NavajoEverclear

Pre-calc is as far as i've gone. I really enjoyed that course, had an awesome teacher who cursed just like us kids, and was good at teaching, and a book that competantly explained concepts. Did half a year of calc with a teacher that sucked, and was a Smiling Nazi, and the book couldn't do shit to help me make up for what i couldn't absorb from the class. Taking AP Stats this year with a teacher that i hear is awesome, hopefully that'll be fun.

how would we know its expanding to fast for gravity? wouldn't that require us to know how big it is, and isn't that kind of impossible? I'll try to find that program anyhow.

I hear that the big crunch idea is losing credibility, and i want to know why. I really like the idea because it means the universe will survive. In the lame expansion thing it just dissapates and is gone forever. But the crunch idea also makes more sense, to me. What caused the big bang? there must have been a beginning to the beginning, and it would make sense that the bang came from the crunch and it goes around forever. The dissapation idea seems to mean that something (the expanse of the universe) had no cause and will never happen again. If its just to dissapate, how can it have cause? In the bang/crunch idea it just goes on forever, it will never be different so it will keep going on forever. In the other theory is there any possibility of an infinate existence before this expansion of the universe? In that case why would it suddenly just die now? If you say this beginning was the only beginning, then you are saying something came from nothing, and that makes no sense (to my understanding, i presume all who oppose the crunch idea will tell me where my reasoning is flawed in their view)

no problem dude. So my reply was somethin like this: Does stripping pay better than the national guard? That's how i may plan on paying for college if i dont get a scholarship. I guess the advantage of stipping is lower probability of death. Say, if i was a female then i could strip FOR the national guard

not sure what format, i was just burning an audio CD, and it cant be the file, cause the same burn worked on another blank of a different brand.

Its definately the CD, i had one good one from the last batch we bought, and got the stuff i was burning to work on that. I don't think its a BAD batch, cuz it does work on the stereo system, just not any other cd player.

oh yeah i totally really dont care. just something to talk about i guess. i'd be fine if this thread disappeared.

First off, i admit i am an idiot, and i actually respect the authority for censoring me on occasion (talking about the mods on this site of coarse, i hold no such respect for my national government). But since i have nothing better to do i am going to question the authority. Over my time here I have had several posts deleted for being disgustingly off topic. I thought they were at least worthy of remaining for humor. Again i admit my humor is often stupid, so its good you edit me. but since i have nothing better to do . . . However i believe there is an unfair judging system as to which off topic replies are allowed. For instance, in the debate forums, i posted a reply that might be slightly psuedoscience, but really wasn't that long, and was valid view toward the debated subject. It was deleted and now there is a screening of stuff before its allowed onto the debate board. --- i'm not on an ego trip, probably i was not the only person who caused this, but I think i may pride myself in being the last straw. Then i checked out Bloodhounds debate sorta thing about physists and mathmaticians. I most of the replies on the first page, not a single of them pertaining to debate, most of them not even directly mentioning anything about the subject. Why were these off topic posts allowed? I thought that was unfair, leading me to post this thread. If a mod decides to delete this, at least send me a PM explaining why

apologies for an incredibly boring subject, but this is my dilemna at the moment, and sci-forums is the first place i go to solve dilemnas

Burnable CDs i stole from my dads office. I burn, and then i cant access the songs, accept we this fancy five-changer stereo mabobber, and it does work on that, but in any of the other players it doesn't even seem to start spinning. I might be able to figure out by simply asking my dad what kind of CDs that he bought (it doesn't say on them, they are completely blank accept a serial number), but the purchase was crap, probably because he didn't know what he was buying. Like those garbage bags without the ties. My parents need to let me do the shopping, cause no offense but they aren't competent buyers. So do you know what the problem is so i can buy my own blanks and not make the mistake my father evidently did. I didn't even know there were different kinds of cds really.

What the hell are you talking about? You say you studied biology and evolution for years? Then you know how all this works. Look all around you YOU CAN SEE evolution working. It's common sense. I dont completely understand this entropy thing, or why it has to be a universal law, but it doesn't sacrifice evolution. Doesn't it apply to the general disorganization of the entire universe combined? Stars dying out and planets drifting apart? Hopefully to collapse back in and start all over again. You are an intellectual weakling and an idiot and i hope your head explodes. Also, your attempt at diplomacy is terribly aggrivating, disgusting to such a degree that not even I have mastered (and never will thanks to your obscene reverse-motivation). Sugar coating contempt is stupid. Conflict rules, embrace it.

thats deceptive. unclassifiable should mean unclassifiable

That really depends on what you mean by clever. Clever applies to humans, the robots we make probably would NOT be improved versions of humans, they would not think LIKE humans. so you cant really compare them to humans. Like other animals to humans, humans are smart at what we do, but animals are efficient at what THEY do. More so than we would be in their job. The robot's intelligence is mathmatical basically, depending on the purpose of the robot, brilliance is more a matter of speed in operating a few simple strategies. Robots manage speed very easily if they are programed to. So clever depends on how you apply it. It would be much more complex to create a robot capable of carrying competant conversation. So if this is the kind of clever you are talking about, I would agree that we do not have the power to make a machine that rivals our capabilites. Why would you want to? there are plenty of people around to have conversations and such with. But if you were speaking of military cleverness, i would dissagree, it is simply a matter of the money needed to create such powerful machines, but I think the programs to run them would be relatively simple. Everything is simple if you break it down. It just the building up of many simple things that makes something complex. And electronic circuits are more stable than our brains, so in their programmed abilities, it would be very simple to make a robot more effecient than us at a particular task. I would not call this cleverness, cause they do only what they are programed to do.

Does unclassifiable actually mean that it doesn't get recorded? That would be pretty sweet, well of coarse it would suck to do that crappy, but if it isn't recorded, or if it doesn't count against you, at least it causes as little detriment as possible. I think Fs are really stupid, in the case of them counting against the GPA, if no credit is give, i think it should just be wiped of the slate-- not nessisarily not recorded, but that it doesn't count against you. I mean you did slightly more work than nothing, but if that's all the credit you get (none) having it count against the GPA is just a pointless punishment. The GPA should only record what you DID do, not what you didn't do.

I swear this isn't a thread spinoff, cuz i think remember reading in the disclosure that those were illegal or something, it's just a focus for a new thread, spawned from a sidetrack on another thread http://www.scienceforums.net/forums/showthread.php?t=1044&page=2&pp=20 Read replies 24-28, if you want, but at least 27 and 28, since thats the main question. Which ever approach one were to take, we'd need to be more proactive than a handful of complainers expecting that things will magically fix themselves if we simply speak up. But which road to take to improve (or completely change) the system? Buckle down and work with the system, until we gain enough power to make some dramatic changes----- or completely refuse to participate in the flawed system. There are most certainly some very awesome individuals who make the education system not total bullshit. But they are few. If refusing to play the established sytem, i would invite these few to also come, they surely have great knowledge that can be used. --- so just so you know i'm not saying trash the system and everyone in it--- we can use components of it to build the new system. Or should i compromise my intellectual beliefs for a time until i get enough credentials to propose changes gradually by the accepted methods? While this second option sounds reasonable, there seems to be some kind of conflict with my conscience that i cant precisely put my finger on. It's like a little annoying voice i know is saying something important, but i cant tell what. Should i just ignore it and work harder in a system dont really believe in, in hopes that i can one day conquer it? Or can anyone help me figure what the litttle voice is saying, and why, and what should i do about it? Thats the issue, now give me some useful insight or i'll send you to a personal room with a moose!

that depends on what you mean by intelligence. It will be DIFFERENT because our intelligence has come about through evolution, we aren't even totally sure of our own abilities. The abilities of the A.I. will be more measurable. I just hope some retard doesn't invent something capable of killing us all. I bet you we have the technology now to make such an error. At the time what we create might not be able to sustain itself after we're gone, but it would be rather simple to create effective killing machines that slaughter at lightening speed, and a too stealthy to be destroyed before its too late. I have faith that there will always be a few smart people around to have a backdoor save our butts plan for avoiding extinction when the idiots screw up. Hopefully we'll think long and hard before giving A.I. very much power in our lives. I think it would be more beneficial to the preservation of our race to learn how to be self sufficient without being slaves to machines we cant completely control (or if we give them contol/life, not give it such a degree as to jepordize our own existence

Of coarse education is a good thing, but i think we could better take advantage of blessing, by rethinking the system. Of coarse there should be some tests---- but only where it serves a real purpose, such as making sure a doctor is qualified to cut someone open. thats a very good point, i've heard it before and it always makes me rethink my view, but it still seems like there could be a better way. And i just realized, teachers do have a certain amount of freedom with the way they work the system, so maybe my focus should be placed else where than accusing some faceless evil that is somehow oppressing me. But you do got to admit there are buerocrats on the school board that damper those freedoms by making stupid rules, and purchasing useless resources (such as crappy books, my Physics teacher was really pissed of about that) ---- not being a teacher i don't know all the details, but i have heard of several good teachers complain of this. Truth is , i know i need to shape up my work ethic concerning school. Sometimes its hard when i think the work they ask me to do is pointless . . . . but i'm beggining to decide maybe i should just buck up and take it, otherwise everyone only looks at me as a lazy ass, and theres no way i can make any changes if people dont think i'm worth listening to I cant really identify why, but it just feels like i'm sacrificing some kind of integrity when i compromise what i believe so i'll be accepted by society

oh my fricken heck, i need a teeshirt with bush and that quote on it

not sure i know the features of russian women, asian woman i definately love, donno about middle eastern. I think Indian (from India) ladies are especially beautiful

So this started as i was clipping my toenails, and i wondered what prehistoric man did about toenails, and decided he probably bit them (any other primitave tool use would probably cause injury). I do not bite my tonails (i used to when i was little) but i have bitten my fingernails all my life. Is this a behavior left over from evolution? In the case of people that don't bite their nails, are they more evolved? is the differerence enviromental or genetic? i'm guessing genetic, because to me its just natural, i start doing it without thinking. Both my parents are nail biters. If you think this is gross, i'll have you know that some very respectable people are nail biters---- Elijah Wood for one. And he didn't stop for the filming of LOTR, if you look at his nails when he holds the ring, they are very short. This led me to thinking about how many inherited behaviors are eventually weeded out by evolution, and this led me to ponder man's growing power of genetic engineering. I wonder, when the time comes if we have the power, how we may change our own genome, and how we might recklessly delete some of our features that we may again need someday. In the comfort of technology we may overestimate ourselves, and when the shield is removed, find that we are not equipt to survive some very simple challenges. This lead me to an idea for a policy we should keep to prevent genetic engineering disaster: Previous adaptation should never be deleted to make room for new ones, it should remain in addition. Ancient adaptations have obviously been naturally lost in evolution. But what if they hadn't? What if we could still do everything we used to be able to do IN ADDITION to our new abilities. We'd still be able to live in water, what other things would we still be able to do? Is there anyway we can regain all the adaptations "no longer need". We may not need certain adaptations in our common enviroment, but being able to breath under water would prevent drowning. Or what about this warm-blooded thing? If we still had the reptile ablitility to conserve energy at diff. temps, we wouldn't be as likely to freeze to death or get heat exhaustion. The adaptations we got instead of keeping the old ones are good, but the old ones would still be useful.

i think i was talking about those punk teenagers. Don't get me wrong, i love the death and doom scene, but some people are just plain idiots mmmm spontaneous combustion sounds very suitable

I dont know if it ever explains, i think i remember reading an article in which Orson admitted only creating the ansible for the convience of the concept. But anyway, the ansible technology was taken from the Buggers, so that could explain more for why they dont really understand how it works. It just does.

sweet

oh no. it appears you think a lot like me (one of my personalities anyway), how disgusting . . . . by the way, the way in which i believe in God is not the classic way supported by most religions. Well to be precise, i mostly don't think about God's origin, because I don't think its productive to anything. But if i have to, i think God evolved. It seems inevitable as life is constantly evolving and improving that people will become advanced enough to be considered Gods. My spiritual beliefs are more humanistic, than really caring about all that divination crap. And my reason for believing in God is because i love life, and want it to continue after death. And it is because i want this, someday my descendants will evolve into Gods, then come back in time to immortalize my soul . . . . . . (thats meant both serious and humorous at the same time). I know my beliefs are not logical---- but logic has its place, and so does non-logic, and . . . . now i'm going to stop digging this philisophical hole before i fall in and drown in the eternal darkness Embrace the Dichotomy!

plastic surgery is stupid--- unless to reconstruct damage from some horrible accident. I find darker skin very beautiful, as much or more than white (depending on the shade of white), i dont have a particular love of BLACK skin, but i have had a crushes on black girls before. Like Phi said, its ultimately the personality that decides, and determines how they take care of what they are, and then you grow to love their particular physical features, but it all starts with character. if you disagree, i think you are confusing love with lust.