Science TBC

There is no question that science fiction shows have a number of the most desirable ladies around. Science fiction, by its very nature, is about fantasy. So why not dream over some popular gals when we are enjoying our favorite shows? Here is a summary of a few of the coolest girls around the newest science fiction shows.

1. Tabrett Bethell
If you’ve viewed Legend of the Seeker, you’ve definitely noticed Tabrett Bethell portraying Cara, a Mord-Sith. Off screen, Aussie born Tabrett has worked as a model along with cheerleader, which will contributes to her lure as the scorching woman across the street. Tabrett has got the actual angelic look, while showing off it like some sort of super model. Tabrett comes across off screen as down to Earth and also sensuous, the woman’s eyes performing as one of her most appealing features.es.

2. Ali Larter
Playing double roles as Niki Sanders as well as Tracy Strauss in “Heroes,” Ali Larter can be simply incredibly hot. The woman’s blond hair as well as green eyes give her a Barbie doll attractiveness, while still remaining right down to Earth. On Heroes, she portrays several characters and her capabilities include being able to mirror water, possess extremely human strength, as well as freeze things, though exactly how hot she is, you can’t really see how something could freeze around her. Enthusiasts of the show have long followed the girl travel throughout the story’s period line, always wanting more Ali.

3. Tricia Helfer
Tricia Helfer, a Canadian born actress, shows Number Six on “Battlestar Galactica,” in the majority of mens’ books, she is number one. As a Cylon, the lady can easily transfer thoughts straight into a different body, however most men can’t get her out of their own storage. Tricia bears herself as a grown-up and desirable person, producing many adult men take a excursion to outer space along with her. If you’ve checked out some of Tricia’s picture spreads online, you’ll find out why she’s one of the absolute hottest women on science fiction television.

4. Anna Torv
On the Fox series “Fringe,” Anna Torv plays Olivia Dunham, a intelligent and elegant FBI agent investigating various paranormal phenomena. Australian born, Anna bears herself a bit more serious and unexplainable than other stars in the genre, leading to men all-around the globe having their own nightly visits with her vision, daydreaming about their own soulful encounter with Anna. Fringe continues to be one of the most unique series on network television, and thanks to Anna, also one of the best.

Most of these are the girls to watch for in the next few years. Do not be surprised if they are in a big feature science fiction film as the main leading actresses. These people are just that good. But for now you can see them here www.scifiseriesonline.com

Sci Fi Series Online is one of the most frequently updates series sites on the net. When een episode is aired the team will do everything in its power to stream it for you! You can watch free series online here. You can watch free series online here.

So you have a beautiful brand new science kit, such as a chemistry set, and you want to set up a truly scientific experiment, something really professional, something tightly organized and keenly observed. Sounds like a great idea so far! So where do you begin?

The first step, perhaps the most important step, is a well-thought-out hypothesis. This article provides instructions for how to make a great hypothesis.

A hypothesis is just a question and what you think the answer is. Its been called an educated guess. To write a good one, keep two principles in mind: your hypothesis should be precise and it should be simple. Its usually written as an Ifthen statement.

Contrary to what you may believe, most science kit experiments are carried out with a pretty good idea of what will happen. The goal of the experiment is to confirm that idea. And the name of that idea is the hypothesis.

So, if you look at your chemistry set or science kit sitting there with its brand-new bottles and think to yourself, Ill bet if I combine the ammonium nitrate with the water it will get colder, thats what happens in those cold packs, well, youve got a basic hypothesis right there!

If you further start thinking and wondering, I wonder what would happen if I added a whole bunch of ammonium nitrate to water. Would it get colder faster? Would it drop to an even lower temperature? How do they measure the right amounts to put in those cold pack things? then you are really thinking like a scientist!

You can expand your hypothesis to read something like the following, This experiment will measure temperature effects across time from varying amounts of ammonium nitrate dissolved in water. Hypothesis: If a greater amount of ammonium nitrate is added to water, the temperature of the solution will drop faster, and the greater the amount of ammonium nitrate added to water, the lower the end temperature will be before stabilizing.

You will notice that the hypothesis is very precise, it states exactly and with no fuzziness just what the experimenter will be measuring and what he expects the results to be. A poor hypothesis would be the following, Hypothesis: Adding ammonium nitrate will make the water colder. It is not at all precise. Colder than what? Its not simply water after you add ammonium nitrate is it? Its a solution. What do you mean by colder? How are you measuring this? The above hypothesis answers all these questions with exactness.

You will also notice that the original hypothesis is very simple. It uses as few words as possible. A poor hypothesis would be the following, When I add greater amounts of ammonium nitrate from the chemistry set to the water to make a solution like in a cold-pack from the store, then measure the temperature as described, I expect to see the numbers go down quicker than they would with a small amount of ammonium nitrate. I also think there will be a point that the temperature stops dropping and levels off, but I think that point will be lower for larger amounts of ammonium nitrate. The original hypothesis keeps things very simple.

A good hypothesis guides your experiment. Every observation is taken with an eye to disproving that hypothesis. Yes, you heard right DISproving the hypothesis. A good scientist knows that the best way to prove the hypothesis is right is by trying to prove it is wrong.

A good scientist is very, very careful and critical at each stage of the experiment, recording exactly what happens and noticing every detail that could potentially be impacting the results and disproving the hypothesis. A good scientist carefully repeats trials and reanalyzes data looking vigilantly for flaws. A good scientist uses all of the materials available in the science kit to test the hypothesis. In the end, if the results still match his hypothesis, then and only then can he begin to say it might be true. A good scientist still wants to see that this success is repeatable, so he may run the whole experiment again at another date, or ask a fellow scientist to do so.

If the results do not support the hypothesis, then the scientist has really learned something! Is it time to get a new chemistry set because this one doesnt give you the results you were looking for? No, that is not the right conclusion. This is where the most interesting part of science comes in, follow-up investigative experiments. The hypothesis is just your best guess, so you dont really know whether or not it is true. This is where a science kit begins to have all the thrill of a detective novel as you the scientist carefully watch for clues, racks your brain for alternative explanations and likely culprits, or devise plans to follow up a hunch. In which case, you get to write another hypothesis!

Epidemiologists and environmental health researchers have a joint responsibility to acquire scientific knowledge that matters to public health and to apply the knowledge gained in public health practice. We examine the nature and source of these social responsibilities, discuss a debate in the epidemiological literature on roles and responsibilities, and cite approaches to environmental justice as reflective of them. At one level, responsibility refers to accountability, as in being responsible for actions taken. A deeper meaning of responsibility corresponds to commitment to the pursuit and achievement of a valued end

Public health ethics is on the map. In the past year, bioethicists and public health practitioners have begun to focus their critical attention on this complex and understudied topic. Much remains to be done. Childress et al. (2002), for example, describe their account of public health ethics as a rough conceptual map of a terrain with undefined boundaries.

Our focus will be on the responsibilities of epidemiologists, a choice made for several compelling reasons. Epidemiology sits at the center of the science and practice of environmental health, and more generally, at the center of public health. Although it is often referred to as a basic science of public health, epidemiology connects the acquisition of scientific knowledge with its application in preventive interventions, programs, and policies. This connection suggests a fundamental question: What are our responsibilities as epidemiologists? Do we, for example, have a joint responsibility to participate in science and to apply the knowledge gained? This is a key concern for us as researchers, health professionals, and as teachers.

The social responsibility of public health professionals is but one of many concerns in the broader picture of public health ethics. It is nevertheless a central concern. As Ogletree (1996) reminds us, responsibility is a concept particularly well suited to flame many key aspects of the ethics of professions faced with making decisions and taking actions in complex situations. These decisions often involve advanced technologies, high levels of specialization, and overlapping areas of expertise and concern among decision makers from diverse educational, political, and social backgrounds, precisely the situation in contemporary epidemiology and public health. In sum, responsibility organizes many (although not all) of public health’s ethical issues in terms appropriate for professional practitioners.

Responsibility has a deeper meaning as well, corresponding to commitment. To be responsible means to be committed to someone or to some thing. Being responsible in this deeper sense involves a commitment to positive action, to the pursuit and achievement of something of value, such as a social good (Jonas 1984). We will return to the notion of social goods in public health. For now, we want to emphasize that responsibility focuses attention on professional commitments

Finally, our inquiry is intended to assist all public health researchers who seek to define their social responsibilities. For those who are involved primarily in environmental health research, we can think of at least two connected and current topics–environmental justice and community-based participatory research.

There are a few old standards regarding social networking sites, and StumbleUpon is certainly one of them since they’ve been active for so long. This is perhaps the ultimate social proof and sharing sites since the model it operates on involves people recommending interesting news and stories. Those of us who are involved in business on the net can get involved with this site to create traffic to our own sites. There are right and wrong ways to do this at this site, and that is what we intend to discuss, today.

You probably have heard of tagging, and that is something that will be your best friend at StumbleUpon. The world revolves around appropriate tags, and that is something you should not forget. We know you do not want to lose your credibility there, and that’s possible if your tagging isn’t right and your post ends-up somewhere in left field. Naturally the links you put in your content need to be right because that is an important part of the way it all works. If you learn how to share and people trust what you put out there, then that will go a long way in your marketing efforts.

Whenever possible make the effort to exceed expectations, and one thing you can is make your RSS feed buttons highly visible around your content. The more of a presence you build there, then people will or could begin reading your RSS feeds. In all the things you do at StumbleUpon, your only goal really is to essentially network and expand the reach of your own personal business web. The only way you can reach out and share solid information is if you can give them the kind of content they’re really looking for.

In order to find your particular target audience, you will always need to publish in the correct topical category. Just the way tags are important, the category you choose also plays a role in helping your links reach out to your prospects. Your topic, tags and category must all be in proper agreement. Clearly, getting targeted traffic from StumbleUpon is not at all difficult if you know what you’re doing. The worst part is always the beginning no matter where you are, and so just work at it bit by bit and results will happen. One good rule of thumb is to give first, then take, and that applies with all social marketing.

Magnets are a common test subject for elementary and middle school science fair projects. Magnet science fair projects often examine what impacts a magnetic field or what a magnetic field can impact. In this sample project students will be examining if magnetic properties can be manipulated based on the type of magnet, ring or bar, that is used.

Hypothesis

The hypothesis for this science fair project is that the ring and bar magnets have the same magnetic properties. The dependent variable for this hypothesis is the type of magnetic properties that are displayed by the magnet and the independent variable is the type of magnet. To clarify this hypothesis the term magnetic properties needs to be defined as having a magnetic polarity.

Supplies

To complete this magnet science fair project students will need a variety of bar and ring magnets. They will also need to have objects that also have polarity such as metal objects. Finally, students will need a data collection sheet.

The Experiment

The control experiment for this test will use the bar magnet. This magnet was chosen because it has the most traditional shape and properties. It will serve as the baseline data source. To test the magnetic properties of a bar magnet students will need to test the bar for polarity by identifying if it attracts opposite poles and if it repels like poles.

The test experiment will focus on the ring magnet. This magnet will be run through similar tests. A bar magnet that has poles clearly labeled can be used to test the polarity of various points on the ring magnet. Students will want to mark what areas of the ring magnet are attracted by each pole of the bar magnet and which areas are repelled.

Data Collection and Analysis

The collection of data will be based on simple observations of repulsion and attraction trends for both the bar and the ring magnets. The analysis of the data will revolve on the students ability or inability to find poles on the ring magnet. (*Hint: the poles on a ring magnet may not be found on the curved edge of the magnet.)

In order to prove the hypothesis may be correct the student will need to find polarity properties on the ring magnet. If polarity is not found then the hypothesis can be assumed to be false. Students may need to run this experiment several times to gather enough data to make a solid conclusion from the data that they collect.