PlanetZ forums - scopeusers.com

Btw, happy to leave the physics alone here, cause it's entertaining, but...

niceboy wrote:Its proven in biochemistry long ago that we are 7 chromosomes apart from monkeys,
and the numbers of chromosomes is impossible to change

Not at all true. In nature, some genetic diseases involve a chromosomal-number mutation in a population, and while most such embryos create a non-viable life, some are reasonably healthy individuals.

This is hard work, but has pretty drawings that illustrate the author's point..
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008 ... some-numb/

And:

niceboy wrote:We are two chromosomes from being Rabbits , and thats much more close then.

Again, it doesn't work that way.
On a point of information, we are two chromosomes from apes (not monkeys), two chromosome from rabbits, and two chromosomes from potatoes too.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_or ... some_count
Given my nationality, it may be that I'm closer to a potato than I am to an ape...
(It's best to anticipate the national stereotype jokes, I find....)


There simply is no evidence of a disproof of evolution. Not only do we have physical evidence in both fossilised remains and in the many recent successes in genetics labs the world over, and use the theory in practice in Artificial Intelligence programming genetic algorithms to design the best possible structures such as aeroplane wing designs, we also have no evidence whatsoever that the theory is incorrect / falsifiable a-la Popper.

And lest some believe it's an affront to some religious belief of mine (to have evolution rejected), I'm not a religious kind of guy. I purposefully do my best to leave my prejudices at the door when I'm venturing into an understanding, in order that I can dodge the bullet of labelling.
Everything is up for debate; good, hopefully simple, science is the best arbiter of persuasion for me.


Btw, e=mc^2 is best described as "energy is directly proportional to mass", or, e ∝ m
That means that mass is directly proportional to energy, which is what nuclear reactions are about - conversion of mass into energy.
The 'c' (speed of light constant number, or the slope of the line when mass is plotted against energy) is what ensures that a little tiny bit of mass get converted into a big chunk of energy. Boom!

And yeah, they're "tax bands" in Ireland... nothing musical about those particular 'bands' !

Btw, when Einstein was working out the equations that made sense of gravity in the context of the universe (relativity), he introduced a constant (the 'cosmological constant') that allowed his equations to be solved in the context of a 'Steady State' universe (neither expanding nor contracting, but instead staying still). A Steady State universe was the current trend of belief when Einstein was working... and Einstein wasn't comfortable with the idea of a Beginning of Time cause it introduced a concept of something that started it all...

Then Hubble proved that galaxies not nebulae within our galaxy, but were far away outside of our galaxy. Not only that, the further away they were, the faster they were moving away from us. The universe was expanding.

A universe that is expanding was necessarily smaller in the past. Extending that 'past' back, the universe can be reduced to a single point at some time in that past.

That point, the moment of expansion, the beginning of time, is the Big Bang.

Einstein has famously acknowledged that his Cosmological Constant is the biggest blunder of his career, where his original equations without that constant agree with what Hubble perceived and proved, i.e. an expanding universe...

Loads of interesting hits in google around this...

so true.
interesting is the new idea that before the big bang there was only gravity. No mass.
Gravity as an instance.
You know more about that?

I don't, to be honest...
Any links?

My understanding of Hawkings meanderings is that before the big bang there was nothing. Absolutely nothing. No gravity, nothing. IE the universe comes from nothing. Nothing started it. It just 'HAD' to be because 'nothing' can't exist.

'Nothing' instantly divides itself into 2 parts - something + anti-something.

Well illustrated in the Stephen Hawkings documentary that shows a man making a hill by digging dirt. He wasn't only making a hill, he was also making a hole. Both the hill and the hole add up to zero. Likewise as soon as matter appeared from the big bang, it was balanced by anti-matter. So we can think of the universe not necessarily coming from 'nothing' but coming from 'something' counterbalancing 'anti-something'.

Explaining the existance of dark matter.

Dark matter is a different thing. It's postulated to exist, even tho it can't be observed by traditional methods... It's there to help balanced the books and to account for the behaviour of such matters are the observed rotation of galaxies - given their observed mass, they spin far too fast - the outlying stars would be thrown out into space - so there must be alot more mass outside of the galaxy arms whose gravitation force keeps galaxies glued together to allow them to spin at that rate...

This galaxy-rotation observation is one of the principal ways to detect Dark Matter. There are others, mostly to do with the gravity of galaxies, such as gravitational lensing - when a galaxy is in our line of sight between us and a bright galaxy 'behind it', the light from the further galaxy is bent 'around' the middle galaxy. The level of refraction / the depth of the bend of the space-time continuum is far greater than would be expected for the observable total mass of that middle galaxy, and in this way, is another indicator of dark matter.

There's also Dark Energy and Dark Flow...

dante wrote:My understanding of Hawkings meanderings is that before the big bang there was nothing. Absolutely nothing. No gravity, nothing. IE the universe comes from nothing. Nothing started it. It just 'HAD' to be because 'nothing' can't exist.

'Nothing' instantly divides itself into 2 parts - something + anti-something.

Well illustrated in the Stephen Hawkings documentary that shows a man making a hill by digging dirt. He wasn't only making a hill, he was also making a hole. Both the hill and the hole add up to zero. Likewise as soon as matter appeared from the big bang, it was balanced by anti-matter. So we can think of the universe not necessarily coming from 'nothing' but coming from 'something' counterbalancing 'anti-something'.

Explaining the existance of dark matter.

You have lost the topic or what ever this actor is about to do.
Or what Dawman wanted to know.
If you want to discuss relativity, or Hawkings new anti religion ,that sounds like religion to me,
I just know its wrong ,so I put me schedule on the mastering here instead.
Bear

Niceboy, are you accusing us of hijacking a thread with something off topic?!

"I just know its wrong"

You have my permission to change the direction, as I believe that the original idea of the thread is boring so we must improvise, evolve, as that's the nature of Off Topics IMHO.
Even if this big bang and evolution stuff is not part of my belief system.

The only man who answers my prayers is Benjamin Franklin, a founding father as well as the face on the 100 Dollar bills I worship.
I have tried to believe in darwinism, big bang and the like, but when I am gambling I have tried praying to Darwin, even tried gravity, Mass and energy, and I lost my ass.

However, when I pray to the Gods when I gamble I win. But there are so many Gods that I start with the God of the Christian whites, and if it doesn't work, I try Allah, Buddha, Zues, Osiris, and on down the line.
I have learned that one must play the odds and pray to all of them, as that way one of 'em is bound to answer. And if that God stops the process of raking in the chips, I start over again.
But I never use Mohammeds name or Jesus, as that will offend the Gods, and it pisses them off as they feel ignored.
But having an open mind I will be going back to meet some CES guys at 9pm, and will try Darwin, and Gravity angles again.

Eanna wrote:Niceboy, are you accusing us of hijacking a thread with something off topic?!

"I just know its wrong"

No it was probarbly my fault and I just dont have time ,
and it seems to me , like one song I have made.
My drummer and textwriter is teasing me about that .
I have asked him many times to write some other verses to the song.
Maybe he dont like it too much , I never asked him.
Its about the selfclear meassures that Einstein was working with.
Its in Swedish though , so I try to translate it right.
Starting :
It is true that times stand still ,
and earth is spinning around
Bear

niceboy wrote: If you want to discuss relativity, or Hawkings new anti religion ,that sounds like religion to me, I just know its wrong ,so I put me schedule on the mastering here instead.
Bear

You're absolutely right, since Einstein / Hawkings etc dont give a flying hoot about audio feedback, that makes them totally irrelevant

SilverScoper wrote:

niceboy wrote: If you want to discuss relativity, or Hawkings new anti religion ,that sounds like religion to me, I just know its wrong ,so I put me schedule on the mastering here instead.
Bear

You're absolutely right, since Einstein / Hawkings etc dont give a flying hoot about audio feedback, that makes them totally irrelevant

Thanks
I am thinking about asking for a permition,
to give out for free the most ultimate drum amp,
and they probarbly want to kill me ,
because they believe we are all monkeys.
Bear

I should like to stay in thread for a post more

dawman wrote:We are far from free, no disillusionment with me. The fact I have to pay a Personal Property Tax on land I agreed to purchase, and eventually own w/o payment is just Mafia/Government shit.
And after decades of protecting European Nations from the evil Soviets, it's just odd that we see these "free" people escaping back to the very nations that threatened their freedon only 23 years ago.... ...
We have a new Obama/Van Jones mantra called top down, bottom up.
The peasants Cheer at this as if it will sonehow apply to them when actually it will be detrimental.
Bottum up can be translated into raising the retirement age by 4 years, and the wonderful Peasants Health Care Act, simply is a Government takeover much like Prohibition was ended beacuse the Kennedys, Capones and other Gangsters were making "tooMuch" money. Not becasue of some righteous protection of the little people, if that were the case why do the Feds tax the sales of alchohol and shakedwon the distributors...?
And the Top Down mantra means anyone over the age of 75 will simply get less treatment, and if they have Cancer, or need a new hip, they are viewed as unproductive citizens, unworthy of the procedures unless they are Federal employees, they are exempted from the commoners provisions.......

If it were up to me people escaping to avoid taxes should not be allowed to go back; sort of exile from a disowned community.

Raising of the retirement age, restrictions in healt care welfare and similar things we are experiencing here too at present; but here for the evaders is plenty of tax amnesties, no prison at all and they are even named cunnings

Someone said he has Cancer so thats why this theatre .
For me its just one more trick from some maffioso-like Russian Business tactic.
Bear

Eanna-
from your point of view, true, all true. there are many points of view in Universe/Multiverse, meaning observation points. your frame of reference does not include all the details of the entirety. some things are difficult to say for sure, especially when the scale is so extreme.

Yes Gary, it's true that the current physics has some tenets. It's a self-imposed limitation of science...

Lads, science is not an alternative viewpoint to religion! The two are not mutually exclusive at all. Religions bring with them a moral code, whose existence can be attributed to a human propensity to have 'religious experiences', and were instantiated to put order on society, imposing laws and prescribing behaviours of its followers before legal systems were introduced. Organised religions extend far back into history, and since there is a moral code of behaviour, it tends to instill a sense of judgement, especially on those who are outside of that religion. Hence the tribal identities and us-and-them'ness associated with religious groups.

Science is a very different thing to religion, it doesn't deal with morality, it doesn't ask that you 'believe' in it at all, to suspend disbelief, to accept someone else's words as 'gospel', immutable dogma. Instead, it presents theories built on a logically-sound foundation in order to explain observable phenomena. Sometimes, on the extremes of scale for example, it extrapolates beyond what is observable - that's theoretical physics. But one of the goals of science is to move theoretical physics into the traditional observable sciences - it's up to the clever practical scientists to work with engineers to come up with a set of experiments that are designed to support or refute a theory. If the observed phenomena indeed matches what theoretically holds true, then that theory becomes the latest, greatest version of the story as presented by science.

It is the progression of theory into observation and into practicality that has got me eating a breakfast that was grown in a different country, taking a Vitamin C tablet, typing at a computer, plugging my guitar into a bucket-brigade delay pedal, driving to work etc. etc.

Mr. Higgs was photographed shedding a tear when the first probable experimentally-observed evidence of the particle named after him was presented last year. It is a human example of the will for theoretical physicists to have their theory validated or refuted by experiment.

I guess that scientists are like Jesus' disciple Thomas - "You believe because you have seen... Happy are those who have not seen but yet believe". That's religion's idea of science I guess! Suspend your disbelief!

So, Gary, yes, my viewpoint doesn't account for such exotic stuff like the Multiverse idea. That's because there isn't good science (theoretical or otherwise) to support the Multiverse theory, as of yet.
And Philosophy, well, that's just 'fun', and like you'd say yourself, a whole different pot of coffee..

Surely this is more interesting than tax bands and the retirement age?!

I shall pray to science tonight then. I lost my ass and it was Zues fault, I think.

Don't lose your ass dude! They're easily misplaced...

I'm on my third ass. I'll never learn...

dawman wrote:I shall pray to science tonight then. I lost my ass and it was Zues fault, I think.

Jim, interested to know which word you've misspelt - Zeus' or Sue's

Damn-EE......
No wonder he's pissed. I'd be mad if someone spelled my name Jym.