic questions I have on music theory?

1) If a song or piece of music is in a given key, does that mean the it will consist only of notes/chords in that scale?

2) There seem to be hundreds of different scales (or modes or whatever you call them). Which ones are actually important? I head about major, minor, diminished, blues etc.

I'm so out of my depth with this stuff so any help is much appreciated

If not, why not?

Given that the terrorist attack threat level has recently been raised to "severe", is the UK in danger of a nation wide disaster? tension and fear has risen in the UK a lot over the last decade, with British people often blaming terrorist attacks that are carried out by Islamic extremists on the entire Muslim population. Is it only a matter of time before organisations like the EDL and "Britain First" become militant and launch real attacks against the Islamic people?

I find a lot of people blame the government for not responding with serious action to previous terrorist attacks ever since 9/11. Since the public transport bombings of 7/7 and various other threats, more and more people are becoming hostile towards Muslims in general and are failing to make the distinction between Islam and extreme Islam. Given that there are now hundreds of Jihads (not sure if that's correct spelling) on the loose in the UK after coming back from fighting in the IS, I fear that the raised threat level is genuine and that if there is some sort of terrorist attack, it may lead to fighting on the streets targeted at Muslims.

Do you think that this could happen? Is it only a matter of time before members of the general public take things into their own hands and target innocent Muslims? No one can deny that the government seems to be very bad at responding to this sort of thing.

Also, if you are a Muslim in the UK, do you get targeted by people because of this?

I'm not talking about religion, though religious healing and perhaps other miracles are effectively the same thing. I understand that everybody has their own beliefs, and I support this. I think its a fundamental human right that you are entitled to believe whatever you want, providing you don't force this on others and it is not harmful to anyone around you. Whilst I'm not religious, I can understand why others are. After all, science can not yet entirely answer the questions we have about our origins as a species, the beginning of the universe etc. and no one can completely disprove the existence of God. I find that religion has adapted to our increased understanding of history and the world around us - for example, many now take religious stories to be entirely metaphoric. However, I can't understand how anyone can still believe in actual magic. People come on YA and ask questions about how to use black and white magic and wicca. I don't know much about the subject, so I don't want to come across as though I'm being arrogant or aggressive, I just don't understand how in the 21st century people actually believe this stuff. Is it a failure of the education system? too many books and movies and video games? are they all a bunch of teenagers trying to stand out or just going through a phase? what on earth are they thinking?

To clarify, this isn't intended to be horrible or condescending. It's a genuine question - I can't get me head around it

I have met many Muslims in my time and been fairly close friends with some, and the vast majority have been very friendly, generous and warm people - I imagine that the vast majority of Muslims in the UK are like this. But regardless of this, Islam has still failed (to a degree) to integrate properly. I live in Leicester in the Midlands, which is a very multicultural city, and the different cultures actually blend with each other quite well. Whilst there are areas where some of these cultures more heavily concentrated than others, there is no friction between these cultures aside from Islam, and I think this is the same in other parts of the country. It seems like there is a divide in the population where Muslims sit on one side, and the rest of society on the other (apart from European immigrants, who seem to be completely indifferent to the situation). This divide has broken down a little and isn't as bad as it was, but it still remains fairly strong. Is this a cultural divide, or religious? the majority of the UK has welcomed other cultures, we have big celebrations for Hindu and Sikh holidays all across the town, but Eid and Rammadan seem to be kept to certain Muslim dominated areas. Is it because of the culture behind Islam and the demands of the religion (Halal food, clothing), or is it because the religion itself isn't built to integrate? What do you think?

Would someone please explain to me the basic idea of Heisenberg's uncertainty principle? A simple explanation would do, if that's at all possible - I only studied physics to GCSE level but have recently taken an interest in the subject as a sort of learning hobby, so no formulas or anything like that are needed. I've just been reading a lot about quantum physics and understand the majority of it at a basic level, but can't quite get my head around this part. I even conducted a simple related experiment where I aimed a laser pen at the wall an created an increasingly narrow gap for the light to pass through, but as I narrowed the gap the light hitting the wall gradually spread out rather than shrinking, which was completely amazing but I still don't understand the mechanics behind it. Something to do with not being able to determine momentum and position at the same time? I'm not sure. Anyway, if someone could explain to me in layman's terms I'd really appreciate it. Cheers :)

Not intended as the usual smug atheist questions that are asked on YA - its a serious question and I don't mean to belittle or offend anyone. Is it not unfair for God to punish me or send me to hell for not believing in him when there is so little empirical evidence? regardless of where you stand on the religious spectrum, the evidence for God's existence is lacking. I'm not saying that absence of evidence is evidence of absence, but religion hasn't had a big role in my life. I've be exposed to a lot of different religions as well - If I was going to be religious, how am I supposed to decide which one is the right one? most of them state that worshipping a different God is wrong and is punishable, and none of them have more evidence than any other. It would be illogical for me to believe in God, and you would say the same thing if you had lived my life. Its ok saying "Jesus loves you and all you need to do is to accept him", but how do I know that when I die I won't find myself confronted by Allah? and wouldn't it be unfair for him to punish me, given that he hasn't given me any reason throughout my life to believe in him more than any other God?

Could someone offer me a basic explanation of what is happening between Russia and Ukraine? I see it a lot in the media but haven't had time to actually look into it. What exactly is the fighting all about?

Hi, I was just wondering if someone could explain the origin of some of these weird spam emails I've been getting. The message will come from a normal looking email address (albeit one that isn't in my contact list from a previous conversation) and always gets put into my junk folder, but I sometimes look at them just to make sure. They often say stuff like "I'm going for a run today, are you coming with me?" followed by a bit.ly address or a similar link. Sometimes hotmail says the email is from just a name like Dave or Cynthia, and sometimes when I look at the email more closely it says it was sent to an email address other than mine - which makes no sense at all!? Once I got one that had my name followed by a question mark for the subject and the message just said "from flat 1?". They really vary in content. I figured that since they all have a dodgy looking link at the end of them, they are genuinely junk and not serious emails, but I just wonder what the weird messages are all about. I thought maybe its a method of trying to trick spam filters by disguising themselves as normal emails?

I dunno, but if anyone could shed some light on it I'd really appreciate it! Thanks!

Just wondering. I live in the UK and there isn't really much of a culture about recreational shooting - at least not so much as there is in the US. I just wonder because surely, restricting the ownership of guns would limit the ability of potentially dangerous people getting hold of them and being able to use them. Wouldn't that be worth giving them up for or making them more exclusive?

I've been looking for this movie that I saw a trailer for in the cinema a couple of years ago and cannot find it anywhere. It's a conspiracy kind of movie - something about a guy meeting a girl and then he goes and meets her again or something but some sort of illuminati type organisation that controls everything gets involved because he wasn't supposed to see her again or something. I think it was set mainly in an American city. I remember from the trailer a scene where the protagonist is backing away from the bad guys and one of them sort of makes this hand gesture and a bit of the floor comes up and trips him over. It couldn't have been that good because I can't find it anywhere and I've been looking for ages. Something about a group of people that control everything and then they go after him because he goes against their plans or something. If you got any ideas please tell me because it's driving me nuts. Thanks!

My Mum has been told by her employer that their company policy now requires employees to book only full weeks off for holiday, so she can't have a day off for her birthday etc. This is written in some sort of policy, but surely they don't have the right to do that sort of thing?

I always need to take a crap before something important happens (exams etc.). I'm moving in at Uni tomorrow and I share a toilet with six people, including girls and I really don't want to spend the day crapping my guts out. And thoughts?

I personally feel that children should not be born into a religion. I feel that it is okay for parents to share their beliefs with their children and explain their religion, but children should not be born into the religion automatically. I feel that they should be educated in all religions as much as one another rather than having the teachings of their parent's religion drilled into them relentlessly. I think no child should be able to join a religion, and that only once someone has become recognized as an adult should they be able to make that decision. I also think that this would allow children to accept and understand science a lot more than they do now. I know people who were born into various religions, and despite being educated in exactly the same way as me, refuse to accept the facts bought forward by science because of the ridiculous dogmatic certainty in their religion that was forced upon them by their parents. What's the point of teaching a child about science if their parents and religious community are just going to instill the fear of God in them?

To clarify, this is not an attack on religious people. I am not religious myself, but I do not hate those who are and would never put a question out simply as a verbal assault. These are my opinions and I'd like to hear as many different perspectives on the subject as possible!

I've been watching some episodes of to catch a predator lately, and over time I've been feeling bit by bit more disturbed by it. Let me make one thing clear before you read on: I am not saying that the actions these men take are Morally acceptable - I am not supporting pedophilia and do not tolerate it. The point of this question is; are we enforcing justice, or are we holding people responsible for things which are out of their control?

Obviously, these people should not act on their desires for underage partners - on this, I think we can all agree. By acting on their urges despite knowing that it is wrong, they are doing something morally wrong. But, do they have another option? Can a pedophile contact a psychiatrist for help? Can they get therapy? And if they can, are we encouraging them to do so or are we passively letting them do the wrong thing so that we can catch them?

Take "to catch a predator" for example: that show is actively getting pedophiles to come to a set up house, so that they can be humiliated, named and shamed, judged and locked away. Would it not be better everyone if instead of being set up for arrest, they were set up for some sort of intervention or therapy?

The point I'm trying to stress is, that this is not justice. Imagine if you were a pedophile - you were attracted to younger people. You would constantly be being told how disgusting you were, and how you deserved death or life imprisonment, and how your some sort of demented messed up horrible evil creature - all for something that's in your head. Maybe if we made everything a little less "we hate you and you deserve to die", and a little more "you have a problem - it's not your fault and we can help you with it", maybe pedophiles would be more inclined to actually seek help instead of acting on their urges. Because they can't go anywhere to resolve their issues, the tension and desire must get so pent up and it must get harder for them to resist acting on their problems.

Like I said at the start, I am not a pedophile and I don't support or tolerate the practice. But, I do think people deserve more than being attacked and torn to pieces for something that they can't even help. I'd like to hear other people's thoughts on this, all answers and opinions welcome

What do you live for? What is the thing that you could not live without?

All teenage kids seem to think they have a mental health issue, whether it's anxiety and depression or paranoia. Seriously, every time I come on YA I see a ton of questions from kids between 14-17 asking if they have a mental health issue. I see people my own age doing this as well, though I see less of them. What's the reason for this? Have teenagers always felt like this but until now never sought help? maybe there is a lot of self-diagnosis going on because of the big focus on mental health at the moment and Doctors are taking it a lot more seriously than they would have done 10-20 years ago? Or are kids these days more susceptible to mental health problems? I read a study recently that demonstrated that the more time people spend on social networking sites, the worse they feel about themselves. Maybe it's something along those lines, or some other area of modern technology? It's not just on YA answers that I see this - it's everywhere! Are teenagers these days suffering from these issues more than previous generations, or do they just think they are? I'd love to hear people's thoughts on this.

I was just finishing my second play through of Infinite. This game has blown me away - I've always loved Bioshock, and I think since that first glimpse of Rapture it's been one of my favourite series. Ken Levine is quite a genius and this is quite clearly seen in the development of characters and architecture of the stories throughout the games. The rest of the team at Irrational are also pretty incredible - the settings are amazing and the game play is dynamic and fairly unique, though I felt this area was the only way in which Infinite could have disappointed.

Having said that, the ending of infinite was incredible - a very good way to rap up the series; everything is tied together. The quantum stuff and the many worlds business kind of popped up out of nowhere, and no one can truly say whether it was planned all the while. I'd personally say no, because like a said the multiple universes stuff comes out of nowhere and is not mentioned before Infinite, but is literally the glue that holds everything together.

The point of this question is: the story is pretty well tied together. To revert back to rapture or Columbia or even a new setting would be difficult as the story would be difficult to enjoy when essentially, Infinite is already the Pinnacle of the series. What do you think they could do with a sequel to top Infinite, keep the game fresh and tie in completely with the previous games?

I personally think that the series needs to take a completely different direction. I was thinking perhaps an open world online game set in Rapture. Make it massive and continually expand it (much like the online content of the new GTA game). It could be a kind of multiplayer survival thing, with side quests and some events that tie everyone in together. Sort of like an RPG style thing. People could manufacture their own vigors/plasmids and weapons. The possibilities are infinite... pardon the pun.

Any ideas welcome! Would love to hear other fan's thoughts on this.

As the title says, this contains spoilers regarding the end of Bioshock infinite, so please don't read if you haven't finished it.

I spent a little while reading up and gathering my thoughts after finishing the game to get my head around the ending of Bioshock, and I can grasp the majority of it. They go back to the point where Booker is at the baptism thingy after wounded knee, and all the variations of Elizabeth drown Booker to stop him from becoming Comstock. Ok, cool; so the universe never branches off, and this means that Booker dies at this point and neither Comstock or Elizabeth ever come to exist. Ok, three things I just don't understand:

1) How can Elizabeth(s) travel back to that point and kill Booker, if doing so means that they never come into existence? Surely this is a paradox?

2) Elizabeth talks about the constants and variables: "There's always a lighthouse, always a man, always a city". She goes on to say that her, songbird, Booker etc. are a constant in each universe, but its sometimes different. At the end, there are several Elizabeth's, meaning that there are several variations of Columbia and what have you. But obviously she is demonstrating that Rapture is just another form of these constants, where you have Jack as Booker, Andrew Ryan as Comstock, the big daddies (delta in particular) as songbird and Elizabeth as... a little sister? Ok, cool. But does that mean that Columbia doesn't exist in the same realities as Rapture? Does that also mean that Booker actually is Jack? If so, why was it only Elizabeths that appeared at the baptism to drown him and not tons of her equivalents in different realities, like the reality in which Rapture exists? By killing Booker, have they not only prevented Columbia from existing but have they also cancelled out Rapture being built? See where I'm coming from with this?

3) If we just ignore the paradox in point one for arguments sake, why oh why does Booker wake up in his apartment after the credits have rolled to go and check on Anna? Surely he's 100% dead now? By drowning him, Comstock is prevented from ever existing, but also Booker dies there and then. Is this just a cushy fairytale ending to such a well told story? Because if it is, I think it kind of kills it. But maybe I'm missing something here completely?

If anyone could offer their views or explanations to these points, I'd really appreciate it.

Cheers!