[an0n]

Originally posted by karajorma
So not content with potentially raining debris over Texas in the event of an accident the inhabitants also have to worry about plutonium raining down on them too?

That's actually happened before. As I recall, some russian satellite went streaming across the upper-atmosphere raining plutonium across the globe.

[an0n]

Originally posted by Hades
In my oppinion the art and music can convey emotions better than words.

No, music presents you with sounds which you associate with certain moods and levels of activity. This, in turn makes you feel a  certain way and as such when you are presented with the lyrics, you feel a certain way. It's basically a weak form of brain-washing.

But still, all it is doing is making you remember past instances and memories.

[ShadowWolf_IH]

see? you do understand.  sorta........

[an0n]

The bald eagle is no more an emotion envoking image than a picture of a shoe.

But it makes you remember how you felt when you saw the Challenger and those memories are what create feelings and emotions.

It is no more effective than saying; "Do you remember the Challenger disaster?"

[beatspete]

Originally posted by StratComm
 but I can't think of a better way to force him to cool down before he gets the thread locked than letting him rant and rave without the temptation to reply.

Hmmm. T'is true.

[StratComm]

Originally posted by an0n

..........No. A picture is a picture. Sometimes a picture will display object which you associate to certain emotions and memories, but it's till just a picture. You won't think "Wow, that Eagle is so sad.", you'll think "I remember how I felt when I heard about those brave souls aboard the Challenger.".

A picture of the challenger exploding though wouldn't have the same effect.  You are really very right here an0n, but if a picture calls up memories strong enough to bring back the emotions that that memory formed under, then it is moving.  And since both relate to a similar event, I think that picture is very touching right now.  It's meant to appeal to Americans, so perhaps an image different from the bald eagle would be appropriate, but the point still stands.

[kode]

Originally posted by beatspete


Hmmm. T'is true.

bah, seriously. ask them to put it in their sigs.

[CP5670]

I'm not going to put him on the ignore list, as I can still get a laugh out of the posts if nothing else.

How much is the life of an astronaut worth compared to seven family fathers? or seven new born babies? or seven mother theresa's? or seven gandhis? or seven other unique human beings?

Most likely more, depending on what the seven others turn out to be, but from a statistical perspective the chances are not too high that at least one of the others will become astronauts as well. As for the Gandhis, they are more of a threat to humanity than an asset.

But the more fuel that could be directed toward accelerating the ship towards its destination, the sooner it will get there. Thus, interplanetary travel and the Orion's advantages. Plus, you aren't storing highly volitile fuel, so a breach of the fuel containment pods wouldn't result in being set adrift in deep space. The original example, the ship in Deep Impact, is a good case in point for the advantages of the Orion drive, when time is important you need that extra kick.

Which is why it would provide some advantage, but not nearly as much as it could have had it worked in atmospheric conditions. Still, it's something, right?

So not content with potentially raining debris over Texas in the event of an accident the inhabitants also have to worry about plutonium raining down on them too?  Nukes also do contain an explosive charge (although great care is taken to make sure THAT doesn`t go off by mistake) but still if you're building lots of them to launch Orions the chance of building a dud does go up.

Actually if they launch it over Antarctica, for example, there would not be any inhabitants to worry about.

No, music presents you with sounds which you associate with certain moods and levels of activity. This, in turn makes you feela certain way and as such when you are presented with the lyrics, you feel a certain way. It's basically a weak form of brain-washing.

Yes, anything can convey any meaning if you are used to seeing it that way. I personally am going to stick to my equations.

[LtNarol]

Originally posted by beatspete
And whats up with all the ignoring, grow up, its better to hear someones (poor) opinion than not to listen to it at all, thats just arogant.

Call me arrogant Texan but the opinions of an idiot are not worth to me the time it takes to read them.

[CP5670]

Anyway I'm going to leave for a bit; keep that arguing going!

*wonders how long it will be until an admin comes here and closes the thread*

[ShadowWolf_IH]

As long as we are now on this road.....ever hear of the term sensory overlap?  When i listen to music......i can almost see it as light or dark.....i mean i actually get a visual sensation of light or dark in my mind.......a friend of mine on the other hand will say something like: I like that song, it has a good flavor.  Whereas music gives me a visual representation to express how i feel abotu it, for Lan it crosses into taste.  Now if i could just hear Pizza...........

[StratComm]

Originally posted by CP5670
*wonders how long it will be until an admin comes here and closes the thread*

I've got my money on less than two hours

[kode]

Originally posted by LtNarol
Call me arrogant Texan but the opinions of an idiot are not worth to me the time it takes to read them.

nah, this one's too cheap...

seriously, tho. I kind of respected you at one point.

[an0n]

The picture IS NOT MOVING.

Show it to a five year old and he'll say "Hehe, that eagle has a white head.". The image itself has no meaning. It is simply the symbology within which pokes at your memory and thought patterns. For example, if you looked at a picture of the Columbia streaming towards the ground without knowing what it was, you'd think "Cool firework.", it is only because you associate the bald-eagle with america, a single tear with extreme sadness and the shuttle with the Challenger disaster that there is any emotion as a result of the memories stoked up by the picture. And the image of the eagle creates a sense that all of America was sad, this interacts with your own feelings of the incident and magnifies it to an epic scale, this creates emotion, not the picture of an eagle.

If you showed a picture of the Twin Towers exploding to a member of Al Qaeda, he'd probably laugh his ass off, therefore I summise that no image carries any inherant emotion and any/all reactions which result from viewing of any picture are merely due to the interaction and associations of the images contained within said picture within the mind of the observer.

And this, kids, is why I should've taken Psychology and Philosophy at college. BOO-YA!

[karajorma]

Originally posted by an0n
And this, kids, is why I should've taken Psychology and Philosophy at college. BOO-YA!

That and the free therapy!

[beatspete]

Originally posted by LtNarol
Call me arrogant Texan but the opinions of an idiot are not worth to me the time it takes to read them.

...and if your 'ignoree' thinks the same about you?

Originally posted by CP5670

Yes, anything can convey any meaning if you are used to seeing it that way. I personally am going to stick to my equations.

cos45=1/(2^1/2)

Originally posted by CP5670

*wonders how long it will be until an admin comes here and closes the thread*

Yip, it'll happen.



An0n is right (mostly).  A picture is nothing unless you associate something with what is contained within it.  Someone looking at the challenger photos might think "cool explosion", unless somebody pointed out what it actually was. Thats when it gains meaning.

[an0n]

Actually, I'll have a free block next year, so i could take the first year of one of them and make up the second year at University.

[kode]

"nothing is anything in itself"
-siddharta gauma (buddha for you uneducated masses )

[an0n]

Originally posted by beatspete

cos45=1/(2^1/2)

The annoying thing is, that's right.

[an0n]

Originally posted by kode
"nothing is anything in itself"
-siddharta gauma (buddha for you uneducated masses )

Or as Einstein put it: It's all relative.