Phi for All

Is your project limited to available technology? Research into microwave transmission of energy is difficult because of current international treaties limiting that line of technology (if you can beam energy effectively from space, who on the planet would be safe?). Umbilicals and space elevators are also theoretical at this point, but might prove to be a possibilty for efficient stored energy transmission. Here's a link I found: space elevator.

Jay Leno said last night on The Tonight Show that it was actually Camilla who suggested this but when she did, Charles was all ears.

I'm surprised more people don't bring up the fact that Bush Jr seems to think his dad did a pretty poor job. Flattening Iraq's WMD capability was one of Bush Sr's objectives in the Gulf War. Let's not forget that Bush Sr predicted catastrophe if we tried to depose Saddam Hussein. Even the Saudis thought it was better to devastate him but leave him in power so terrorism wouldn't gain a foothold there (among other reasons).

Funny, I took the test, even though I don't have trouble sleeping, and it told me I worry unneccesarily, but my neck size may be causing me to snore. It suggested I see a specialist about this since life-threatening illnesses could be present. I'm going to be up all night....

Brad Pitt's available, I hear. And he likes monkeys.

Neither your post nor your bio mention your age. You could be experiencing a growth phase if you are not mature physiologically. You don't mention if your dreams wake you up or not. Sometimes if I get woken up during the night a few times, even briefly, I feel it the next day. Personally I would avoid any kind of chemical fix like sleeping pills. Perhaps you could increase your exercise routine (not just before going to bed though), I've heard from many people that being more tired means sleeping sounder.

Oh, it's your parents?! GAH!! Don't you just hate it when parents love you and care about what happens to you? It's almost like they think they know you best or something....

I would suggest posting in the Psychology forum, but preface each thread with, "This is actually dealing with Sociology, but there is no separate forum, so...." Get some interesting threads going with a lot of varied members joining in and we'll probably see a sub-forum created. Lots of interest will speak volumes.

Let me step in here a moment us.2u, if you don't mind. No one here is implying anything is wrong with anyone's intelligence, education or articulation. There are all levels on these boards and the ones who make fun of others get smacked down, hard. Or banned. I fear that I might have started a bad tone in an earlier post of mine (which I deleted later) when I asked you if you wanted me to close the thread after Coquina agreed with you. You had said, "Well, I guess that sums it up!" and I made an un-witty comment about preserving your theory. For that I apologize. It was meant to be tongue-in-cheek, not foot-in-mouth. AzurePhoenix is a good member here and doesn't belittle anyone. Keep your thread topic clear, you're doing fine, backing yourself up with solid evidence and you are definitely holding your own here. Let's stay on topic.

You're looking to put a quantitative measure (maximum) to an unquantifiable concept (knowledge). There is no way to immediately test whether or not your most recent piece of knowledge displaced some piece learned at an earlier point in life. Is this what you're getting at, or were you asking if anyone has ever reached maximum and then been unable to learn a single thing more? There is also no storage unit of measurement for the brain that I know of. Bytes work for computer storage, but not for the brain. There are intelligence quotients and memory quotients, but no encapsulating knowledge quotients that take everything into account.

I think you realize no one but you can do this. As ramin said, hold yourself accountable. Things and other people are only temporary motivation. Motivate from within, otherwise you'll always be looking for others to motivate you. If you're happy with yourself, you can be happy anywhere with nothing BUT yourself. Then things and people can come and go, but you'll still be motivated and happy. And no, I'm not going to put a damn smiley face on this. It'll be hard, but you're smart and tough and you can do it.

One of the best places to observe this is when we are driving, set apart in a microcosm where we're the sole inhabitant. We assume everyone else is either a horrible driver, a drunk, an inconsiderate prig, a rich a**hole, a consummate imbecile, a doddering ancient or a road rage warrior. But if WE cut someone off, or tailgate because we're in a hurry, that's completely different....

I'm not optimistic about him doing much more than looking when I hear he quotes spending increases based on what Congress approved, rather than on the amounts actually spent due to his discretionary powers. He's waving figures about that he's not entitled to since he's hiding the real numbers with the other hand.

So everything non-biological is included in that "etc"? My mistake, never mind, I'll shut up now. *edit* How about the contents of the stomach? Nigerian food, lack of anything comestible from the UK, could that help?

"A Nigerian man, newly arrived in the UK...." This part could be determined by currency from Nigeria in the victim's possession, indicating country of origin and the fact that he hadn't time to convert to British currency yet. No thief/murderer from the EU would balk at taking foreign currency along with any pound notes the victim might have had.

I never gave Enterprise mush of a chance. I saw one episode, lost most of a good dinner and called it quits. I'm a fan of Live long and prosper, but not for that show. Stuff Monkey = a pack rat, one who keeps things indefinitely. Stuffed Monkey = a plush toy, usually kept on a girl's bed. Stuffy Monkey = a Brit with a head cold; a ninjutsu ryu.

I think this thread needs to be moved to the "Only Post IF You Agree With Me" Forum, which I'm advising Administration we create immediately.

This would make some other forums I've seen a much quicker read.

I find the intelligence required to turn on a computer, log onto the internet and navigate to this site to be sufficient. In most cases. Are you suggesting that everyone be a rocket scientist or just a scientist, ROCKET?

If this were the present case, you would get no opposition from me. If we were to defend ourselves while diplomacy shows our good intentions to the rest of the Islamic world, the heat of fanaticism would die and Al Qaeda would be hard-pressed to find a following. Taking the offensive into Iraq and being so brutal about it may make some folks at home proud but it only adds fuel to an already raging inferno over there.

What, you can't throw a piece of straw that high, Mr. Muscles?

My point was not in support of agricultural subsidies. It was in response to Tetrahedrite saying, "As long as the rich have their tax cuts everything's alright!" I'm starting to think maybe Bush put the farming cuts in the budget knowing it would eventually get stricken, giving Congress a way to impress their constituents. He can always point back later and say, "I tried!"

"Load a camel from the ground, he won't get up and you will frown." --unknown Arab philosopher

Unfortunately, it was Dickens who used the phrase "As the last straw breaks the laden camel's back", not an Arab philosopher as one might surmise. While I would never excuse or justify violence of the level Al Qaeda has used, I would imagine that there was not one "precise reason" for us to be on their "hit list". As with most things, I'm sure it built up over time until it reached a critical mass. Al Qaeda was an offshoot of the Mujahadeen resistance movement, opposing the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in the 1980s (where they actually received our help in equipment and training). I believe they eventually broadened their scope to include all countries they felt oppressed Muslim society, such as Israel and the United States. I don't know why you bring this up after quoting my earlier post. My point is simply that further violence from us is what Al Qaeda wants. Diplomacy and negotiation would destroy them where all the bombs and torture we can produce just makes them grow. Disprove THAT statement if you want any further debate from me.

But he's cutting some of the rural projects as well. Farmers aren't going to like this new budget one bit. This doesn't sound like he's trying to set brother Jeb up in 2008. He may not think he has to maintain popularity since he can't run again, but if he burns too many people he'll throw the election to the Democrats in 2008 (and the House and the Senate before that). Even if you believe he can fix the election results, does keeping taxes low really gain him enough popularity to offset burning the majority?