Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Dylandrako

  • Birthday 02/11/1993

Profile Information

  • Interests
    electromagnatism, religion/science, light potential, INVENTING
  • College Major/Degree
    k12 high school and Military trainer as tank mech
  • Favorite Area of Science
    Electromagnetism, light potential

Dylandrako's Achievements


Quark (2/13)



  1. Not really satisfied but gave Me a small crumb to nibble on till I get more comments. Plus it kinda rude to shot down someone's ideas or to simply ignore them so I say thanks and then I look into it.
  2. Thanks I'll look into that. The substance doesn't need to be reflective for long. It's a flash and then it's gone. Kinda like a flash bang grenade but without the bang.
  3. (Thumbs up) Especially likes the middle where if you take r science and cause it to stop for whatever reason it will essentially become a religion. To where the person has to believe in it in order to make it "real" again.
  4. What exactly do you mean by transitions?
  5. this is a post with several question that all have to do with the various properties of light that i simply dont know. 1: light travels at approximately 299,792,000 miles per second. this has been proven oven time. however what has not been proven and my first question is, is this speed determined in space where very little to no resistance is or were these measurements take on earth where there is an atmosphere that the light has to travel through and if so what are the 2 measurements for these varying light situations? 2: to the current knowledge of the human populous, light is the fasted thing in the universe and it is impossible to travel faster than light. so my second question is has there already been a way to "harness" light and use it as a means of propulsion? 3: light is, like radio frequencies, a wave. we have been able to reproduce light for several hundreds of thousands of years using various means. my 3rd question is, is there a way to potentially speed up light to make it travel faster and further that it already does? 4: i remember when i was younger that light could be altered to change its course through water and other objects. my 4th question is, how exactly does this work, is it the light itself being pulled or pushed or is it the particles that the light is traveling through that is getting moved? thanks for your time.
  6. im attempting to make a flashlight prototype that is extremely bright and have come up with all the other components needed however i am missing the backing for the filament to adaquately reflect the light without melting. if you know of a substance i could try i would very appreciative.
  7. I was actually trying to think of that word. "Monotheism" thank you. And I never actually thought of science as being a sort of faith needed for it. Then again everything in life that we do has some level of faith so I guess it's just that I wasn't thinking of it at the time. In that sense then it could almost go to the point where science itself is a sort of "religion" as well. Very thought provoking thank you.
  8. I mean all main stream religions. Christianity, catholicism, jewdism, muslum, ext. No one in particular, however I would like to keep the topic strictly to the one god religions if possible.
  9. I would like to see what peoples opinions on religion and science. I was raised for 15 years in a christian house, at which point I was taught to believe the various things that religion has taught me. However after these 15 years i left my home and my church to go serve in the military where my religious beliefs faded and i more looked at the world in a more "logical" manor, this being if you can explain it then its real. since getting out ive thought back on this again and again and have come to the idea that it is no longer science OR religion, but rather science AND religion, in the sense that science is mearly a way for poeple to explain how the "inexplainable", religion, happens. i would like feedback on this thought process and see what exactly other people this of this. both good and bad.
  10. If it's too long to read then this matter isn't for you. There is a lot written because there is a very large idea to discuss. If you don't read it then don't post. Simple solution.
  11. I'm curious and I've been working on a project out of the back of my truck and I'd just like to gather some information that would otherwise take years to get. It's my understanding that if a rusted iron Plat is connected to a positive lead and then dunked into a solution that had a negative lead on it the the rust will be removed from the remaining iron and then a reaction would take place removing the oxygen from the iron. Is this true or am I crazy. I would try the project myself but I have little to no funding for it and nowhere to do it. Also if this is true, is there a certain current needed in order to start this process or how exactly does this work?
  12. I would agree with the majority of what Matt is saying although I would like to push your thought process even further and say that there is no good or bad, pleasure or pain, and that rather life is simply just a series of random act and occurrences that when encountered by certain individuals it is their mind that will determine whether to push that thought toward good or bad, pleasure or pain. And for every person it is different how their mind will take this encounter and perceive it in their own way. This being said every person can encounter the exact same thing and each come out with a different experience and view of the occurance. This has been proven time and time again in investigations where a select few "witnesses" are to testify and the detective has to decide who to rely upon out of a group. This is a little far off but the concept remains. what I am trying to say is that the mind very simply, just takes in information through the senses, processes it, "labels" it and moves on, all in a nanosecond. And so to say that everything is pleasure or pain is simply incorrect. The basic ideas of pleasure and pain only exist in our minds and therefore occurances do not take on these roles and automatically become good or bad pleasure or pain but rather after every nanosecond of existence our mind instantly attaches an emotion to the situation. The situation itself is inert. Completely lacking of anything but the situation and/or occurance. Emotion is human, manmade, artificial, fake. Like in the movie After Earth," The danger is real, the fear is not". As far as labeling the emotion as good or bad I don't believe that they in and of themselves have no moral standing. Again they are simply labels that our mind puts on things to better understand them. Pleasure is the ideal for living. It is not the standard. The simple fact for that is to look at the streets of any major city, not the major streets the slums, the ghetto, the alleyways under bridges, look at the homeless people, the starving people that have lost everything they ever knew to be "pleasure" and are now emotionally wrecked. These people live a life of pain and suffering, some due to their own doing, and their standard is far less then their idea of "pleasure".
  • 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.