I think you are wrong. Just read Leopard's License Agreement:
"2. Permitted License Uses and Restrictions.
A. Single Use. This License allows you to install, use and run one (1) copy of the Apple Software on a single Apple-labeled computer at a time. You agree not to install, use
or run the Apple Software on any non-Apple-labeled computer, or to enable others to do so."
So sorry, you are buying just an upgrade for your Apple-labeled hardware;) Am I wrong?
>After all, modern chemistry is incredibly useful for predicting how atoms interact with eachother to >form compounds... even though it's based off the idea that electrons orbit a nucleus like a tiny little >planet orbitting a sun... that is precisely NOT what an electron does, but who cares, the math allows >you to make determinations. It's the same with string theory.
Just for a clearness. Modern quantum chemistry (something like 90 years old) IS NOT "based off the idea that electrons orbit a nucleus like a tiny little >planet orbitting a sun". Born model is tought in schools but NOT used by scientists. See, for example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_chemistry
ID would say, however, that our world can only be fully understood if we include an original designer instead of random chance.
It was always very interesting for me why people which believe in God and/or are ID enthusiasts are so much afraid of the idea of randomness in the world. Why are they excluding the possibility that - using their terms - God has choosen randomness as a 'driving force' in some places? What's wrong with randomness? Even Einstein said, he believes God does not play dice - so it means - God could.
But seriously, randomness quite efficiently explains a lot of phenomena and there is no need not to like it or to say, it is somehow worse. That's why Prigogine obtained Nobel Prize in 1977. And, as the quantum mechanics shows, randomness is intrinsic property of our reality. Sorry;)
Another theory is much more interesting: God created physical laws and then the universe evolved in the way we know. This idea, in my opinion, is acceptable for both people believing in God's finger and in the evolution theory.
Polish newspaper "Gazeta" have started the same already. They have their own aggregator called "News-man" (sth like this but in Polish). Unfortunatelly, Win version only;)
Slashdot Mirror
I think you are wrong. Just read Leopard's License Agreement: "2. Permitted License Uses and Restrictions. A. Single Use. This License allows you to install, use and run one (1) copy of the Apple Software on a single Apple-labeled computer at a time. You agree not to install, use or run the Apple Software on any non-Apple-labeled computer, or to enable others to do so." So sorry, you are buying just an upgrade for your Apple-labeled hardware ;) Am I wrong?
>After all, modern chemistry is incredibly useful for predicting how atoms interact with eachother to >form compounds... even though it's based off the idea that electrons orbit a nucleus like a tiny little >planet orbitting a sun... that is precisely NOT what an electron does, but who cares, the math allows >you to make determinations. It's the same with string theory. Just for a clearness. Modern quantum chemistry (something like 90 years old) IS NOT "based off the idea that electrons orbit a nucleus like a tiny little >planet orbitting a sun". Born model is tought in schools but NOT used by scientists. See, for example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_chemistry
Beta version of Opera 8.5 for PocketPC is already available!m obileppc/
Release info can be found at:
http://www.opera.com/products/mobile/products/win
and you can download:
Windows Mobile 5.0 for Pocket PC version:
http://www.opera.com/download/get.pl?id=27582
WM 2003 for Pocket PC version:
http://www.opera.com/download/get.pl?id=27580
ID would say, however, that our world can only be fully understood if we include an original designer instead of random chance. ;)
It was always very interesting for me why people which believe in God and/or are ID enthusiasts are so much afraid of the idea of randomness in the world. Why are they excluding the possibility that - using their terms - God has choosen randomness as a 'driving force' in some places? What's wrong with randomness? Even Einstein said, he believes God does not play dice - so it means - God could.
But seriously, randomness quite efficiently explains a lot of phenomena and there is no need not to like it or to say, it is somehow worse. That's why Prigogine obtained Nobel Prize in 1977. And, as the quantum mechanics shows, randomness is intrinsic property of our reality. Sorry
Another theory is much more interesting: God created physical laws and then the universe evolved in the way we know. This idea, in my opinion, is acceptable for both people believing in God's finger and in the evolution theory.
Polish newspaper "Gazeta" have started the same already. They have their own aggregator called "News-man" (sth like this but in Polish). Unfortunatelly, Win version only ;)