Xyph

Edit: Oops, sorry, the LaTeX on the above post didn't show up for me before. Man, 103 is a tough one.

[math]\frac{4!-\sqrt{4}}{.4} - \sqrt{4} = 53[/math] [math]4! + 4! + \sqrt{4} + 4 = 54[/math] I don't think using constants in any form should be allowed... It defeats the purpose of the game. Why not just leave it as 4 4s, other numbers excluded? Constants will make things far too easy.

The 48 results from 4!+4!, but in any case: If we can use numbers like pi and not have them count towards the 4 4s total, then we could just use [math]\frac{\pi}{\pi}[/math] to get every number.

Numbers apart from 4 aren't allowed.

You still don't need any more temporal dimensions than 1 to have motion. Moving upwards in space isn't the same as choosing a different direction in time, because each of these frames already contain 3 spatial dimensions.

[math]\frac{4!-\sqrt{4}}{.4} - 4 = 51[/math]

Assuming the universe remains a closed system at the Crunch-Bang transition, I'd think the amount of usable energy would be conserved... On the other hand, if some sort of extrauniversal physics come into play at that point, energy might leak out (or even seep in, I suppose). I'm not sure how likely that is, though.

There seem to be a few possible amounts of extra spatial dimensions in string theory. In any case, it seems to me that different inertial frames can all exist in a single temporal dimension. It's not correct that there's a difference of 2 million years between time in the Andromeda galaxy and time in the Milky Way, by the way - there are probably some relativistic effects on the rate of time's flow, but that wouldn't equate to a 2 million year separation of events. Events in galaxies billions of light years apart could still happen simultaneously, it would just take billions of years for observers from one to observe events in the other (assuming an incredibly powerful telescope). A good way to visualize a temporal dimension, I think, is to imagine a set of frames stretching off into the distance - each frame represents the state of the universe at a certain time - the next frame represents a certain unit of time (say, a second) ahead, etc, etc. To have more than one temporal dimension (say, 2), you'd need to stack multiple rows of these frames, and people would be able to pick which temporal direction to travel in. Not which direction as in whether backwards or forwards in time, either - rather, whether forwards or up. This alone would probably make for a very complicated universe, and three time dimensions would be even worse.

Edit: Oops. Miscalculated. That said, [math]\sqrt{4}[/math] probably shouldn't be allowed since it's [math]^2\sqrt{4}[/math] which includes another number, and [math].4[/math] should properly include a 0, as well. Still, they might as well be allowed now, I suppose.

[math]4+4+4-4 = 8[/math]

Nah.

[math]4^{\frac{4}{4+4}} = 2[/math]

Just take comfort in the fact that they'll (maybe) die of lung cancer soon enough.

What you describe seems to be Quantum Teleportation, which has already, in fact, been done (although only with isolated particles, so I'm not sure if the quantum teleportation of something macroscopic would ever be feasible). Someone will probably show up with a more detailed explanation eventually, but for now, as far as I understand it (which is not very much) it seems to involve using a "carrier particle" of some sort to carry the state of one particle to another, which then starts to mimic the properties of the original.

Does it include evolution? I assume it does, since it's based on science, but such has been claimed for a lot that doesn't warrant it, recently. I'm curious about how this could be any different from the the currently accepted theory of human evolution. Is it any different? Other than that, good for you if you're attempting, in some way, to put a stop to the deception practiced by YECs. On this bit, though: Some scientists do this already. To me, though, the problem seems to be that people who aren't interested enough in science to go out of their way to understand it in it's native form probably aren't interested enough to try to understand a greatly simplified version of it either. I remember hearing somewhere that Stephen Hawking's "A Brief History of Time" is something like the most purchased-but-unread book ever, which gives some idea of the situation.

Photons don't have mass, although, apparently, they can be assigned a relativistic mass from their energy (E=mc^2 and all that).

Could you summarize whatever it was he said about hyperspace? Are you sure it wasn't just an analogy to explain the effects of mass on space (and hence, gravity)?

It sounds like you're thinking of spacetime as some sort of aether...

As long as you know the volume of water you started with, it should.

I don't see how what you've described as "the illusion of time" is any different to what most would call "time". What do you think people usually call time? Illusion or not, if there seem to be events that have happened and events that could happen, what do you have other than time? What name would you give the illusion?

It's obviously idiotic and nonsensical, but you can't seem to see that.

I expected you were going to say something like that eventually. If this universe is the only possible result that would allow us to discuss the fact, then it's rather ridiculous to speculate about how unlikely it is, since if things weren't the way they are, there wouldn't be anyone to conclude "Well, this universe isn't a very well designed one. God must not exist after all." There could easily be a vast amount of universes that failed to ever produce life for every one that does, for that matter, but even if there aren't it doesn't make the conclusion you seem to have come to any more logical, since if things hadn't worked out the way they were you wouldn't be able to conclude the opposite.

If there's enough air circulation the atmosphere will be prevented from freezing to the surface or boiling into space as well, although this might make things a bit windier at the terminator.

If you mean by "hyperspace" another space existing adjacent to our 3-dimensional space, then I don't see how it can be anything but a dimension. That said, it's probably not going to be any use to us anytime soon.

Is it possible that our use of fire had something to do with it? This seems to make some sense because animals who were particularly furry would have some difficulty with safely manipulating fire without setting themselves alight, whereas, at the same time, most would try to keep their head and their genitals well away from fire, which would account for the hair that remains.