ParanoiA

You know I'm really starting to dig this idea. I can see candidates using that as ammo in their commercials. And it's perfect being a socially pressured accomodation rather than a legal obligation.

Who said I can't see why they'd view us as a threat? They've always viewed us as a threat, and will always view us as a threat no matter how you dance to please them. Have you been reading anything I've posted? I'm just pointing out the obvious and accepting reality for what it is. It doesn't matter how cushy you want everything to be, it isn't and will never be. What have you seen in nature to suggest such a thing?

woman(kind) though...definitely the most beautiful thing on it.

Here's the link... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socrates I'll lay the 'elitist philosophical circle jerk' idea to both of their feet. I don't like the mental test because it can be corrupted and influenced, for instance to a political party or ideology. Or any number of other ways. Maybe if you could do it like a lie detector test. Something other than written examination. Something that can be proven not to have any bias other than this trait we don't like.

And now we have a nuclear North Korea. Restraint, ain't impressed me much. If we had already thumped North Korea and left it for South Korea, I would be willing to bet we would have had an even more prosperous US ally, and I'm sure the North Korean civilians would be all impressed with their new lifestyle, like eating...everyday..and due process..etc

Especially since it mirrors their own feelings and intentions as well. Every country wants to dominate, they're humans. This should be obvious to you already. Let me help you reconcile it then. If you try to make a nuclear bomb, I'm going to blow up your facilities and materials that you are trying to make it with. Period. If you view that as oppression or not, I don't really care (hence, indirect oppression, as opposed to occupation and slavery) and I'll attempt to still be your friend, but it will be a conditional friendship since I'll never allow you to have nuclear weapons, if you don't like that - tough. I'm not interested in fair or just. I'm interesting in preservation of my life. There isn't a single predator on earth who's the least bit concerned about "fairness". I prefer to recognize the playing field for what it is, rather than fluffy misrepresentation and naivety. North Korea and Iran are your enemy, no matter how nice you want to be to them, they will remain your enemy. I suggest getting past that, and quit trying to win their favor and try winning the conflict they are engaged in with you.

Ok, maybe I've got my rose colored glasses on, but how badly do humans really treat animals? With the exception of careless slaughter through habitat invasion, how bad do we really treat animals in direct contact? I was watching a documentary on lions the other night. They followed a pride that hunted buffalo exclusively. They follow these herds constantly, day after day, picking at them and when they get one, it's a long cruel death as they tear and bite and rip into them, indifferent to the moaning and suffering coming from the buffalo. This is similar to most predator/prey relationships, as it's usually something being eaten by something else which is usually indifferent to its feelings on the matter. We don't treat animals like that. Even the ones that do treat other animals like that. Most animals that we murder are done by hunters or slaughter houses, which means a bullet or decapitation - either way a quick death, usually completely unaware. I know we murder animals for profit, but I think we kill really nice. As far as animal testing goes, how much of it compares to the stress of a lifetime of scouring for food, while being trailed and hunted by a hungry predator, only to die a long horrific death? And doesn't some of the testing ultimately benefit other animals as well? What if we ultimately help exponentially more than we hurt considering the quality of life for all in the future?

That fact that they no longer believe that god wants them to kill everybody who doesn't believe and behave their way. Iran's government is made up of religious nutjobs bent on destroying the west and Israel, and don't mind sacrificing their own or anybody else's life to achieve it. And the exact same people don't even think they should be alive. Hell, the people you speak of, even have a religion practically dedicated to their destruction. Are we supposed to seek approval from our enemies? I would think if your enemy doesn't want you to have something, you should probably get it - alot of it. Actually they should, because it's the west that provides most of the resources and manpower for their means. Like the Gulf war I you brag about in the next paragraph. But, I still get your point. Which is why I don't care for the U.N. I prefer my country to be the superpower of the world, picking off competition before they become competition - such as restricting nuclear ambitions - without directly oppressing anyone nor imperialising. And I prefer to do that without anyone's permission, just sheer might.

No worries... Yeah, but it's cool lookin' though...

So, are you theorizing that lepton number violation could explain the bulk of matter-antimatter asymmetry? I only understand about 20% of what you just said. Hopefully that number will come up as I read this thing.

But I'm left handed...

This has been a problem for me as well. The idea that somehow we must be religious in order to not hate humankind or to not apply our silly ideas of morality on nature.

Interesting. I wonder if Greene will take a stab at that question in this book. Also, would our universe be built and behave the same way if it was built on antimatter rather than matter?

Ok, that all makes sense. When matter is created (assuming from energy because where else would it come from?) an equal amount of antimatter is also created, thus concluding that at some point, all particles have (or had) antiparticle partners. Cool. So, how do you create mass from energy? Or, at least, what's an example of that?

I agree wholeheartedly.

I figured that would rattle somebody's cage. Look, I'm not a misanthrope - that's a little too obvious and presumptuous for my world view. And since I likely don't subscribe to your ideas of morality, I doubt there's any advantage to arguing it all out. But...I will say the "earth" could give a crap less what we do with it, it is a rock. Albeit a complex complicated rock.

Actually, I meant why do we conclude the 1:1 ratio of particle / antiparticle since there is very little antimatter. I wondered if perhaps the math suggested this. From what I understand, we can generate antimatter in small quantities - for quite the price I hear.

I've just started reading The Elegant Universe and I've run into the whole antiparticles thing again. What I don't understand and what never seems to be explained is: If every particle has a partner antiparticle upon which contact annihilates each other, then how can there be more matter than antimatter? Does something else also annihilate antimatter? I've run into this before, so apparently I'm missing something.

Who cares if there isn't any intelligent life to appreciate it...

Yeah...whether they asked for it or not!

Well maybe I'd make a good friend like that then, and I have my own food. Oh, and triangular sandwiches are better...

Why do you want to pal up with humans? Get a dog. Save yourself the drama and politics of human interaction.

Good point, but then that also serves Dr Dalek's point as well. With the advent of the UN and its coveted "sanctions", no one wants to do anything until the usual "flow chart" criteria has been satisfied. And apparently, that's a never ending loop in some cases. The UN almost gives the countries of the world an excuse not to really do anything. A resolution, in their eyes, is doing something. Some issues don't warrant sanctions, but rather immediate action. If the UN approved a bombing campaign of both NK's and Iran's nuclear facilities, we'd already be past that. Sure they'd be pissed about it. Like they're not pissed now? What has restraint really done for us in these situations?

It doesn't make it the wrong thing to do either. The particulars of the situation determine if it's the right thing to do or not. By right or wrong, I mean if it achieves the ends we're after or not. That's really sweet and all, but not realistic. In a globe of predators, inflicting fear in others is necessary. What if we didn't inflict fear in the soviet union during the 80's? What if they didn't inflict fear in us? It was that fear that generated respect, that generated cooperation - which kept us from acting out. Hatred wasn't generated at all. Unless you consider hatred for our political system prior to any engagements as an infliction by the US. So, here, inflicting fear may have saved millions of lives and global catastrophy. You're attempting to apply civilized cooperative behavior to an essentially uncivilized platform. Within our borders, we cooperate and civilize in order to get along and live our lives. Between our borders, we are still at odds, competing for land, resources, etc. It would be nice to turn off all that competitive, predatory programming that got mankind to this point, but we can't and we're a long way from evolution fixing it as well. Which leads me to believe, perhaps we shouldn't. Perhaps this competitive behavior is still necessary. Sure we caused that. And it's true. We are out to get him. And Ahmedinejad as well. Sucks that he's so far along with Nukes himself. But we would launch an attack in a heartbeat if wasn't for the rest of the world's resistance and possible nuclear retaliation upon an innocent party - like south korea. We've botched the situation there. Just the last 25 or 30 years? Please. We've been imperialist since the beginning. Just about every country is when it comes down to it. We've just done it with money before. Iraq isn't imperialism. At least not yet. When it becomes a state in the union, then we'll call it imperialism. And I hope we stay gung-ho about preemptive strikes and get rid of all of the other threats before all of these thugs get nuclear and one of them decides to sacrifice their country in the name of "god" and launch a full scale attack on us, or wipe Israel off the map. Remember, these people we're after aren't as fuzzy and passive as you are. In fact, they're downright morbid and far more predatory than the american government. When they rule, they oppress. When we rule, we liberate.