Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

i bn thinking we need a thread where we can pose scientific questions that we can ponder and or answer.

Question One :

Can a heterosexual person be turned chemically gay along with help from outside factors?


an unaware test subject given high levels of estrogen and other female hormones... can it cause him to start to develop homosexual tendencies and or thoughts/behavior?

what if he were surrounded by homosexual people he can interact with maybe a adult video store access to erotica and other stimuli?

i ask b/c i am curious about how some scientist believe homosexuality occurs early in the fetus life cycle when it is bombarded with hormones from its mother... some believe the fetus may get too much estrogen and although it will be born a male it will develop feminine behavior making it more likely to be gay. (its just one of many theories, dont shoot the messenger).

another is about how one is raised some think it has to do with environment even to how much time a woman spends raising a child as a factor.(even possibly molestation).


i think if we can answer this it will get us one step closer to a real answer about a possible cause to homosexuality.

Homosexuality is caused by the devil... That's all we need to know... hmm

but can it be chemically treated or deprogrammed out of a person?

of course it can be exorcised but you need a lvl 12 Holy priest with relics and charms.. you dont have them walking around every day so that leaves it up to science to do its best.

I got an idea: lets ask a scientific question.

Do you support the idea that entropy is a reflection of the arrow of time? If not, please explain.

Like that...

I don't believe it can be deprogrammed, as for chemical treatment I don't know... I certainly wouldn't like it to be tested.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I got an idea: lets ask a scientific question.

Do you support the idea that entropy is a reflection of the arrow of time? If not, please explain.

Like that... yes, just like that.

no, i do not think entropy is a reflection of time. every thing is happening at once the mind is what gives it all a sense of order.

you might as well say the human life cycle is a reflection of time and memory is a window to the past as it is happening at the exact moment as the present and future the mind is what gives it order and purpose.

this is heavy, getting into quantum mechanics and metaphysics.

its just my two cents. to me time is a concept not really measureable nor understood. humans use it to to measure distance.

but, without us it has no meaning.


anyways,,, this sounds more like a philosphy question rather then an outright scientific one.. but, most quantum theory sh#$ is.. :P

I remember studying entropy... Now that is some boring shit.

umm.. it loses energy, bonds break things collapse and fall apart one day the universe will die.. some say it will be dead cold and a whimper others compress itself in a "crunch"

Have to say that I skipped a lot of lectures in regards to it.

well its all theory its untestable.. gives you something to think about but you are just wasting time and money.. its like sitting in a rocking chair it gives you something to do but it doesnt get you nowhere.

great fan of science quantum/physic theories and stuff in comics/movies not so much as a college course nor ppl making money off it.(professors)

Originally posted by King Castle
Question One :

Can a heterosexual person be turned chemically gay along with help from outside factors?

I hear if you jam something up a man's ass he automatically turns gay, so there is that as an option.


Originally posted by King Castle
an unaware test subject given high levels of estrogen and other female hormones... can it cause him to start to develop homosexual tendencies and or thoughts/behavior?

Considering that hormonal treatments are generally taken by people who want to change sex, I would say no. After all gay men don't want to be women, they want to be gay men.

Originally posted by King Castle
what if he were surrounded by homosexual people he can interact with maybe a adult video store access to erotica and other stimuli?

No, that's stupid. I watch lesbian porn but that hasn't turned me into a lesbian yet.

Originally posted by King Castle
i ask b/c i am curious about how some scientist believe homosexuality occurs early in the fetus life cycle when it is bombarded with hormones from its mother... some believe the fetus may get too much estrogen and although it will be born a male it will develop feminine behavior making it more likely to be gay. (its just one of many theories, dont shoot the messenger).

another is about how one is raised some think it has to do with environment even to how much time a woman spends raising a child as a factor.(even possibly molestation).

Those things would explain gay men who are dandies and thus, even if we assume they're true, cannot possibly be the whole story.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I got an idea: lets ask a scientific question.

Do you support the idea that entropy is a reflection of the arrow of time? If not, please explain.

Like that...

No, thermodynamics is still consistent if you run time in reverse. It just becomes an inevitable march toward order.

Originally posted by King Castle
great fan of science quantum/physic theories and stuff in comics/movies not so much as a college course nor ppl making money off it.(professors)

How dare physicist make some money for doing the research that built the entire modern world.

Originally posted by King Castle
Can a heterosexual person be turned chemically gay along with help from outside factors?

almost certainly not

the only thing that might occur is the association between homosexual sex and things that previously found attractive.

So, if you forced a person to masterbate to gay porn, you might be able to condition a sexual reaction in that person to homosexual sex, but I don't think that comes close to defining a person as homosexual.

However, given how fetishes work, I don't think this is true. This would be like saying you could watch people defacate on eachother enough that you eventually were into it sexually.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
No, thermodynamics is still consistent if you run time in reverse. It just becomes an inevitable march toward order.

But there is a lack of symmetry, because entropy always increases. It takes more energy to un-mix cream from coffee, then putting cream into coffee. This basic lack of symmetry maybe the arrow of time. Unless I am misunderstanding you.

Originally posted by King Castle
i bn thinking we need a thread where we can pose scientific questions that we can ponder and or answer.

Question One :

Can a heterosexual person be turned chemically gay along with help from outside factors?


an unaware test subject given high levels of estrogen and other female hormones... can it cause him to start to develop homosexual tendencies and or thoughts/behavior?

what if he were surrounded by homosexual people he can interact with maybe a adult video store access to erotica and other stimuli?

i ask b/c i am curious about how some scientist believe homosexuality occurs early in the fetus life cycle when it is bombarded with hormones from its mother... some believe the fetus may get too much estrogen and although it will be born a male it will develop feminine behavior making it more likely to be gay. (its just one of many theories, dont shoot the messenger).

another is about how one is raised some think it has to do with environment even to how much time a woman spends raising a child as a factor.(even possibly molestation).


i think if we can answer this it will get us one step closer to a real answer about a possible cause to homosexuality. Are you worried the army made you gay with drugs? Don't sweat it, you were probably born that way.

That estrogen theory can't explain lesbians, bisexuals, pansexuals, or even non-femine gay man. Gay people aren't the product of molestation either. Homosexual behavior can be found across more than 400 species of animals and in virtually all human cultures, it's biological.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
But there is a lack of symmetry, because entropy always increases. It takes more energy to un-mix cream from coffee, then putting cream into coffee. This basic lack of symmetry maybe the arrow of time. Unless I am misunderstanding you.

Maybe I don't understand what you mean by "arrow of time". What I mean is that if the universe suddenly starting running in reverse I'm pretty sure it would still have a consistent set of rules, one of which would be that you can never increase the disorder in a system.

Originally posted by inimalist
almost certainly not

the only thing that might occur is the association between homosexual sex and things that previously found attractive.

So, if you forced a person to masterbate to gay porn, you might be able to condition a sexual reaction in that person to homosexual sex, but I don't think that comes close to defining a person as homosexual.

However, given how fetishes work, I don't think this is true. This would be like saying you could watch people defacate on eachother enough that you eventually were into it sexually. what is your view on homosexuality in prison with ppl who professed not to be gay but have raped some one of the same sex?

Originally posted by King Castle
what is your view on homosexuality in prison with ppl who professed not to be gay but have raped some one of the same sex?

I don't consider prison sex to be "homosexual" in that way. I guess it is in a technical "the two people are of the same gender" way, but the actors aren't homosexuals.

In any valuable definition of homosexuality, it is going to need to account for much more than just having sex with people. Gay people can still bone women.

situatinal sexuality

Originally posted by 753
situatinal sexuality

power hirearchies also

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Maybe I don't understand what you mean by "arrow of time". What I mean is that if the universe suddenly starting running in reverse I'm pretty sure it would still have a consistent set of rules, one of which would be that you can never increase the disorder in a system.

If time where to reverse separate from entropy, the universe would not look the same in the final crunch, as it did in the big bang. If time and entropy where reversed together you would still not reach a point of the big bang. This is something that I have read, and I do not fully understand it. There is a broken symmetry here.

Originally posted by inimalist
power hirearchies also yes, them as well

Originally posted by inimalist
I don't consider prison sex to be "homosexual" in that way. I guess it is in a technical "the two people are of the same gender" way, but the actors aren't homosexuals.

In any valuable definition of homosexuality, it is going to need to account for much more than just having sex with people. Gay people can still bone women. but, can a straight man be unknowingly enticed into a homosexual act from chemical saturation of certain hormones and subliminal messages?

Originally posted by King Castle
but, can a straight man be unknowingly enticed into a homosexual act from chemical saturation of certain hormones and subliminal messages?

subliminal messages do not exist

we can quibble about priming and associative conditioning, but the idea that subliminal messages can observably affect how you behave is false. straight up false.

aside from that, if what you are asking me is: "can drugs make a man sexually attracted to another man" the answer is no.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Do you support the idea that entropy is a reflection of the arrow of time? Depends on the eigenstates.

http://kara.allthingsd.com/files/2009/09/kool-aid-man.jpg

if we live in a matter universe and if their is multiple realities or possible realities or whatever.. quantum mumble jumbo..

is their an exact opposite mirror image universe where matter is antimatter and antimatter is matter?

also are there realities where dreams are reality and our reality is a dream?

serious question:

what exactly is antimatter since the description has bn changing since last i recall.

Originally posted by King Castle
what exactly is antimatter since the description has bn changing since last i recall.

Generally speaking: Particles with the same quantum "spin" but the opposite charge to normal matter.

I believe the rules get a lot more technical for things without a charge like neutrinos and neutrons.

: Nope, its still the same for neutrons you just have to go a level deepers. The quarks they are made of have a charge, thats where the flip happens.

and if an equal amount of mass touch the opposite amount of mass with opposite charge they explode?

if they were both the size of basketballs what would be the result?

also answer my quantum mechanics mumbo jumbo or i will be forced to seek answers in movies and comics.

Originally posted by King Castle
and if an equal amount of mass touch the opposite amount of mass with opposite charge they explode?

Not quite. When an electron touches a positron they annihilate each other but if an electron touches an anti-proton they just bounce off.

Originally posted by King Castle
if they were both the size of basketballs what would be the result?

The particles at the very edge of basketballs will annihilate, creating a burst of energy (and various particles) that will push the basketballs apart, preventing any more annihilation between them until they're moved back into place.

Basically they'll touch for a fraction of a second, then go flying apart (the force of the explosion might destroy the objects).

Originally posted by King Castle
also answer my quantum mechanics mumbo jumbo or i will be forced to seek answers in movies and comics.

If we accept the "many-worlds" interpretation of quantum mechanics, then yes. A lot of people who know more about quantum mechanics than we do have been debating about that for a long time, "many-world" gets more exposure than "Copenhagen" because the implications are cooler.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Not quite. When an electron touches a positron they annihilate each other but if an electron touches an anti-proton they just bounce off.
An anti-proton has the same charge as an electron though.

Originally posted by King Kandy
An anti-proton has the same charge as an electron though.

Hence the bounce, I assume. Like charges repel each other.

Originally posted by King Castle
if we live in a matter universe and if their is multiple realities or possible realities or whatever.. quantum mumble jumbo..

is their an exact opposite mirror image universe where matter is antimatter and antimatter is matter?

Probably not, we don't know for sure why there is so little anti-matter, the original prediction said there should be as much as regular matter. One idea is that it's concentrated in another part of the universe, presumably one half of it, that is too far away for light to have travelled here yet. This would be the mirror image you were refering to, although it wouldn't really be a reflection of our world, just have equal mass and similar properties. Another idea, more currently accepted, is that physical constants aren't symetric in regards to the origin of matter and that the universe is skewed towards regular matter.

Originally posted by King Castle
if we live in a matter universe and if their is multiple realities or possible realities or whatever.. quantum mumble jumbo..

is their an exact opposite mirror image universe where matter is antimatter and antimatter is matter?

also are there realities where dreams are reality and our reality is a dream?

serious question:

what exactly is antimatter since the description has bn changing since last i recall.

FYI

http://www.universetoday.com/13377/why-theres-more-matter-than-antimatter-in-the-universe/

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I watch lesbian porn but that hasn't turned me into a lesbian yet. "Yet" is the key here.

what exactly is black matter or dark matter?

Originally posted by King Castle
what exactly is black matter or dark matter?

No one knows, if we did it wouldn't be "dark".

What we know so far is that it has mass, there is a lot of it and no method that has ever been tried has been able to observe it.

We know it exists for two related reasons. For given masses, and a given orbital speed there is only one orbit an object can stay in. (as an example if the moon circled the Earth more quickly it would be further away, if more slowly closer) We know this is true with incredible precision.

Galaxies have small satellite galaxies in orbit around them. So using the principle above we can calculate the mass of galaxy they orbit. However when we calculate the mass of the galaxy by looking at it we get a much lower number. Now that estimate isn't as good, but its fairly close, certainly it won't give us a mass 1/400 the size of the real thing.

The second method is gravitational lensing. Mass curves space, more mass curves space more, light follows that path. We know this with incredible precision. Again, calculating based on how bent space is gives us a different number than a visual estimate many times over.

Wiki gives a much of other, more complicated ways that scientists have confirmed it.

so we know nothing can travel faster then light and you have some yahoos who say tachyons travel faster then light...

so question is: does a tachyon particle travel faster then a photon?

in my mind its like saying a spaceship can travel FTL via a wormhole.

hence, the ship itself cannot accelerate to the speed of light but simply cut the distance by bending space.

Originally posted by King Castle
so we know nothing can travel faster then light and you have some yahoos who say tachyons travel faster then light...

so question is: does a tachyon particle travel faster then a photon?

in my mind its like saying a spaceship can travel FTL via a wormhole.

hence, the ship itself cannot r accelerate to the speed of light but simply cut the distance by bending space. wrong thread dude

Originally posted by King Castle
so we know nothing can travel faster then light and you have some yahoos who say tachyons travel faster then light...

so question is: does a tachyon particle travel faster then a photon?

in my mind its like saying a spaceship can travel FTL via a wormhole.

hence, the ship itself cannot r accelerate to the speed of light but simply cut the distance by bending space.
Tachyons are hypothetical. They don't really exist.

If they did exist, though, the reason they could move FTL is that they have an imaginary mass and thus can never move slower than light.

Originally posted by King Castle
so we know nothing can travel faster then light and you have some yahoos who say tachyons travel faster then light...

so question is: does a tachyon particle travel faster then a photon?

in my mind its like saying a spaceship can travel FTL via a wormhole.

hence, the ship itself cannot accelerate to the speed of light but simply cut the distance by bending space. nothing can be accelerated to the spped of light, but tachyons would move constantly faster than light

Originally posted by King Castle
so we know nothing can travel faster then light and you have some yahoos who say tachyons travel faster then light...

so question is: does a tachyon particle travel faster then a photon?

If we had a tachyon, yes it would travel faster than photon (in fact it would be unable to move slower than one). But keep in mind that we know how to look for tachyons, they would stand out like crazy too, and no one has ever seen one. There's is little reason to believe they exist.

can some one explain the difference between:

quantum entanglement

quantum teleportation

worm hole or folding space.

in the context of how each could be considered teleportation and how each is different,...

and also is one method of teleportation not really just fancy cloning and destroying of the original?

Originally posted by King Castle
quantum entanglement

The wiki description amounts to: You have a bunch of things that cannot be described properly without describing all of them, and describing them requires lots of scary math.

Originally posted by King Castle
quantum teleportation

Well I don't know how it happens (and I seriously doubt I could explain it to you accurately if I did).

What occurs is pretty simple. Once you entangle two particles they become "linked". In the case of quantum "teleportation" this only a matter of information (in all explanations I see they use the "spin" of the particle). When you observe/measure/disturb one of the particles it picks one quantum state to be in at the exact same time the
entangled particle picks the same state.


Now, I feel I have a responsibility, even as a lay person, to explain that this isn't very useful for teleportation:

Imagine you have two locked boxes. Each of them has a random number generator inside. When you turn the key to open them the random number generator picks a value between 1 and 100, then tells the other one to do the same. They're now both stuck like that, displaying a number forever, in this case it is 54.

If the person who owns the other box opens it he'll see 54 but he won't know if it was like that before he opened it or if he was the one that caused it to change. And you don't know either, to find out you both have to communicate through some other method.

Originally posted by King Castle
worm hole or folding space.

Its like a hole punched through space-time. Anything of the right size can pass through.

I wouldn't call it teleportation. The usual term is a short cut.

An understanding of the physics of it (beyond this famous simplification of the concept) would apparently require knowing what a "three-manifold of the nontrivial topology" is.

so what exactly is happening here?

if it were possible what would be the science of what they are doin?

9eTUz61LNjo

I was wondering, when we look in a mirror why is the reflection only reflected mirrored in the horizontal. virtically our image remains the same?

Originally posted by King Castle
so what exactly is happening here?

if it were possible what would be the science of what they are doin?

9eTUz61LNjo

They're talking about Star Trek where the transporters take a snapshot of every atom of your being, destroy your body, then build an identical version of you in a new place.

The problem Sheldon presents is a philosophical one, not a scientific one.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
The problem Sheldon presents is a philosophical one, not a scientific one.

at least not a physics one.

The problem is that the "transported" you would not have the same "stream-of-consciousness" that the destroyed person would have. To you, if would be the same as death, you would cease to exist. Another, new being, with the same memories/personality/etc would then exist in a new place, and to anyone who wasn't undergoing to "transportation", it would seem like a single being was moved from place to place, but in terms of the "You" that is created by the brain, you would cease to exist and a new "you" would now inhabit the earth.

Originally posted by King Castle
quantum entanglement

quantum teleportation

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_qmSdC7aQpY

i wonder if autism is hereditary?mhmm

also which ones can be beatin out of the child ala positive negative reinforcement?

Originally posted by King Castle
i wonder if autism is hereditary?mhmm

also which ones can be beatin out of the child ala positive negative reinforcement?

Beating a child to make them stop doing something is punishment, not positive or negative reinforcement. Doing it as an attempt to cure autism is barbaric as well.

Originally posted by King Castle
i wonder if autism is hereditary?mhmm

Autism is a very poorly understood range of disorders with a similar constelation of symptoms. While there are as many theories as there are psychologists, there is almost certainly a genetic component.

iirc, it does run in families, the same way anxiety disorders run in my family (ie - it isn't likely that each child will have the same "autism", but they may each have similar symptoms involving social interactions and attention).

Originally posted by King Castle
also which ones can be beatin out of the child ala positive negative reinforcement?

negative reinforcement means something different than "punishment" in technical psych terms, but in terms of "beating" someone, there is no psychological disorder that this will assist.

Strangely enough, though, conditions like autism, ADD and a couple others show the best results from extreme behavioural interventions. Basically, one-on-one specifically guided attentional and social training.

but, let me just clarify, punishment does not do anything positive for a child (in terms of curing mental illness)

hmm.. in my weekend catholic school, i would get hit on my knuckles for not paying attention same with my MA classes . i would be hit on the surface of my palms with a bokken stick. what i learned from this was to pay attention and try harder so not to get hit... i would then repeat everything in my mind to reinforce it.

hence, punishment does work.

although, i do suffer from high anxiety attacks which is great for certain situations not so great for day to day routine.mhmm

Originally posted by King Castle
hmm.. in my weekend catholic school, i would get hit on my knuckles for not paying attention same with my MA classes . i would be hit on the surface of my palms with a bokken stick. what i learned from this was to pay attention and try harder so not to get hit... i would then repeat everything in my mind to reinforce it.

hence, punishment does work.

anecdotes =/= general evidence

lack of attention =/= autism

Originally posted by King Castle
hmm.. in my weekend catholic school, i would get hit on my knuckles for not paying attention same with my MA classes . i would be hit on the surface of my palms with a bokken stick. what i learned from this was to pay attention and try harder so not to get hit... i would then repeat everything in my mind to reinforce it.

hence, punishment does work.

well, yes, and there are times where, as parents, some type of punishment is needed (though, the way the majority of parents, as well as the teachers you have outlined, go about punishing is probably the worst way).

Originally posted by King Castle
although, i do suffer from high anxiety attacks which is great for certain situations not so great for day to day routine.mhmm

when have you found an anxiety attack to be helpful?

Originally posted by inimalist
well, yes, and there are times where, as parents, some type of punishment is needed (though, the way the majority of parents, as well as the teachers you have outlined, go about punishing is probably the worst way).

i trained in korean TKD in old school methods physical punishment was standard. if a parent didnt like it they could try to sue which failed due to contract or take them out.. both happen regularly large turn over but my master refused to allow his dojo to be Americanized and commercialized.

also it wasnt the worse thing it was the best thing for the environment i was in... the only one i consider to be bad is the stupid nuns in catholic school... bein hit for asking questions really erks me.

Originally posted by inimalist
when have you found an anxiety attack to be helpful? durin incoming mortar rounds in iraq, having to move follow procedures gather my guys run down all my mental list of things to do under the situation assessing and whatnot....

it increased my reaction time and ability to focus under pressure probably due to the immediate adrenaline surge..


also when i got back from the states i could skip work and go see the base psychiatrist and talk about how my natural anxiety had bn strengthen by PTST back in the rear...

odd to since i had never considered my behavior in iraq as anxiety attacks but normal responses... turns out i couldnt shut it off back home when it came to cars, loud noises and even certain ppl approaching me.. that was the bad part.

Originally posted by King Castle
i trained in korean TKD in old school methods physical punishment was standard. if a parent didnt like it they could try to sue which failed due to contract or take them out.. both happen regularly large turn over but my master refused to allow his dojo to be Americanized and commercialized.

also it wasnt the worse thing it was the best thing for the environment i was in... the only one i consider to be bad is the stupid nuns in catholic school... bein hit for asking questions really erks me.

you are describing more of a "I wanted a brutal teacher" than "punishment worked" scenario. There is an abundance of research on how poor of a motivator punishment is.

Originally posted by King Castle
durin incoming mortar rounds in iraq, having to move follow procedures gather my guys run down all my mental list of things to do under the situation assessing and whatnot....

it increased my reaction time and ability to focus under pressure probably due to the immediate adrenaline surge..

not to argue with whoever told you such, but that isn't an anxiety attack. You were right to consider that a normal adrenaline rush, but it also has to do with the conditioned response the military trained into you

Originally posted by King Castle
also when i got back from the states i could skip work and go see the base psychiatrist and talk about how my natural anxiety had bn strengthen by PTST back in the rear...

touche

Originally posted by King Castle
odd to since i had never considered my behavior in iraq as anxiety attacks but normal responses... turns out i couldnt shut it off back home when it came to cars, loud noises and even certain ppl approaching me.. that was the bad part.

see, the back home stuff, that is the anxious response based on the conditioning Iraq would have given you. From how you describe it, your performance in Iraq was more of a "pre-conscious motor plan" that the military trained you for, basically, your training took over the thinking part of your brain in terms of deciding your actions.

For instance, many people totally shut down during anxiety attacks, for myself, I need to lay down or I will faint. "heightened performance and awareness" are normal responses to normal amounts of anxiety, not qualities of an anxiety attack.

Originally posted by inimalist
you are describing more of a "I wanted a brutal teacher" than "punishment worked" scenario. There is an abundance of research on how poor of a motivator punishment is.
it wasnt my choice my mom made me go into MA's...

also i guess some ppl are not aware between commericalized MA's and actual combat oriented MA's..

its the difference between exercise or looking pretty and doin it right as it was intended for and able to be effective in Maiming and inducing pain.



Originally posted by inimalist
not to argue with whoever told you such, but that isn't an anxiety attack. You were right to consider that a normal adrenaline rush, but it also has to do with the conditioned response the military trained into you


touche

the Anxiety also came from constantly bein yelled at and ordered.. do this!! hurry up!! dont make me writeyou up!! i will kick your @$$!! i will have you discharged with a dishonorable!!! etc ect..



Originally posted by inimalist
see, the back home stuff, that is the anxious response based on the conditioning Iraq would have given you. From how you describe it, your performance in Iraq was more of a "pre-conscious motor plan" that the military trained you for, basically, your training took over the thinking part of your brain in terms of deciding your actions. the anxiety was also in iraq its just that the i had an outlet and a different trigger. i was constantly on edge tryin to keep from being yelled out and fear of screwin up and losing my rank via a vindictive @$$hole and a yrs of hard work goin down the drain and bein labeled or risked being kicked out with a dishonorable discharge..

Originally posted by inimalist
For instance, many people totally shut down during anxiety attacks, for myself, I need to lay down or I will faint. "heightened performance and awareness" are normal responses to normal amounts of anxiety, not qualities of an anxiety attack.

also the 1st time i had an anxiety/panic attack was in disney land only about a month back from returning. i wasnt comfortable socializing nor did i want to, i felt completely alienated from the ppl i once freely socialized with.. the fireworks and canon fire caused both me and my friend to flinch and a physical adrenaline response. my friends wife who was a nurse had bn noticing our behavior through out the night and made an excuse for us to leave.. she was a navy nurse studying to be a doctor.. we both got in the car no one talked accept her saying that it was okay for us to not be sociable.. i had curled up in a ball in the back of a seat and was overwhelmed with a need to cry and despair... needless to say she reported us to our command the next day.. she went over my head since i was the office Nco at the time.

i have said this story in the past.... anyways the anxiety in iraq was a precursor to me being constantly primed and ready for whatever was happening whether it was being yelled at or a stupid mortar round landing near our location.

the problem was i had learn to deal with it as a constant due to my location and my behavior was the norm not so so much back in the states where a stranger causes me to be on guard not allow him to approach me.. where a guy mouthing off at me gets the same response and i am willingly to escalate it which is frowned upon especially by douche baggery cops... i dont like being touched not that i didnt like it b4 but i really really dont like being touched especially by certain ppl.. i also have anxiety attacks behind the wheel to the point i no longer want to drive where i would rather take the bus or walk..

i explained all my issues b4 in various threads so this isnt the 1st time i have posted these particular issues.

Originally posted by inimalist
at least not a physics one.

The problem is that the "transported" you would not have the same "stream-of-consciousness" that the destroyed person would have. To you, if would be the same as death, you would cease to exist. Another, new being, with the same memories/personality/etc would then exist in a new place, and to anyone who wasn't undergoing to "transportation", it would seem like a single being was moved from place to place, but in terms of the "You" that is created by the brain, you would cease to exist and a new "you" would now inhabit the earth.

Is that actually definitely true though or just an assumption? I mean this stream of consciousness wouldn't it be the exact same one? Can't the stream of consciousness also cut in different ways? Comas or sleep or something?

Originally posted by Bardock42
Is that actually definitely true though or just an assumption? I mean this stream of consciousness wouldn't it be the exact same one? Can't the stream of consciousness also cut in different ways? Comas or sleep or something?

"stream of consciousness" was the best thing I could come up with, though, you are right, it isn't specifically the stream of consciousness ending that would create the problem.

Its more like, the experiences you have, as in you, are tied into the physical pieces of your body as they are assembled now. If quantum teleportation actually destroys the physical pieces of your brain, regardless if something else, identical, is created somewhere else, the experience to you is going to be the same as death.

This is an assumption, yes. But, the only way it could really work is if there is some form of dualist "thing" inside your mind which can be transported to the new body being assembled, which would require essentially everything we know about the brain to be rewritten.

My understanding of quantum teleportation might be wrong though, I'm going by what was described in the "Big Bang" video above, which was the literal deconstruction of the brain at a sub-atomic level.

It is the same reason why being "downloaded" into a computer, if possible, would have to be a step by step thing. Though, in that case it might be possible to teleport, if the "hardware" of the brain could be converted to software (rather than just replaced with chips that act as neurons).

its like downloading the info of a computer to an external thumb drive and then smashing the original...

there should be a science forum on here. i 've always thought that for years.

my question i always wanted to know, and i know no one person or persons has the answer yet, or that i know of, but i've always wondered if the universe goes on forever to infinity and beyond or is there a proverbial wall where things just stop.

or is the unverse, just a small area in the cosmos, with many clusters of galaxies with in it, that can be left behind (maybe into another universe. -or not-)..

but then do the cosmos have a wall or is it just forever. infinite and eternal, with no beginning or end..

it's really all just unimaginable. but there is are answers. factually. naturally or scientifically.

Originally posted by FistOfThe North
there should be a science forum on here. i 've always thought that for years.

my question i always wanted to know, and i know no one person or persons has the answer yet, or that i know of, but i've always wondered if the universe goes on forever to infinity and beyond or is there a proverbial wall where things just stop.

or is the unverse, just a small area in the cosmos, with many clusters of galaxies with in it, that can be left behind (maybe into another universe. -or not-)..

but then do the cosmos have a wall or is it just forever. infinite and eternal, with no beginning or end..

it's really all just unimaginable. but there is are answers. factually. naturally or scientifically.

Maybe the universe is a four dimensional hypersphere. That means if you could magically move across the universe, you would come back to where you started regardless of the direction you came from.

Originally posted by FistOfThe North
there should be a science forum on here. i 've always thought that for years.

my question i always wanted to know, and i know no one person or persons has the answer yet, or that i know of, but i've always wondered if the universe goes on forever to infinity and beyond or is there a proverbial wall where things just stop.

or is the unverse, just a small area in the cosmos, with many clusters of galaxies with in it, that can be left behind (maybe into another universe. -or not-)..

but then do the cosmos have a wall or is it just forever. infinite and eternal, with no beginning or end..

it's really all just unimaginable. but there is are answers. factually. naturally or scientifically.

One popular concept is that the universe is both finite and has no "wall". Imagine a baseball, if you were a microbe living on it you could calculate the area of your "universe" but you would never find an edge to it.

The universe may well be built the same way, except in 4 spatial dimensions rather than three. It's literally impossible to visualize but describing it mathematically is possible.

However, the last heard was that no one was really sure about the shape of the universe.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Maybe the universe is a four dimensional hypersphere. That means if you could magically move across the universe, you would come back to where you started regardless of the direction you came from.

i'm assuming by magic you meant something that's phisically possible some how in some way but just unexplainable rather than pixie dust hocus pocus.

teleporation is what you seem to mean and that's not phisically possible as far as i know. but then again i hear that there are places just in our universe where the laws of physics are completely different from what we know or experience here in our cosmic neighborhood.

Originally posted by FistOfThe North
i'm assuming by magic you meant something that's phisically possible some how in some way but just unexplainable rather than pixie dust hocus pocus.

teleporation is what you seem to mean and that's not phisically possible as far as i know. but then again i hear that there are places just in our universe where the laws of physics are completely different from what we know or experience here in our cosmic neighborhood.

That was just a narrative device. What I meant was if you could travel much faster then the speed of light. That would be like magic.

Originally posted by FistOfThe North
there should be a science forum on here. i 've always thought that for years.

my question i always wanted to know, and i know no one person or persons has the answer yet, or that i know of, but i've always wondered if the universe goes on forever to infinity and beyond or is there a proverbial wall where things just stop.

or is the unverse, just a small area in the cosmos, with many clusters of galaxies with in it, that can be left behind (maybe into another universe. -or not-)..

but then do the cosmos have a wall or is it just forever. infinite and eternal, with no beginning or end..

it's really all just unimaginable. but there is are answers. factually. naturally or scientifically. What do you mean by "universe?" Ours could be one of many if you're thinking Hubble volume. Or, in the broadest sense, existence is whatever form it can/does/eventually will take (ultimately, whatever the Ultimate Ground is, by definition it is infinite and eternal).

http://space.mit.edu/home/tegmark/multiverse.pdf

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
One popular concept is that the universe is both finite and has no "wall". Imagine a baseball, if you were a microbe living on it you could calculate the area of your "universe" but you would never find an edge to it.

The universe may well be built the same way, except in 4 spatial dimensions rather than three. It's literally impossible to visualize but describing it mathematically is possible.

However, the last heard was that no one was really sure about the shape of the universe.

this asian guy named, mr. kaku, presented what he though the universe looked like phisically, but in theory of course. it was a 4d digital illustation of the whole entire universe and it looked like a virtual glistening spiderweb of galactic clusters going out in every direction.

Originally posted by Mindship
What do you mean by "universe?" Ours could be one of many if you're thinking Hubble volume. Or, in the broadest sense, existence is whatever form it can/does/eventually will take (ultimately, whatever the Ultimate Ground is, by definition it is infinite and eternal).

http://space.mit.edu/home/tegmark/multiverse.pdf

whoa. i read the first couple of pages and printed that out. now that's a piece you take your time with and delve into for the evening. thanks Mindship.

loved the concept level 1 reigions beyond our cosmic horizon and level 4 where there indeed may be different fudamental equations and laws of physics as i wrote earlier.

and by univese i meant that unit of galactice clusters, that we and our planet, are apart of. that corner or area or part of the cosmos where these networks of clusters take up space. we could be one of many universes but still. my main thing is whether or not there is a "wall", if not in the universe but the cosmos. and even then, what's beyond this "wall"...God? nah j/k..

Originally posted by FistOfThe North
and by univese i meant that unit of galactice clusters, that we and our planet, are apart of.

That's like saying "the planet Earth" when you mean "in my apartment".

Originally posted by FistOfThe North
this asian guy named, mr. kaku, presented what he though the universe looked like phisically, but in theory of course. it was a 4d digital illustation of the whole entire universe and it looked like a virtual glistening spiderweb of galactic clusters going out in every direction.

That would be an image of the observable universe. Powerful telescopes make it possible to see that galaxies really are arranged in networks of strings. But that doesn't tell us what the shape of the whole universe.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
That's like saying "the planet Earth" when you mean "in my apartment".



That would be an image of the observable universe. Powerful telescopes make it possible to see that galaxies really are arranged in networks of strings. But that doesn't tell us what the shape of the whole universe.

no, he said "this is what our whole entire universe may look like." not just the observable portion. like, we're talking all of it and not just what we've phisically captured so far with the tech we have now.

Originally posted by FistOfThe North
no, he said "this is what our whole entire universe may look like." not just the observable portion. like, we're talking all of it and not just what we've phisically captured so far with the tech we have now.

the universe almost certainly contains physical structures that are impossible for the human brain to visualize, specifically a fourth dimension.

Originally posted by inimalist
the universe almost certainly contains physical structures that are impossible for the human brain to visualize, specifically a fourth dimension.

almost certainly? if you're saying our brains can't even imagine these physical structures yet they almost certainly exist what makes you so certain that they're there?

my point is these questions are unanswerable from a human perspective but there is definetely a natural answer.

all one can do is wonder or theorize or use advance math and relative science to get as close to the or an answer as possible.

is there a cosmic or universal "wall" or not. i don't think anyone on earth knows. but there is a definite answer. and it's factually either yes or no. and that's ok for now.

you know, i think that's my answer. "that's it factually either yes or no."

Originally posted by FistOfThe North
almost certainly? if you're saying our brains can't even imagine these physical structures yet they almost certainly exist what makes you so certain that they're there?

because every mathematical model we have regarding the structure of the universe includes such things, afaik.

i wonder how Sheldon from the big bang theory would be labeled if he were analyzed by a psychiatrist, if he would fit any mental issues?

763_zTgL6YY&feature=related

Originally posted by King Castle
i wonder how Sheldon from the big bang theory would be labeled if he were analyzed if he would fit any mental issues?

_MModPwl13o&feature=related


Fictionanitis?

Originally posted by King Castle
i wonder how Sheldon from the big bang theory would be labeled if he were analyzed by a psychiatrist, if he would fit any mental issues?

A person normally interacting with a group of friends?

that would be: none

Originally posted by King Castle
i wonder how Sheldon from the big bang theory would be labeled if he were analyzed if he would fit any mental issues?

From what I've heard he's meant to have a vaguely autistic spectrum disorder, because his defining trait is intelligence and TV writers don't know any other way to represent that.

Originally posted by inimalist
A person normally interacting with a group of friends?

that would be: none that's it?

no hyper attention, egotistical behavior, xenophobia etc etc...

those guys arent really sheldon's friends he just finds them tolerable, leanard is his friend due to circumstance b/c they live together and leanard has a car.

Originally posted by King Castle
that's it?

no hyper attention, egotistical behavior, xenophobia etc etc...

those guys arent really sheldon's friends he just finds them tolerable, leanard is his friend due to circumstance b/c they live together and leanard has a car.

this:

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
From what I've heard he's meant to have a vaguely autistic spectrum disorder, because his defining trait is intelligence and TV writers don't know any other way to represent that.

also: neither hyperattention, egotistical behaviour or xenophobia are mental disorders in any sense.

isn't he supposed to have asperger's syndrome?

Breakout Character Syndrome.

Originally posted by FistOfThe North
whoa. i read the first couple of pages and printed that out. now that's a piece you take your time with and delve into for the evening. thanks Mindship.No problemo. Yep, it's a brain churner, though easier to get through than other articles. Also, there are the pertty pictures.

but still. my main thing is whether or not there is a "wall", if not in the universe but the cosmos. and even then, what's beyond this "wall"...God? nah j/k.. In a sense, I suppose one could consider the fabric of spacetime itself a kind of wall that it takes the power of a black hole to punch through. As for what's on the other side...well, could be another universe with another KMC.

negative and positive reinforcement is used to alter behavior through the use of reward/praising and or using pain and physical discomfort.

Mice are subjected to both form of stimuli and quickly learn to change their behavior when shocked.

this leads me to believe that Negative enforcement leads to quicker behavior change under certain conditions. it is used almost exclusively in military boot camp and i see no reason why a mild form of it cannot be used on children with behavior problems or "minor" supposed autistic behavior.

Originally posted by King Castle
negative and positive reinforcement is used to alter behavior through the use of reward/praising and or using pain and physical discomfort.

this is not the definition of negative reinforcement.

Positive reinforcement is: the adding or giving of something to a subject to reinforce behaviour

Negative reinforcement is: the removing or taking away of something from the subject to reinforce behaviour

Originally posted by King Castle
Mice are subjected to both form of stimuli and quickly learn to change their behavior when shocked.

being shocked for undesired responses are a form of positive reinforcement, just applied in a reverse paradigm.

This isn't a matter of opinion. You are just confused about how these terms are applied. Dont worry though, it takes 4 years of university for lots of people to understand the difference

Punishment is, generally, a type of positive reinforcement, though things like grounding your child or taking away their toys, time outs, etc, would be negative reinforcement.

Originally posted by King Castle
this leads me to believe that Negative enforcement leads to quicker behavior change under certain conditions. it is used almost exclusively in military boot camp and i see no reason why a mild form of it cannot be used on children with behavior problems

potentially. However, in terms of punishment, it is just not a good type of motivator. For instance, what behaviour is a person learning when they are avoiding displeasurable consequences? certainly, in terms of children, they are not learning that they should behave in a desired manner, but in fact, only to avoid being punished for doing bad things.

the research on this is essentially unequivical, and has existed since the 70s

Originally posted by King Castle
or "minor" supposed autistic behavior.

this is disgusting

you are suggesting a type of corporal punishment for behaviour that a child has no control over

there is no argument on this point, punishment would have zero benefit for this person

tomatoes, tomatos..

http://www.mcli.dist.maricopa.edu/proj/nru/nr.html

mild autism can go undiagnosed and parents can be completely ignorant of the child condition and may view it as just an unruly child whose behavior can be and has bn altered by parental punishment leading from time outs, one on one sessions, physical punishment and or cold baths.

ok, but those tactics, imho, are akin to child abuse

only b/c you are not black or brown or asian or the average non suburbia white american.

i am tired of hearing kids being wrongfully diagnosed with autism behavior by lazy or stupid shrinks, which can be fixed with threat of punishment or actual interactions.

My nephew who is only 5 was said to have some mild form of autism b/c he didnt speak around strangers and whatnot..

A) he was and is only 5.

B) he was taught not to talk to strangers

C) he did not talk to authoritative ppl.. Doctors, teacher(pricks).

D) he was shy at pretty women/girls which what young guys or adult males arent.

E) he didnt like being talked down to like a baby or being pinched.

F) he didnt normally interact with the kids his age b/c he said they were too childish and acted like babies. he is very intelligent.

G) his parents were separating and he didnt like the fighting, hence he was quiet out of some screwed up sh#$ parents were doing.

he wasnt autistic.

all it took is me being around him and teaching him how to talk to people, flirting being confident cracking jokes at @$$hole ppl and asking him when he would shut down why he was doing it.. which he answered the above.

Originally posted by King Castle
only b/c you are not black or brown or asian or the average non suburbia white american.

i am tired of hearing kids being wrongfully diagnosed with autism behavior by lazy or stupid shrinks, which can be fixed with threat of punishment or actual interactions.

My nephew who is only 5 was said to have some mild form of autism b/c he didnt speak around strangers and whatnot..

A) he was and is only 5.

B) he was taught not to talk to strangers

C) he did not talk to authoritative ppl.. Doctors, teacher(pricks).

D) he was shy at pretty women/girls which what young guys or adult males arent.

E) he didnt like being talked down to like a baby or being pinched.

F) he didnt normally interact with the kids his age b/c he said they were too childish and acted like babies. he is very intelligent.

G) his parents were separating and he didnt like the fighting, hence he was quiet out of some screwed up sh#$ parents were doing.

he wasnt autistic.

all it took is me being around him and teaching him how to talk to people, flirting being confident cracking jokes at @$$hole ppl and asking him when he would shut down why he was doing it.. which he answered the above.

Did abusing him help with these problems in some way?

no abusing is not the same as punishment.

but like all things there are consequences to his actions when he would act out violently which his parents would not implement. i had no problem implementing it as it was how i was raised.

stop crying, now..( serious face, eye contact).
bam he stop.

Originally posted by King Castle
no abusing is not the same as punishment.

but like all things there are consequences to his actions when he would act out violently which his parents would not implement. i had no problem implementing it as it was how i was raised.

stop crying, now..( serious face, eye contact).
bam he stop.

Okay, did that do anything to help him in the long term?

yes, with the added reinforcement of the hand raise ready to strike.

he toughen up and doesnt cry from the mundane anymore.. like being pushed(while playing soccer), forced to socialize, and just out right teasing him or mildly hitting him with a ball or a light tap.

he is not afraid of heights and jumping into padded cushions in his gymnastic class.

when he doesnt like something he doesnt shut down or start crying but tells ppl what he doesnt like and why like his parents fighting. he is more confident.

he is also aware of physical pain when he misbehaves so he avoids having tantrums and can tell the difference between escalation of pain and simple irritants.

i guess for the loooong run we'll have to wait till he is an adult, late teens or early 20's

the goal was if he acts more mature he more often then not will be treated accordingly.

yes, because the "speak sternly and make eye contact" approach has never been applied in research.

I'll get a nobel for this!

did they reinforce it with i will hurt you i am not playing around icy stare?

its more then acting its actually immersing yourself.

it works on adults just as well.. cops, judges, manager.. etc etc..

instead of the the i will hurt you stare its the you will die stare.

also it can be further strengthen with a raised hand with adults a gun or knife within reach.. remember you have to go through with it if they test you which is what makes it convincing in the 1st place you cant act it out you have to live it.

http://www.tvovermind.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/dexter5.jpg

yes

trust me, you aren't proposing anything new

from a psychological view, most of what you are saying is demonstrably untrue, if not outright rubbish

when they test you slap across the face.. then they start crying b/c you gave them something to cry about.

then you tell them if they want another to keep on crying. eventually they will stop before you do.

= child abuse

i guess majority of america should be locked up along with various other countries.

55% of parents have slapped or spanked their children. .

yes, if most of the people in America hit their children, they are guilty of child abuse

your hyperbole is nonsensical though. So you think that because I am against the unavoidable psychological issues that come with corporal punishment, I also feel there should be some state run intervention which breaks up homes by locking people in jail?

both hitting and breaking up families are bad for kids. you don't think their are solutions that aside from jail?

Originally posted by inimalist
yes, if most of the people in America hit their children, they are guilty of child abuse

your hyperbole is nonsensical though. So you think that because I am against the unavoidable psychological issues that come with corporal punishment, I also feel there should be some state run intervention which breaks up homes by locking people in jail?

both hitting and breaking up families are bad for kids. you don't think their are solutions that aside from jail? there are. but, i think that there are easier solutions to certain problems one being pain, fear, physical and psychological dominance for a desired response.

Originally posted by King Castle
only b/c you are not black or brown or asian or the average non suburbia white american.

i am tired of hearing kids being wrongfully diagnosed with autism behavior by lazy or stupid shrinks, which can be fixed with threat of punishment or actual interactions.

My nephew who is only 5 was said to have some mild form of autism b/c he didnt speak around strangers and whatnot..

A) he was and is only 5.

B) he was taught not to talk to strangers

C) he did not talk to authoritative ppl.. Doctors, teacher(pricks).

D) he was shy at pretty women/girls which what young guys or adult males arent.

E) he didnt like being talked down to like a baby or being pinched.

F) he didnt normally interact with the kids his age b/c he said they were too childish and acted like babies. he is very intelligent.

G) his parents were separating and he didnt like the fighting, hence he was quiet out of some screwed up sh#$ parents were doing.

he wasnt autistic.

all it took is me being around him and teaching him how to talk to people, flirting being confident cracking jokes at @$$hole ppl and asking him when he would shut down why he was doing it.. which he answered the above.

Well the thing is that no child, autistic or not, should be physically or mentally abused, which some of the things you said definitely are.


And if you now say it's not abuse and that you went through it and turned out fine then I rest my case.

lets be honest who here hasnt bn punished, spanked, slapped and whatnot by their parents?

Originally posted by King Castle
there are. but, i think that there are easier solutions to certain problems one being pain, fear, physical and psychological dominance for a desired response.

so essentially a PsyOps terrorism campaign against your child?

ya, that doesn't sound abusive at all

Originally posted by King Castle
there are. but, i think that there are easier solutions to certain problems one being pain, fear, physical and psychological dominance for a desired response.

The only context I can see those as a good thing would be an S&M scene, also not something you should do with your children.

Originally posted by inimalist
so essentially a PsyOps terrorism campaign against your child?

ya, that doesn't sound abusive at all

You know, he might be joking about that. Because nothing is funnier than child abuse apparently.

it can be funny. Like if the kid has freckles

his sarcasm was lost on me though, if that is the case

Originally posted by King Castle
lets be honest who here hasnt bn punished, spanked, slapped and whatnot by their parents?

I


Not that it matters, what you are describing is actually more like elaborate torture than a slap on the butt.

Originally posted by inimalist
so essentially a PsyOps terrorism campaign against your child?

ya, that doesn't sound abusive at all worked for me..



it kept me on my toes when moms wasnt around also allowed me to teach my brother life lessons that i went through without having to go through the punishment himself.

help me be a better person and pass it on to my brother.

my childhood taught me respect toward women which nowadays i find lacking in the modern youth. aside from the internet machismo jabs i am a gentleman due to respect and inherent fear of my mother kicking my @$$ no better life lesson.

side note i notice that certain suburban ppl who joined the military in the same unit with me were more likely to disobey orders or test their limits when superiors werent around then the ppl who came from less then perfect parenting which involved hitting.

also they did not cry when yelled at in boot camp they were less "soft"

not a study just a personal observation..

oh, ok, right, because you are of the mindset that non-aggressive, well adjusted and socially appropriate people are soft.

no, that makes sense. if you want to raise people most suited to be robotic killers, then hit them all you want

Originally posted by King Castle
worked for me..


No it didn't, you obviously have some major issues. You don't seem to have developed any empathy at all.

My parents used to take a rod to my ass all the time. I remember running out of the house and getting chased by my mom.

I've always wondered if that might have had any lasting effects.

Originally posted by Bardock42
No it didn't, you obviously have some major issues. You don't seem to have developed any empathy at all. i have empathy.
just not all encompassing. you ppl seem to think i take "punishment" to the extreme rather then what it was, a threat of slap, spank maybe send to my room without my favorite food, raised voice.

now i believe in escalation of force with children and adults it isnt a straight slap and beating and psychological threat of violence but teaching them consequences for their actions.

my nephew was pretty easy there was no extreme level of behavior modification due to punishment and what little of it it was mild.

he suffered more from his parents yelling at each other and their interaction and pampering and fear of punishing him due to being used against each other in the divorce settlement then how i treated him.

i treated him like a person and spoke to him like one when he misbehaved. which was rare since his problem was social and how he responded when he shut himself off..

he was shown love from both me and my mom and not the suburbia BS of "mister you need a time out" "no ice cream for you" "we can wait till you are done"..

that kid went his early life without ever being punished or voice raised.

everything he did was scheduled by both parents... while they watch over him like a hawk as if he was a lab rat... that is more harmful and cause for his self concious behavior that even i could see. what he needed was real stimuli not preplanned psych BS..

playing soccer with kids being taught sports by his parents to get him to develope his interactions skills.

is there an anti life equation?

Originally posted by Colossus-Big C
is there an anti life equation? you've asked that question before in one of your own threads. the answer is that their is no mathmatical equation that would grant you absolute obedience of the universe. nor is a possibility short of your fantasy world.

Originally posted by King Castle
you've asked that question before in one of your own threads. the answer is that their is no mathmatical equation that would grant you absolute obedience of the universe. nor is a possibility short of your fantasy world. how do you know that? do you know every single equation in exstance?

imo theres very well a creation equation and a anti life equation

Originally posted by Colossus-Big C
how do you know that? do you know every single equation in exstance?

What is anti-life? Do you mean something that would kill you?

Originally posted by Colossus-Big C
how do you know that? do you know every single equation in exstance?

imo theres very well a creation equation and a anti life equation
What possible mechanism could lead to an equation granting someone powers?

Originally posted by King Kandy
What possible mechanism could lead to an equation granting someone powers? for all you could know our universe could just be an experiment by some being of a higher plane of existance
there equations probably are unconcievable to us

just look at mxy from the 5th dimension, his 5d tech gives him reality warping powers in the 3d

Originally posted by Colossus-Big C
how do you know that? do you know every single equation in exstance?

He doesn't need to know that. The whole idea is pretty silly when you get right down to it.

.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
He doesn't need to know that. The whole idea is pretty silly when you get right down to it. remember the guy that said the world was round? and they called him silly and killed him?

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
What is anti-life? Do you mean something that would kill you?

It's an idea from the comic book setting The Fourth World, by Jack "The King" Kirby. He decided that his ultimate evil (representing despotism) needed a grand goal. He picked total destruction of free-will as that goal and a vaguely defined "equation" as the mechanism. He called it the Anti-Life Equation on the argument that if your ability to choose is taken away you are as good as dead.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
What is anti-life? Do you mean something that would kill you? here you go
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Life_Equation

http://media.comicvine.com/uploads/0/8190/272587-90772-darkseid_super.jpg

Originally posted by Colossus-Big C
remember the guy that said the world was round? and they called him silly and killed him?

No they didn't. When Democritus suggested that the world was round he did so with proof of his claim in hand and people believed him.

Originally posted by King Castle
here you go
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Life_Equation

http://media.comicvine.com/uploads/0/8190/272587-90772-darkseid_super.jpg

"The Anti-Life Equation is the fictional equation for which the DC Comics villain Darkseid..."

The answer is NO!

Originally posted by Colossus-Big C
for all you could know our universe could just be an experiment by some being of a higher plane of existance
there equations probably are unconcievable to us

just look at mxy from the 5th dimension, his 5d tech gives him reality warping powers in the 3d
Mxy is a fictional character. Get a grip.

Originally posted by King Kandy
Mxy is a fictional character. Get a grip. how do you know there isnt something like him?

Originally posted by Colossus-Big C
how do you know there isnt something like him?

The question should be, why do you think there is?

If we go with "anything is possible" then we can ignore Myx anyway because it exactly as possible that something exists that undoes everything he tries to do.

its always so weird to see what constitutes "science" to the layperson

I get the same thing whenever I follow science news stories in the Economist on Facebook.

Originally posted by Colossus-Big C
how do you know there isnt something like him?
That's asking to prove a negative.

why is heavy water the performed liquid for nuclear reactors?

stop feeding the troll poeple

Originally posted by King Castle
why is heavy water the performed liquid for nuclear reactors?

slows down neutrons better than normal water, allowing them to cause the desired nuclear reaction more easily

Originally posted by King Castle
why is heavy water the performed liquid for nuclear reactors?

It's a "neutron moderator". Basically a nuclear power plant work by generating neutrons which break apart atoms and release more neutrons. In order for this to happen you need to slow down the neutrons, deuterium is very good at that.

Because it's toxic (and you can use the tremendously cheaper substance of normal water) heavy water isn't very popular these days.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
It's a "neutron moderator". Basically a nuclear power plant work by generating neutrons which break apart atoms and release more neutrons. In order for this to happen you need to slow down the neutrons, deuterium is very good at that.

Because it's toxic (and you can use the tremendously cheaper substance of normal water) heavy water isn't very popular these days. what's being used now?

Originally posted by King Castle
what's being used now?

Normal water. It not quite as good but it's way cheaper and won't poison the environment if you spill it.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Normal water. It not quite as good but it's way cheaper and won't poison the environment if you spill it. interesting that heavy water is toxic, isnt it found in the antarctic or somewhere along those lines?

plus wouldnt the water become toxic radioactive once its bn used in cooling the radioactive rods?

which makes me ask does the water vapor that non hazardous that it is put back into the atmosphere?

Originally posted by King Castle
interesting that heavy water is toxic, isnt it found in the antarctic or somewhere along those lines?

Atoms of deuterium are found in all water, unless you take the time to remove them, at a harmless concentration. I guess "toxic" isn't the right word, but most animals become sterile if they have to live for long on a 50% concentration or more and die not to much above that.

You could probably dump it most places safely but unless you were cartoonishly evil why would spend money to produce the stuff at all when the material you use to make it is also pretty effective?

Originally posted by King Castle
plus wouldnt the water become toxic radioactive once its bn used in cooling the radioactive rods?

I was thinking more about during shipping.

I'm not sure how well water stays irradiated. There was a craze for irradiated water at one point that was completely harmless because the water shed its radiation before it reached the consumers. But that's probably on the order of days or weeks after making it.

Originally posted by King Castle
which makes me ask does the water vapor that non hazardous that it is put back into the atmosphere?

I'm not sure what you're asking. The steam that comes from the cooling towers of nuclear plants certainly isn't irradiated to a harmful degree.

k, thx for the explanation. i am content. now back to my cold fusion experiment ..*whistle as i walk*

the toxicity of heavy water is generally exagerated though, not pointing fingers or anything, lol

for instance, you could drink a glass of it with no ill effects

Not sure if this is the thread for it but, how would I calculate the Pounds per square inch of force across a surface?

For example, smaller surfaces such as the point of a sharp needle exerting different force than that of a blunt object over a surface area?

Originally posted by Burning thought
Not sure if this is the thread for it but, how would I calculate the Pounds per square inch of force across a surface?

For example, smaller surfaces such as the point of a sharp needle exerting different force than that of a blunt object over a surface area?

If you know the force and the area it's pretty easy. Divide the force by the area and you get the answer in (units of force) per (units of area).

1lb of force across 1in^2 is 1psi
1lb of force across .002in^2 is 500psi

The word "per" can always be read as "divided by", just like "of" can always be read as "multiplied by".

Thank you, how would I for example find the area of a pin tip, or other small areas? a knife edge? just in case you know?

Originally posted by Burning thought
Thank you, how would I for example find the area of a pin tip, or other small areas? a knife edge? just in case you know?

A pin tip is basically a circle (pi * radius^2) and a knife edge is just a rectangle (length*width). To get the measurements you would need to buy a very good quality caliper as well as a normal tape measure for the length of the knife blade.