http://www.physorg.com/news71419492.html
While I acknowledge there are "addictive personalities" who will go from one "high" to another to seek increasingly intense experiences; the notion that everyone will automatically turn to stronger drugs from using marijuana is patently a load of fecal matter (censorship forces me to use clinical terms). I have smoked marijuana from my teens onward. I am now nearly 60yo, and the strongest drug I use now is Ibuprofen to alleviate my arthritis. The everlasting Ministry of Truth is hard at work...
In my time I have seen many different people use cannabis, and hardly ever do they start using heroin. People how enjoy cannabis like it because it organic, safe (when used responsible), and reduces anxiety. If weed is a "gateway drug" than alcohol and tobacco would be the king of gateway drugs
And Organic Weed doesn't contain any MSG.
Arthur
Arthur
I don't encourage drug use, but from what I've seen prescription drugs cause more problems than illegal ones and it's just a source of conflict to treat someone who might simply be minding their own business and not harming others like a criminal (not to mention the costs from legal actions, property seizures etc.). If we're going to put people in prison for simply making stupid decisions, I can think of a ton of new laws we can add to the books, but as far as I know you can't simply arrest someone because you think they're doing something stupid ... then again there are already laws in the books that effectively do this already ...
I am probably in the same demographic as Argoid, and in most cases it is safe except for lung cancer issues.
The problem is that many people in the population are borderline schizophrenic, and it is these unfortunates who may progress to harder more addictive drugs, or precipitate into schizophrenia, which is now at epidemic levels.
I am unconvinced the nanny state can do much about this.
The problem is that many people in the population are borderline schizophrenic, and it is these unfortunates who may progress to harder more addictive drugs, or precipitate into schizophrenia, which is now at epidemic levels.
I am unconvinced the nanny state can do much about this.
QUOTE (Argiod+Jul 7 2006, 07:19 PM)
While I acknowledge there are "addictive personalities" who will go from one "high" to another to seek increasingly intense experiences; the notion that everyone will automatically turn to stronger drugs from using marijuana is patently a load of fecal matter (censorship forces me to use clinical terms). I have smoked marijuana from my teens onward. I am now nearly 60yo, and the strongest drug I use now is Ibuprofen to alleviate my arthritis. The everlasting Ministry of Truth is hard at work...
I don't know where you live, but I think that either marijuana is legal there or your drug dealer is stupid or he's your very best friend.
Here the process goes like this... You buy marijuana. Your drug dealer sells you marijuana with some heroin mixed. You smoke it without knowing that the heroin is there, because you're just stupid child and believe in everything they tell you. Then drug dealer increases doses of heroin in you marijuana and you become more and more addicted. It's as easy as that.
I don't know where you live, but I think that either marijuana is legal there or your drug dealer is stupid or he's your very best friend.
Here the process goes like this... You buy marijuana. Your drug dealer sells you marijuana with some heroin mixed. You smoke it without knowing that the heroin is there, because you're just stupid child and believe in everything they tell you. Then drug dealer increases doses of heroin in you marijuana and you become more and more addicted. It's as easy as that.
QUOTE (Upisoft+Aug 16 2006, 01:47 PM)
I don't know where you live, but I think that either marijuana is legal there or your drug dealer is stupid or he's your very best friend.
Here the process goes like this... You buy marijuana. Your drug dealer sells you marijuana with some heroin mixed. You smoke it without knowing that the heroin is there, because you're just stupid child and believe in everything they tell you. Then drug dealer increases doses of heroin in you marijuana and you become more and more addicted. It's as easy as that.
That's fraud and a crime. If some kid buys a lollipop and someone puts acid in it, that's a crime too.
Children shouldn't be using drugs (and maybe adults shouldn't even drink alcohol) but this should be a parental responsibilty and decision. If a parent wants to let their 16 year old kid drink some wine, that shouldn't be a decision made the community. Of course if a drunk 16 year trashes the neighborhood, that's just as much a problem and crime as if the 16 year old wasn't drunk though you can place some of the responsibility on the parents for this as well, but the point is that people don't generally spontaneously go crazy. There's a paranoia that without ever increasing levels of oversight people won't learn what's wrong or right and that line of thought is entirely incorrect - it's by over-pampering and assigning blame on society instead that individual irresponsibility is fostered to everyones detriment.
If you take a baby and trap it in a walker, so that it can't get hurt by falling on occassion, it will never learn how to walk without the walker and as it grows, it will continually with larger and larger sized walkers as the atrophied legs aren't adapted to carrying the weight. Yes, by removing the walker some falls and scraps will happen but ultimately the child learns and adapts even to the point of running faster and being more capable than having been artificially restricted by a crutch. People aren't nearly as stupid as they're often treated though treating them as if they were tends to convince them it's true and they may very well live down to the expectations.
Look what happened because of the overreaction to 9/11. Yes, it was a tragedy but each day 3 times as many people die of other causes in the U.S. and to react in ways that compounds the damages is simply self-destructive.
Here the process goes like this... You buy marijuana. Your drug dealer sells you marijuana with some heroin mixed. You smoke it without knowing that the heroin is there, because you're just stupid child and believe in everything they tell you. Then drug dealer increases doses of heroin in you marijuana and you become more and more addicted. It's as easy as that.
That's fraud and a crime. If some kid buys a lollipop and someone puts acid in it, that's a crime too.
Children shouldn't be using drugs (and maybe adults shouldn't even drink alcohol) but this should be a parental responsibilty and decision. If a parent wants to let their 16 year old kid drink some wine, that shouldn't be a decision made the community. Of course if a drunk 16 year trashes the neighborhood, that's just as much a problem and crime as if the 16 year old wasn't drunk though you can place some of the responsibility on the parents for this as well, but the point is that people don't generally spontaneously go crazy. There's a paranoia that without ever increasing levels of oversight people won't learn what's wrong or right and that line of thought is entirely incorrect - it's by over-pampering and assigning blame on society instead that individual irresponsibility is fostered to everyones detriment.
If you take a baby and trap it in a walker, so that it can't get hurt by falling on occassion, it will never learn how to walk without the walker and as it grows, it will continually with larger and larger sized walkers as the atrophied legs aren't adapted to carrying the weight. Yes, by removing the walker some falls and scraps will happen but ultimately the child learns and adapts even to the point of running faster and being more capable than having been artificially restricted by a crutch. People aren't nearly as stupid as they're often treated though treating them as if they were tends to convince them it's true and they may very well live down to the expectations.
Look what happened because of the overreaction to 9/11. Yes, it was a tragedy but each day 3 times as many people die of other causes in the U.S. and to react in ways that compounds the damages is simply self-destructive.
QUOTE (StevenA+Aug 17 2006, 12:35 AM)
That's fraud and a crime. If some kid buys a lollipop and someone puts acid in it, that's a crime too.
Of course it's a crime.
However selling lollipops isn't a crime. And here is the difference. In my country selling marijuana is a crime, as is selling heroin. If they catch you, you go to jail regardless what you've been selling.
So the drug dealer is already doing a crime, while selling the weed. Putting heroin in it is an investment in the future. He wants reliable customers, so he makes them addicts to achieve his goal.
Of course it's a crime.
However selling lollipops isn't a crime. And here is the difference. In my country selling marijuana is a crime, as is selling heroin. If they catch you, you go to jail regardless what you've been selling.
So the drug dealer is already doing a crime, while selling the weed. Putting heroin in it is an investment in the future. He wants reliable customers, so he makes them addicts to achieve his goal.
QUOTE (Upisoft+Aug 16 2006, 02:47 PM)
Here the process goes like this... You buy marijuana. Your drug dealer sells you marijuana with some heroin mixed. You smoke it without knowing that the heroin is there, because you're just stupid child and believe in everything they tell you. Then drug dealer increases doses of heroin in you marijuana and you become more and more addicted. It's as easy as that.
Upisoft,
If its "organized" crime, not just petty street supplying then yes, what you mentioned is just one of the methods to facilitate drug abuse and a drug demand used by the drug barons. Thats conventional "gangster" network methodology.
BUT in standard street supply, the heroin is not mixed in marijuana at all, because frankly it sells for too much more, as a luxury. Even with marijuana/weed/ecstacy users heroin is LAST resort as considerd "hardcore", b/cus its highly addictive, expensive and lethal.
Drug "dealers" are only normal people off the street, NOT necessarily some thug dispositioned dudes, and most of them do it as part of survival, society and culture...
I.E. Dad did it, brother does it, sister does it, mother does it, friends ALL do it at different strengths and levels; kid grows older, is VERY desensitised and adapted to taking/distributing illegal drugs by now and carries on the trend, because theres a DEMAND for it.
Its definitely two way, BUT when the parents have only taught them this, what do you expect. One of many scenarios but I've seen this scenario play out to begin a full area into a 'drug network'.
How it works is like women/sex works for many; you do one thing and you move on to what you've never tried but heard pleasantly about
Never heard of the "buzz" or "high" these people will brag about?
Well, thats one of the reasons they'll attempt consuming drugs and then moving on to one with a bigger "buzz".
Upisoft,
If its "organized" crime, not just petty street supplying then yes, what you mentioned is just one of the methods to facilitate drug abuse and a drug demand used by the drug barons. Thats conventional "gangster" network methodology.
BUT in standard street supply, the heroin is not mixed in marijuana at all, because frankly it sells for too much more, as a luxury. Even with marijuana/weed/ecstacy users heroin is LAST resort as considerd "hardcore", b/cus its highly addictive, expensive and lethal.
Drug "dealers" are only normal people off the street, NOT necessarily some thug dispositioned dudes, and most of them do it as part of survival, society and culture...
I.E. Dad did it, brother does it, sister does it, mother does it, friends ALL do it at different strengths and levels; kid grows older, is VERY desensitised and adapted to taking/distributing illegal drugs by now and carries on the trend, because theres a DEMAND for it.
Its definitely two way, BUT when the parents have only taught them this, what do you expect. One of many scenarios but I've seen this scenario play out to begin a full area into a 'drug network'.
How it works is like women/sex works for many; you do one thing and you move on to what you've never tried but heard pleasantly about
Never heard of the "buzz" or "high" these people will brag about?
Well, thats one of the reasons they'll attempt consuming drugs and then moving on to one with a bigger "buzz".
QUOTE (StevenA+)
Look what happened because of the overreaction to 9/11. Yes, it was a tragedy but each day 3 times as many people die of other causes in the U.S. and to react in ways that compounds the damages is simply self-destructive.
So I take it declaring war on Japan was a similar OVER REACTION to Pearl Harbor?
Think how many died because of THAT decison, compared to our limited response to 9/11.
Arthur
So I take it declaring war on Japan was a similar OVER REACTION to Pearl Harbor?
Think how many died because of THAT decison, compared to our limited response to 9/11.
Arthur
QUOTE (bang4thebuck+Aug 17 2006, 01:40 AM)
If its "organized" crime, not just petty street supplying then yes, what you mentioned is just one of the methods to facilitate drug abuse and a drug demand used by the drug barons. Thats conventional "gangster" network methodology.
BUT in standard street supply, the heroin is not mixed in marijuana at all, because frankly it sells for too much more, as a luxury. Even with marijuana/weed/ecstacy users heroin is LAST resort as considerd "hardcore", b/cus its highly addictive, expensive and lethal.
I guess the reality here differs. Our "standard" street supply are very "organized", and regularly someone is being killed for getting his territory. Often killed is someone not so organized and selling without "permission".
BUT in standard street supply, the heroin is not mixed in marijuana at all, because frankly it sells for too much more, as a luxury. Even with marijuana/weed/ecstacy users heroin is LAST resort as considerd "hardcore", b/cus its highly addictive, expensive and lethal.
I guess the reality here differs. Our "standard" street supply are very "organized", and regularly someone is being killed for getting his territory. Often killed is someone not so organized and selling without "permission".
QUOTE (adoucette+Aug 16 2006, 07:14 PM)
So I take it declaring war on Japan was a similar OVER REACTION to Pearl Harbor?
Think how many died because of THAT decison, compared to our limited response to 9/11.
That situation was different, as there was already a war going on in the world; Pearl Harbor simply got the US involved with it. With 9/11, only a small group of terrorists were attacking, and yet somehow that group expanded to entire societies president Bush has named "TERROR". In WWII, we were fighting for a very specific cause. In the war on terror, no one actually knows what we are really fighting for (eliminating terror from the world can not be brought about by starting a war). Anyway, I could go on and on about this, but I'll force myself to stop and say good night.
Think how many died because of THAT decison, compared to our limited response to 9/11.
That situation was different, as there was already a war going on in the world; Pearl Harbor simply got the US involved with it. With 9/11, only a small group of terrorists were attacking, and yet somehow that group expanded to entire societies president Bush has named "TERROR". In WWII, we were fighting for a very specific cause. In the war on terror, no one actually knows what we are really fighting for (eliminating terror from the world can not be brought about by starting a war). Anyway, I could go on and on about this, but I'll force myself to stop and say good night.
Not societies, STATE SUPPORTED TERRORISM.
You can't really win a war on terrorism, but then you have to ACTIVELY combat it, because terrorists allowed to act with impunity will eventually cause SERIOUS damage.
In today's world the POTENTIAL for death and destruction that just a few men can cause is ENORMOUS.
As to State Supported Terrorsim
Where do you think Hezbollah got 12,000 rockets from?
Hint = Iran.
Why do you think Iran is hosting a showing of Holocaust CARTOONS?
Hint = To show the Jews don't DESERVE Israel.
Why?
Hint = To justify their claim that Israel has no right to exist
Hint 2 = Who were the Iranians supporting in WW2?
Arthur
You can't really win a war on terrorism, but then you have to ACTIVELY combat it, because terrorists allowed to act with impunity will eventually cause SERIOUS damage.
In today's world the POTENTIAL for death and destruction that just a few men can cause is ENORMOUS.
As to State Supported Terrorsim
Where do you think Hezbollah got 12,000 rockets from?
Hint = Iran.
Why do you think Iran is hosting a showing of Holocaust CARTOONS?
Hint = To show the Jews don't DESERVE Israel.
Why?
Hint = To justify their claim that Israel has no right to exist
Hint 2 = Who were the Iranians supporting in WW2?
Arthur
"In today's world the POTENTIAL for death and destruction that just a few men can cause is ENORMOUS."
Thats true.
As for the propoganda, the US/UK do the SAME repeated embellishing and exagerrations when Iran and Syria are concerned (b/cus theyve not took them out yet), BUT never DO it with Israel (who they mostly have supplied everything to including NUCLEAR WEAPONS and strategy plans on how to HIT Iran, together).
Yep, US support for Israel is STATE SPONSORED TERRORISM witnessed by all alike.
Like this: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/11/world/mi...age&oref=slogin
Argue that side and you have PLENTY to play around with, UNLIKE the other, where you find postulates. Unlike...
"Interestingly, to back up this prediction, a report was released in December 1996 by The U.S. House of Representatives' Task Force On Terrorism And Unconventional Warfare. It was entitled, 'Approaching the New Cycle of Arab-Israeli Fighting'. In brief, the report tells us that such nations as Syria, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, and Egypt are planning and building for a final, devastating war of annihilation against Israel. This includes acquiring nuclear, biological and chemical weapons (NBC) in a mix with conventional weapons, e.g. tanks, aircraft, and soldiers, all in massive, overwhelming numbers." [P. 43]
I've NO want to debate/dsicuss this with you anyway, knowing well your repsonse on this repeatedly.
But Arthur, have you got any PROOF (not alleged) for 12,000 rockets by Hezbollah? Though they obviously DO have many, STATES are doing MORE damage than they EVER have and EVER will.
WW2 is history btw, and by NO means the way to judge ANY nation. Thats mere GUESS work again.
STILL 51 Allied countries, since each became a charter member of the United Nations and in order to qualify for charter membership in the UN, a nation had to have been at war with one or more of the Axis nations.
These 51 were: Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, Byelorussia SSR, Canada, Chile, China (Republic of..), Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Ethiopia, France, Great Britain, Greece, Guatamala, Haiti, Honduras, India, Iran, Iraq (post-Gailini government), Lebanon, Liberia, Luxembourg, Mexico, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, The Philippines (Osmena government), Poland, Russia USSR, Saudia Arabia, South Africa, Syria, Turkey, Ukraine SSR, USA, Uruguay, Venezuela and Yugoslavia.
SO WHAT YOU TALKING about?
Thats true.
As for the propoganda, the US/UK do the SAME repeated embellishing and exagerrations when Iran and Syria are concerned (b/cus theyve not took them out yet), BUT never DO it with Israel (who they mostly have supplied everything to including NUCLEAR WEAPONS and strategy plans on how to HIT Iran, together).
Yep, US support for Israel is STATE SPONSORED TERRORISM witnessed by all alike.
Like this: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/11/world/mi...age&oref=slogin
Argue that side and you have PLENTY to play around with, UNLIKE the other, where you find postulates. Unlike...
"Interestingly, to back up this prediction, a report was released in December 1996 by The U.S. House of Representatives' Task Force On Terrorism And Unconventional Warfare. It was entitled, 'Approaching the New Cycle of Arab-Israeli Fighting'. In brief, the report tells us that such nations as Syria, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, and Egypt are planning and building for a final, devastating war of annihilation against Israel. This includes acquiring nuclear, biological and chemical weapons (NBC) in a mix with conventional weapons, e.g. tanks, aircraft, and soldiers, all in massive, overwhelming numbers." [P. 43]
I've NO want to debate/dsicuss this with you anyway, knowing well your repsonse on this repeatedly.
But Arthur, have you got any PROOF (not alleged) for 12,000 rockets by Hezbollah? Though they obviously DO have many, STATES are doing MORE damage than they EVER have and EVER will.
WW2 is history btw, and by NO means the way to judge ANY nation. Thats mere GUESS work again.
STILL 51 Allied countries, since each became a charter member of the United Nations and in order to qualify for charter membership in the UN, a nation had to have been at war with one or more of the Axis nations.
These 51 were: Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, Byelorussia SSR, Canada, Chile, China (Republic of..), Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Ethiopia, France, Great Britain, Greece, Guatamala, Haiti, Honduras, India, Iran, Iraq (post-Gailini government), Lebanon, Liberia, Luxembourg, Mexico, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, The Philippines (Osmena government), Poland, Russia USSR, Saudia Arabia, South Africa, Syria, Turkey, Ukraine SSR, USA, Uruguay, Venezuela and Yugoslavia.
SO WHAT YOU TALKING about?
QUOTE (Upisoft+Aug 17 2006, 01:48 AM)
I guess the reality here differs. Our "standard" street supply are very "organized", and regularly someone is being killed for getting his territory. Often killed is someone not so organized and selling without "permission".
Upisoft,
I don't know where you are, so I couldn't say, but if thats the case, then YES, the "dealer" would almost certainly spike some higher class drug in there.
Not always, but where they know they can extort more income, and another long term puppet.
Upisoft,
I don't know where you are, so I couldn't say, but if thats the case, then YES, the "dealer" would almost certainly spike some higher class drug in there.
Not always, but where they know they can extort more income, and another long term puppet.
QUOTE (Upisoft+Aug 16 2006, 10:33 PM)
Of course it's a crime.
However selling lollipops isn't a crime. And here is the difference. In my country selling marijuana is a crime, as is selling heroin. If they catch you, you go to jail regardless what you've been selling.
So the drug dealer is already doing a crime, while selling the weed. Putting heroin in it is an investment in the future. He wants reliable customers, so he makes them addicts to achieve his goal.
Well if it wasn't an underground market then we could catch people who slip a kid heroin. As it stands now it's a black market so of course it's hard to catch the real criminals.
The point is that if you're in a back alley with a guy who doesn't leave a forwarding address, then obviously there's more risk involved in what you're buying but it's the laws that created this scenario.
And consider with 70%+ of the prison sentences being over marajuana and all the police work involved, how much additional time do you think they'd have to catch someone slipping unsuspecting kids heroin?
Laws should simply be limited to addressing real crimes - violence, theft, destruction of property, murder, fraud etc. If someone's got a plant growing in the back that they enjoy smoking on occassion really isn't something that justifies police action unless this somehow becomes more than this. They used to call police 'peace officers' and that's what the purpose should be.
However selling lollipops isn't a crime. And here is the difference. In my country selling marijuana is a crime, as is selling heroin. If they catch you, you go to jail regardless what you've been selling.
So the drug dealer is already doing a crime, while selling the weed. Putting heroin in it is an investment in the future. He wants reliable customers, so he makes them addicts to achieve his goal.
Well if it wasn't an underground market then we could catch people who slip a kid heroin. As it stands now it's a black market so of course it's hard to catch the real criminals.
The point is that if you're in a back alley with a guy who doesn't leave a forwarding address, then obviously there's more risk involved in what you're buying but it's the laws that created this scenario.
And consider with 70%+ of the prison sentences being over marajuana and all the police work involved, how much additional time do you think they'd have to catch someone slipping unsuspecting kids heroin?
Laws should simply be limited to addressing real crimes - violence, theft, destruction of property, murder, fraud etc. If someone's got a plant growing in the back that they enjoy smoking on occassion really isn't something that justifies police action unless this somehow becomes more than this. They used to call police 'peace officers' and that's what the purpose should be.
To Yasmin.Hurd@mssm.edu; Yasmin.Hurd@cns.ki.se; journal@acnp.org;
information@nida.nih.gov
Sent Wednesday July 5, 2006 4:32 PM
Subject Teen cannabis use and heroin addiction.
re: Adolescent Cannabis Exposure Alters Opiate Intake and Opioid Limbic
Neuronal Populations in Adult Rats
(and the Daily Mail headline: "Early cannabis abuse 'leads to heroin
addiction'")
Dr. Hurd,
Frankly, I have a very difficult time taking this research seriously.
For starters, it seems rats have to be forced to use either THC or heroin.
Apparently, they won't do it on their own... unless they're already
addicted.
Second, no comparison of these data has been attempted with those obtainable
from murine experience with other pleasure-producing substances or
activities.
Finally, the conclusion that early cannabis use "leads to heroin addiction"
from these data is patently absurd, since both THC-exposed rats and
THC-naive control rats became addicted to heroin once forced to do so.
I have an absurd hypothesis of my own that I think you should test for
comparison with your own:
Subject rats to endo-opioid release by forced sexual stimulation exactly as
early and frequently as you did with THC administration... then see if those
rats are more likely than controls are to self-administer opioids.
My best guess is that frequent, early, sexually-induced endo-opioid exposure
would be vastly more likely than THC to produce increased heroin
self-administration in addicted rats.
Ergo: early masturbation and teen sex lead to heroin addiction.
And of course, the rats would probably enjoy it more.
Michael Muirhead
Queen Charlotte, BC
Canada
information@nida.nih.gov
Sent Wednesday July 5, 2006 4:32 PM
Subject Teen cannabis use and heroin addiction.
re: Adolescent Cannabis Exposure Alters Opiate Intake and Opioid Limbic
Neuronal Populations in Adult Rats
(and the Daily Mail headline: "Early cannabis abuse 'leads to heroin
addiction'")
Dr. Hurd,
Frankly, I have a very difficult time taking this research seriously.
For starters, it seems rats have to be forced to use either THC or heroin.
Apparently, they won't do it on their own... unless they're already
addicted.
Second, no comparison of these data has been attempted with those obtainable
from murine experience with other pleasure-producing substances or
activities.
Finally, the conclusion that early cannabis use "leads to heroin addiction"
from these data is patently absurd, since both THC-exposed rats and
THC-naive control rats became addicted to heroin once forced to do so.
I have an absurd hypothesis of my own that I think you should test for
comparison with your own:
Subject rats to endo-opioid release by forced sexual stimulation exactly as
early and frequently as you did with THC administration... then see if those
rats are more likely than controls are to self-administer opioids.
My best guess is that frequent, early, sexually-induced endo-opioid exposure
would be vastly more likely than THC to produce increased heroin
self-administration in addicted rats.
Ergo: early masturbation and teen sex lead to heroin addiction.
And of course, the rats would probably enjoy it more.
Michael Muirhead
Queen Charlotte, BC
Canada
PhysOrg scientific forums are totally dedicated to science, physics, and technology. Besides topical forums such as nanotechnology, quantum physics, silicon and III-V technology, applied physics, materials, space and others, you can also join our news and publications discussions. We also provide an off-topic forum category. If you need specific help on a scientific problem or have a question related to physics or technology, visit the PhysOrg Forums. Here you’ll find experts from various fields online every day.
To quit out of "lo-fi" mode and return to the regular forums, please click here.