Phi for All

Was it the same guy who was walking his cat before? I bet he blames you now.

Slice or no, he wound up winning that tournament, only to discover that his trophy was not pure gold as promised, but had a little silver mixed in. Legend has it that he threw both the trophy and his bag of clubs into the water hazard and stormed off. Only to return moments later to wade out into the lake, find his bag, and retrieve his chariot keys from one of the zippered pockets.

ROFL. "Give me a 3-iron long enough and I shall make the green!" So many good quotes from Archie.

YT, you are right. It was Archimedes who said "Eureka!", which is Greek for "Don't fill the tub so full next time!" But I could have that wrong as well.

Indeed, this can be said of many people. I swear I can't tell if this is just philosophical philibustering or an attempt to simply use every word in the English language in order sue someone if they ever repeat them in a passingly similar fashion. I had to move this from Physics to GD because it is so... general. And pervasive.

Absolutely. I remember reading once how likely it was that there were intelligent beings all over the universe, even in our own galaxy, who simply didn't (or won't) survive their discovery of the power of uranium. Most of our weapons progress along with our social abilities to keep ourselves from being wiped out by those weapons. But uranium means a millionfold leap in our destructive power which must be matched by a similar leap in our ability to avoid war.

I'm sure he did. Waving his balls over his head, his club swinging wildly and his left knee slightly bent.

Didn't Socrates call this the "Eureka!" experience?

Why not? Does the lack of human form preclude increased technological advancement? I think they are saying, "Of those Americans that believe in extraterrestrial life...."

I would still vote yes if the question were about intelligent life, and for the same reasons.

If someone could tell me we could easily do something better than South Park-like characters, I'd be all over that. I think it's more a matter of animating a more realistic-looking character than a spud-like one. Don't worry, Azure, we'll make sure you look a-peel-ing.

You're a big moosie now, you should be able to use the Search function that's available for the entire forum, each sub-forum and each thread. It even highlights your search words in red for easy recognition. Or you can Google resources your damn self.

My best was 6. I love the 5+ curve balls the best.

We ARE heavily moderated here at SFN. We are not like many science boards who allow a lot of junk and clutter. Our members prefer it when we clean up the crap so their limited reading time is not wasted. This will not change. And when I get posts reported to me as being unproductive by several people, I close them.

I'm thinking it sticks straight out from the sides and back, but it's circumcised from the eyebrows up.

Please read, people! Just list hair color and length, facial hair types if any, glasses if any. I will add gender and skin tone to that list. No "rides", no height (everyone will probably be the same height), no details beyond this. I will be asking in another post (or thread) about some intellectual attributes for scripting purposes, but for now we want drawing basics. JUST THE BASICS!

RedAlert had the idea of doing a short Flash movie about these forums. It is intended to be a spoof of members and some of the trolls that occasionally appear to thwart the ideals of science. With an advanced degree in physics, right? If you wish to be included, you will have a cow head, but I don't know if we can make you dance. If included (your discretion), it is guaranteed that you will be witty, intelligent and give delicious milk.

I don't know the level of detail we'll be capable of, so for now just list hair color and length, facial hair types if any, glasses if any. Everyone will be in t-shirts with their names on them most likely. I'm not sure if we're going to be able to tell if you're wearing pants, jeans, sweats shorts or whatever, so forget that for now. Also list a type of weapon you might use against trolly trolls who would sully the good name of science. Creativity here (with minimal detail) is a plus. I'm thinking along the lines of a big book to smash them with for me.

We'd all like to think we would be the first ones not to be affected by the absolute power. We'd end the corruption and the pork barrel practices and the elitism. Then the reality of 230 years of Beltway brawls runs up hard against your measly 4-year term. Sorry, my 10-foot pole is in the shop. One president can't make the changes necessary. Maybe we should give the psych test to all the people who don't vote but get hurt by a system they feel powerless to change. Or the voters who really care about an independent candidate but don't vote for him/her because they don't want to throw their vote away. They're the real whackos.

Is he expecting you to squawk about the 60% commission so it will prod you into negotiating with him? "Well, if you'll send $10,00 to cover some expenses of mine, I'll cut my fee to 30%". I also love: it takes 2 weeks to bury your relative, there's no mention of who your relative was, local expenses on processing a will are going to be $2.3M!

Perhaps it came about from the concept of borrowing. If you have 5 apples but borrow 10 to make pies, you have -5 apples. This, of course, lead directly to deficit spending and politics.

And they rarely have any concept of proper accessorizing. It's always taffeta, stiletto heels and a beaded clutch. Gah. This is the really unfortunate truth of our present system. I think the only solution is mandatory service, with psych test, based on qualifications chosen by representatives who are also forced to serve. The best leaders wouldn't touch politics without such a system.

I think a psych test would be new grounds for mudslinging and smear tactics. They can imply things that any political strategist would manipulate and take out of context. Good idea in theory, bad idea in practice, imo. Are you thinking of J. Edgar Hoover? He was Director of the FBI. And he didn't have the figure for a really nice ball gown. Not a backless one anyway.

Personally, I think women in general have a more strategic, long-range focus when it comes to most things. Men, as hunters, were looking for the animal that made the tracks they were currently stalking. Theirs is a much more tactical focus. Their early role as gatherers equipped women to look at everything all at once and see how it relates to their lives. Gatherers have to find not only ripe berries, but also firewood, medicinal plants, tool stones, keep an eye on the kids, ad infinitum.This may naturally lead them to think more about future needs, leading also to things spiritual. Indeed, women played a much bigger part in early religious leadership than they do now.

My wife and I raise our daughter using the Love and Logic approach. I tried spanking, when she was about three, for safety issues and it just made her angry and made me feel like crap. Love and Logic tells you you don't ever let them see you out of control, yelling or flying off the handle. You calmly take things away, you pick them up if they won't walk voluntarily, you put them in their room, you come up with consequences for inappropriate actions. You commiserate with them on how their behavior has affected their freedom and you say, "What a bummer!" a LOT. You should never let them get away with bad behavior, but hitting them is not good, imo. I know you get an immediate response from spanking, but I think fear as discipline can teach them to avoid YOU rather than avoiding bad behavior. Above all you want a child who associates natural consequences from doing the wrong thing. When a child sees you lose it they love it, but secretly it makes them uncomfortable too. If they learn that there are logical consequences for bad behavior, they move away from that behavior. It takes more time to master than spanking, but it has the benefit of not teaching them to hit to solve problems.