<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_10_14_2241209</id>
	<title>Researchers Discover "Magnetic Current"</title>
	<author>samzenpus</author>
	<datestamp>1255530180000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>fsouto writes <i>"Researchers have discovered a <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8307804.stm">magnetic equivalent to electricity</a>. From the article, 'The phenomenon, dubbed "magnetricity," could be used in magnetic storage or in computing. Magnetic monopoles were first predicted to exist over a century ago, as a perfect analogue to electric charges. Although there are protons and electrons with net positive and negative electric charges, there were no particles in existence which carry magnetic charges. Rather, every magnet has a "north" and "south" pole.'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>fsouto writes " Researchers have discovered a magnetic equivalent to electricity .
From the article , 'The phenomenon , dubbed " magnetricity , " could be used in magnetic storage or in computing .
Magnetic monopoles were first predicted to exist over a century ago , as a perfect analogue to electric charges .
Although there are protons and electrons with net positive and negative electric charges , there were no particles in existence which carry magnetic charges .
Rather , every magnet has a " north " and " south " pole .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>fsouto writes "Researchers have discovered a magnetic equivalent to electricity.
From the article, 'The phenomenon, dubbed "magnetricity," could be used in magnetic storage or in computing.
Magnetic monopoles were first predicted to exist over a century ago, as a perfect analogue to electric charges.
Although there are protons and electrons with net positive and negative electric charges, there were no particles in existence which carry magnetic charges.
Rather, every magnet has a "north" and "south" pole.
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29754269</id>
	<title>the article itself, and available</title>
	<author>f3r</author>
	<datestamp>1255639620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I post the paper itself (not the abstract whose text cannot be accessed, not a derivative article in a divulgative magazine)
<a href="http://arxiv.org/abs/0907.0956" title="arxiv.org" rel="nofollow">arXiv:0907.0956</a> [arxiv.org]
I know nobody is interested, because after so many posts no one had the urge. But anyway..
<p>
Why not link directly to arXiv in all scientific posts? Maybe a divulgative link AND a link to the paper in the arXiv. I am crazy?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I post the paper itself ( not the abstract whose text can not be accessed , not a derivative article in a divulgative magazine ) arXiv : 0907.0956 [ arxiv.org ] I know nobody is interested , because after so many posts no one had the urge .
But anyway. . Why not link directly to arXiv in all scientific posts ?
Maybe a divulgative link AND a link to the paper in the arXiv .
I am crazy ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I post the paper itself (not the abstract whose text cannot be accessed, not a derivative article in a divulgative magazine)
arXiv:0907.0956 [arxiv.org]
I know nobody is interested, because after so many posts no one had the urge.
But anyway..

Why not link directly to arXiv in all scientific posts?
Maybe a divulgative link AND a link to the paper in the arXiv.
I am crazy?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29753627</id>
	<title>so...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255544700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>flying cars?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>flying cars ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>flying cars?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29754957</id>
	<title>Question on magnetic fields</title>
	<author>master\_p</author>
	<datestamp>1255606500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What is a magnetic field composed of? The article says that a small magnetic field is formed around the muons. Is a magnetic field composed of particles?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What is a magnetic field composed of ?
The article says that a small magnetic field is formed around the muons .
Is a magnetic field composed of particles ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What is a magnetic field composed of?
The article says that a small magnetic field is formed around the muons.
Is a magnetic field composed of particles?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29755305</id>
	<title>One-sided coins are trivial</title>
	<author>dallaylaen</author>
	<datestamp>1255610640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>just as soon as you can make coins with one side</p></div><p>You mean, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M\%C3\%B6bius\_strip" title="wikipedia.org">Moebius strip</a> [wikipedia.org]-shaped? Those would have one side and one egde!</p><p>A bit tricky to manufacture and store, and therefore impractical, but still possible.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>just as soon as you can make coins with one sideYou mean , Moebius strip [ wikipedia.org ] -shaped ?
Those would have one side and one egde ! A bit tricky to manufacture and store , and therefore impractical , but still possible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>just as soon as you can make coins with one sideYou mean, Moebius strip [wikipedia.org]-shaped?
Those would have one side and one egde!A bit tricky to manufacture and store, and therefore impractical, but still possible.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29754129</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29754613</id>
	<title>Tehy clearly have no ear for a catchy name</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255601100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would have gone for Magtricity. It has a better ring to it. That or Ultra Mago-Leetricity.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would have gone for Magtricity .
It has a better ring to it .
That or Ultra Mago-Leetricity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would have gone for Magtricity.
It has a better ring to it.
That or Ultra Mago-Leetricity.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29753971</id>
	<title>So what do the field lines look like?</title>
	<author>Pfhorrest</author>
	<datestamp>1255549140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>The classic illustration of magnetic field lines is to put a big bar magnet on a table and sprinkle iron filings on and around it; they will end up tracing the magnetic field lines of the bar magnet.<br><br>So say they could construct the monopole equivalent of such a bar magnet, just one big lump of North or South. If we put that on a table and sprinkled iron filings on and around it, what (if any) lines would they end up tracing? Just rays away from the monopole?</htmltext>
<tokenext>The classic illustration of magnetic field lines is to put a big bar magnet on a table and sprinkle iron filings on and around it ; they will end up tracing the magnetic field lines of the bar magnet.So say they could construct the monopole equivalent of such a bar magnet , just one big lump of North or South .
If we put that on a table and sprinkled iron filings on and around it , what ( if any ) lines would they end up tracing ?
Just rays away from the monopole ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The classic illustration of magnetic field lines is to put a big bar magnet on a table and sprinkle iron filings on and around it; they will end up tracing the magnetic field lines of the bar magnet.So say they could construct the monopole equivalent of such a bar magnet, just one big lump of North or South.
If we put that on a table and sprinkled iron filings on and around it, what (if any) lines would they end up tracing?
Just rays away from the monopole?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29754889</id>
	<title>John Searl..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255605660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>..found this circa 60 years ago. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John\_Searl</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>..found this circa 60 years ago .
http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John \ _Searl</tokentext>
<sentencetext>..found this circa 60 years ago.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John\_Searl</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29753797</id>
	<title>a tiny magnet is monopole</title>
	<author>bgd73</author>
	<datestamp>1255546980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext> if a magnet is large enough to detect north and south, we can tell, but what if it isn't?</htmltext>
<tokenext>if a magnet is large enough to detect north and south , we can tell , but what if it is n't ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext> if a magnet is large enough to detect north and south, we can tell, but what if it isn't?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29754023</id>
	<title>Re:Bad summary</title>
	<author>fractoid</author>
	<datestamp>1255549920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The only thing new here is the current, not the "magnetic charge" from the monopole. And it's theoretical physics ridiculously far from being used in magnetic storage or computing.</p></div><p>The monopole is at most a month old, so it's not like we're talking particularly old news. At worst it's an update on ongoing research.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The only thing new here is the current , not the " magnetic charge " from the monopole .
And it 's theoretical physics ridiculously far from being used in magnetic storage or computing.The monopole is at most a month old , so it 's not like we 're talking particularly old news .
At worst it 's an update on ongoing research .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only thing new here is the current, not the "magnetic charge" from the monopole.
And it's theoretical physics ridiculously far from being used in magnetic storage or computing.The monopole is at most a month old, so it's not like we're talking particularly old news.
At worst it's an update on ongoing research.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29752723</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29752723</id>
	<title>Bad summary</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255533960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The only thing new here is the current, not the "magnetic charge" from the monopole. And it's theoretical physics ridiculously far from being used in magnetic storage or computing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The only thing new here is the current , not the " magnetic charge " from the monopole .
And it 's theoretical physics ridiculously far from being used in magnetic storage or computing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only thing new here is the current, not the "magnetic charge" from the monopole.
And it's theoretical physics ridiculously far from being used in magnetic storage or computing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29753549</id>
	<title>Re:Oh no, Rick Berman just came in his pants...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255543920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thankfully, that fuckwad has nothing to do with Star Trek! He's a fucking dolt. So's Brannon Bragga.</p><p>My CAPTCHA said "wreckers". How appropriate!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thankfully , that fuckwad has nothing to do with Star Trek !
He 's a fucking dolt .
So 's Brannon Bragga.My CAPTCHA said " wreckers " .
How appropriate !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thankfully, that fuckwad has nothing to do with Star Trek!
He's a fucking dolt.
So's Brannon Bragga.My CAPTCHA said "wreckers".
How appropriate!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29752993</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29753001</id>
	<title>Re:Bad summary</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255536360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Basically, what they found was a material that looks like two opposite magnetic monopoles. In other words, they found a magnetic dipole.</p><p>Wake me up when I can buy a north magnetic monopole, and not get the south magnetic monopole with it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Basically , what they found was a material that looks like two opposite magnetic monopoles .
In other words , they found a magnetic dipole.Wake me up when I can buy a north magnetic monopole , and not get the south magnetic monopole with it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Basically, what they found was a material that looks like two opposite magnetic monopoles.
In other words, they found a magnetic dipole.Wake me up when I can buy a north magnetic monopole, and not get the south magnetic monopole with it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29752723</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29755847</id>
	<title>Re:Bad summary</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1255614960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>And it's theoretical physics ridiculously far from being used in magnetic storage or computing.</i></p><p>Indeed, the <a href="http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17983-magnetricity-observed-for-first-time.html" title="newscientist.com">new scientist article says:</a> [newscientist.com]</p><blockquote><div><p>In September, two teams of physicists fired neutrons at spin ices made of titanium-containing compounds chilled close to absolute zero. The behaviour of the neutrons suggested that monopoles were present in the material.</p><p>To get more detailed information on the monopoles than had previously been possible, Bramwell's team injected muons - short-lived cousins of electrons - into the spin ice. When the muons decayed, they emitted positrons in directions influenced by the magnetic field inside the spin ice.</p><p>This revealed that the monopoles were not only present but were moving, producing a magnetic current.</p><p>It also allowed the team to measure the amount of magnetic charge on the monopoles. It turned out to be about a 5 in the obscure units of Bohr magnetons per angstrom, in close agreement with theory, which predicted 4.6. Unlike the electric charge on electrons, which is fixed, the magnetic charge on monopoles varies with the temperature and pressure of the spin ice.</p></div></blockquote><p>So you would have to cool you memory to almost zero kelvin and individually bombard each bit with neutron radiation and perhaps muons as well to write and read any data.</p><p>I don't think it's quite ready for the desktop yet.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And it 's theoretical physics ridiculously far from being used in magnetic storage or computing.Indeed , the new scientist article says : [ newscientist.com ] In September , two teams of physicists fired neutrons at spin ices made of titanium-containing compounds chilled close to absolute zero .
The behaviour of the neutrons suggested that monopoles were present in the material.To get more detailed information on the monopoles than had previously been possible , Bramwell 's team injected muons - short-lived cousins of electrons - into the spin ice .
When the muons decayed , they emitted positrons in directions influenced by the magnetic field inside the spin ice.This revealed that the monopoles were not only present but were moving , producing a magnetic current.It also allowed the team to measure the amount of magnetic charge on the monopoles .
It turned out to be about a 5 in the obscure units of Bohr magnetons per angstrom , in close agreement with theory , which predicted 4.6 .
Unlike the electric charge on electrons , which is fixed , the magnetic charge on monopoles varies with the temperature and pressure of the spin ice.So you would have to cool you memory to almost zero kelvin and individually bombard each bit with neutron radiation and perhaps muons as well to write and read any data.I do n't think it 's quite ready for the desktop yet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And it's theoretical physics ridiculously far from being used in magnetic storage or computing.Indeed, the new scientist article says: [newscientist.com]In September, two teams of physicists fired neutrons at spin ices made of titanium-containing compounds chilled close to absolute zero.
The behaviour of the neutrons suggested that monopoles were present in the material.To get more detailed information on the monopoles than had previously been possible, Bramwell's team injected muons - short-lived cousins of electrons - into the spin ice.
When the muons decayed, they emitted positrons in directions influenced by the magnetic field inside the spin ice.This revealed that the monopoles were not only present but were moving, producing a magnetic current.It also allowed the team to measure the amount of magnetic charge on the monopoles.
It turned out to be about a 5 in the obscure units of Bohr magnetons per angstrom, in close agreement with theory, which predicted 4.6.
Unlike the electric charge on electrons, which is fixed, the magnetic charge on monopoles varies with the temperature and pressure of the spin ice.So you would have to cool you memory to almost zero kelvin and individually bombard each bit with neutron radiation and perhaps muons as well to write and read any data.I don't think it's quite ready for the desktop yet.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29752723</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29752993</id>
	<title>Oh no, Rick Berman just came in his pants...</title>
	<author>Mr. Roadkill</author>
	<datestamp>1255536300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>More buzzwords and concepts for Trek to abuse.<br> <br> <br><nobr> <wbr></nobr>...that whizzing sound is my karma, flying out the window.</htmltext>
<tokenext>More buzzwords and concepts for Trek to abuse .
...that whizzing sound is my karma , flying out the window .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>More buzzwords and concepts for Trek to abuse.
...that whizzing sound is my karma, flying out the window.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29756691</id>
	<title>Hrm</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255619040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Looks like someone finally Picked up Ed Leedskalnin pamphlet and actually read it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Looks like someone finally Picked up Ed Leedskalnin pamphlet and actually read it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Looks like someone finally Picked up Ed Leedskalnin pamphlet and actually read it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29753045</id>
	<title>Magnetic Storage</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255536780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Isn't that how a hard drive operates?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't that how a hard drive operates ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't that how a hard drive operates?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29752723</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29758719</id>
	<title>Re:Question on magnetic fields</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255627320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Photons are the force carrying particles of the electromagnetic field.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Photons are the force carrying particles of the electromagnetic field .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Photons are the force carrying particles of the electromagnetic field.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29754957</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29753229</id>
	<title>magnetricity?</title>
	<author>glwtta</author>
	<datestamp>1255539000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Do you have to have smision to be able to detect it?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do you have to have smision to be able to detect it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do you have to have smision to be able to detect it?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29781885</id>
	<title>Re:Bad summary</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255799580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The only thing new here is the current</p></div></blockquote><p>Is this a pun?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The only thing new here is the currentIs this a pun ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only thing new here is the currentIs this a pun?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29752723</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29753423</id>
	<title>So this means</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255541940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...we're 0.00317\% closer to flying cars!<br>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...we 're 0.00317 \ % closer to flying cars !
 </tokentext>
<sentencetext>...we're 0.00317\% closer to flying cars!
 </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29755481</id>
	<title>Magnetic Current?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255612440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Shades of A. Bertram Chandler!  How long before we get LodeJammers?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Shades of A. Bertram Chandler !
How long before we get LodeJammers ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Shades of A. Bertram Chandler!
How long before we get LodeJammers?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29754249</id>
	<title>macroscopic?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255639440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>if it's only working inside some material (spin ice), then it appears to me that the magnetic charge it is not truly a fundamental particle, but some macroscopic effect is at work...<br>anyone who can explain what is really going on? why can this magnetic effect only be shown inside spin ice?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>if it 's only working inside some material ( spin ice ) , then it appears to me that the magnetic charge it is not truly a fundamental particle , but some macroscopic effect is at work...anyone who can explain what is really going on ?
why can this magnetic effect only be shown inside spin ice ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>if it's only working inside some material (spin ice), then it appears to me that the magnetic charge it is not truly a fundamental particle, but some macroscopic effect is at work...anyone who can explain what is really going on?
why can this magnetic effect only be shown inside spin ice?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29754305</id>
	<title>One step closer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255640040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>to build a stargate</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>to build a stargate</tokentext>
<sentencetext>to build a stargate</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29752729</id>
	<title>Maxwell Equations</title>
	<author>Veramocor</author>
	<datestamp>1255534020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The vaunted Maxwell equations are crying.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The vaunted Maxwell equations are crying .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The vaunted Maxwell equations are crying.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29753479</id>
	<title>We're going up the tech tree!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255542780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So, what's the next breakthrough? According to the Alpha Centauri tech tree I'm reading, we can now research Unified Field Theory and Nanominiaturization now that we have Monopole Magnets!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , what 's the next breakthrough ?
According to the Alpha Centauri tech tree I 'm reading , we can now research Unified Field Theory and Nanominiaturization now that we have Monopole Magnets !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, what's the next breakthrough?
According to the Alpha Centauri tech tree I'm reading, we can now research Unified Field Theory and Nanominiaturization now that we have Monopole Magnets!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29754739</id>
	<title>Re:you can make monopoles</title>
	<author>ChienAndalu</author>
	<datestamp>1255602960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or if electric charges are quantized.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or if electric charges are quantized .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or if electric charges are quantized.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29754129</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29754215</id>
	<title>spin ice doesnt violate div B =0</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255639020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In spin ice "monopoles" lines of "molecular bar magnets" line up head-to-tail to form a tetrahedral network of "pipes" along which a flux much less than h/e can be said to flow,</p><p>Usually, at each lattice point of the spin-ice pyrochlore structure two pipes have inward flowing flux, and two have outward flowing flux.<br>At a "monopole-like" defect, three flow in and  one flows out (or vice versa)  and the excess flux sprays out from the defect in all directions, looking like there<br>was a monopole there.  This radial flux is not quantized and much less than the dirac monopole flux</p><p>
&nbsp; The monopole looks like</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; SNSN*NSNSNS</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; .<br>(from an anonymous physicist who knows about the spin-ice/pyrochlore work)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In spin ice " monopoles " lines of " molecular bar magnets " line up head-to-tail to form a tetrahedral network of " pipes " along which a flux much less than h/e can be said to flow,Usually , at each lattice point of the spin-ice pyrochlore structure two pipes have inward flowing flux , and two have outward flowing flux.At a " monopole-like " defect , three flow in and one flows out ( or vice versa ) and the excess flux sprays out from the defect in all directions , looking like therewas a monopole there .
This radial flux is not quantized and much less than the dirac monopole flux   The monopole looks like                                                                 SNSN * NSNSNS                                                                                 .
( from an anonymous physicist who knows about the spin-ice/pyrochlore work )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In spin ice "monopoles" lines of "molecular bar magnets" line up head-to-tail to form a tetrahedral network of "pipes" along which a flux much less than h/e can be said to flow,Usually, at each lattice point of the spin-ice pyrochlore structure two pipes have inward flowing flux, and two have outward flowing flux.At a "monopole-like" defect, three flow in and  one flows out (or vice versa)  and the excess flux sprays out from the defect in all directions, looking like therewas a monopole there.
This radial flux is not quantized and much less than the dirac monopole flux
  The monopole looks like
                                                                SNSN*NSNSNS
                                                                                .
(from an anonymous physicist who knows about the spin-ice/pyrochlore work)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29757951</id>
	<title>Is it really a monopole?</title>
	<author>Xerxes314</author>
	<datestamp>1255624020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Are these objects actually monopoles? Well, yes and no. They fall into an interesting gray area:</p><p>No, they are not the fundamental monopoles that Dirac proposed. They are not fundamental particles, but only quasiparticles arising from the dynamics of some substrate. In this case, the substrate is quite exotic: a spin ice, which is a kind of material (dysprosium titanate) with polar atoms arranged into tetrahedra.</p><p>OK, so they're not fundamental, but they're still quasiparticle magnetic monopoles, right? Sort of. These quasiparticles still have to obey the standard laws of electromagnetism, and those laws still forbid the existence of magnetic monopoles. Every magnetic monopole is actually a member of a monopole-antimonopole pair connected by a Dirac string. To quote the paper:</p><blockquote><div><p>In general, it is of course well known that a string of dipoles arranged head to tail realizes a monopole&ndash;antimonopole pair at its ends. However, to obtain deconfined monopoles, it is essential that the cost of creating such a string of dipoles remain bounded as its length grows.</p></div></blockquote><p>So this is the key innovation here. A normal magnetic dipole like a bar magnet can be thought of as being like a stick: it has two ends; if you break it, both pieces have two ends; when you wave the stick around, both ends wave around. But this system is like a rope: it still has two ends; if you break it, the pieces still have two ends; but when you wave one end of the rope around, the other end can remain fixed. So the end of a rope can act like an object independent of the other end.</p><p>This makes it a great model system for playing with monopoles, as long as you close your eyes and pretend the rope doesn't exist. But it does exist, Maxwell's equations are obeyed and all is well in the universe.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Are these objects actually monopoles ?
Well , yes and no .
They fall into an interesting gray area : No , they are not the fundamental monopoles that Dirac proposed .
They are not fundamental particles , but only quasiparticles arising from the dynamics of some substrate .
In this case , the substrate is quite exotic : a spin ice , which is a kind of material ( dysprosium titanate ) with polar atoms arranged into tetrahedra.OK , so they 're not fundamental , but they 're still quasiparticle magnetic monopoles , right ?
Sort of .
These quasiparticles still have to obey the standard laws of electromagnetism , and those laws still forbid the existence of magnetic monopoles .
Every magnetic monopole is actually a member of a monopole-antimonopole pair connected by a Dirac string .
To quote the paper : In general , it is of course well known that a string of dipoles arranged head to tail realizes a monopole    antimonopole pair at its ends .
However , to obtain deconfined monopoles , it is essential that the cost of creating such a string of dipoles remain bounded as its length grows.So this is the key innovation here .
A normal magnetic dipole like a bar magnet can be thought of as being like a stick : it has two ends ; if you break it , both pieces have two ends ; when you wave the stick around , both ends wave around .
But this system is like a rope : it still has two ends ; if you break it , the pieces still have two ends ; but when you wave one end of the rope around , the other end can remain fixed .
So the end of a rope can act like an object independent of the other end.This makes it a great model system for playing with monopoles , as long as you close your eyes and pretend the rope does n't exist .
But it does exist , Maxwell 's equations are obeyed and all is well in the universe .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are these objects actually monopoles?
Well, yes and no.
They fall into an interesting gray area:No, they are not the fundamental monopoles that Dirac proposed.
They are not fundamental particles, but only quasiparticles arising from the dynamics of some substrate.
In this case, the substrate is quite exotic: a spin ice, which is a kind of material (dysprosium titanate) with polar atoms arranged into tetrahedra.OK, so they're not fundamental, but they're still quasiparticle magnetic monopoles, right?
Sort of.
These quasiparticles still have to obey the standard laws of electromagnetism, and those laws still forbid the existence of magnetic monopoles.
Every magnetic monopole is actually a member of a monopole-antimonopole pair connected by a Dirac string.
To quote the paper:In general, it is of course well known that a string of dipoles arranged head to tail realizes a monopole–antimonopole pair at its ends.
However, to obtain deconfined monopoles, it is essential that the cost of creating such a string of dipoles remain bounded as its length grows.So this is the key innovation here.
A normal magnetic dipole like a bar magnet can be thought of as being like a stick: it has two ends; if you break it, both pieces have two ends; when you wave the stick around, both ends wave around.
But this system is like a rope: it still has two ends; if you break it, the pieces still have two ends; but when you wave one end of the rope around, the other end can remain fixed.
So the end of a rope can act like an object independent of the other end.This makes it a great model system for playing with monopoles, as long as you close your eyes and pretend the rope doesn't exist.
But it does exist, Maxwell's equations are obeyed and all is well in the universe.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29754579</id>
	<title>Re:Oh no, Rick Berman just came in his pants...</title>
	<author>ionix5891</author>
	<datestamp>1255600380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Mr Data! reverse the polarity on that magneton beam<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mr Data !
reverse the polarity on that magneton beam .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mr Data!
reverse the polarity on that magneton beam ...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29752993</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29754017</id>
	<title>Re:So this means</title>
	<author>DrSpock11</author>
	<datestamp>1255549860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Now we can look forward to the definitive source on scientific accuracy to test if they're really possible...</p><p>Mythbusters.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Now we can look forward to the definitive source on scientific accuracy to test if they 're really possible...Mythbusters .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now we can look forward to the definitive source on scientific accuracy to test if they're really possible...Mythbusters.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29753423</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29756761</id>
	<title>A magnetic current?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255619340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Suppose a bar magnet is touched at its north end with a long iron wire.  At the other end of that wire will be a "north attractive pull" of a now greatly extended bar magnet.  Um, yes?  So, imagining that wire to be 200,000 miles long, when we touch the bar magnet with the end of the wire, it will take one+ seconds before that "northness" is measurable at the other end of the wire.  Therefore, is this not a "current of magnetism" that will behave in every way possible like an electrical current?  If so, what passes along the wire that's akin to "electrons?"  What would be the magnetic equivalents of ohms, amps and volts?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Suppose a bar magnet is touched at its north end with a long iron wire .
At the other end of that wire will be a " north attractive pull " of a now greatly extended bar magnet .
Um , yes ?
So , imagining that wire to be 200,000 miles long , when we touch the bar magnet with the end of the wire , it will take one + seconds before that " northness " is measurable at the other end of the wire .
Therefore , is this not a " current of magnetism " that will behave in every way possible like an electrical current ?
If so , what passes along the wire that 's akin to " electrons ?
" What would be the magnetic equivalents of ohms , amps and volts ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Suppose a bar magnet is touched at its north end with a long iron wire.
At the other end of that wire will be a "north attractive pull" of a now greatly extended bar magnet.
Um, yes?
So, imagining that wire to be 200,000 miles long, when we touch the bar magnet with the end of the wire, it will take one+ seconds before that "northness" is measurable at the other end of the wire.
Therefore, is this not a "current of magnetism" that will behave in every way possible like an electrical current?
If so, what passes along the wire that's akin to "electrons?
"  What would be the magnetic equivalents of ohms, amps and volts?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29758821</id>
	<title>why am i always getting modded troll</title>
	<author>circletimessquare</author>
	<datestamp>1255627800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>when i point out that monopoles are an impossibility?</p><p>it's like saying you want to feel the wind in your face, to turn around, and then feel no wind at all on your back. as if a magnetic field flows out, but not in, or in, but not out. you understand why you can't have a coin with one side, right? if you understand that you understand conceptually why monopoles don't exist: there is no such thing as a magnetic field that goes out, but never returns. logically, belief in a monopole is the same as belief in a perpetual motion machine</p><p>and, interestingly enough, monopoles are frequently featured in perpetual motion machine schemes. perhaps because that, indeed, if monopoles existed, you really could have a perpetual motion machine. a monopole, under the influence of a magnetic field, would begin moving and never stop. you understand that right? doesn't that tell you something about what a monopole really is in terms of reality/ not reality?</p><p>but for the sake of argument, let's say i'm wrong. ok, show me a monopole. i'm waiting</p><p>it's not like i'm a flat earth advocate arguing against the existence of the globe, or a creationist arguing against the existence of evolution. i'm simply pointing out that a monopole is a conceptual impossibility, and i get treated like i'm the electric universe troll</p><p>whatever</p><p>i just don't understand where this weird fervent certainty of monopoles comes in to the point where i have to be modbombed every time i point out that they don't exist and can't exist. its like i'm questioning the existence of god to a bunch of religious fundamentalists. this site is apparently overwhelmed with excitable physics freshman</p><p>i don't understand this bizarre certainty of belief in monopoles</p><p>there AREN'T ANY folks. pfffffft</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>when i point out that monopoles are an impossibility ? it 's like saying you want to feel the wind in your face , to turn around , and then feel no wind at all on your back .
as if a magnetic field flows out , but not in , or in , but not out .
you understand why you ca n't have a coin with one side , right ?
if you understand that you understand conceptually why monopoles do n't exist : there is no such thing as a magnetic field that goes out , but never returns .
logically , belief in a monopole is the same as belief in a perpetual motion machineand , interestingly enough , monopoles are frequently featured in perpetual motion machine schemes .
perhaps because that , indeed , if monopoles existed , you really could have a perpetual motion machine .
a monopole , under the influence of a magnetic field , would begin moving and never stop .
you understand that right ?
does n't that tell you something about what a monopole really is in terms of reality/ not reality ? but for the sake of argument , let 's say i 'm wrong .
ok , show me a monopole .
i 'm waitingit 's not like i 'm a flat earth advocate arguing against the existence of the globe , or a creationist arguing against the existence of evolution .
i 'm simply pointing out that a monopole is a conceptual impossibility , and i get treated like i 'm the electric universe trollwhateveri just do n't understand where this weird fervent certainty of monopoles comes in to the point where i have to be modbombed every time i point out that they do n't exist and ca n't exist .
its like i 'm questioning the existence of god to a bunch of religious fundamentalists .
this site is apparently overwhelmed with excitable physics freshmani do n't understand this bizarre certainty of belief in monopolesthere ARE N'T ANY folks .
pfffffft</tokentext>
<sentencetext>when i point out that monopoles are an impossibility?it's like saying you want to feel the wind in your face, to turn around, and then feel no wind at all on your back.
as if a magnetic field flows out, but not in, or in, but not out.
you understand why you can't have a coin with one side, right?
if you understand that you understand conceptually why monopoles don't exist: there is no such thing as a magnetic field that goes out, but never returns.
logically, belief in a monopole is the same as belief in a perpetual motion machineand, interestingly enough, monopoles are frequently featured in perpetual motion machine schemes.
perhaps because that, indeed, if monopoles existed, you really could have a perpetual motion machine.
a monopole, under the influence of a magnetic field, would begin moving and never stop.
you understand that right?
doesn't that tell you something about what a monopole really is in terms of reality/ not reality?but for the sake of argument, let's say i'm wrong.
ok, show me a monopole.
i'm waitingit's not like i'm a flat earth advocate arguing against the existence of the globe, or a creationist arguing against the existence of evolution.
i'm simply pointing out that a monopole is a conceptual impossibility, and i get treated like i'm the electric universe trollwhateveri just don't understand where this weird fervent certainty of monopoles comes in to the point where i have to be modbombed every time i point out that they don't exist and can't exist.
its like i'm questioning the existence of god to a bunch of religious fundamentalists.
this site is apparently overwhelmed with excitable physics freshmani don't understand this bizarre certainty of belief in monopolesthere AREN'T ANY folks.
pfffffft</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29754129</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29754129</id>
	<title>you can make monopoles</title>
	<author>circletimessquare</author>
	<datestamp>1255637880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>just as soon as you can make coins with one side</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>just as soon as you can make coins with one side</tokentext>
<sentencetext>just as soon as you can make coins with one side</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_14_2241209_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29753549
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29752993
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_14_2241209_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29753001
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29752723
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_14_2241209_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29754023
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29752723
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_14_2241209_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29781885
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29752723
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_14_2241209_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29755305
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29754129
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_14_2241209_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29758821
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29754129
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_14_2241209_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29758719
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29754957
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_14_2241209_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29754017
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29753423
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_14_2241209_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29754579
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29752993
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_14_2241209_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29755847
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29752723
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_14_2241209_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29754739
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29754129
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_14_2241209_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29753045
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29752723
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_14_2241209.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29752723
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29753001
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29755847
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29754023
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29781885
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29753045
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_14_2241209.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29753971
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_14_2241209.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29752729
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_14_2241209.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29754129
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29754739
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29755305
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29758821
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_14_2241209.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29754957
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29758719
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_14_2241209.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29756761
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_14_2241209.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29754269
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_14_2241209.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29753479
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_14_2241209.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29752993
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29753549
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29754579
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_14_2241209.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29753423
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_14_2241209.29754017
</commentlist>
</conversation>
