 |
|
Rogan Josh
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Boris Godunov
Religious fundamentalism often goes hand-in-hand with moral bigotry.
|
What a bigoted statement!
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
BustaMike
|
 |
You think you're better than me? You've been handling my ass pennies!!!
Nov 1999
time: 21:28
|
|
To quote the original post
quote:
One of the most fundamental rules of physics, the second law of thermodynamics, has for the first time been shown not to hold for microscopic systems.
The demonstration, by chemical physicists in Australia, could place a fundamental limit on miniaturisation, because it suggests that the micro-scale devices envisaged by nanotechnologists will not behave like simple scaled-down versions of their larger counterparts - they could sometimes run backwards. |
This should be perfectly obvious if you think about it. Energy, when looked at at a fundamental level, can be quantified into units (example - electrical currents are made of moving electrons). Each electron contains a quantifiable amount of energy, so as the system gets smaller and smaller it no longer is perfectly smooth. A good analogy is your computer monitor. From far away it looks smooth, but zoom in really close and you can see the pixels or even just one pixel. Same with any system. Zoom in enough and you no longer have a system, you just have one particle and the second law doesn't really apply because the particle isn't interacting with anything, it's by itself.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
St Leo
|
 |
Member of the Apolyton Social Democratic Party
Jul 2005
time: 00:28
|
|
Creationistical evolution says... well I shouldn't go to much depth in this thread.
quote:
Important facts from Galactic history, number two:
(Reproduced from the Siderial Daily Mentioner's Book of popular Galactic History.)
Since this Galaxy began, vast civilizations have risen and fallen, risen and fallen, risen and fallen so often that it's quite tempting to think that life in the Galaxy must be
(a) something akin to seasick - space-sick, time sick, history sick or some such thing, and
(b) stupid.
|
The problem with a divine fist controlling evolution is that nature's sieve doesn't appear to be teleological in the slightest. The same mistake are made over and over and over again.
Example:
-herbivores evolve really thick skin
-their predators evolve big teeth
-herbivores evolve thicker skin
-predators go all out and get sabre teeth
-some small omnivore takes up grazing
-thick-skinned herbivores starve to death
-slow giant-toothed predators starve to death
-the new herbivores start evolving thicker skin
This happenned several times in the Mesozoic and Cenozoic. If it hadn't happenned in the Paleozoic, it was because leg structure was still the most important factor, thought it probably did. There were certainly enough mammal-like reptiles, reptiles, crocodile-like reptiles, and thecodonts frolicking for the Cycle of St00pidity to recur several times.
quote:
"Life," said Marvin dolefully, "loathe it or ignore it, you can't like it." |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
raghar
|
|
I wish somewhere else.
Oct 2002
time: 05:28
|
|
It was Douglas Addams, isn't it.
So you basicaly want to say something like this.
There are M1A2.
Then Russian build towerless 152 mm T-95.
Then US develop reactive armer for M1A2.
Then US opponents would mount gun on cars 1000 guns for price of 1 M1A2.
There were reasons for that.
BTW Temperature and sea levels on earth are cycling too. So no problem wiht that.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Frogman
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Big Crunch
Persuasion is only effective on people who have an open mind and willing to forget pre-conceived notions. Once you accept you can't persuade creationists all that is left is to have fun insulting and ridiculing them. |
While I would have liked to take issue with this sort of mind set, sadly it is true. Creationists cannot be convinced by any use of logic or facts. "Creationists take heed" was obviously spoken in jest since of course they will not take any heeds.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
GePap
|
 |
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001
time: 23:28
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by skywalker
Three points - one, the Universe is BY DEFINITION a closed system, because the Universe is defined as the set of all that exists. Thus there can be nothing outside the Universe, for it would not exist. |
By which definiton is the Universe all point, everything? I have never heard this. As for there being nothing outside of it: well, that just brings out the problem of what the universe is expanding in. If you could tarvel in such a way as to meet up with the primordial particles of light that have been travelling since the Big Bang (or to put it another way, the edge of the universe), what is there, ahead? Nothing, nothingness, pure and simple? Well, as you ask, how could nothingness exist? But then that also brings up the tricky problem of origins..I mean, can everything just pop out of nothingness?
This si why the start of the universe holds little interest for me..too many phylosophical questions with no answers.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Cruddy
|
|
A circle has an infinite number of points on it's circumferene, yet that is closed.
Suggest you try reading "Fractals Everywhere" by Miichael Barnsley. It won't tell you what shape the universe is, but you'll have a few ideas for modelling it.
Universe = set of all things in relation to one another.
Multiverse = set of all things in all possible states.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:28.
Apolyton Time is 00:28. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
10-05-2003 00:23
Right, well that's that then. May as well all go home. 
|
|