npbreakthrough

I propose: Chapter 1, Chapter 2, Chapter 3, Chapter 4, Chapter 5, Chapter 6, Chapter 7, Chapter 8, Chapter 9 and finally Chapter 10.

 

Don't decide how many chapters you need before starting to write. You just write what you have to say. Order the information into categories. Each category becomes a chapter.

thanks for your reply,......basically i was just looking for a quick summary of philosophy's most important debates,....i use the "book" idea because i figured it would be a little more fun to answer than just "what are the top 10 philosophy.....etc".....and i was just kidding about writing the book myself,.....i was hoping peoples naming of the chapters would give me a good scope of where i could focus my own pondering. i have thousands of philosophy books and would like to jump right into the most recent and controversial ideas.

If some one were to write a Book, on philosophy and its most important , perplexing , intriguing, and mysterious questions, .....and this book consisted of 10 chapters, one on each greatly debated questions......what would be the names of each chapter?

thanks for your replies,.....so i can get right to work on this book........jk

Philosophy is what philosophers do.............and from time to time,....philosophers crap.

hey buddy,

i am a welder, and trust me, welding aluminum is a pain in the ass,

my honest opinion and advice to you would be to get a welder,

i attempted to MIG and TIG aluminum in welding school and i hate it, i refuse to weld aluminum

but if you have to do it yourself, MIG is your best option

trust me you don't want to get into all the crap involved in TIG, sharpening electrodes, switching currents , forming the electrodes into a "ball" using foot pedal,worrying about melting point......etc

all at the same time, it is horrible......that's why aluminum welders make the large amounts of money you don't want to pay them....

welding is an art form comprised of many stressful considerations, machine settings, all your equipment safety standards and codes, travel angles , the crap is almost too much to list, plus most welds are tested , even x-ray tested for quality ......

as for "poor mans tig machine"......

not a chance, these machines are very precise and for a very specific purpose,.....much more specialized than a car battery.....

GIA - what do you hope to accomplish with your posts on religion? I am a firm atheist and rationalist and have been for many years so my criticism of your posts is not made with a religious perspective; in your posts you seem to be going out of your way to offend and upset those who do believe in god and are members of an established religion, is there a reason for this constant attack? I cannot believe that you are of a mind such that you think religious members of the forum will read your posts and re-examine their faith, they do not raise any interesting or new points, and they use highly inflammatory language; to me they only seem to evince an attitude of snide contempt and mockery, and I am curious why you bother.

i agree,

GIA your posts are boring me to death,

if you cant understand the important role that religion has played in the development of human society

and can only rephrase your misunderstanding of religious precepts into arrogant quips

you'll be none the wiser.

markearthling

im no big evolution fan myself,

i find the mechanism of unguided chance mutation to simply be inadequate to explain the varieties of life and systems withing living creatures,

but understand that science is not interested in the theories that deal with the supernatural

science must try and solve problems with the only tools that science has, and that is the natural

evolution is the only theory currently available that can attempt to explain how all these things happen absent of the supernatural

just because evolution does not explain everything , does not give anybody the right to inject supernatural ideas into scientific query

doing so adds nothing to the debate

science does not necessarily explain things away from the supernatural

and the supernatural explanation is not always needed when natural explanation is inadequate

alright,

thanks for everyone's replies,

as for the title "is the number 1 flawed"

i am not necessarily picking on just this number,

i guess what i was trying to get at was

how inadequate can numbers be when subjected to certain theoretical math

but my questions were answered,

with units and formulas, the strictness of a single digit can be more malleable and useful

and with our ability to create new fields of mathematics we are constantly able to reform our current views

thanks to everyone,

replying to my posts

especially

drrocket

michel123456

soon i will have my 30 posts

and ill be able to move onto the religion and philosophy threads

where i am much better suited

evolution doesn't give animals what they need..........

try and make non-Newtonian fluid

http://www.instructables.com/id/How-To%3A-Make-Non-Newtonian-Fluid-%26-Experiment-wit/

Pure evil

we use mathematics to probe the limits of our universe,

its a philosophical issue that because we can accurately describe our material universe with mathematics , a mathematical basis for our universe is implied,

but what if that is not accurate, and instead our failure to completely understand our universe, even our ability to ever fully understand our universe is because mathematics is too rigid

perhaps the abstract ideas of mathematics invented by man fail because

our universe is more analog then digital (i know analog and digital deal with something else, but its the best analogy i could think of at the moment, digital being mathematics)

http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/159654/20110608/red-bull-killer-stephen-coffeen.htm

http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/159654/20110608/red-bull-killer-stephen-coffeen.htm

What is going on here?

??

i think the magnets on the rail are in a fixed position facing one way,

maybe if you engineered it so each magnet could swivel

That's generally the best practice for systems that need to be secure. You make an "air gap" between the data and the rest of the world, so it cannot leak out or be attacked.

 

Unfortunately most companies and computer users do not follow best practices. If they did, most attacks would never happen.

thanks for your reply,

i figured it would be painfully obvious,

my concern is that in recent weeks, the pentagon has declared that certain cyber attacks could be construed as acts of war,

but if people could steal anything worth going to war over, then it would be our own fault for making that info available.

and the submission of info that sensitive into public servers would constitute some sort of dereliction of duty to begin with,

meaning our government basically invited the intrusion, and failed to keep us safe

it seems to me with new threats of hacking from almost every angle aimed at every conceivable weak point,

wouldn't it be simpler to remove our most sensitive information from servers connected to the internet?

wouldn't it be simpler to remove our infrastructure controls from CPU's connected to the web?

i understand the convenience of having these systems networked, but wouldn't it profit us to use only local networks for systems

that are subject to remote control?

i also understand that im not the first guy to come up with this idea.

does anybody have any idea as to what degree in what areas this idea has already been implemented (im hoping , that most

of our defense contractors and the pentagon already figured this out)

i just prefer my sabotage, and espionage to be of the "mission impossible , drop through the air duct on rope through lasers" variety, as opposed to the "were a bunch of anonymous douchebags" type.

thanks for any replies

np

npbreakthrough , my reply is short and to the point . I am trying to encourage you to take the idea to a physical existence stage , which can lead to two more options , then . You can accept the idea will go no further or you may then notice something you had not noticed before and continue on . You may start to design a door and finish designing a window . I don't need to make myself feel smarter , there are people in these forums who I will learn from and if people learn from me that is also good .

if you were trying to help,

then i apologize,

i may have misinterpreted your tone.....

Thin line between giving sound scientific advise/feedback and just being rude and curt. Give an answer not arrogance. npbreakthrough, got some interesting and straightforward issues within the theory and just some prat that thinks we learn from, well in this case, nothing but a vanity affair!

 

I work in Engineering and think we actually have a brushless engines where the magnets don't actually move on the outside of a stator but the coils rotate in the middle. They use drag however as P.W.M squere 3 pilses, just like a Squirell Cage set-up. Not forgetting the very fact that energy is dissipated as the force is reduced. All magnets have a maximum energy product (Mega Gauss oersteds). Although they still hold a lot of force inthier own right when dying out not enough to influence another body, even another magnet. even the most powerful and expensive ( NdFeB) magnets max out at less than 50 MGOe. Further more all losses in energy are actually incurred by these 33%-66% concept magnet devices alone, the energy consumed in the overall manufacturing process is 20-25 times the actual output.

 

This is a good, but old read that may help

 

http://www.ldolphin.org/zpe.html

thanks for the reply and the link,

its a little over my head

but i gather from it that the magnets are not efficient enough at this point

heard.

I think 4, because the most basic building blocks of genetic code are the nucleotides, the purines (2) and pyrimidines (2) - A, T, C, G which are made up of sugar and phosphate along with the nitrogen base. So if you add up, It will be -

Sugars - Ribose + DeoxyRibose = 2

Phosphate Group = 1

Nitrogen Base = 5

Total = 2+1+5=8

 

8 unique molecules are responsible for the entire genotype which cause the variations among all the species.

 

Hope that helped.

thanks for your reply Amitash,

that was exactly what i was looking for

also,

any guesses on how much information is thought to exist in each cell

i mean how much in bytes, like kilo, or giga

if in fact that could be guessed

i know a chemical code with at least double the complexity of digital code

may not be easily compared and related and may in fact act in a very different fashion

but is there any research addressing this?

npbreakthrough , Your idea is failing at the concept stage . Would you prefer to spend a few dollars to make a prototype , then fail at the prototype stage or maybe learn a valuable lesson ?

hey hal, thanks for the reply,

im no engineer, i have no stake in this idea , and therefore no "dog" in the fight,

and no lesson to learn

i figured id come to a science forum site and run the idea across a few real engineers ,

fortunately all my questions have already been addressed by other members,

and i now see how this idea is not as viable as maybe i thought it could be.

ive always known the only way to become less ignorant is to ask questions from those who are less ignorant than myself,

so i haven't failed in anyway, in fact, id like to believe i came out with just as about as good as an outcome that i could have expected,

although much short of my billion dollar goal.

but i do appreciate you taking time out of your busy schedule, to come super late into this thread and propose failure upon me

i hope you accomplished your goal of making yourself feel smarter without having to contribute any actual intellectual stimulus or engineering expertise

thanks, to everyone else

the chance of genetic deformation would double, ......probably just like incest

Show me where i got wrong.

what if we......used 1 inch marbles 2 for every square inch of room, kept the amount of explosives at the adequate level to propel each marble to atleast one wall, and gradually reduced the number of marbles each trial by one until we had only one marble left, and

charted results looking for the trial number when the marbles ceased to hit the bulls eye for good? of course......we would have to decide how large the bullseye would be........which brings me full circle to how we would try and quantify the odds of the fortuitous event.....determining the size of the bullseye is the same as trying to find the odds of a life allowing planet ..........DAMNIT......DAMNIT........i understand now, Drrocket, sorry for wasting your time.....

if binary is to 2,

then genetic is to ??

basically , if you boil down to the most basic building blocks of the genetic code.....how many are unique?

Really? This is how you contribute? Really?

 

Race and genetics are two related yet different concepts.

 

There are different types of intelligence, IQ is not the absolute measure thereof. But, it is influenced by genes, pretty much everything is. But since IQ has got a distinctive *brain* flavour to it, nurture plays a huge role, possibly even greater than nature. So, whilst your genes may give you a basic foundation or layout, it's up to you and your environment to choose how you build the house.

not quite sure i understand your grievance, my first paragraph simply re-affirmed some of the more articulated points made, (which also lines up with your point as well)

and my second , was just a funny observation.......

But you have no a priori idea what that finite number will be.

 

Even a probability zero event can occur a finite (or actually infinite) number of times in infinitely many trials.

 

So, your logic doesn't help.

what if we......used 1 inch marbles 2 for every square inch of room, kept the amount of explosives at the adequate level to propel each marble to atleast one wall, and gradually reduced the number of marbles each trial by one until we had only one marble left, and

charted results looking for the trial number when the marbles ceased to hit the bulls eye for good? of course......we would have to decide how large the bullseye would be........

From the Wiki link to the Drake equation:

 

" As T.J. Nelson states:^[24]

The Drake equation consists of a large number of probabilities multiplied together. Since each factor is guaranteed to be somewhere between 0 and 1, the result is also guaranteed to be a reasonable-looking number between 0 and 1. Unfortunately, all the probabilities are completely unknown, making the result worse than useless.

 

Likewise, in a 2003 lecture at Caltech, Michael Crichton, a science fiction author, stated:^[25]

 

The problem, of course, is that none of the terms can be known, and most cannot even be estimated. The only way to work the equation is to fill in with guesses. [...] As a result, the Drake equation can have any value from "billions and billions" to zero. An expression that can mean anything means nothing. Speaking precisely, the Drake equation is literally meaningless..."

 

From Feynmam:

 

"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool." -- Richard P. Feynman

 

You are fooling yourself. Your approach is going nowhere. Fast.

 

 

 

wow, thanks again for the reply,

my reply to spyman was just to thank him for letting me know the actual name of such previous inquiries, i am under no

assumption that the drake equation can really solve anything i always read the criticisms of theory first.......

also, from my initial post "5. i dont assume that we know how much energy is in the universe, and wouldn't want to burden anybody with trying to weigh all the mass in it either,.....just wanting to know what kind of math would be needed to start this kind of inquiry"

so therefore, thanks spyman

before i replied to to spy man, i did reply to your last post, again if you could help me with this it would be greatly appreciated,

"okay, thanks again for your reply, allow me to scale this down a bit so we can forget the "god" word, and do away with the substance of the universe

suppose we put a jar of marbles with a grenade in the middle of a 20x20 ft room, and put a target at the top of one of the corners

what kind of formula could i use to try and predict how many marbles,size of explosion, and attempts will be needed before a marble hits the bulls eye?"