Posts by atrapado

266

There Was No First Human

by cofty in

this excellent 4 minute video will help to clear up a few common misunderstandings regarding evolution.. ....

cofty You explained why every way possible 10 pages to discrived every possible way. Keep telling that to yourself if it makes you feel better and sleep better at night. Very few things are absolute and when people start using absolutes like you "every way possible" there is just no point the person is to dense. Apology for what? If I am wrong I'll admit I am wrong but why the apology? Just because everyone believes that something is impossible it doesn't make it so. Go read on P versus NP problems. You'll find out most think they are not equal. But because there is no formal proof if you suggest either side nobody is going to tell you how stupid or go read until you agree with them.

You act as if there is a formal proof which so far I haven't seen if you can show it to me I'll tell you I am wrong and you are right. But seems like your technique is to talk down to people that don't agree with you and ignore what they said or you just don't understand what they said. Your formal proof so far has been a series of objections. Objections are not proof maybe in your mind they are.

266

There Was No First Human

by cofty in

this excellent 4 minute video will help to clear up a few common misunderstandings regarding evolution.. ....

atrapado

Viviane you asked why draw the line where I did. It was a suggestion. The line was drawed becaused it fit the data and a pattern was found. Why use the definition of species when is flawed? You have horses and donkeys mating and some of the offsprings are not always sterile. If you take the definition of species that they can only mate with their own species and produce only that species then mathematically you could prove that a species could NEVER produce another species therefore prooving evolution doesn't exits. Since we know that is not the case the definition of species if flawed. Start with a wrong premise no wonder is impossible to find the first human(s).

cofty you say " It's not really a "current limitation", it's intrinsic to the task of trying to put the continuum of life into neat boxes."

That was my point why put a continuum in neat boxes why not redefine them and make the models fit better? Sure it might be more complex but it could help explain things better. But maybe someday you'll become less close minded and find out there are more ways than one to look at something and more than one solution to most problems, and if we all limited ourselves to what the science says now and what other scientists have written down there would never be any more breakthroughs. My suggestion was why not do it differently, your answer: because it will not work. OK I understand you now all the infinite number of models have been tested and they don't work, I am glad we clear that up it might save someone a lot of time when they think about trying something different.

Viviane usually programs are squishy(have bugs) because we don't have the same standards as other disiplines and we get away with it. Compare a bridge collapsing vs a program crashing. Some fields required very robous and bug free coding but those are few.

Thanks Apognophos I was beginning to think no matter how I try to explain myself I failed.

30

what is the answer to the old question about the immovable object and the irresistible force?

by Hortensia in

i know isaac asimov's answer, which makes sense to me.

anyone else have any answer to the question about what happens when an irresistible force meets an immovable object?.

atrapado

That is why we said you can't have both. But if we are willing to accept infinite something then there could be a type of element that the more you put on it the higher the density it has. So infinity density equals infinite mass and no volume, then we could add that even at infinite density the volume is the size of an element. If we can have infinity mass why not infinite density? And since infinity + infinity = infinity that means both the energy to create the force is infinity and the energy to create the object will also be infinite.

30

what is the answer to the old question about the immovable object and the irresistible force?

by Hortensia in

i know isaac asimov's answer, which makes sense to me.

anyone else have any answer to the question about what happens when an irresistible force meets an immovable object?.

atrapado

prologos an object with infinite mass. Or some object that repels force.

30

what is the answer to the old question about the immovable object and the irresistible force?

by Hortensia in

i know isaac asimov's answer, which makes sense to me.

anyone else have any answer to the question about what happens when an irresistible force meets an immovable object?.

atrapado

This question reminds if God is almighty can he create a stone large enough he cannot lift. As people have mention earlier our rules of logic only allow for one to exist. However if you insist on having them both why not expand our logic. Just like the square root of (-1) is no longer a real value and we created imaginary values. Why not expand the state of an object. So now you'll have 3 states: moving, not moving, new state(something that is moving and not moving at the same time).

I know it looks contradictory but is basically saying when an immovable object and the irresistible force colide the state of the object is no longer moving or resting is some state that satisfies both.

Light has properties of both particles and waves which is it :).

266

There Was No First Human

by cofty in

this excellent 4 minute video will help to clear up a few common misunderstandings regarding evolution.. ....

atrapado

talesin makes sence. When I read it I though 'with any of the tools avaiable to you etc.' The computer doesn't get confuse though if we tried it with our eyes they'll start seeing other colors just because they get tired.

So eyes might not(maybe there is some human out there that can, unlikely) be able to do it. Just like most methods will failed with the topic at hand but there could be a way to do it even if we haven't discovered it yet.

266