capnrefsmmat

Well, without context, it's really impossible to tell what x and p mean. But h-bar is the Dirac constant, and the [math]\Delta[/math] signs mean "change in." So the change in x times the change in p is greater than or equal to the Dirac constant over 2. I could hazard a guess that p is momentum, but it depends on what p has been defined to be in the context.

Hmm. Backslash problems? \test [math]\frac{2}{x}[/math] We encountered problems with backslashes being eaten on 3.1.1; I don't know if they're fixed in 3.1.2, but I haven't had a change to upgrade and find out.

Good to see that one of the two dozen bugs I reported in IPB after the conversion had an impact :-p I'm not sure how you could redo old BBCodes, apart from running a script over every old post in the database that uses a regex to find the BBCodes, then queries the conv_link table to replace the old post ID with a new one. That would require a regex call on every old post in the DB, plus a query for every use of the post BBCode. Ouch. Alternately, you could replace the BBCode with a PHP BBCode plugin that parses the BBCode differently depending on the age of the post it's in. I dunno if that information is available to the BBCode parser, though.

It's possible he hasn't released a new version of the converter package yet. Yeah, we run dedicated and it's a nice feeling. I dunno how permissive the IPS folks are.

As I understand it, though, your external service doesn't support the old [ce]equation[/ce] tags, or [imath]inline math[/imath]. Or the popups. I just packaged and released our system, though, if you can convince IPS to let you run LaTeX. http://blogs.scienceforums.net/capn/2010/08/26/releasing-ipblatex/

Oh, you're doing IPS hosted software, I see. Yeah, Jason at converters is pretty slow (I think he's a part-timer for IPS) but he gets stuff fixed when he has the time. We had some conversion bugs that have been open for several months. You might just ask support to apply that hack I gave in the above bug... Also worth noting that I may be releasing our LaTeX plugin sometime soon, with mhchem and all that. Presuming you can install custom BBCode plugins and they'll install LaTeX for you, I guess... we host on dedicated, so I dunno what IPS does.

Tormod, you may be interested in this: http://community.invisionpower.com/tracker/issue-24164-vb-showthreadphp-redirect-script-doesnt-handle-all-links/ That'll cover nearly all of your broken links, I'd bet.

No, what I meant is that the fluid in the eye would conduct heat away from the focus point of the light a lot better than air would. That wouldn't save your eye, but it would be better than if the eye was filled with air.

Except your eyeball has fluid in it that will dissapate the heat somewhat.

That's all true, but the advantages of not having an appendix are very small. Very few people even have appendicitis, and most live through medical treatment, so there is practically no advantage. An extra few cubic inches of space won't make much of a difference in terms of reproduction and survival (the point of evolution being to make organisms that can reproduce the most), so I don't see why the appendix will go away. It's quite possible for it to happen, but not likely.

Most Linux users don't write their own software or filters. Simply because some other kind person took the time to do it themselves, and then put it in the package repositories for everyone to use. That's the joy of free software--someone's probably already made something to do that task. And dare I note that Linux creators can't make big bucks like Microsoft, because Linux is free. No. You don't see them on shelves because they're all free. Ubuntu, for example, has more than 16,000 free software packages available in its repositories. See also: Firefox, OpenOffice, The GIMP, etc. WINE. WINE. (Which, ironically, stands for WINE Is Not an Emulator). FUD is fun!

Some scientists believe it was originally for helping the digestion of raw meat. It's probably still there because appendicitis only affects a tiny percentage of people, so there's no evolutionary reason for it to go away.

I already am :hyper: and thank you! This site seems to be a bit more intellectual than the one I normally visit, but has less posts and members. I suppose this forum hasn't attracted the crackpots quite yet (gotten any folks trying to prove that there are goats on Mars? we have!), but they make part of the fun.

That's quite true. However, we can use scientific reasoning to establish that God is an illogical concept. This does not rule out God if you are willing to believe that there are exceptions to scientific reasoning (singularities fit in--we simply haven't figured out laws of physics that will work there), but if you follow only logic, God just doesn't work.