Hmm... if having gravity is a requisite of being affected by gravity, then yeah you're right. I guess then what would really define matter as opposed to "pure" energy (will use your terminology for lack of a better term at 3:20am) would be some kind of force that drags it through time (or lack of the force that keeps it still in time, thus traveling only though space). I was thinkin the link was gravity (an object with gravity cannot travel at speed of light; an object without gravity can only travel at the speed of light), but I guess it lies elsewhere... unless gravity is quantised, and a photon has the smallest possible amount (and cannot lose the rest), and the speed of light happens to be how fast (or, the 4D-vector) you travel when you have that little gravity...
A mistake known as "generalising from self"; you know nothing, therefore you assume that everybody else must know nothing too (not your fault, you cannot conceive of anything else). This is a primitive form of reasoning called "induction", whilst it can have its place, it often leads to huge inaccuracies such as deriving "we know nothing" from "I know nothing".
Proof of your limited ability to use logic: "we know nothing, and what we do know..." The two are mutually exclusive; we cannot both know nothing, and have stuff that we do know.
Proof of your lack of knowledge: "Science-is-infallible types claim to know and understand the universe" No they don't. They claim to be trying.
With both a lack of knowledge and a lack of ability to use logic, one might think the two would cancel out and you'd get a thing or two right, but I guess you're pretty unlucky, which would explain the bitterness too.
This isn't truely perpetual though; the tides cause drag on the earth, changing its spin. This will, over a long enough period of time, stop being usable (eg, when the earths spin matches the movement of the oceans as pulled by the moon).
We're talking huge scales here, whether the earth+moon will even last that long is probably unlikely, but the energy's still not free/perpetual, it's just coming from outside of the local system.
Actually no, if I came up with a free energy device, I'd shout and scream and let as many people know as possible, try stay in the public eye until they start rolling out, because err... yeah, there are a lot of people out there who would lose a lot of money, and wouldn't want you to succeed.
Re:Unfounded Criticism
on
iPods at War
·
· Score: 1
Moderator cannot spot irony and humour... thanks
Re:Unfounded Criticism
on
iPods at War
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
"I don't think someone has a right to criticize the military unless they've been a part of it"
That's absolute crap. Intelligent humans have this ability called "conjecture", that allows them to make informed judgements about things based on their own, different experiences. Now, maybe your experiences will be different enough to mean that judgements can be made poorly, but that's not always the case, there are 'universals' that people can discover by themselves without having to experience the thing ("I'm not gonna jump in that fire, because it will burn. I know this, even though I've never jumped in a fire before"). The same goes for certain morals; a soldier killing someone is *just as* wrong as anybody else killing somebody. What changes is the necessity: is that person about to blow you up? Then necessity outweights.
At the end of the day, people don't want soldiers to be "too comfortable" because going out and killing people shouldn't be nice, you should never be comfortable doing it, so you only do it when it's really necessary to. The thought of it being comfortable, rightly or wrongly, makes other people (aka "society") uncomfortable. Not sure whether I agree, but it's certainly understandable.
Re:"fighting for democracy"? Are you joking?
on
iPods at War
·
· Score: 1
Getting rid of sadam was the right thing, even if they did it for the wrong reasons (a debate raised enough already, so we'll skip that one). And maybe they're doing a crappy job at rebuilding, but it was always going to be a slow painful process. A bunch of people who were kept in track by fear of sadam 'n co, now have the freedom to run riot, and that's what's happening. Meanwhile, contractors... well they're totally taking advantage of the situation, "there's money to be made, lots and lots of money".
But I have no doubt that in 50 years, it will be better over there than it would have been if it were left to sadam 'n son. The price is high, but that's expected by anyone who wasn't stupid enough to think it was gonna be a cake walk (eg, bush and his "mission success").
Re:Unfounded Criticism
on
iPods at War
·
· Score: 5, Funny
There's a huge difference between "I don't wanna give you this in case you abuse or become addicted to it", and "I don't wanna give you this in case you get raped"! I say again: jeez!
yes, and I'm willing to bet you could pump the vaccine into a woman full of HIV, and it wouldn't affect her, and it wouldn't affect the fetus because it would already have the virus too.
Ya ya, people are dying, spare the emotional attacks, they're narrow minded and short sighted. What we're talking about is injecting people with a modified form of a virus that is known for the fact that it's delivery system causes genetic mutations (which is why it's so hard to kill; it keeps changing). This is potentially very dangerous stuff; you give it to everyone, and 50 years later some mutation is triggered, you wipe out the population.
You're damn right they're covering their arses, would you like to be responsible for killing a bunch of people because you overlooked something?
If you were really concerned with the numbers of people dying: if they plowed the money gone into r&d for this straight into food and water resources, they could have saved *many many* lived already. But that's not what this is about. Put the money to best use, not throw it at whatever "solution" to saving a few lives comes first. Even with this vaccine, people will die. Should you not be thinking about all these africans who could have their lives extended past hiv/aids, only to starve to death instead? We need to make things better, not just lash out in any direction whatever the cost ("hell, only kills 10% of the population...").
Yes, with pure smack, injecting's gonna be more on the dangerous side, but that level of danger is *nothing* compared to the danger of injecting yourself with brick dust or anything else often found in the street stuff.
"Could it be that they have less soreness that the heroin relieves?"
Addiction to opiates is caused (primarily I believe) by the fact that the body stops producing it's own version (endorphines) to balance things out ("oo, I have plenty, I don't need to be making any more"). When the drug wears off, you're left with too low a level of endorphines, causing an increase (above what it was before) in activity in all the pain gates that endorphine was modulating.
However little 'soreness' you have before taking heroin, there's plenty of scope for pain on the comedown.
Slashdot Mirror
Closer would be to say "matter is just energy with inertia"
:-p
Oo yeah that's basically what I said in my above post, but I said it in a much longer winded more prone-to-mistakes way
Remember the intro to "Bill Nye the Science Guy"?
Nope but sounds interesting... I'll go google!
Score: 5, Funny?!! You bastards, I'll have you know that I was actually being completely 100% super-duper cereal!
Maybe the universe is anorexic, appearing fatter/heavier than it actually is?
Hmm all this talk about food has got my stomach going...
"Just picking nits"
:-)
Go right ahead
Hmm... if having gravity is a requisite of being affected by gravity, then yeah you're right. I guess then what would really define matter as opposed to "pure" energy (will use your terminology for lack of a better term at 3:20am) would be some kind of force that drags it through time (or lack of the force that keeps it still in time, thus traveling only though space). I was thinkin the link was gravity (an object with gravity cannot travel at speed of light; an object without gravity can only travel at the speed of light), but I guess it lies elsewhere... unless gravity is quantised, and a photon has the smallest possible amount (and cannot lose the rest), and the speed of light happens to be how fast (or, the 4D-vector) you travel when you have that little gravity...
All rather interesting really!
"we know nothing"
A mistake known as "generalising from self"; you know nothing, therefore you assume that everybody else must know nothing too (not your fault, you cannot conceive of anything else). This is a primitive form of reasoning called "induction", whilst it can have its place, it often leads to huge inaccuracies such as deriving "we know nothing" from "I know nothing".
Proof of your limited ability to use logic:
"we know nothing, and what we do know..."
The two are mutually exclusive; we cannot both know nothing, and have stuff that we do know.
Proof of your lack of knowledge:
"Science-is-infallible types claim to know and understand the universe"
No they don't. They claim to be trying.
With both a lack of knowledge and a lack of ability to use logic, one might think the two would cancel out and you'd get a thing or two right, but I guess you're pretty unlucky, which would explain the bitterness too.
Slashdot - "It's a big day for astrophysics. After much speculation, scientists now have conclusive proof of dark matter"
God damnit!!!
I'll go read that, wonder just how "conclusive" it really is.
isn't matter just energy with gravity? We just don't understand 'how come'?
"2) It's conventional matter in some seriously surprising state that we don't understand, causing it not to be visible"
:-p
What... like, being behind other matter?
This isn't truely perpetual though; the tides cause drag on the earth, changing its spin. This will, over a long enough period of time, stop being usable (eg, when the earths spin matches the movement of the oceans as pulled by the moon).
We're talking huge scales here, whether the earth+moon will even last that long is probably unlikely, but the energy's still not free/perpetual, it's just coming from outside of the local system.
"Things like dark matter are just proof that the..."
Um... until there is "proof" for the dark matter, dark matter cannot be "proof" of anything else.
Actually no, if I came up with a free energy device, I'd shout and scream and let as many people know as possible, try stay in the public eye until they start rolling out, because err... yeah, there are a lot of people out there who would lose a lot of money, and wouldn't want you to succeed.
Four.
Moderator cannot spot irony and humour... thanks
"I don't think someone has a right to criticize the military unless they've been a part of it"
That's absolute crap. Intelligent humans have this ability called "conjecture", that allows them to make informed judgements about things based on their own, different experiences. Now, maybe your experiences will be different enough to mean that judgements can be made poorly, but that's not always the case, there are 'universals' that people can discover by themselves without having to experience the thing ("I'm not gonna jump in that fire, because it will burn. I know this, even though I've never jumped in a fire before"). The same goes for certain morals; a soldier killing someone is *just as* wrong as anybody else killing somebody. What changes is the necessity: is that person about to blow you up? Then necessity outweights.
At the end of the day, people don't want soldiers to be "too comfortable" because going out and killing people shouldn't be nice, you should never be comfortable doing it, so you only do it when it's really necessary to. The thought of it being comfortable, rightly or wrongly, makes other people (aka "society") uncomfortable. Not sure whether I agree, but it's certainly understandable.
Getting rid of sadam was the right thing, even if they did it for the wrong reasons (a debate raised enough already, so we'll skip that one). And maybe they're doing a crappy job at rebuilding, but it was always going to be a slow painful process. A bunch of people who were kept in track by fear of sadam 'n co, now have the freedom to run riot, and that's what's happening. Meanwhile, contractors... well they're totally taking advantage of the situation, "there's money to be made, lots and lots of money".
But I have no doubt that in 50 years, it will be better over there than it would have been if it were left to sadam 'n son. The price is high, but that's expected by anyone who wasn't stupid enough to think it was gonna be a cake walk (eg, bush and his "mission success").
"Letting soldiers share mp3 files amongs themselves and purchasing bootleg DVD's"
You're forgetting one thing...
Copying music and movies FUNDS TERRORISM!!! Therefore anyone who does it is the enemy, and shouldn't be allowed into the military!
There's a huge difference between "I don't wanna give you this in case you abuse or become addicted to it", and "I don't wanna give you this in case you get raped"! I say again: jeez!
yes, and I'm willing to bet you could pump the vaccine into a woman full of HIV, and it wouldn't affect her, and it wouldn't affect the fetus because it would already have the virus too.
Ya ya, people are dying, spare the emotional attacks, they're narrow minded and short sighted. What we're talking about is injecting people with a modified form of a virus that is known for the fact that it's delivery system causes genetic mutations (which is why it's so hard to kill; it keeps changing). This is potentially very dangerous stuff; you give it to everyone, and 50 years later some mutation is triggered, you wipe out the population.
You're damn right they're covering their arses, would you like to be responsible for killing a bunch of people because you overlooked something?
If you were really concerned with the numbers of people dying: if they plowed the money gone into r&d for this straight into food and water resources, they could have saved *many many* lived already. But that's not what this is about. Put the money to best use, not throw it at whatever "solution" to saving a few lives comes first. Even with this vaccine, people will die. Should you not be thinking about all these africans who could have their lives extended past hiv/aids, only to starve to death instead? We need to make things better, not just lash out in any direction whatever the cost ("hell, only kills 10% of the population...").
"For example, actor Jon-Erik Hexum accidentally killed himself by firing a blank against his head with a prop gun"
That shouldn't be funny...
except for all the kids being born with it. Vaccine won't touch that.
"what if I get raped" is really *not* a way to live, jeez
Unfortunately it's not... it's pretty f*#!&k up.
Yes, with pure smack, injecting's gonna be more on the dangerous side, but that level of danger is *nothing* compared to the danger of injecting yourself with brick dust or anything else often found in the street stuff.
"Could it be that they have less soreness that the heroin relieves?"
Addiction to opiates is caused (primarily I believe) by the fact that the body stops producing it's own version (endorphines) to balance things out ("oo, I have plenty, I don't need to be making any more"). When the drug wears off, you're left with too low a level of endorphines, causing an increase (above what it was before) in activity in all the pain gates that endorphine was modulating.
However little 'soreness' you have before taking heroin, there's plenty of scope for pain on the comedown.
"Reluctance (on the government's part anyway) to give terminal patients all they want is also baffling to me"
Because it's a drug, and as we all know, drugs cause terrorism!!!
Depends where you're from... in some places, "sarcasm" is just saying one thing, and then calling it "sarcasm" when somebody corrects you...