Posts by Caedes

47

Methane-Based Life Forms Could Exist on Titan (the giant moon of Saturn), say Scientists

by abiather in

liquid water is a requirement for life on earth.

but in other, much colder worlds, life might exist beyond the bounds of water-based chemistry.

cornell chemical engineers and astronomers offer a template for life that could thrive in a harsh, cold world specifically titan, the giant moon of saturn.

First law of thermodynamics vs God vs Big Bang

by EndofMysteries in

first law of thermodynamics, that energy cannot be created or destroyed but changed from one form to another.

how does that fit in with god and the big bang to you?

does it make one make more sense then the other to you?

Caedes

Viviane,

I suspect fishy is going to bail on this thread very shortly! Can't have the filthy mudbloods pointing out the gaping holes in fishy's arguments.

43

Why are extraterrestrials pictured in ugly form in movies?

by abiather in

humans have produced many movies on extraterrestrials.

yet all of them are shown in ugly form.

why cant we depict an et more beautiful/handsome than humans.

Caedes

Hang on, there was an international atomic war 5000 years ago? Who knew?

http://www.brahmakumaris.info/

43

Why are extraterrestrials pictured in ugly form in movies?

by abiather in

humans have produced many movies on extraterrestrials.

yet all of them are shown in ugly form.

why cant we depict an et more beautiful/handsome than humans.

Caedes

The example I gave of the Hanar from mass effect are not human at all, they look like jellyfish if anything.

http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Hanar

I think the idea of highlighting another dangerous cult trying to recruit is very sensible. Respect to Cofty for the idea.

http://www.brahmakumaris.info/

88

First law of thermodynamics vs God vs Big Bang

by EndofMysteries in

first law of thermodynamics, that energy cannot be created or destroyed but changed from one form to another.

how does that fit in with god and the big bang to you?

does it make one make more sense then the other to you?

Yes, it's a skill called English comprehension, you should try it some time. For example given the nature of your posts and your screen name it is not difficult to work out that your name refers to the book of Matthew rather than a preference for sitting for hours with a rod and line.

The facts are that the bible writers were not reporters hence the widely dissimilar writing styles throughout the book.

Says you.

Have you not read the bible? The bible writers vary greatly in style, the one style they don't use is journalistic reporting. It is a fact, you merely have to read your bible to see the evidence.

I hope that is a sufficiently simple explanation of the differences

Why did you conclude that the author meant that?

Because the author was incapable of expressing him or herself clearly.

I ought to point out that tangencies actually implies the common points between the two theories

Now you are thinking. That is what the author meant. That is the point.

The common points between the two theories is Newtonian physics, Relativity builds on the principles of Newtonian physics. You haven't made a point at all and certainly nothing in relation to your original question. Your original question shows that you know little about physics and yet now you are claiming that you have made some point about relativity? So why not actually state what your point is if you have one?

Since you so very kindly allowed me to believe what I like about your posts I will also assume

As I have shown before, you assume too much and you jump to conclusions. That is what your posts unveil about your thinking. I mean no disrespect.

Since I am not the only person to point out that you are incapable of stating your opinions clearly then perhaps you ought to take on board the criticism about your dreadful word salad. I will make another assumption and guess that any reply you make will also utterly fail to address any of the actual points I made. For example I answered both your question about reconciling quantum mechanics and relativity and the one about why I believe the bible to be myth and you completely ignored those answers in favour of some poorly thought out ad hominen attack when the only criticism you can make of my original answer is that you didn't like what I wrote. What this reveals is that you are not here to listen even to the answers to your own questions and that your opinions are so delicate that they are unable to cope with a dissenting view.

I have never understood some peoples need to say 'no disrespect' when they mean the precise opposite, at least have the balls to stand by your insults.

BTW referring to oneself in the third person 'i.e. the author' makes you sound very pretentious, I would suggest not doing it if you don't want to sound to sound like a twat.

88

First law of thermodynamics vs God vs Big Bang

by EndofMysteries in

first law of thermodynamics, that energy cannot be created or destroyed but changed from one form to another.

how does that fit in with god and the big bang to you?

does it make one make more sense then the other to you?

Caedes

Bohm,

I read the other day that if you think about it when you look up at the stars you are dangling over a bottomless pit of nothing and the only thing that stops you falling into it is the incredibly weak gravity field of Earth.

Hopefully that makes up for you trying to scramble my brain with your trip to Alpha Centauri!

43

Why are extraterrestrials pictured in ugly form in movies?

by abiather in

humans have produced many movies on extraterrestrials.

yet all of them are shown in ugly form.

why cant we depict an et more beautiful/handsome than humans.

Caedes

There is the alien in the beginning of the Prometheus movie, he is quite handsome, The Na'vi in Avatar, in Mass Effect the Asari and the Hanar, in Warhammer 40000 the Eldar are beautiful. In fact I could probably do this all day if you want.

The word better is an entirely subjective description though so I suggest just googling beautiful alien and finding something that fits your criteria, unless of course you have already decided that nothing can fit your criteria.

88

First law of thermodynamics vs God vs Big Bang

by EndofMysteries in

first law of thermodynamics, that energy cannot be created or destroyed but changed from one form to another.

how does that fit in with god and the big bang to you?

does it make one make more sense then the other to you?

Caedes

Bohm,

Eden one is my non-evil twin with another picture of Hobbes for an avatar! Easy mistake to make though.

As a lowly engineer I will bow to your superior knowledge of physics, Hopefully the rest of my explanation is sound though?!

50

How do Americans feel about Canadians and Britons interjecting their opinions onto hot localized political topics: gun laws, abortion, ect?

by adjusted knowledge in

jw
friends

in addition to the above question, why do citizens of the two above mentioned countries, or other countries, feel the necessity to tell americans how they should interpret the american constitution for localized issues?.

i fairly much have an idea what the general population in the usa feels in regards to the first question.

this could be one of the possible reasons cnn piers morgan poor ratings and eventual firing.

Caedes

Perhaps it's just annoying because we are so much better informed!

88

First law of thermodynamics vs God vs Big Bang

by EndofMysteries in

first law of thermodynamics, that energy cannot be created or destroyed but changed from one form to another.

how does that fit in with god and the big bang to you?

does it make one make more sense then the other to you?

Caedes

Fisherman,

I presume that you are trying to suggest that I don't know the meaning of the word documented, however, I was responding to the use in your initial post of the words documenting and reporting. The use of these words is intended to give the reader of your post the impression that the bible writers were unbiased reporters. The facts are that the bible writers were not reporters hence the widely dissimilar writing styles throughout the book. You are also ignoring the vast amount of time that the stories presented were passed on verbally and the length of time between the events happening and the time of writing.

I assume your difficulty in comprehending this is perhaps understandable given the poor writing, woeful grammar and incomprehensible sentence structure in the second part of your response to me.

There are a number of differences in the way that Newtonian physics and relativity work. Newtonian physics works very well for physics as we experience them here on earth, so much so that they are still used by engineers and physicists the world over. However they start to break down when you look at the application in scenarios that involve large gravitational speeds and velocities approaching the speed of light, hence planetary orbital calculations using purely Newtonian physics are not as accurate as calculations that take account of relativity.

The best example of relativity in the modern life is the fact that Newtonian physics would not predict any difference between a clock here on earth and one in orbit. Relativity predicts that the clock nearer to a large gravitational field would run more slowly. In order for GPS satellites to work the on-board clocks have to take this difference into account.

Newtonian physics also does not take into account the fact that all motion is relative and that the speed of light is constant no matter what the observer is doing. If for example you were in a spacecraft travelling at the speed of light and shone a torch out of the front window then Newtonian physics would say that you would see a beam of light out of the window. Relativity states that the beam of light would travel at the speed of light, the same as your spacecraft and hence never leave the torch.

I hope that is a sufficiently simple explanation of the differences, I have assumed that is the question you were trying to ask when you referred to the tangencies between the two. I ought to point out that tangencies actually implies the common points between the two theories but I tried not to read too much into your use of the word!

Since you so very kindly allowed me to believe what I like about your posts I will also assume that I am free to state that you are very badly in need of a remedial class in English comprehension and a good dictionary.