ydoaPs

What books are you reading now?

 

Doesn't matter what kind, what subject, whatever. It'll just be fun to see what everyone's reading. I'd certainly like to get more reading material in.

 

I'll start: I'm currently starting The Blind Watchmaker, by Richard Dawkins, as I'm currently writing a report discussing evolution and I spotted it in the library while doing research.

 

Awesome book. I tried to buy The Greatest Show on Earth, but the Barnes & Noble here doesn't carry it.

A man walks into a pharmacy and wanders up & down the aisles.The sales girl notices him and asks him if she can help him.He answers that he is looking for a box of tampons for his wife.She directs him down the correct aisle. A few minutes later, he deposits a huge bag of cotton balls and a ball of string on the counter. She says, confused, 'Sir, I thought you were looking for some tampons for your wife? He answers, 'You see, it's like this, yesterday, I sent my wife to the store To get me a carton of cigarettes, and she came back with a tin of tobacco and some rolling papers; cause it's sooo-ooo--oo- ooo much cheaper.

 

So, I figure if I have to Roll my own .......... So does she.

MIT Differential Equation lecture videos

They say it is impossible to manufacture a ideal engine.

First what we require is a source with a infinite thermal capacity.So to keep its temperature constant we can add external heat to it. By that way though we take heat from it its temperature will remain constant.

 

Similarly for the sink we can use a coolant constantly to keep its temperature very low.

 

Is it possible to do that.

 

I am just 15 years old. So please dont mistake me if my question is ridiculous

 

In a carnot engine, the working fluid is at the temperature of the heat source when the fluid is at the heat source, and it is at the temperature of the heat sink when it is at the heat sink.Heat transfer, however, is impossible without a difference in temperature([math]Q=mc(T_{hot}-T_{cold})[/math])

 

This is a temperature-entropy diagram of an ideal carnot cycle:

The line from A to B represents the heat being transferred into the system.The line from B to C represents an Ideal work process performed by the system. Notice how the line is straight. In all real work processes, friction exists, and thus entropy increases. The line from C to D represents heat being transferred out of the system. The line from D to A represents an Ideal work process performed on the system. Note this line is straight as well. In real heat engines, the work lines are curved, because they both increase entropy.

 

edit:gah, I play with a heat engine every day....I should be able to explain it better than that.

(Where are the engineering threads?)

 

In the Engineering section

lucaspa, the fused chromosome is what allows sin. Before eating the forbidden fruit, mankind had no sin and no fused chromosomes. The forbidden fruit fused the chromosomes and made Adam and Eve sinful. That explains scientifically how we are all sinners!

Here's mine:

Thought i'd say hi, though i'm sure you'll get to know me through discussions!

 

Welcome. Care to tell us about yourself? What you like to do, favourite area of science, etc?

Gamma Function

 

[math]\Gamma(z)=\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\frac{n!n^z}{z(z+1)...(z+n)}[/math]

 

 

 

edit: 4,000^th post....oh yea

The adjective in the broadest sense of the word, which is being attacked as a negative value across the board in this thread.

Could you please explain how it is necessary in science? I really can't see where you're coming from here.

Thank you for the walkthru. Now we can clearly see the errors in your reasoning and logic. You made a strawman. I never did what you claimed.

Really? Let's look at the next line of your post.

 

I stated that Christians accepted evolution. I also stated "If you are going to claim to deal with reality, then you must deal with the reality that Fundamentalism is not Christian and is certainly not all of "theology". "

Gosh, it looks like that is EXACTLY what I claimed you said!

 

I never stated that Fundamentalism was outside Christianity because of its rejection of evolution. You read the "fallacy" into it; thus the "fallacy" exists solely in your imagination.

Let's see. I'll requote this post.

 

I also stated "If you are going to claim to deal with reality, then you must deal with the reality that Fundamentalism is not Christian and is certainly not all of "theology". "

In case you missed it, this is you stating fundamentalists aren't Christians.

I stated that Christians accepted evolution.

And here is you saying Christians accept evolution. Let's see, fundamentalists don't accept evolution, ergo, you say they aren't Christian. It seems like a pretty standard True Scottsman Fallacy from here.

 

 

Fundamentalism is outside Christianity for reasons independent of its rejection of evolution.

Then why bring it up in a discussion about Evolution? You were talking about Christians and how they accept evolution. You did not say "some"; you said Christians, which implies "all Christians". When called on it, you spout some bollocks about your definitionof Christian being based on the Nicene Creed implying some connection to the acceptance of evolution and NOT explaining how fundamentalists do not apply to these standards.

 

See my posts to Sisyphus. Basically, Fundamentalism is outside of Christianity because it violates the First Commandment.

By that reasoning, everyone who does not kill their children for talking back is not a Christian.

Please expand. Walk us thru the details of how my analysis is wrong.

 

So far the only talents I've seen you display is for obfuscation and ducking issues.

 

Your post to which I replied was a True Scottsman fallacy. You set up an arbitrary condition for one to be a Christian which cuts out a large amount of Christians. The only "true" Christians, in your post, are the ones which believe in evolution. IIRC, that condition is not in the bible.

Yourdad, this is the science forums. It's not enough to try to make fun of me. What you must do is show where my analysis is wrong.

I actually did both. I'm talented like that.

Good thing lucaspa knows a true Scottsman when he sees one.

so, if we redefine "myth" to mean something besides "myth", then we all believe in "myth"s?

I think everyone has to believe in a creation myth on some level.

and i think you are wrong

Hi, im doobuzz, and i look forward to posting in future

care to tell us anything about yourself?

i like how he called his ex to have her get tested......lmfao

which episode was that on?

btw, did you know that, In Indiana it's illegal to bathe in winter?

hmmm....that's why it smells this way.

i didn't know that. i'll have to write the governor about that one.

it should be

kicked into pseudoscience or closed or both.

isn't that somewhat covered by the engineering forum?

sr-special relativity

gr-general relativity

bh-black hole

qm-quantum mechanics

idk=i don't know

 

lolly roffles=lol+rofl (not an acronym, but dave's sig proves that some don't know it's meaning)