Reaper

Have you guys heard of this site here: http://www.atlasoftheuniverse.com/universe.html Basically, it is an attempt to map the entire visible universe. Each little speck represents clusters of galaxies. Damn, that's pretty big. The map also allows you to zoom in on our part of the universe, and gives some interesting facts about the number of stars within a given patch of space. There's alot more in it too, like the big bang data, and so on.

Not quite. Even though there will be delay (due to constraints imposed by the speed of light) you can always use it to stream in large amounts of information and data, scientific or otherwise. Such communication would definitely be invaluable, especially if this civilization happens to be more advanced then we are. Maybe so that they could establish good relations with the human race (or to invade us, depending on the civilization....). And we don't know what exactly they may teach us, especially if it is more advanced, so it's hard to say if we would learn it or even comprehend it. Well, that assumes though that the aliens are peaceful in nature. There is also the possibility that the aliens out there can be extremely warlike (in which case we would be screwed if they decided to conquer Earth).

Yeah, you know what SkepticLance?! I'll start calling you on your bullshit, if no one else is willing to. ======================================== oh, my, god! You know something, it would definitely help if you actually took the time to read and understand the damned graphs before you went off posting such brainless comments. Why don't we take a look at the data again: Now take one good look at the radiative forcing due to solar irradiance (which, interestingly enough, is the only natural cause listed there, gee I wonder why that might be ). You see how tiny that is compared with other sources, especially compared to CO2 emissions? And, as others have pointed out, this will be weaker in the coming years as the sun completes it's solar cycle. As you can clearly see (provided you don't keep your eyes deliberately shut), solar irradiance is insignificant compared to other contributions. It wouldn't matter if was stronger or weaker, simply because the primary causes of global warming are overwhelmingly due to other (i.e. man made) factors. We will use all the proper terms when discussing this, regardless of whether or not they are inconvenient However, why is it that you want to omit certain things or points from this discussion though? Wrong dumbass. The very definition of solar irradiance means, specifically, the amount of solar radiation and solar energy that arrives at a given area at any one time. Chris C knows exactly what he is talking about. How about start backing up your claims and conclusions, rather then trying to shit your way out of this. Or better yet, why don't you take a book on climate change and actually take the time to learn what it is all about, instead of spreading your erronous opinions around. Nobody gives a **** about what you think. Either put up or just concede the debate. Using your opinions to back yourself up hardly qualifies as a proper rebuttal.

So, how long will it take before my username changes?

You mind if I ask you some questions. What compels you to create incredibly gay topics? Why do you insist on clinging on to your idiocy?

Somehow I do not think that cars will ever go away anytime in the near or far future. And, from my experience from playing SimCity 4 (I know it's probably not the best game to cite, but supposedly it can simulate city building and planning), rebuilding or restructuring infrastructure isn't quite as easy as just simply demolishing a couple of city blocks... Especially if it has been built in place for a long time.

I would like my new username to be Reaper, if it is available. Thanks.

Hey, most of my rep points came from spammy posts.

Just wondering, is there anyway to change your username? Or am I stuck with this one ?

You might want to take a look at this site: http://allpsych.com/psychology101/groups.html Hope that helps.

Basically, we are trying to achieve what most of the other nations with national healthcare systems have: free healthcare or healthcare insurance provided by the government. And if you read carefully the reasons for doing this is that most everyone agrees that healthcare should be a fundamental right of the people, not a commodity as it is being treated by the current system. The current system refers to the fact that our healthcare insurance is being controlled by corporations, whose sole purpose for existence is to make a profit, not to care for the people under such insurance policies. The fact that they can choose to simply refuse to cover for you out of convenience should cause some very serious concerns. In fact, they do indeed do this.

The point, which is something that you obviously do not comprehend, is that these units give us a way to quantify distance, time, etc. It's what allows us to make reliable measurements and descriptive statements of time. But the units of time, distance, etc., as Swansont said earlier, are not the same thing as time and distance itself. Time is NOT something that humans just made up. Wrong! And contradictory to your earlier statements. Have you ever heard of a biological clock, which is common in most nearly all organisms on Earth? Nobody cares about your opinions. Either point out a genuine flaw within the experiments or the process, or just concede the debate and admit that you are wrong. We have told you over and over again that any flaws with the clock themselves are either accounted for and/or have a negligible affect on the results, and our ability to determine what they mean. Read the damned paper, it is listed right there. Swansont even pulled it out for you to see for yourself. And, have you ever heard of a standard deviation? Well, it is clear then that you didn't actually understand the material, because the equation that he derived to describe time dilation states precisely what we have been telling you. That, or your just cherry picking quotes and haven't really read it at all. Oh please, you wouldn't know skepticism even if it came up to you and slapped you in the face. You know what else Einstein said: "Two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe" And another quote by one of my favorite philosophers: "Real knowledge is to know the extent of one's ignorance." -- Confucius

Oh, did we mention that it would also take an infinite amount of energy to accelerate an object to the speed of light?

Don't you know, the world has already ended, several times over! And, it has ended several times within your lifetime too: http://www.armageddononline.org/failed_armageddon.php It has ended 10 times since the day I was born . And, it ended a few more times after 2000 (e.g. 9-11, etc.)

Thanks for all your replies guys I really appreciate them. The thread was just more or less written out of frustration and an effort to blow off some steam, nothing to do with depression. I was just reading some book and I read something in there that really made me realize just how little I knew and how brutal the world really is... Heh heh.... fighting against hugely overwhelming forces is always fun, and something that I have had experience in my short life on this planet...... and with a pretty good success rate may I add .

Just recently got Failed States by Noam Chomsky. Really nice read and definitely eye opening to exposing the abuses and criminal acts committed by our own U.S. government. Also, I now have a purchased copy of The Road to Reality by Roger Penrose. Beforehand, I was checking it out from the nearby library.

Really? Then why is it that most measurements are made with respect to time (e.g. m/s, m/s/s, J/s, etc.). The whole point of a clock is to measure how much time has actually passed i.e. it is a way to quantify it, just as a ruler helps quantify space, and a scale helps quantify force due to gravity. And not all clocks are necessarily man made, for instance radioactive isotopes have predictable half-lives, and quartz crystals oscillate at regular intervals. Read the above. Clearly, you haven't really thought it through. You can read about that right here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hafele-Keating_experiment Not according to this equation: t=to/[root]1 - v2/c2[/root]. According to the above, time dialation is a real phenomenon, not just someone's perception. But it doesn't accumulate more time. Read the above. And actually take the time to learn relativity before you go off spreading your erroneous opinions. Simple. I just create a device or find a substance/material/object that oscillates/moves/ticks/etc.. at a regular interval or a constant rate. And then, we assign a value to each tick/movement/..... It's how we've always done it, except that nowadays we use atoms instead of hourglasses. The only real difference between time and space is that time is a temporal dimension. =========================== And, we know that time dialation occured because there is nothing wrong with the device itself. And any errors that occur, human or otherwise, are taken into account, that's why a margin of error is always included when explaining the results of an experiment. It would help if you actually read a textbook on Relativity and do some equations on it and understand what exactly the equations and concepts mean, rather than stubbornly clinging on to your preconcieved notions of it. Not according to this equation: t=to/[sqrt]1 - v2/c2[/sqrt]. This equation states that objects do actually experience time dialation at relativistic speeds, as I said above. It has been verified by many experiments over and over again. EDIT: Does anyone know how to put in a square root symbol?

To expand upon what ^ said, try plugging in the speed of light for v, and see what happens....

What I meant is that most things you see in the universe don't happen out of malice, or apathy, etc. For example, when an earthquake happens, it is not intentional. Supernova's don't wipe out entire star systems because they hated them. They just happen because of stuff like plate techtonics, low fuel, etc. Human nature on the other hand is a rather different story. The physical laws that govern us do not impede our ability to understand what they are, use them to make tools, food, weapons etc. and more importantly whether actions are right or wrong and to act accordingly. And, humans also behave due to their emotions, desires, etc. 1) I said "we humans", and except for the mentally unstable, the vast majority of us do have the capability to do what I just said earlier. 2) I am well aware of that. Their effectiveness remains to be seen (depending on which ones your talking about of course). Also keep in mind that there are also organizations who specifically intend to impede and undermine their good intentions too. And also keep in mind that some of these organizations do sometimes resort to otherwise immoral acts in order to prove their point. Actions speak louder then words, and have much more of an impact. Now, what makes you think I don't do that? Just because I'm pessimisic about things doesn't mean that I don't do anything I can about these various issues. That has crossed my mind. But I'm not talking about those people. In fact, that's one of the reasons why I posted this in the first place, to see how you guys would respond. How?

Here is a derivation of the equation: http://www.adamauton.com/warp/emc2.html Let me know if you spot a mistake, it seems alright to me.

Yeah, but most of nature behaves the way it does simply because of a set of laws. And as for animals, we are not even sure if they are even capable of actually being aware of what they are doing. We humans not only have the ability to do what you just described, but also the ability to act on our morals/ethics/whatever too. The fact that we aren't willing too is what the issue is. I've read somewhere that we have the same instincts as a chimpanzee and other primates, but we also have hugely more power.

From what I remember, it has something to do with the fact that you can't accelerate anything past the speed of light.

I would put that estimate at about 70+ years, but yeah, everything else in your post is pretty much spot on. Better sooner rather then later, lest something unexpected comes about....

Oh really? It is clear then that you really have no idea what the hell you are talking about.... and I usually have a policy of not responding to idiotic statements; you are lucky that I have enough restraint. Thanks. Although, I'm pretty much over it by now. At the time I was writing this out of frustration after reading some book... The bright side is nice, but take care not to be blinded by it.... Yeah, but there is a difference; Nature just is, as Glider eloquently put it.

Well, that depends on what aspect of the world (or universe rather) you are looking at... I don't quite agree with you here. While this sort of mindset would definitely be appropriate for nonliving things and processes, I would not hesitate to apply so-called "human contructs" to animals. And as for predators being sadistic, well, I'm pretty certain that they do get some enjoyment out of killing their prey. Yeah? Well, why don't you tell that to someone who does live in those wretched conditions, down in those third world countries, and see how they respond. Or better yet, why don't you take a look at all the stuff you are appreciative about and take a look at the places at which they were made... SOME human beings are capable of doing that..... But whether or not that's a good thing or a bad thing has yet to be seen. Just because we have the ability to empathize doesn't mean that it will necessarily lead to good.