Ten oz

Time has to be calculated for. Pluto by any name or classification is an actual thing. It exists. Regardless of the words used to define time, time still must be accounted for. So it isn't a waste of time to have an understanding or definition. If I am sailing a boat in the ocean and and lower an analog device into the water to messure the speed at which the boat is moving through the water that messurement alone would not accurately tell me my speed of travel sailing to a destination. The ocean itself moves. So if my hull over water speed is 10kts but I am sailing against 4 kts of current I am actually only traveling at 6kts. Another factor is drift. My boat may drift a nautical mile parallel to my direct of travel for every X amount of nautical miles I gain. Sailors have formulas to account for these factors. It took us thousands of years to get to a place where we could accurately calculate it. Time is a messurement just like a nautical mile is a messurement and lots of things effect it just like set and drift for boats. Gravity and relative speed (object to object) effect time calculations just like current, drift, and speed over water effect nautical travel. Of course we don't have all the math worked out for time to speed to gravity yet so there isn't a single formula we can apply. Doesn't mean it is a waste of tme though.

I agree that baseball is the most likely sport to lose some of its audience to soccer but I disagree about why. Baseball like football is more expensive to organize. You need several different sized bats, different gloves for different positions, a specifically arranged field and so on. Soccer can be played on any flat surface indoor or outdoor with nothing more than one ball. As for attention deficit in modern society you allude to I think every generation feels that way. Prior to the industrial revolution it was common for people to farm a healthy portion of their own food. I am sure those humble farming generations would view people living in the 1950's (Republican's idealic America) as lazy, glutinous, and vain. It is all perspective. Generations that grew up without cable TV, video games, Internet, and vast expanses of paved areas to ride: bikes, skateboards, scooters, rollerblades, heelys, etc, etc obviously had more time to play a slower paced position game like baseball. I don't see it as a bad thing that youth today no longer have the time for such. Times have changed youth today have far more options.

@ Nicholas Kang, it isn't simple as you are summarizing. For starters we don't currently have any large scale energy storage systems that can service industrial level needs. The enegery we produce with fossil fuels is on demand for the most part. To collect lightning we would need storage facilities that don't exist. Also, with fossil fuels we produce the power we need in the form we need it. The numbers of poles in a generate and the speed they turn produces the various voltages we use like 120vac, 240vac, and 450vac. So we would need to invert from DC to AC and then step it down with transformers. At each stage power would be lost.

Soccer will continue to grow in the States. I think less and less parents want there children playing Football as an ever growing amount of research is linking football to brain injuries. Soccer is also easier and cheaper to organize for kids than Football and Baseball. Less equipment, less specialization in position, and can be played just about anywhere. I doubt Soccer becomes the number one sport here in the States in my life time but it's audience will continue to grow throughout my lifetime. This is just another stupid thing Replublicans need to shutup about. Seems like Ann Coulter is looking to replace the myth of the black athlete with the myth of the Latino athlete.

@ Moontanman, I don't disagree with any of your last post.

I view time as a messurement of movement just as electrical voltage is a messurement of electron movement and the potential for it. If there were no movement in the universe at the atomic level then there would be no time. The scale of time messurement is absolute zero to the speed of light. Anything above or below can't be messured by time.

My statements was directed at stand your ground laws. I was not looking to send a mild insult your way. Self defense laws are already in place. Stand your down is just a silly addition that says an armed person has no responsibility to avoid trouble. I disagree with that. There is a thin line between not backing down and antagonizing. I think the Zimmerman case in Florida is an example of that. Zimmerman was standing his ground but many wonder if that ground he stood wasn't ground he had taken by confronting Trayvon? We will never know. Perhaps Trayvon attacked spontaneously or perhaps Zimmerman confronted and a fight followed. Either way in my opinion Zimmerman probably stays in his vehicle and waits for the police had he not been armed. As for grouping all guns together I am not sure what you are referring to? I have not advocated for any type of gun ban in this thread.

absolutely !!! my point is that we already know how to create electricity with those things but choose not to because of cost.

Producing electricity isn't really a challange. Producing the ever growing amounts of on demand energy at the cheapest possible cost is the challange. I don't see how we could cheaply use lightning as a power source. Perhaps it we found a way of getting to it before the lightning bolts. If we tapped the difference of potential between clouds and the surround atmosphere? Even then it would be tough to beat simply putting a gallon of gas into a generator in terms of cost on convinience.

If you no longer live there, unusually lawless and danger place, and today never handle you gun or take it out for show it woul seem you found a solution to your problem without needing your gun.Self defense laws are already on the books. Self defense is everyone's right. Now one is saying different. Open carry and stand your ground laws are a different thing in my opinion. Once a person is armed they shouldn't confront, challange, intimidate, or otherwise harass anyone unless they are doing so to protect themselves or others from a clear physical threat. That means no putting a gun in the pocket and walking down the street to demand the kids on the corner turn their music down. When and if that situation escalates and the gun owner shoots an unarmed person in my opinion it is vigilantism, a crime. Let the cops handle it.

If I felt my life was threatened at home I would prefer to be homeless someplace safe. ......seriously, if people were pointing guns at me and I was arming myself in response I would sacrifice whatever needed to be sacrificed and find a way out of that situation. What could be more important than safety? Exterior motion lighting, bars on your windows n' doors, alarm systems, dogs, etc, etc are all effective crime prevention tools. None are free but neither are guns and ammunition. If I were convinced nothing could protect me other than a gun on my person while at home that would mean I was living someplace too dangerous. It would become my life's mission to not live there.

If local law enforcement told me I wouldn't be safe living somewhere unless I purchased fire arms to protect myself with I would live someplace else.

It is very fascinating. Fortunately we don't have to keep up with it all on an individual level. Collectively we can process huge amounts of knowledge. All each of us have to do is small. I understand your point of view but feel your confidence is overstated. You said you'd "bet" but how are you calculating the odds? It has never been done before. We can't say for sure it will ever be done. I personally think we will eventually discover life and intelligence elsewhere in the universe but won't bet on it. The odds are still very long.

All known life on earth has DNA. We are still working out how basic chemicals mixtures formed DNA. Life elsewhere in the universe could be very different. With a reproduction coding other than DNA evolution may not be possible or it could be faster. Perhaps all life in the universe has DNA. It is seeding throughout the universe in asteroids. We just don't know. We have only set foot on the moon and sent probes to planets in our own backyard. I also don't think we are advanced enough to interpret a message from other intelligent life. Any off world life form would have to learn our language, concepts of thought, and then send us a clear linear message. Reason I think that is because we live on a planet full of life and have not yet to learned to communicate with any of it. We have no idea what dolphins, chimpanzees, or any other animal thinks. Even when we see our own pets like the family dog or cat dreaming we have no idea what they would be dreaming about.

It seems like you are using the missing parts of the big bang, what can before it and lays beyond, as evidence for other theories. I find that logic circular. A lack of evidence for one thing does not in itself equal evidence for another. You still need your own evidence for your theories. You said "Our universe is infinitely large and infinitely small", that is a contradictory statement that implies size isnt relevant. While I under that depending upon perspective it may appear that way I don't find the statement correct. We can not travel or see beyond the speed of light which is what prevents us from visiting or seeing "the end" of the universe. It doesn't mean there isn't one. Also time is not a force. Time is a messurement of speed/travel. Time does exist.

Humans have successfully removed themselves from the food chain. We go about our lives free from the threat of predators looking to eat us or our children. The dangers that surround us are ones we as a species create for ourselves. If you are of the us vs them mindset you'll eventually find an excuse to act. Most violence is self fulfilling prophecies. People believe others are after them so they need weapons to protect themselves. Once they have weapons defensive positions are take that put people at odds with others. Then it is just a matter of time before there is conflict. Our, humans, development of weapons throughout history has driven the necessity for more weapons. Once country "A" has a bomb then country "B" needs a bomb to defend against country "A". Once too many countries have bombs we need to develop bigger bombs. Same thing plays out in neighborhoods across the U.S.. Good guys buying guns because they fear bad guys with guns. Meanwhile basic supply and demand principles mean greater demand equals greater supply. The greater the supply the more likely it is someone you fear, a bad gun, has access which then feeds more demand.

Species do not evolve continously at a set pace. Evolution occurs when different mutations allow members of a species to avoid extinction or provides them an adavantage over others. If a species is thriving it generally doesn't evolve as all members are able to pass their genes freely. So if we are trying to predict evolution I think looking at which species are endangered are the most likely candidates for the adaptation.

It was a failed attempt at humor. I thought the laughing face would make it clear I was joking.

We'll get around to killing them too. I have faith in our ability to destroy habitats.

Good post! I would also add that our economic model fails humanity as a whole because it only rewards growth. It only rewards efficiency when efficiency leads to greater volumes of production and growth. Efficiency that leads to less demand is a detriment in our current economic system.

Mass extinction events seem to have had the biggest impact throughout history. We (humans) appear to be creating the next mass extinction so our impact is huge, obviously. We are destroying habitats all over the world. In the future if your a species that humans don't eat, keep as pets, or think is incredibly cute it is safe to say you're future is bleak.

We are all very different. Some men like a tall woman while other men like short women. Do we just choose to be that way? I find the question a bit meaningless because we are that way. It is the reality. What matters is whether or not it is bad for society. Pedophiles for example like child. Is that a choice? We generally don't care if it is a choice or not because it is obviously very harmful to society. It can't be tolerated choice or not. Same goes for any number of things like violence, addiction, and so on. I would argue that most serial killers are born with mental disorders. We still can't tolerate serial killers as a society. With the above stated an adult (post puberty) men or women choosing to have intimate relations with their same gender does not impact society in my opinion. People have to right to spend there time with whomever they choose doing whatever they choose long as it is mutual.

@Barfbag, First let me just say that I am really enjoying this conversation. A lot of the concepts you have presented are ones I had considered years ago. I appreciate your responses. As a teenager one of the first jobs I had was working graveyard at a 24hr convenience store. I noticed that customers always seemed to show up in bunches. The store would be empty for 45 minutes to an hour and busy for 5 minutes. I use to wonder why. The several people that would fill up the store didn't know each other and weren't all coming from or going to the same place. So why would they all converge at the same time? I went so far as to recording the frequency of it to ensure it wasn't just a false perspective. I also chatted people up to get an idea of where they where coming from or headed. Comically my next job was driving a truck delivering various goods to convenience stores. That was graveyard too. I say comically because every store I would deliver to would always be crowded regardless of the time. Which means I was now on the other side of that frequency I had noticed. All the variables that effected what time I would reach a store like size of previous deliveries, traffic, weather, how quickly I moved, etc and I consistently hit every store during a rush. Ultimately I got a better job and moved on. At that time in my life I had considered some time of group consciousness. That the thoughts and ideas of one person somehow influences the thoughts and ideas of others. I gave up on the idea however because I realizes there were just too many variables I didn't know to run any proper experiments. In the case of the convenience store the answer might have been simply as people seeing others pull into the store reminded them that they wanted something too. No group thought required. Perhaps a lot of people are afraid of empty stores and avoid them. I couldn't rule enough options out and in the end group consciousness felt like a wild stretch. Similarly I have done thought experiments like the one you suggested with the blue feather. Problem I have with those is there is no real way to calculate to likelihood of seeing an item. Our subconscious controls a lot of what we do. We move about our day only consciously focusing on a few things. When you bush your teeth in the morning while thinking about work are you consciously aware of everything in your bathroom? Are you looking at everything or just letting your subconscious run you on auto pilot while you think about your day? So once you put blue feathers into your mind are you causing blue feathers to appear or simply tricking yourself into paying better attention to the world around you? When people are not paying attention they fail to notice any number of things. If I had a dollar for every time a co-working asked me if the could borrow a pen while already holding a pen I would be a wealthy man. Tens of thousands of things happen around us everyday that we don't notice. Passing blue feathers in our environment could easily be one of them. The idea is intriguing though. When you look back on the evolution of civilization there does seem to be continuity between humans all over the world. Agriculture seemed to pop up amongst different groups at the same time. Various weapons seemed to come about at the same time. Similar structures were built and so on. Then again humans are all a humans. When a number of golden retrievers that aren't related express similar traits we aren't surprised. We just say that is how golden retrievers behave. So why are we surprised when different humans do the samething? You mentioned being an author. What have you written? Feel free to PM me if you'd prefer not to say on the board.

@Barfbag, I am not looking to convince you of anything or change your mind. I am merely sharing my thoughts on this issue with you. No need to say in advance your position is unchangeable. I have actually had a lot of experiences like the one you are describing. I have had dreams about things, ones I have actually written down because they were so compelling, come true. I have thought about random people I haven't talked to in years and then within the day received emails or calls from them. I think most people have had these experience. I just don't attribute them to any form of extra sensor perception. Example; my grandmother pasted 18yrs ago. To my understanding she was the oldest of his siblings and the last to pass. About 5 years ago I had a dream that I was walking around a small town in Nebraska where I saw an old women that peoplwet old me was my Grandmother's sister. I argued with the people in my dream that my grandmother did not have any living siblings. When I woke up the dream wouldn't leave me. I just keep thinking about it. So that night I called my mother, whom I am not close with, and told her about the dream. She immediately corrected me about my grandmother being the oldest and not having any living siblings. In fact my grandmother had a younger sister she was astranged from that was still alive and living in Nebraska, WOW!! Thing about the story is that I can't know for sure if I had not already known that information. My subconscious could've just triggered information I had forgot. I don't have access to all the variables so in my opinion jumping to a paranormal conclusion would be a very rash thing to do. Same goes for thinking about a person and then they call. Something in the news, a song on the radio, something on TV, etc could have subconsciously triggered a shared memory each person shares which in turn drove the actions that follow. I believe our subconscious has a lot more to do with our behavior that most entertain.

@Barfbag In my opinion it is important to remove ones self from things they are trying to look at analytically. Phenomenon that can not be measured, only manifests within lone individuals, and can not be routinely repeated are not reliable. The minded is too easily fooled and our memories are often just suggestions of a past event. That is why eye witness accounts of crimes are no longer considered strong evidence in the absence of physical evidence. Interesting little bit from the American Bar association on eye witness reliability. http://apps.americanbar.org/litigation/committees/trialevidence/articles/winterspring2012-0512-eyewitness-testimony-unreliable.html I believe that you are honest about your experiences. You are being accurate as you can about how they played out. I don't believe, unfortunately, it is evidence of anything.