It would be greatly beneficial to mankind. I trust the Scientists' judgements. After all, it didn't blow up TOO badly last year, right ?
[ 3 ] 60%
Might be interesting, but not sure we are ready yet.
[ 2 ] 40%
We should try frying meat with those high particle beams first before attempting collision, and have a HUGE BBQ. If they can't control it well enough to keep the meat from burning to a crisp, time to re-think the project.
[ 0 ] 0%
Who cares if Geneva gets sucked into instability. It's not as if it's a whole country anyways.
[ 0 ] 0%
Total Votes : 5
darryl
Posted: Wed Nov 25, 2009 4:14 pm
RegularJoined: 25 Jun 2008Posts: 2124
yes, im an all or nothing type.
relativity is a path. the path where all the other forces meet and a brief equality is created..both or multiple powers benefit from this unequal equality..unequal because one force will always be overpowering the other until a certain point is reached..the relative ground.
it is my belief that which we call electromagnetism is a multifarious force that has an extraordianarly high degree of difference in its actions upon electrons and protons .
i believe that everyone is wrong in how the see the universe. and what einstein and newton and maxwell and faraday and telsa gave us where only a ground work for the tree to begin. they found nothing but the forces and one man saw a path through the forces.
now comes the time to show what the forces are doing. weve discovered the ocean and the path..now is time to set sail.
it is my belief everything else is childs play.
so to get stuck in the mud about why im saying something or who im pissing off..really has no value to me.
darryl: it is my belief that which we call electromagnetism is a multifarious force that has an extraordianarly high degree of difference in its actions upon electrons and protons
Yes. Well... certainly. You, and myself, and...most of the people I've ever associated with who've had any education in Physics to begin with...throughout my life...
At least. IF you mean, by its responses in association to influencing and associative factors. And, of course, in TURN, in its ability to "create" influencing factors and some 'interesting' reactions in wide variety, relative to its input.
Which, I guess, I am assuming that you mean, in the process.
It appears also, by Laddo's previous posting, that he has perhaps had similar experience along such regards. But I am just guessing here. I DO have a difficult time imagining much formalized education without such already incorporated, however.
So -- what are you saying ? Are you claiming that no one believes or takes into account such things, nor has considered such before ?
Quote:
darryl: i believe that everyone is wrong in how the see the universe. and what einstein and newton and maxwell and faraday and telsa gave us where only a ground work for the tree to begin. they found nothing but the forces and one man saw a path through the forces.
Ok. So, "Everyone" is wrong in regards to their ideas of how they see the Universe. Does this mean All of the People in the World Everywhere ?
Or, is this just referring to those Scientists you named ?
Which One Man ?
Last edited by Kyaela on Wed Nov 25, 2009 4:44 pm; edited 1 time in total ~ Light is Relative to the Observer ~
My apologies for attempting to decipher and understand what you were trying to say. I really did not understand your "point". Nor, who you were referring to in the process. Why I questioned such things.
Kyaela: My apologies for attempting to decipher and understand what you were trying to say. I really did not understand your "point". Nor, who you were referring to in the process. Why I questioned such things.
Quote:
lorax: its just you keep doing the same thing over and over.
if you KNOW everthing, stop questioning me as if you know everything.
i KNOW your theories, they are the same as everyones BECAUSE you all buy into the same theory.
if you wanted to hear what i had to say, you woulda LISTENED instead of TOLD
which makes it obvious that you ARENT interested and just pulling my leash.
Of course I listened, and I 'fed back' what I heard from you so far, as well as related it in order to try to find associative grounds for communication, then I QUESTIONED the specifics as to your intentions. Because I wanted to know your "point" with such in consideration.
The question marks might well have been an indicator.
So. If such was true. Why then, did I even ask those questions to begin with ?
And. Well. Gosh. Thank You for assuming that you KNOW MY theories, and clumping them into those of "Everyone Else", by the "across the board" belief of "Everyone Buying into the Same Theory".
Just because there are relative points in education and history, for a BASIS, does NOT mean "Everyone" has necessarily drawn the SAME conclusions.
At least now, you answered ONE of my questions.
You DID mean "Everyone in the World" in your base assumption in that you have "read Everyone's mind" in the process, it seems. You somehow "knowing" what ALL Of us think, EVERYONE in the WORLD, PLUS our personal conclusive determinations in the process.
So, since you are now a "god"...
Just Keep "defending yourself" on my SUPPOSEDLY JUST "yanking your chain", which is, AGAIN, another erroneous conclusion you have jumped to, indicating, as well, what you THINK of me and my intentions in the process --- while making utterly delusional statements such as the above.
I WAS going to "leave you the fuck alone", but since you WANT to keep FLINGING out truly (I won't say it what) assumptions such as those ----
I am going to give myself an allowance to defend against them. As well as be 'honest' with you, as to what I TRULY think regarding your 'mind-reading' abilities of "Everyone in the World" in the process, which, also, rather offensively, includes myself.
Not intended personally, mind. Just for honesty's sake. So you know how I feel upon that particular subject.
Quote:
darryl: dont take it personal. you, as i was probably doing, just PISSED Me off.
I was not taking your 'ending the discussion' "personally".
I was never "pissed off".
The most emotion I felt was a bit of frustration that you would toss out statements without seeming to listen, mainly in the "Lightbulb of the Future" thread, and, just in attempting to communicate in general.
Right NOW, UNLIKE before, you might be accurate in saying that I am feeling "Caustic", and hold some "Derision" in my statements.
Due to what you have tossed out, and, how I am receiving such.
And. Since I am dealing with brutal honesty.
I ALSO have felt some emotion in how much of a rift is being/has been created between us.
And, well, such has been for quite a while. And, it has become "acute" today.
And. So there are NO erroneous assumptions involved while YOU go about trying to 'pass claim' upon determining MY thoughts and emotions as you seem inclined to do in your 'omniscient manner'... which has failed miserably SO far...
Nor mixed up interpretations vs. intentions which occur naturally enough even when people DO communicate "wellish" and do NOT make such claims as to "reading other people's minds" in the process ---
darryl wrote:
einstein loved god. why do all great scientists love god so much and all wretched little pukes involved in science these days consider themselves atheists.
Einstein didn't love god like you say. Moron.
Quote:
"I believe in Spinoza's God, who reveals Himself in the lawful harmony of the world, not in a God Who concerns Himself with the fate and the doings of mankind."
Quote:
"I have repeatedly said that in my opinion the idea of a personal God is a childlike one. You may call me an agnostic, but I do not share the crusading spirit of the professional atheist whose fervor is mostly due to a painful act of liberation from the fetters of religious indoctrination received in youth."
Quote:
... The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this. These ... interpretations are highly manifold according to their nature and have almost nothing to do with the original text. For me the Jewish religion like all other religions is an incarnation of the most childish superstitions. And the Jewish people to whom I gladly belong and with whose mentality I have a deep affinity have no different quality for me than all other people. As far as my experience goes, they are also no better than other human groups, although they are protected from the worst cancers by a lack of power. Otherwise I cannot see anything 'chosen' about them.
You're so stupid.
All I know is that every time I even mention quantum computing my cat gets nervous and absolutely refuses to get in the box.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Regular
Joined: 29 May 2006
Posts: 3691
Regular
Joined: 05 May 2006
Posts: 8656
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Regular
Joined: 27 Jun 2007
Posts: 915
