Mart

Keep it safe.

Have I got this correct? The Twin Paradox can be resolved by showing that only one of the twins undergoes acceleration in order to return to base. So what has the value of their relative velocity got to do with the paradox?

Losfomot . . . in an earlier post you said "The distance is there, and has a definite value." Any idea where this distance value is stored (for want of a better term) other than in the physical distance (which has yet to be measured)?

What specific reservations do you have about instant updating of a distance?

If I've got this right, according to Losfomot distances exist independently of measurement. Until a distance is measured by someone its value remains unknown (but knowable). On this thesis, when we measure we are attempting to ascertain a pre-existing quantity. This suggets a universe in which everybody's distance to every other body exists and has some specific value. Due to limitations (finite speed of light. etc) we need time to get these numbers. Also when I move from home to work all these distances are being instantaneously updated even to the farthest reaches of space.

If they believe that they are unhealthy and they believe that they have some responsibility for their unhealthy state then maybe they will want to do something about it? Using blame as a lever may be counter-productive.

If there is a definite value to the distance and no one has measured it how is that definite distance established and maintained? Wouldn't some type of interaction be necessary? If a tree falls in the woods, and nobody is there to hear it then it makes vibrations but it doesn't make a sound. Sound needs somebody - unless you allow that trees and rocks hear sounds.

They could only be known to be stationary relative to each other in retrospect. That's to say I would have evidence about the past. The problem is : can I have the same sort of evidence about the present distance of the mirror?

Who would know it and how?

I want to measure the distance to a mirror. I send a pulse of light to it and measure how long it takes for the round trip. I can then calculate the distance. While I'm waiting for the light to return am I correct in saying that the distance between myself and the mirror has no definite value?

If it was voluntary and there were no reprisals then no abuse. But if it was an expectation then it could be an indicator of abuse.

Good stuff, Xakana. I'm reluctant getting a parrot because I don't know how to treat them so that I'm not acting cruelly. What are the minimum requirements - space, temperature, food. Do you have any good links?

I second that!!! I think Gnieus has it in a nutshell in his first line. Dawkin's believes he is the deity. He has the absolute truth and people like him will burn you at the stake if they ever get the chance. Does that sound melodramatic? Not to me. I won't bore you with details

Can you cite experimental evidence?

I think your post #130 is important. It's full of feeling. Some people find that uncomfortable or they just don't get it (immaturity, lack of relevant experience, etc). Also folk on this forum have all sorts of intentions. Some want to fool around and play trivial games others seek help with important issues. I think you're correct about the subtle way the use of language can reveal intention, somewhat like body language.

Depends on the scale. Think fractals.

I agree that everything in the universe has its own uniqueness but I don't think I mentioned that in my post and I was not thinking along those lines anyway. I did ask some questions which I believe are relevant. Can you supply answers or at least tell me what makes my questions irrelevant.

We use light to see with. We see colors, we have the concepts we use to describe light. Do we see light? I'm not doubting the convenience of a way of thinking about our experiences but to assert that is how things are is premature. There are two (at least) possible interpretations of the laws of physics. One is that we get closer and closer to Nature's laws with our laws. The other is that Nature has no laws and that our laws are convenient and necessary explanations. If Nature does have it's laws how does matter/energy interact with those laws. Where are the laws? When did those laws start to exist - were they prior to the existance of matter/energy or were they concurrent with it? What type of entity is a law of Nature or any law?

Depends on the Jazz style. Early jazz (dixieland) is easiest to get into. Modern Jazz (from 1945) needs you to know the tune and recognise the chords. Depending on your taste you will find that certain styles and musicians are worth more effort more than others. Once you get it you ain't gonna lose it.

No.

Jazz (especially Clifford Brown, Bill Evans, Horace Silver), Hendrix (Electric LadyLand), Larry Coryell, Robin Trower, Ozric Tentacles (Erp Land !!!) anything that gives me a buzz from the back of my head down my spine

I think there is one way in which light is different from anything else in the universe. Everything, apart from light, can be "seen" in motion.

can anyone on this forum give me objective evidence that they are conscious?

Thanks. Understood.