[lyner]

The phrase in your quote was ELECTRIC ENERGY is converted  not ELECTRONS are converted. Something quite different!

[lightarrow]

My arguement is not putative. If there is no battery to power the light, such as found ina  general lightbulb in the cieling, it is powered by electricity; the photons are a by-product of this electroactivity.

It doesn't change anything: in a power plant some kind of energy is converted into potential electric energy, which drives the electrons, which number stay constant; the electric energy is then converted into photons in the lamp. Where is the problem?

It was here.

Ah, sight problems. Have you recently been to an ophthalmologist?   []

[Mr. Scientist]

I apologize then. I was mistaken.

[lyner]

Spoken like a true gent!

[lightarrow]

Spoken like a true gent!

Agree  []

[Andrew K Fletcher]

U.S top Scientist links moons orbit to earthquake in Japan

[yor_on]

Alex Jones?

=

"It was astrologer Richard Nolle who linked the full moon of March 19 to natural disasters. He claimed that this "supermoon" would trigger massive earthquakes, volcanoes and powerful storms when it arrived.  But scientists assure that this is not the case. ['Supermoon' Did Not Cause Japan Earthquake and Tsunami]

Jim Garvin (NASA), for example, said the moon's effects on Earth have been the subject of extensive studies.

"The effects on Earth from a supermoon are minor, and according to the most detailed studies by terrestrial seismologists and volcanologists, the combination of the moon being at its closest to Earth in its orbit, and being in its 'full moon' configuration (relative to the Earth and sun), should not affect the internal energy balance of the Earth since there are lunar tides every day," Garvin wrote.

But while the moon helps drive Earth's tides, it is not capable of triggering devastating earthquakes.

"The Earth has stored a tremendous amount of internal energy within its thin outer shell or crust, and the small differences in the tidal forces exerted by the moon (and sun) are not enough to fundamentally overcome the much larger forces within the planet due to convection (and other aspects of the internal energy balance that drives plate tectonics)," Garvin explained."