Peron

I've looked for figures on the internet but couldn't find any. The sun is ejecting mass into space and I need to know how much hydrogen the sun loses through solar wind and the like. thanks.

I here people use the word talent in reference in people who can sing well, write well, or dance well. My question is whether there is something with in certain people that allows them to perform certain task better than others. Has anyone studied this scientifically?

Yes, but philosophy usually asks questions that are impossible to prove experimentally. When you get into a very high level of abstraction experiments become impractical or impossible. Science itself isn't special when it comes to this, take string theory. The strings are so small that no experiment could ever prove that they exist and even if other predictions of the theory are proven, we would never really know that the string exists.

Which kind of universe would people prefer to live in, one which has freedom to choose (free will) or one that is set and determined? Is it better to find yourself in a universe with free will or a universe with out it?

Is there any way you could give me a reference to where Jean-Paul Sartre wrote that? Thanks.

People who call themselves professionals, are most likely not.

Is a nuclear bomb possible if we build it out of other fissionable materials? Like Fermium or maybe some other heavier element? Could the explosion be increased in size in this way?

But this wouldn't topple relativity, would it? Haven't physicists been predicting faster than light particles based on Special relativity?

Thanks all for the posts, I think I get it now.

Okay I understand that, yet what if metaphysicians come to the conclusion that space doesn't exist with our objects wouldn't that then invalidate GR? After all ajb states that there is a physical interpretation of spacetime. I take it to mean that space actually exists independent of objects, so it seems that GR is making a metaphysical claim.

It seems that GR claims to know that space and time exist. Not only that it claims to know the nature of space with out providing any proof that space exists in the first place. My reasoning goes something like this, if we ask the questions does space exist? we might answer it by saying that it does and we might give our description of what we think space is. classical physics will call it a volume. But let's say we remove all the matter in the universe are we still left with space? Some (I think Mach) have said that, no if matter is missing there is no space. Even if this is un true, whatever our concept of space is, does it not fall on GR to give us a working definition of space, a definition that works independent of matter?

Simple question, just trying to figure out what reason their is to value another persons life.

If the Higgs Boson isn't discovered what does that mean for particle physics?

Let's say that we have a simple moral theory that goes like this: It is wrong to harm people. From there we can build a moral frame work. But my question is why do it be wrong to harm a person? The answer seems to be that it is wrong to harm a person because it harms the person! I would say that this is a problem for ethics. Or I might be misunderstanding something here. (This particular moral theory comes from Shelly Kagen.)

You're confusing hostility with rational thinking. just look at the evidence and you will see that it supports the big bang theory. the theories of Halton Arp and Eric Lerner have been disproved. Here, Arp and here Lerner

Is the fetus a human? Or is it something else other than a human? Because it would seem that a fetus would satisfy the criteria of being human; it is part of the human species and shares our genetic makeup. But then I have this nagging in my brain that tells that a single cell also has the same genetic makeup, but is not considered a human. Anyone wanna clear my confusion up?

Yeah, no it wouldn't require Fusion Reactors. A 2-megawatt plant would be enough to produce 4300 cubic meters of water a day. OTEC And Lockheed Martin is developing this viable technology, here's a link My link Also about the declining Phosphorous; wouldn't asteroid mining solve the problem? Or any resource problem humans will face?

As we see in this video at 1:00 the moons gravity well is very small, hardly extending towards the Earth. So then how does the moon pull on the Earth?

I'm just wondering if a hermaphrodite, with functioning testicles and ovaries, impregnate herself and give birth. Is it anyway possible? Should she just being cloning herself?

If I can divert for a moment. Why is the united states helping the rebels? I understand if the United states was defending the Libyan citizens from attack by Gaddafi, but why go to such great lengths as to, "support the opposition"? When the united states doesn't seem to know much about the opposition, as Clinton stated, "We don't know as much as we would like to know and as much as we expect we will know", so this leaves me wondering what the hell does the United States hope to gain? At this point Obama's policy does not include "regime change". So I think we can rule that out. http://abcnews.go.com/International/president-obama-authorizes-covert-libyan-rebels/story?id=13259028&page=1

Wow, Silenus casts a dim view. I would argue that consciousness also increases pleasure, so the two elements, Misery and Pleasure, cancel each other out. And if they are unbalanced i.e if a person experiences more pleasure than pain. These two elements are unbalanced so that person becomes less concerned with the pain after it has passed. So I don't think that the "net effect of the world on us is negative", on the contrary it can be quite positive.

Is it better to be aware of the outside world and of pain, pleasure, and emotions or be blind to them and not have the ability to know that you feel them? For instance as conscious beings we know we will die and a vast majority of us (not all of us) have a hard time accepting the inevitable, for this we live with an 'absence of death' we don't think about it. but Mice and most of the animal kingdom do not know what pain feels like, by this I mean to say that they lack the ability to know that they are being hurt. So is it better to be a mouse, completely blind out the outside world, or a conscious being and aware and conscious of this world and all that it means?

Distract in what way, could you elaborate? Thanks