[an0n]

 

You're talking about the strong anthropic principle. Its tripe.

No, it's high-school physics. (Action -> reaction)= Event. Event -> reaction.

And about the holidays. The fact is, we simply don't know enough about the Vasudan culture to speculate. Although I'd say that holidays are pretty much a certainty for a species that prides itself on such trivial ****  as how to address someone being based on their age, status and time of day. They're big on formality.

[mikhael]

 

Originally posted by an0n:
No, it's high-school physics. (Action -> reaction)= Event. Event -> reaction.

No, the strong anthropic principle is cosmology. You are misapplying basic Newtonian physics, which are demonstrably broken during certain extremely high energy and low energy situations, such as very soon after the creation of the universe, and thus destroy any tracing of causal chains back to the creation of the universe. Further, Newtonian physics break down (as do most such things) at extremely small or short(Planck length) scales.

------------------
--Mik
http://www.404error.com
ruhkferret on ICQ/AIM

[Ace]

Kind of tough for the Vasudans to be amphibious on a planet where most of the water is undrinkable by their own standards  

The destruction of Vasuda Prime by the Lucifer would definately be a holiday of mourning for the Great War. Probably most of a "Vasudan holiday" though is in the handling of The Conversation during that time period...

------------------
Ace
Staff member FreeSpace Watch
 http://freespace.volitionwatch.com/

[mikhael]

 

Originally posted by Ace:
Kind of tough for the Vasudans to be amphibious on a planet where most of the water is undrinkable by their own standards  

Is it? I didn't know that. *heh* They still remind me of fishies.


------------------
--Mik
http://www.404error.com
ruhkferret on ICQ/AIM

[an0n]

You don't seem to realise that no matter the force affecting an object, be they on the microscopic, macroscopic or universal scale, they are all unbreakable, unbendable and interlinked with each other. Just because Newton's theories don't apply directly, Newtons laws are a larger part and are made up of all the Planck scale interactions. Everything obeys some law, all the laws are in the universe and are based on observations in the universe and thus are all linked in many many ways. Just because modern science can't link them or understand them doesn't mean that they are random or not linked.

[mikhael]

 

Originally posted by an0n:
You don't seem to realise that no matter the force affecting an object, be they on the microscopic, macroscopic or universal scale, they are all unbreakable, unbendable and interlinked with each other. Just because Newton's theories don't apply directly, Newtons laws are a larger part and are made up of all the Planck scale interactions. Everything obeys some law, all the laws are in the universe and are based on observations in the universe and thus are all linked in many many ways. Just because modern science can't link them or understand them doesn't mean that they are random or not linked.

Everything obeys certain laws, but those laws change the conditions, which chains the laws, which change the conditions. That's cosmology again. Its still not high school physics. And high school physics neither states, nor implies that causal chains dictate the patterns of thought in sentient beings brain. You might want to go back to Hawking for a fine discussion of that topic.

I'll buy the weak anthropic principle, but not your strong anthropic principle. It neither makes sense, nor is it terribly likely once you start looking at the numbers.

------------------
--Mik
http://www.404error.com
ruhkferret on ICQ/AIM

[CP5670]

What would a Shivan holiday (or "special" day that repeats periodically) be like anyway?

 

Now taking these laws we can see that under a set of circumstances involving a number of particles in motion that only a single sequence of events can occur and that this sequence and every part of it was predetermined by the state of the particles at the beginning of the sequence. Now we take this out to a larger, universal scale and we can see that all actions, reaction and events were predetermined at the point of the big-bang or the creation of the universe. Therefore we see that no species has free will and is only doing what it was destined to do, what it was programmed to do.

Actually I think that with recent advances in quantum mechanics and the development of the chaos theory, this idea has been replaced in favor of the random/probability idea. (nothing is directly predetermined but is a matter of probabilities, influenced but not determined by the laws)

[an0n]

You're a good arguer.

Here's something for you to think about:

I can setup and experiment whereby, according to einstein, if one result is given, I can determine and absolute fixed, motionless point in space and if the other possible result holds true, I'll have moved the universe with a few rockets and a pair of lasers. That's how ******  up that fuzzy haired *****  was.

Everyone goes to such great lengths, dreaming up highly implausible, very thin and impossible to prove wrong theories just to prove that Einstein (the man who miraculously came up with the e=mc2 thing while working in a PATENT office) was right. They simply cannot accept that he bluffed his way through and talk a load of crap. I mean how the hell can you prove him wrong when he says that speed of light is constant but all speed is relative? You make light slow down and they just say that you were moving very fast in the direction of the light. Complete bull****. Thats little ****er has held up science for decades.

[an0n]

 

Actually I think that with recent advances in quantum mechanics and the development of the chaos theory, this idea has been replaced in favor of the random/probability idea. (nothing is directly predetermined but is a matter of probabilities, influenced but not determined by the laws)

I know. They've observed particles simply appeaing outta nowhere. But there must have been some event or circumstances that triggered the particle to form, even if the event was extra-dimensional or from the Xth dimension of space.

[mikhael]

 

Originally posted by an0n:
I know. They've observed particles simply appeaing outta nowhere. But there must have been some event or circumstances that triggered the particle to form, even if the event was extra-dimensional or from the Xth dimension of space.

Yes. Something does cause it: random chance. The important thing is that such particles annihilate themselves instantaneously. They do not last in the universe very long. Their very existence is observerabel only by ancillary effects, not by direct observation. The Casimir Effect is one such consequence, as is the (theorized) 'evaporation' of black holes.


------------------
--Mik http://www.404error.com
ruhkferret on ICQ/AIM

[This message has been edited by mikhael (edited 12-21-2001).]

[an0n]

Don't get me started on black-holes.

The whole bending of space thing was just invented to explain how light got sucked in to them (it magically having no mass and no gravitational force being able to attract it). They're just super-dense stars that have the gravity to suck in light.

Oh did you read the thing about the super-positioned particles that did stuff simultaneously even over great distances, so great that the communication between them must have been faster than light. Now that has some interesting possibilities.

[Shrike]

Hmmm, talking about quantum-inseperability?

And what do you have against black holes and warped space-time?

[mikhael]

 

Originally posted by an0n:
Don't get me started on black-holes.

The whole bending of space thing was just invented to explain how light got sucked in to them (it magically having no mass and no gravitational force being able to attract it). They're just super-dense stars that have the gravity to suck in light.

Oh did you read the thing about the super-positioned particles that did stuff simultaneously even over great distances, so great that the communication between them must have been faster than light. Now that has some interesting possibilities.

No, the whole 'bending of space' thing was theorized as a reason why gravity fails to obey the speed of light. Again, go read your Hawking. You've missed some points.

The other matter to which you refer is called 'entanglement' and was referred to by Einstein as 'spooky action at a distance'. In theory, changes to one particle on a quantum scale are mimicked precisely by a second particle that is somehow 'entangled' with the first. Entanglement actually been created in laboratory conditions in several hundred atoms at once.

Since entanglement only happens when the particles are near each other, for spooky action at a distance to actually violate c, you would have to, in some way, seperate the two particles. However, once you start interacting with them, the entanglement collapses, and you're left with a bunch of undifferentiated atoms with no particular relationships.



------------------
--Mik
http://www.404error.com
ruhkferret on ICQ/AIM

[an0n]

What do you think is more likely:

Einstein was wrong and light can go faster and round corners
OR
The very fabric of our existence is broken by objects that exist within the space they destroy

Hmmm?

[an0n]

 

No, the whole 'bending of space' thing was theorized as a reason why gravity fails to obey the speed of light.

Yes. Something went faster than light and they tried to destroy this heracy with ****** -up new theories.

[mikhael]

 

Originally posted by an0n:
What do you think is more likely:

Einstein was wrong and light can go faster and round corners
OR
The very fabric of our existence is broken by objects that exist within the space they destroy

Hmmm?

Light can go 'round corners, and it cannot go faster than itself. c is the frame of reference by which all other relationships are measured.

Existence is neither a fabric, nor is it 'destroyed'. Parts of it, can, however be made impassible, or extremely hazardous.

------------------
--Mik
http://www.404error.com
ruhkferret on ICQ/AIM

[an0n]

 

Existence is neither a fabric, nor is it 'destroyed'. Parts of it, can, however be made impassible, or extremely hazardous.

I was dumbing stuff down because it's like 4am and I'm getting to tired to make use of my extensive vocabulary.

[mikhael]

 

Originally posted by an0n:
I was dumbing stuff down because it's like 4am and I'm getting to tired to make use of my extensive vocabulary.

And your incredible reserves of humility and modesty?

------------------
--Mik
http://www.404error.com
ruhkferret on ICQ/AIM

[an0n]

They were depleted about the same time this guy in a white coat held me upside down and smacked my *** . I really should drink less when I got camping.

[an0n]

Cool, my spelling is starting to go as well. Musta been the Lambrini. That stuff sucks ***  but my sista wouldn't let me at the Red Square.