thedarkshade

And it's 4.18 Joule per calorie

If you are referring to the Cal (capitalized, food calorie), that equals 4182J.

But I also can't respect any person like iNow, who one day will be rotting two feet under the grass, with no hope and nothing more.

You are so wrong about the respect! Just stick a little more in the forum and you will see.

 

Btw, iNow is just an example, I picked his name, but there are more like him over here

I wish there are more like him over here.

Oh... you do organic chemistry at that age?!!!

Thats crazy.

Where I come from, we took organic chemistry in the 8th class, when I was 14. It was not that advanced though.

I think it was since then that I hate organic chemistry. It is indeed boring.

Keep in mind however that not every salt dissociates. CaCO₃ doesnt dissolve in water and therefore should be written as CaCO₃ (s).

It might not dissociate in a particular solvent, but that doesn't mean it's dissociative.

Aren't some of these 'philosophical' type questions made up just to stir debate, to practice argument, and to annoy the hell out of scientists??

I don't think so. Scientists are reasonable people and only spend time doing reasonable things.

Yes, a very good one indeed. Thanks for sharing:-)

It's just an expression antimatter. Jeez!!!

Have you read how deBroglie derived his "wave-particle duality" equation?

Have you read Planck's article in which he expounded the "quantum"?

 

That was to swansont:D:D:D:D:D:D

It's always now!

In a physical sense, yes , he was a normal guy (ignore his hairs for a moment). But on the mental sense, he wasn't actually quite quite ordinary.

 

And I actually disagree with Klaynos. Disregarding the fact that he failed on unification (failure: another fact that makes him human:-)), a lot of changes have happened in physics since him, but his merits stand on the fact that he was one of those people who triggered this change.

As public loathing of nuclear plants has reached fever pitch, new installations of that type have been built far from the end-users, if at all. imp

It is actually the misuse that might be the reason for this loathe!

But remember that Aristotle and was a philosopher, and philosophers really know how to screw up a lot of things making them over-complicated when there is actually no need to do so. This is a typical example.

 

"Yes, travel over a distance cannot be completed, or begun." I am a bit ashamed to say but this sentence has no meaning to me. What does this mean? That I don't really get back home from school when I get back home from school?

You can get the idea of measuring a triceratops now that we have the concept of measurement, but back before man, who was assigning length to things?

But this doesn't meant that length didn't exist before man!

 

But the point I wanted to understand was if you thought that length was a physical thing. You have stated that no, you do not consider length to be a physical thing. I agree.

And it isn't a physical thing! It's just a dimension where physical things lie in to.

 

Is the distance a physical thing? You say no. I agree.

 

Can you measure the distance a satellite travels? You say yes. I agree.

 

Is the distance a physical thing? You say no. I agree.

I have a version:

 

Does time exist now? You say yes. I agree.

 

Do animals age? You say yes. I agree

 

Can you know how old is an animal if you have grown it up? You say yes. I agree.

 

Did animals exist before man? You say yes. I agree.

 

Did animals age before man existed? You say yes. I agree.

 

We neither had a concept about force till Newton did that for us' date=' and force is neither a physical thing, but this doesn't mean force didn't exist before Newton.

 

 

 

 

I might have misread that to mean you were saying the distance was a physical thing, when you were saying the moon was a physical thing. Right?

Well I believe such distinction is quite easy to be made.

 

I assume this because I have come to the conclusion that in order for anything to exist it has to physically exist or exist as a thought or concept.

Time is subjective. Thought is subjective too!

 

You say that dimensions, length, width, height existed before man. So, from this I would conclude that these things are not concepts but things that physically existed before man. These things already existed as a physical thing and then man gave it a name.

Please Eric, try to understand this, it's not hard. Length, width, height and time along with them are dimensions in which all physical things lie in. Nothing can't exist nowhere and never, out of time and out of place.

 

So you see, the way I look at this is all measurements are concepts.

It is the technique of measurements that was invented by man. You measure the height, length and width, which are dimensions, free of men's will for their existence of non-existence.

 

So when you say that these things existed before man I would like to get a better understanding of what you mean existed.

Existed as dimensions, which are a very very fundamental characteristic of every physical object.

 

 

A rock is something that we can agree is a physical object and existed before man. Right?

Right! But it couldn't exist nowhere and never. So it existed in time and space!

 

Man created the concept of a rock, not (the) rock. There was a rock even when man wasn't there, and all that man did is give it a name, concept, ROCK.

It's actually this simple;)

There are approximately 1000 atoms of K-40 exploding every second, and about 90% percent of which produce beta rays and most of the other 10% is gamma rays.

And there are approximately 12 atoms of C-14 exploding every minute for every gram of carbon in your body.

The interested 14-year-old... wtf!!!

One of my cousins is about 90kg, and she's had 4 girls 'in a row'. Should I tell her to eat more?

shade, do you know the charges of quarks?

Yes, I do, and I understand what your point is. But in many many textbooks I have come across the term elementary charge and it's value is the charge carried by an electron (a proton too), so I see no reason of ignoring it.

iNow, thanks for clarifying, I really appreciate it:-). I am aware of what you said and it is my mistake for not being clear enough! I was trying to say that any kind of evolution of intelligence should start from the internal communication system, as Mr Skeptic points out, and since neurons are part of this systems it should start with neurons too, disregarding those organisms who do not use neurons to transmit signals.

 

...that intelligence would have to result from an organism's internal communication systems.

Absolutely! Well said:-)

Did you breath that on purpose (curious), or was it an accident?

It may look interesting in the first place, but don't try it, really. It's enough that you understand it!

Why on Earth would somebody so something like that? And did they use those 'weapons' BTW?

Meaningful (IMO) means making sense, fitting logic. But facts (truths) don't necessarily need to fit logic!

Except the charge of an electron is not an elementary charge.

Care to share a link?

There is something funny I have to mention. Last Xmas except my X 360, I got also a book, a very good book, and guess which was it.. "The God Delusion". What a perfect present for Xmas! Jeeeez!!!!

So why so concerned about global warming then?

Huh? Devastating consequences, that means loss of lives. The concern is related to the "fight for survival". There is nothing special about this either.