Jump to content

jfoldbar

Senior Members
  • Content Count

    76
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

11 Neutral

About jfoldbar

  • Rank
    Meson

Profile Information

  • Favorite Area of Science
    all

Recent Profile Visitors

1793 profile views
  1. jfoldbar

    Questions to Ask

    im not too sure i can see what this thread is about. the construct of 'belief' or the meaning of life/god. but my 2 bobs worth on both it probably doesnt make sense, but me personally i dont like the word 'believe'. it annoys me. i dont understand its function. i dont want to 'believe' something. anything. i would prefer to remain neutral until evidence comes along. when we as humans 'believe' something, and the evidence comes along that our belief was incorrect, we are actually more likely to believe it. this has been shown by numerous studies. so im of the frame of mind to try to remove the human error part. the belief. and just wait until evidence presents itself either way. who knows if there is a god or not. we cant prove it either way. we can be quite sure though that if there is a god, he has not contacted us as the religious teachings we have in the world today are easliy disprovable. so if god is real, then the meaning of life is to be the butt of cruel god jokes. as there is no evidence that he is anything but cruel. if there is no god, then there is no meaning apart from what we make ourselves.
  2. ive been having a philosophical debate with someone about the concept of who is to blame in an example. imagine a scenario where 2 neighbors have an issue. the neighbors generally get on very well until now. joe is happily washing his car when greg from next door comes strait over and starts screaming at him about a noisy party he supposedly had last weekend. greg kicks the tire of joes car a few times in anger. in retaliation joe starts arcing up and goes over and kicks gregs tire. he misses the tyre and kicks the panel, causing damage. and of course the problem escalates from there. joe could have handled the situation different, but in anger he acted the way he did which resulted in the car damage, which resulted in the problem growing. an analogy i like is " greg made a fire, but instead of joe putting water on the fire, he put petrol" in a situation, who is generally considered at fault. the person who made the fire, or the person who put the petrol.? why/why not?
  3. im a tradie who has spent his life with all kinds of tools. we often take for granted the thought that goes into designing most of these tools. so i was drilling heaps of holes into stone last week. something ive done many times but not really thinking bout it. i tried a different drill bit and was surprised how different it was. so then i got thinking about the science behind drill bit design and how i can learn more about it. after all, knowledge means being able to better choose the right tool for the job. ive tried to find a youtube vid about this but cant. specifically id like to learn,for example, why/how the spirals are different shapes and angles, and the tungsten is different on different stone/concrete bits. can anyone steer me towards a video or something. only really about the tungsten drill bits.
  4. arc. thanks for the detailed answer. the shorter engine is totally plausible. while the 5.2L 4 cyl is much bigger in size, it is a bit shorter in length. its more cube shaped rather than long like the 6 cyl. not sure bout the turbo spooling up. my isuzu is variable vane turbo which starts spooling up at about 800rpm. my landcruiser has an aftermarket old school turbo that doesnt really spool up till about 1200 rpm. it is however a very low psi turbo which hardly increase the power at all. UD had a truck about 10 years ago, which is almost the same specs as my isuzu, except its a 6cyl instead of a 4 cyl, and it is noticibly more responsive below 1200rpm. i wonder if its something like, less pistons means less rings, which means less end gap. less injectors. less valves. different ratio of heat loss. simpler fuel delivery.
  5. well, i can tell you that my landcruiser has much more power at low revs than my isuzu. the isuzu lags until it gets to about 1500rpm. the cruiser has power at 600rpm.
  6. im curios about engine piston sizes and why it is done. i have 2 vehicles. 1 is a toyata landcruiser 4.2 diesel strait 6. its about 25 yrs old. i have recently bought a new isuzu truck with a 5.2 liter 4 cyl. something i wonder is why are the truck makers seeming to go for larger pistons than 20 years ago. so why do isuzu have a 4 cyl motor when a 5.2 liter could easily be a 6 cyl.
  7. jfoldbar

    the soul

    uuummm, inappropriate how? if you ask me i think the whole "believing" thing is inappropriate in the 21st century. but hey theres still plenty of em here
  8. jfoldbar

    the soul

    so i was thinking about the "soul" concept and i have a few questions for any people that may believe we have a soul. as i do not. soul believers claim that when we die, the soul leaves the body and goes to heaven, or hell. so, im wondering, when and how did the soul enter the body? was it at birth, or conception, or when. if its at birth, what about a premature birth, or induced somehow. if its at conception, what if the mum has a miscarriage or some other complication. and where is the soul before it enters the body? and how how does gods cataloguing system decide which soul goes to which body? and does every human have one? what about spastics and down syndrome etc. im sure there are humans out there who have less brain capacity than a monkey, do they have a soul? if not, why not. if so, then why wouldnt a more intelligent monkey have one? boy, there are just so many problems with the whole "soul" concept.
  9. so, if i understand you correctly, maths and science may clash in this scenario. imagine i have 1 million red marbles. i put 1 marble each into 1million small sealed containers. i didnt leave the room so the containers were not tampered with. when im finished i randomly pick up a container and open it. maths says the marble inside is still red. but science says its possible it is now blue. is this correct?
  10. this also then means that 1+1 doesnt always equal 2. in the whole universe there may be a place where, if you had 2 apples and i gave you 1 apple you dont absolutely have 3 apples (excluding things like you lost it or ate it), because, i have had this discussion with a friend, and he " suggest that mayby "facts" are just what the majority of people can agree on." we can say its a fact that if i dont eat for 3 weeks i will be hungry, but is it really a fact, or is it something that 99.9% of us can agree on so we deem it a fact. then, what agreement percentage is required for something to change from a belief to a fact? i suspect, though, that there is no actual line between the 2. so in the grey fuzzy area where they meet, this then could mean the definition of what is "true/fact" can and will be different for some people. some peoples fact may not be another persons fact. btw, my answer to my friend when he said that was, "99% of children believe in santa, so since they mostly agree, by your definition of fact he must be true". so, im thinking the definition of fact must be a bit different to what he thinks.
  11. are you saying then that we dont actually know we will get hurt, but we calculate the chances of getting hurt based on past experience?
  12. thanks for replies guys.
  13. i hear you guys. but if knowing is 'having high confidence' then that means the religious person 'knows' that god exists, and children 'know' that santa is real. religious peoples confidence is so high that they can often die for what they 'know'. i argue to them that i 'know' that if i jump off a cliff im gunna hurt myself. but do i actually 'know' this or do i 'believe' it based on the idea that if everyone on earth decided to jump off that cliff almost every single one of them would get hurt, and the ons(s) that didnt were lucky. those one(s) could argue that i didnt actually know it but believed it with great confidence is there a definitive line between knowing and believing or is it just a scale certainty based on our previous experiences. but, the believers of this world will argue that our belief in a testable scientific theory is still just that, a belief. i accept that 1+1=2. but there are people who would argue that is a belief, and that we dont really know for 100% sure, only 99.9% so, back to the cliff analogy, if i use the averages of people getting hurt to calculate my chances of getting hurt, i can know with high confidence that i will get hurt. similarly, the believer can use the averages of the people who have a high level of confidence in their beliefs, to support their beliefs as being true. ie, can 10+ billion people all be wrong?
  14. thans for the reply prometheus. but i realised from your response that i didnt explain my question too good. i get what you mean about the psychology of the guy trying to break the combination, totally makes sense. but i was asking in a purely mathematical point of view. but i guess from this you think that a brain dead unthinking person, or a random machine,s chance are the same regardless of how the lock is arranged
  15. i have a question for any maths wizz here. something from my real life. i have a toolbox with a padlock that opens via a 4-digit sequence. so, for example 8734. and the padlock opens. so when i lock the toolbox sometimes im a bit lazy and i just move the 4 slot around a bit, without touching the 873. one of the other guys reckons its easier for someone to work out the code to open the lock if i have only moved 1, instead of all 4 of them. is he right? or does the law of averages mean there are still the same chances someone will guess it regardless of how many or few i move.
×
×
  • 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.