Well, I am both a religious person, and a philosopher. Both you, and the "religious nutjob" as you put it, have made some philosophical errors.
I don't know if you have heard of Aristotle's Form/Matter distinction, but basically, it is this. Matter is the stuff of a thing, and Form is (more or less) how it is arranged. To put it another way, Matter is the material stuff that makes something what it is, and Form is the immaterial stuff that makes it how it is.
So, why is this important to note? Well, for a human being, the Matter is our body, and the form is our soul. So, as long as we have something that is human material (read, fertilized egg), we have the human form, aka, a soul. Don't believe me? The difference between a living thing and a dead thing is the presence of an animating principle (soul). Still don't believe me, I challenge you to come up with a material way of describing the difference between a living organism and a dead organism.
Now, your friend clearly isn't a philosopher, so I will correct her mistake as well. An animal has an animal body, and as a result, an animal soul. When the cow dies, the cow's soul goes with it. The difference is that a human being has an immaterial and thus immortal soul, and as a result, should be treated differently.
Before you go and deny that humans have an immortal soul, I point to the fact that it is the operation of an immortal soul to come to some notion of God (an immortal being). Every person I know has some notion of God. The Atheist has to have one so that he can deny it, and the agnostic has to come to a notion of God in order to be not sure about it. The cow can't say "I wonder about what there was before I existed" (an action that is uniquely human) but the cow can seek good grass to convert into methane and manure.
I just spent waaaay too much time with your sig...
public class doh {
public static int i;
public static void main(String[] args)
{
for(i = 'a'; i = 'z' ; i++)
System.out.println( (char) i + " " + i);
} }
Europa is an example of something that has no atmosphere, but does have liquid water under the ice. You're right to think that there has to be something to contain the liquid, so that it doesn't boil off into space, but solid works just as well as gas for that task.
Well, the stuff I am talking about is more of the skips, graininess and artifact nature. It might be my screen size, or it might be the player, but it isn't smooth. I would actually prefer less resolution and have it compressed at a higher bit rate, because skips and artifacts do bug me.
Sure, thats the advertised resolution, but in the quest for ever smaller downloads, they compress it way too much, and the video quality is somewhere between "barely acceptable" and "pitiful". Of course, I blow my weekly $2.07 to get the latest Battlestar Galactica, so I should probably quit my wining and buy DVDs as they come out, which I think is what lots of people have been doing.
Couldn't that weak field be the residual of one dissapearing or the beginnings of one forming around Mars as a result of a Geomagnetic reversal?
Sure, it is possible, but the field that is there is very weak (on the order of 1/100th of Earth's, if memory serves). Since we have only been measuring the magnetic field of Mars for the last 9 years (thanks to Mars Global Surveyor) there isn't the same long term magnetic data to compare with that of the Earth.
Is there definite proof that Mars doesn't have a molten core?
Well, the lack of active volcanoes seems like a fairly strong indicator.
This is a function of having a molten core, if there is moving metal, there is a magnetic field (which Mars doesn't have much of now, but it does have a weak one, probably residual from a time when there was a molten core). So, once upon a time, Mars did have a magnetic field, and that helped keep the water there.
Mars doesn't have the same gravity that the Earth does, nor does it have a magnetic field to stop incoming solar wind. The water could have evaporated, and since it is a lighter element (than CO2, which is most of Mars' atmosphere) it could have just blown away.
If this is pronounced "why fy pod", than the beat neck apple users (as a subset of all apple users) will have a new slogan.
If this is pronounced "wifey pod", I don't think it will catch on, except with those married women who are looking for something with a specifically feminine touch.
If this is pronounced "wee fee pod", than it is for sure that apple is going to charge a dollar a download to get music onto it, plus other wireless fees, and make a killing when people can't stop downloading music.
It didn't hit at *exactly* the right time. It hit just a tad early, as the cost was too high when it first came out. Apple had lots and lots of them left over (the local MUG got a deal on them for $150 each) and it wasn't until a little bit later that they were able to find the right cost/feature/performance point to make it really take off.
Your experience is not unique. My first exposure was a friend's rented DVD... it was sad when there weren't any left on the DVD and the rental place was closed. I ended up watching them all over again in order, though never all in one sitting (I have yet to had sufficent caffeine on hand to pull that off).
Slashdot Mirror
Well, I am both a religious person, and a philosopher. Both you, and the "religious nutjob" as you put it, have made some philosophical errors.
I don't know if you have heard of Aristotle's Form/Matter distinction, but basically, it is this. Matter is the stuff of a thing, and Form is (more or less) how it is arranged. To put it another way, Matter is the material stuff that makes something what it is, and Form is the immaterial stuff that makes it how it is.
So, why is this important to note? Well, for a human being, the Matter is our body, and the form is our soul. So, as long as we have something that is human material (read, fertilized egg), we have the human form, aka, a soul. Don't believe me? The difference between a living thing and a dead thing is the presence of an animating principle (soul). Still don't believe me, I challenge you to come up with a material way of describing the difference between a living organism and a dead organism.
Now, your friend clearly isn't a philosopher, so I will correct her mistake as well. An animal has an animal body, and as a result, an animal soul. When the cow dies, the cow's soul goes with it. The difference is that a human being has an immaterial and thus immortal soul, and as a result, should be treated differently.
Before you go and deny that humans have an immortal soul, I point to the fact that it is the operation of an immortal soul to come to some notion of God (an immortal being). Every person I know has some notion of God. The Atheist has to have one so that he can deny it, and the agnostic has to come to a notion of God in order to be not sure about it. The cow can't say "I wonder about what there was before I existed" (an action that is uniquely human) but the cow can seek good grass to convert into methane and manure.
Finding out that in Soviet Russia, electronics powers you... priceless.
For everything else, there's Cowboyneal.
I just spent waaaay too much time with your sig...
public class doh
{
public static int i;
public static void main(String[] args)
{
for(i = 'a'; i = 'z' ; i++)
System.out.println( (char) i + " " + i);
}
}
just to tell me what it says.
I don't suppose I could suggest:
01001001 00100000 01100001 01101101 00100000 01101110 01101111 01110100 00100000 01100001 00100000 01101100 01100001 01110111 01111001 01100101 01110010 00101110
Europa is an example of something that has no atmosphere, but does have liquid water under the ice. You're right to think that there has to be something to contain the liquid, so that it doesn't boil off into space, but solid works just as well as gas for that task.
What about exposé? I have many maximized windows, and after a quick tap to F9, everything is visible.
Well, the stuff I am talking about is more of the skips, graininess and artifact nature. It might be my screen size, or it might be the player, but it isn't smooth. I would actually prefer less resolution and have it compressed at a higher bit rate, because skips and artifacts do bug me.
Sure, thats the advertised resolution, but in the quest for ever smaller downloads, they compress it way too much, and the video quality is somewhere between "barely acceptable" and "pitiful". Of course, I blow my weekly $2.07 to get the latest Battlestar Galactica, so I should probably quit my wining and buy DVDs as they come out, which I think is what lots of people have been doing.
Wow, if there were nerd elections for a slashdot nerd leader, I would vote for you. Mixing humor with serious challenging issues.
I Vote buswolley for Prime Moderator!
I haven't ever seen such a clever way to respond to trolls. If I had points, I would mod this as Informative :)
I for one welcome our new wing-regrowing chicken overlords.
Mission time is based on Houston Time.
Couldn't that weak field be the residual of one dissapearing or the beginnings of one forming around Mars as a result of a Geomagnetic reversal?
Sure, it is possible, but the field that is there is very weak (on the order of 1/100th of Earth's, if memory serves). Since we have only been measuring the magnetic field of Mars for the last 9 years (thanks to Mars Global Surveyor) there isn't the same long term magnetic data to compare with that of the Earth.
Is there definite proof that Mars doesn't have a molten core?
Well, the lack of active volcanoes seems like a fairly strong indicator.
This is a function of having a molten core, if there is moving metal, there is a magnetic field (which Mars doesn't have much of now, but it does have a weak one, probably residual from a time when there was a molten core). So, once upon a time, Mars did have a magnetic field, and that helped keep the water there.
Mars doesn't have the same gravity that the Earth does, nor does it have a magnetic field to stop incoming solar wind. The water could have evaporated, and since it is a lighter element (than CO2, which is most of Mars' atmosphere) it could have just blown away.
(or is it the WiFiPod?)
If this is pronounced "why fy pod", than the beat neck apple users (as a subset of all apple users) will have a new slogan.
If this is pronounced "wifey pod", I don't think it will catch on, except with those married women who are looking for something with a specifically feminine touch.
If this is pronounced "wee fee pod", than it is for sure that apple is going to charge a dollar a download to get music onto it, plus other wireless fees, and make a killing when people can't stop downloading music.
It didn't hit at *exactly* the right time. It hit just a tad early, as the cost was too high when it first came out. Apple had lots and lots of them left over (the local MUG got a deal on them for $150 each) and it wasn't until a little bit later that they were able to find the right cost/feature/performance point to make it really take off.
If it is in the sub-kiloton range, than I doubt much fusion was going on.
Your experience is not unique. My first exposure was a friend's rented DVD... it was sad when there weren't any left on the DVD and the rental place was closed. I ended up watching them all over again in order, though never all in one sitting (I have yet to had sufficent caffeine on hand to pull that off).
I always find it amazing how easily and quickly someone can point at error when there isn't a lot of hot air behind it.
I for one welcome our new exploding battery overlords.