Jump to content

Syntho-sis

Senior Members
  • Posts

    402
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Syntho-sis

  1. Read it again. You assumed wrong.

     

    Can you please explain what it meant? It's not coherent.


    Merged post follows:

    Consecutive posts merged

    I did not say capitalism doesn't work. What I was pointing out was the "What Is Seen and What Is Not Seen", as they say in economics. What we see is the high standard of living in United States. What is not seen is the increase of poverty.

     

    Do you not agree that we consume to much resources?

     

    How much is too much? I've met some pretty poor people here in the U.S.

     

    You know about the war on poverty Johnson created? Well my family was directly impacted by that, living in Appalachia (Not that they were all that impoverished, they had a farm and were pretty self-sustained). Poverty still exists in the U.S. at a high level.

     

    I've known people just about as poor as those over in Africa or w/e. The only thing that separates the two, is one lives off the government generation after generation and the other barely even has a government.

     

     

    Not everybody over here has a slab on the mantelpiece, so to speak, I can guarantee you that.

  2. He was in an accident 23 years ago and has been in a vegetative state since. How much detail do you need?

     

    I'd like to know whether the damage was spinal or brain. What kind of accident was it. Was he in a vehicle? Did he fall down the stairs? This he get shot in the back by gangsters? Did he slip and fall and bang his head on a piece of furniture?

     

    I'm just curious.

     

     

    It's the same story all across the globe, dude. My god... :doh:

     

    Your God? haha that's funny. Anyways I thought this was pretty sad. vv

     

    Recently he went to his father's grave for the planting of a tree.

     

    "A letter he wrote was lowered into the grave through a tube," his mother said. "He closed his eyes for half an hour, because he cannot cry."

  3. Well, the Bible is full of references on how to conduct business in a capitalist society. It never says, not once, that people should pool their resources and divide it equally, no matter how much or how little work is done. Rather, there are instances in both testaments that tell us we will reap what we sow, not sow what we reap, take a fair portion and give the rest to sloths.

     

    I couldn't figure out what that meant so I assumed it was a typo. :)

  4. He basically "pulses" his hand while someone else holds it...

     

     

    http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=120762270

    "It was especially frustrating when my family needed me. I could not share in their sorrow. We could not give each other support," he wrote,
    punching the words letter by letter into a touchscreen with one finger held by an assistant
    at the 't Weyerke institute in eastern Belgium.

     

    Pulse? Hmmm this is strange. It doesn't really say anything about the accident he was involved in or how much he was injured.

     

    And what's happened to NPR? They basically wrote the same stuff as AP, seems like NPR would look more into the means by which this guy is communicating. Smells fishy to me..

  5. Because gravity is an attractive force, of course. In other words, it just does.

     

    To say why this is so you would need to deduce gravity from first principles.

     

    Question one: What causes it to be attractive? Why not repelling, or even sometimes both?

     

    Question two: What do you mean by first principles?

  6. Photons have zero rest mass, but are never actually at rest, instead always traveling at c. They have non-zero relativistic mass, all in the form of kinetic energy.

     

    I read some thing where this guy used E=mc^2 to convert sunlight to pounds or something. Like the sunlight to hit Earth in 100,000 years equaled so many pounds. I thought that was kinda strange. For one thing the photons even converted to pounds would need to remain at c in order to have mass? If they were at rest, then they wouldn't have mass..

     

    I have another question though. You say photons have a non-zero relativistic mass, which I'm guessing means that they have a mass that exists relative to something which would probably be the speed of light, correct?

     

    Is there really anything there though? I mean if photons are considered massless, what causes the forces to act upon them? You say acceleration induces gravity, but in order for something to accelerate it must have mass! It's a bit confusing.

     

    Or if you say its just small packets of energy, well then you would have matter and thus mass and thus volume and density.

     

    So maybe photons are just kinetic energy? Like insane_alien said. Caused by the acceleration of the photons.

     

    So it seems to me that:

     

    Photons exists to move, and move to exist?

     

    I'm done ranting. Is that the correct assumption?

  7. Does anyone happen to know why matter when acted on by gravity will always fall towards the source of gravity?

     

    You all know the pool full of jello and the bowling ball analogy. I understand that somewhat, but why doesn't the matter acted on move away from the source? What makes this work the way it does?

     

    And how exactly do gravitons fit in?

     

    EDIT: Does it always fall towards the source? That was an assumption btw, correct me if I'm wrong.

  8. Well almost everyone agrees with you. The singularity is a prediction of general relativity, due to the fact that no known force can at that point counteract the force of gravity. However, in practice it doesn't matter since we can't get any closer to a black hole than the event horizon and still be able to report back. These supposed points of infinite density are always confined to a sphere of finite volume and density that we can't in any way examine the insides of.

     

    Many people take the predicted singularity at the center of a black hole as a failing of general relativity, but then again there's no way to look and see.

     

    Is it possible that there's some unknown force we haven't discovered yet? I'd bet money that elementary particles do some veryyy strange (Not behaving normally) things within a black hole. They are so mysterious and fascinating at the same time.

     

    I just realized something. Since photons are massless (at rest), how is it that they can have density? By definition since there is no mass, there should not be any volume which means density cannot exist if a photon is confined to an infinitely dense point. huh?

     

    But then, on acceleration a photon has mass- because of gravity. Is this a constant value or is it proportional to the force exerted by gravity on it?

     

    How does gravity even affect it in the first place, if there is no mass for it to act on when it is accelerating?

  9. At the center of a black hole lies the singularity, where matter is crushed to infinite density, the pull of gravity is infinitely strong, and spacetime has infinite curvature. This means that a black hole's mass becomes entirely compressed into a region with zero volume. This zero-volume, infinitely dense region at the center of a black hole is called a gravitational singularity.

     

    ^That's pretty much what my book said. Wouldn't an infinite pull of gravity require and infinite mass on which to exert force?

     

     

    How would we know matter exists in infinite density at a singularity though? Maybe it's just an extremely high value?

     

    I mean think about it. What's the maximum density matter can have anyway? What the crap does 'infinite density' even mean on a subatomic level? Are the particles entirely close or do they almost meld within one another?

  10. Society exists for people to help one another.

     

    • Police
    • Firefighting
    • Emergency medicine
    • Roads
    • Refuse control
    • Sewage control
    • Food production
    • Water purification

    These are facets of groups of humans functioning as a society. We can't function strictly as individuals. Each facet is dealt with in different ways; Some are paid for via taxation, others on a per-use basis, some by incorporated enclaves... etc. These basics are none-the-less granted for the good of the whole.

     

    But existence of these facets aren't the only grounds for a society. You can have all of these or none at all, and still have a functioning society. There were 'societies' long before the concept of 'Emergency medicine' came about. Society exists for the mutual benefit of individuals in a human community.

     

    I agree with you, I just didn't wanna leave that point unsaid.

     

    Cheers,

  11. Hi Syntho-sis,

     

    I am interested in both stages of the development (embryo & fetal).

     

    Thanks for the links. The former doesnt really go into muscular-skeletal formation and the wiki article only mentions the following:

     

     

     

    I have a question, since some muscle groups are attached directly to the bone, which of the two is formed first? The muscle or the bone or do both form parallel to one another?

     

    http://www.sdbonline.org/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=23

     

    http://wiki.medpedia.com/Skeletal_System#Bone_development

     

    http://www.uen.org/Lessonplan/preview.cgi?LPid=4016

     

    For this one look under the right hand column that says Prenatel Development: Articles

     

    There are tons of resources there that should be useful for you.

     

    Also, if I'm not mistaken development of the muscles and bones begins intermittently depending on the structures. The heart is one of the structures that form first, and then various bones that make up the spinal column. As far as what you are referring to (Skeletal muscle), I would imagine that bones form originally because they are the support system for the other organs and structures (Every article I've found so far basically just says 'bones and muscles begin to develop.') There should be something within these websites, if I find anything else I'll let you know.


    Merged post follows:

    Consecutive posts merged

    Also maybe Google 'prenatal osteogenesis' or something like that and see what you can locate.

     

    Cheers,

  12. In my frame of mind, I'm in agreement with Bascule - if you're doing something recreational and happen upon a life threatening event, whether it was stupid or just a patch of water on a piece of wood - is it really the rest of society's job to help fix you up?

     

    Please elaborate if you disagree

     

    padren already has, I agree with what he says.

  13. Perhaps now I'll take a less jovial tone... you're repeating hearsay, then washing your hands of it. That is in bad form, sir.

     

    Jovial? I perceived it as sarcasm and belittlement.

     

    It was still a suggestion. I identified my position as uninformed and that the statements made by Fox should be taken with a grain of salt. It's unbecoming for an intellectual like yourself to get his panties in a bunch over something so silly.


    Merged post follows:

    Consecutive posts merged
    Several FOX News memos have shown that they often aim their negative research at liberal targets, which they don't do with conservative ones (and do the opposite with positive research). Is that rational for a "news organization", whether they find something or not? And too often, if they don't find anything, they can always say they're investigating, which to some FOX News viewers means it's a forgone conclusion.

     

    Then you answered my question fairly.

     

    See how simple that was?

     

    *claps*

  14. Well, just so you know there's a huge difference between knowing something and hoping something.

     

    Yes somewhat. For example, I know that it will rain sometime in the near future. I hope that the rain will provide the farmer's crops with adequate hydration so that they can take the crops to market and thus our economy prospers because of it.

     

    Knowing something doesn't always mean that it will actually occur though. Hope is usually an irrational belief that something will occur. (At least that seems to be what you are implying.)

     

    If Fox was hoping ACORN was dirty, was it entirely irrational?

     

    I'm honestly curious about this. Does anyone know what factors contributed to Fox's mistrust of ACORN overtime?

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.