My No 1 goes to,
Amelie
No 2 Lord of the rings,
even though its no where near as good as the book
Posts by sleepy
-
10My 2001 Top Ten List of Movies
by Seeker inok, folks, the year is almost up, and it's time for the critics to post their list of the ten best movies of the year.
since this is subjective, everyone's list is unique, and here is my list.
feel free to comment with your own selections, or even disagreements with my choices, though i'm not so much interesting in arguing the worth of a given movie as i am in seeing what the consensus for the best movies is.. i can't think of ten really great movies this year, but i can easily come up with the 5 best, in ascending order to number 1:.
-
-
sleepy
-
22
Can you answer this?(scientific question)
by sleepy inhere is and interesting question which touches on some points raised in other posts.. can things really move?.
if you haven't thought about it before it may seem like a stupid question, but i'll try to explain.. one of the principles of quantum physics is that things do not get infinatly smaller.there is a granuality to objects so at some point things don't get any smaller.. the same holds with energy if you take energy out of a system you can not go on forever .eventually you hit absolute zero were every thing is still.. in the other direction , the speed of light is an absolute limit.. so what happens if you make smaller and smaller movements eventually you would stop.but what is the next smallest movement between being stopped and moving?.
if we put some figures on it it may make it easier.. if to be stoped is 0 and the next possible amonut of movment is 1 you could not move say 1/2 as that is smaller than 1 and if you could keep dividing forever like this you would never reach absolute standstill.. so like the particals in the universe movment has to be granular as well.made up of definate jumps though very tiny.. if this is the case then there is a problem how does one object , if we imagine the smallest to be a quark jump from one place to another is it technicaly the same object or a new one ?.
-
-
sleepy
Heres my Christmasy thoughts.
If you think about it before you were born you didn't exist.
So you couldn't use your senses to detect anything nor could the forces of nature effect you.
So before you were born from your perspective nothing existed.Of course when you shut you eyes you have other means of detecting the universe. Sound , touch etc also you body feels the forces of nature on it so from your perspective things still exist.
Anything that exists and is undetectable to our bodies is irrelvent and can never effect us.
In the quatum world things only take on a definate value when measured
by something.So unless you measure for light ( say by looking or measuring with an instrument there is no value for any potons present)This raises another problem .Ultimately the measuring objects we use are themselves made out of atoms and therefore exist as quantum objects at the lowest level.
So how can a quatum objest measure a quatum object if none exist untill measured? -
7
"I wish you a merry christmas "from t...
by sleepy ini wish you a merry christmas from the governing body.
-
-
sleepy
I wish you a merry christmas from the governing body
-
4
Hello its christmas
by sleepy inhello its christmas , oh i'm the only one here.. i didnt get any prezzies either.. oh well.
-
-
sleepy
Hello its christmas , oh I'm the only one here.
I didnt get any prezzies either.
Oh well. -
22
Can you answer this?(scientific question)
by sleepy inhere is and interesting question which touches on some points raised in other posts.. can things really move?.
if you haven't thought about it before it may seem like a stupid question, but i'll try to explain.. one of the principles of quantum physics is that things do not get infinatly smaller.there is a granuality to objects so at some point things don't get any smaller.. the same holds with energy if you take energy out of a system you can not go on forever .eventually you hit absolute zero were every thing is still.. in the other direction , the speed of light is an absolute limit.. so what happens if you make smaller and smaller movements eventually you would stop.but what is the next smallest movement between being stopped and moving?.
if we put some figures on it it may make it easier.. if to be stoped is 0 and the next possible amonut of movment is 1 you could not move say 1/2 as that is smaller than 1 and if you could keep dividing forever like this you would never reach absolute standstill.. so like the particals in the universe movment has to be granular as well.made up of definate jumps though very tiny.. if this is the case then there is a problem how does one object , if we imagine the smallest to be a quark jump from one place to another is it technicaly the same object or a new one ?.
-
-
sleepy
I love sex so there must be a creator.
-
22
Can you answer this?(scientific question)
by sleepy inhere is and interesting question which touches on some points raised in other posts.. can things really move?.
if you haven't thought about it before it may seem like a stupid question, but i'll try to explain.. one of the principles of quantum physics is that things do not get infinatly smaller.there is a granuality to objects so at some point things don't get any smaller.. the same holds with energy if you take energy out of a system you can not go on forever .eventually you hit absolute zero were every thing is still.. in the other direction , the speed of light is an absolute limit.. so what happens if you make smaller and smaller movements eventually you would stop.but what is the next smallest movement between being stopped and moving?.
if we put some figures on it it may make it easier.. if to be stoped is 0 and the next possible amonut of movment is 1 you could not move say 1/2 as that is smaller than 1 and if you could keep dividing forever like this you would never reach absolute standstill.. so like the particals in the universe movment has to be granular as well.made up of definate jumps though very tiny.. if this is the case then there is a problem how does one object , if we imagine the smallest to be a quark jump from one place to another is it technicaly the same object or a new one ?.
-
-
sleepy
Any brainy boxes around?
-
146
Friends we are too unbalanced.
by sleepy inwell sometimes we are.. look we have the knowledge and experience to help a lot of people.must of us have one time been jw's and understand how many think.so lets not put them off by being too negative.. when we were witnesses most of us were quite happy .
we tried to be good people , to put into practise principles that many people think are good.
we did this sometimes even when we didn't want to , because we thought god would hold us accountable and because we cared for people .
-
-
sleepy
Wishes I speaky Italiano(I'm sure its rude)
Kisses anyway kiss,kiss. -
146
Friends we are too unbalanced.
by sleepy inwell sometimes we are.. look we have the knowledge and experience to help a lot of people.must of us have one time been jw's and understand how many think.so lets not put them off by being too negative.. when we were witnesses most of us were quite happy .
we tried to be good people , to put into practise principles that many people think are good.
we did this sometimes even when we didn't want to , because we thought god would hold us accountable and because we cared for people .
-
-
sleepy
Sorry I cant resist.
Tina
"You've totally missed the point. I suggested you look it up.It is not my definition,but universal ideals.Do you understand this sentence?
You are exactly like the witnesses.You want all the answers handed to you so you dont have to put forth some honest effort"I was quoteing what YOU said.How rude.
Edited by - sleepy on 24 December 2001 12:42:24
-
146
Friends we are too unbalanced.
by sleepy inwell sometimes we are.. look we have the knowledge and experience to help a lot of people.must of us have one time been jw's and understand how many think.so lets not put them off by being too negative.. when we were witnesses most of us were quite happy .
we tried to be good people , to put into practise principles that many people think are good.
we did this sometimes even when we didn't want to , because we thought god would hold us accountable and because we cared for people .
-
-
sleepy
Kisses lovely
-
32
But, we want to be free!!
by ThiChi inman: we want to be free, and want no god telling us how to live.. god: fine, do your own thing.. after numerous murders, genocide, and other evils, we hear this:.
man: i can't believe in a god who would allow all this evil to happen .
and not intervene to prevent it.. god: why not?
-
-
sleepy
"You wanted to live without My commandments, "
Beside not personnaly requesting this,I though it was impossible to live up to Gods commandments as we are imperfect and sinners.Sets us an impossible task and we get kicked in the butt for not being able to do it.