Royston

Good point Jacques, actually judging by Shygirls post, I think Newtonian Mechanics should be the first port of call, i.e if we havn't scared her off already. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_mechanics

And therein lies the problem, if we can't even agree on what constitues said phenomenom, how can we possibly test for their existence, or even deduce their existence from some logical standpoint. Lucaspa, I think Gerald Feinberg (excuse the pun) would turn in his grave if tachyons were brought up in the same discussion as ghosts. As swansont stated, that's a blatant strawman, and you're attempting to lead the discussion astray...which I can only see as 'for the sake of argument', the topic is ghosts, which are not a product of some allowance from an already heavily tested scientific theory. Infact, as already stated, ghosts are open to definition, tachyons have a fairly robust definition.

Shygirl...just type relativity in 'search', you'll find plenty of discussion on the subject, with many posts describing the principles in layman terms. You appear (judging from your OP) that you're familiar with the analogies of relativity, (bowling ball on a trampoline) so you at least have a starting point. Avoid any threads in speculations, because they're misleading, and well...speculative. EDIT: I'll look for some useful links / threads, as (first sentence) the above advice will be too tricky to find what is relevant.

Who said that ? Anyway I thought we were discussing literature which covers all categories of creative writing. I'm sure this was mentioned before, (I can't be arsed to trawl back through this thread) whether JK Rowling can be accused of writing structurally formulaic novels...which they are, it's encouraged an entire generation to read, and will more than likely provoke an entire generation to read other books. That's clearly a good thing...and apologies to whoever already raised that point initially. EDIT: Oh, it was ecoli...sterling point ecoli

Simple...it's a matter of taste. I'm just about to read Gormenghast, where the environment i.e the castle and the landscape act as a metaphor rather than just a setting, and the book relies heavily on descriptive poetry. That clearly requires a high amount of skill to write, but that doesn't mean the reader wouldn't find it boring, even if they did appreciate the use of language. I appreciate most classical music, but I grow bored of listening to one particular style of music quite quickly. Unfortunately my English teacher was so obsessed with Shakespeare, that I feel mentally drained even before I start reading any, so the odd sonnet now and again, although I just see the structure of iambic pentameters leaping off the page, rather than just enjoying the language. As for Harry Potter...I started reading the first book, and tossed it aside after the first couple of chapters, just didn't do anything for me at all.

I'd like to know that as well, I thought the title Professor was equally presitigous whether you came from the U.S or U.K.

In the UK, although (AFAIK) it's not commonly used anymore, Master is used before you hit eighteen...and more than likely still living with your parents . I always preferred Master over Mr.

Sorry, I didn't make that very clear, I was just talking about a sphere in a 'physically real' sense, in the context Hypercube was talking i.e how can you have a 2 dimensional sphere...mathematically you can, I was just explaining how a sphere would exist as Hypercube was describing. Judging by the question, I was trying to explain in Layman terms (clearly failed) ho hum.

Counter to what abskebabs is saying, proofs won't give you a better understanding of the subject...proofs are actually a different concept altogether, I'd quite happily give you the proof of integration for example, but I'm not sure it would help in your understanding of the subject...i.e become familiar with the operations, AFAICS proofs can wait. EDIT: Ummm, ignore my last comment... quite late, had a number of drinks, so I misread abskebabs post.

You can't compare nicotine addiction with technology, and how is technology responsible for killing everything on the planet. A technology that has been developed to purposely be compulsive could be comparable to an addictive substance...for instance WOW With regards to what YT said, how is a shed on an allotment a public place...unless YT is selling his home brew to the general public from his shed, I fail to see how it classes as a public area. Cigarette smoke stains on the interior of a shed, are hardly a health hazard.

I'm a hermaphrodite...(where's the 'other' option) for us molluscs.

I'd say at the very least you need to understand trigonmetric ratios, unit circles et.c before you start calculus, that's just my opinion, but trig crops up in calculus a lot, so I'd recommend becoming familiar with the concept and memorize the identities. As above (what Lockheed touched on) here's a brief summary... Take P(x.y) as a point on a unit circle, with centre O, where the angle from the positive x axis to OP is theta [math]\theta[/math] it's important to remember if [math]\theta[/math] is positive you're measuring the angle anticlockwise, and obviously if [math]\theta[/math] is negative you're measuring in a clockwise direction, so... cos [math]\theta[/math] = x and sin [math]\theta[/math] = y where tan [math]\theta[/math] = sin [math]\theta[/math] / cos [math]\theta[/math] obviously under the condition cos [math]\theta[/math] doesn't equal zero. Useful identities... cos (-[math]\theta[/math]) = cos [math]\theta[/math] sin (-[math]\theta[/math]) = -sin [math]\theta[/math] tan (-[math]\theta[/math]) = -tan [math]\theta[/math] cos ([math]\frac {1}{2} \pi - \theta[/math]) = sin [math]\theta[/math] cos ([math]\pi - \theta[/math]) = -cos [math]\theta[/math] sin ([math]\pi - \theta[/math]) = sin [math]\theta[/math] tan ([math]\pi - \theta[/math]) = -tan [math]\theta[/math] sin ([math]\frac {1}{2} \pi - \theta[/math]) = cos [math]\theta[/math] cos ([math]\theta + 2\pi[/math]) = cos [math]\theta[/math] sin ([math]\theta + 2\pi[/math]) = sin [math]\theta[/math] tan ([math]\theta + \pi[/math]) = tan [math]\theta[/math] cos^2 [math]\theta[/math] + sin^2 [math]\theta[/math] = 1 Once you have unit circles down, you can move onto functions using trig...e.g f(x) = tan x et.c, these won't make much sense unless you understand unit circles.

Do you still play Callipygous, albeit I wouldn't be able to meet you.

Yes, I realize this thread is over two years old, but I've been avoiding playing WOW due to (as I feared) how ridiculously compulsive it is. I'm on a European server : Korgall I have but one character : Legibus lvl 28 I'm a forsaken warlock, and I belong to the Horde Anyone else play WOW, it would be neat to meet up with anyone on SFN...obviously they'd have to be from Europe.

Precisely, if we had the means, there wouldn't be a corner of the universe that wasn't probed. Even from a physics point of view, that we need to assume that the same laws hold in our galaxy, compared to another...it doesn't retract from satisfying our curiosity, and doesn't retract from achieving what appears to be an impossible feat. Agentchange...look up gravitational lensing and dark matter for the method of detection of those pesky non-baryonic particles. Other than that, I don't really have the foggiest what you're going on about. EDIT: the first paragraph was in response to post 11...away from desk.

So your left testy is expanding at an accelerated rate...sounds nasty. EDIT: Sorry for going off topic.

What ?

Only ? Is that a modest number of bonzais relative to other bonzai lovers ? Alcohol does tend to play a role in some of my 'me time' activites, unless you were talking about milshakes or horlicks or some other beverage. I can't believe I missed the obvious...posting on SFN. I really enjoy rapid fire posting...when I check the 'who's online' to see if they're replying to my post, and then rush in for the kill. I wish we had a stream nearby, that does sound very relaxing...the closest I have is listening to my housemate taking a piss, whilst I read some Terry Pratchett or physics and sometimes philosophy, I'm sure it's not quite the same experience.

Please see the BBC article below... http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/6923577.stm

Hmmm, the only point I can see for bringing back P&R is due to popularity, which may at face value seem a good reason, but it really isn't. I actually posted in the 'how many posters here are athiest' just because I felt a little left out. It was a perfectly standard question, (and all due respect to those involved) but it went on and on with a load of inconclusive semantic (yawn inducing) and sometimes heated discussion...as though people were trying to come to some conclusion...the OP was just asking what belief category you fell into, that's all. This is the problem with talk on God et.c I want to use logic in debate, the discussion goes somewhere, and you learn as you go...you can't apply logic when the subject matter is pure 'belief', and when a scientific approach just isn't applicable. I can see myself posting in the P&R section if it's reintroduced, for the same reason as when I have a drunken discussion with my friends on the subject...it's like we can't help wanting to discuss the subject, even though 9 times out of 10 it ends up in an argument...THAT DOESN'T GET ANYWHERE. Perhaps that's why it's popular, a seemingly endless discussion point. OTOH, I'd like to be proven wrong, but I would be suprised if calm, mature discussion is maintained throughout. I personally don't think such discussion should be promoted by having a dedicated section for it, but obviously allowing it in GD for example, means it can't be moderated seperately. Pfft, I guess the proof is in the pudding, and maybe it will work out this time round (with the new regulations et.c)...if it's brought back.

This thread is just to share those possibly rare moments or hours, where all the responsibilites of the day are put aside (works over, kids are asleep et.c), and you get to do exactly what you want. For me, getting back from work sitting in the back garden with a huge cup of tea, and just pondering and enjoying the sun (although that's been sadly lacking recently...the sun that is) More recently, (after avoiding playing it for the last two years) I like to get up at the crack of dawn on Sunday, and emmerse myself in WOW for several hours, or late at night with a bottle of wine. SFN chat, if I'm in on a Friday, is always good fun. So what do you get up to, when you have some proper 'me time'...stiff whiskey and a good book, going for a jog late at night, tending the garden or simply putting your feet up and watching sci fi re-runs ? This is really about what 'you' do in or around home, so not involving anybody else (e.g with your 'other half' or going out with friends for example.)

Freewill basically requires that you can determine an event (through choice), without any influence from external sources. That's clearly not determined or random, because the source of the next event is solely your choice. I'm sure there's many ways of looking at how that could be a possibility, but how do you test such a thing. Freewill would have to be something that manifested or evolved over time, it would have to involve some anthropic view of the universe, which I'm not entirely comfortable with. I certainly don't feel I'm in a position to say whether it exists or not.

You're not thinking in the right terms...only the surface is defined on a 2 dimensional sphere, there's no volume (2-manifold)...where as a 3-sphere requires the co-ordinates in 4d Euclidean space (3-manifold.) Think of it this way, if you start with an x,y plane, and a point is defined by the relationship between x and y, that is one dimensional, as depth (z) isn't included. The point isn't 2 dimensional, because all it is a reference of y with respect to x. I think you're slipping up, because you're thinking of lines and points as solely physical objects i.e you draw a line, the ink from your pen is 3 dimensional in a 4 dimensional space. A line or point doesn't require higher dimensions to be defined. The same with the surface of a sphere. Does that make sense ?

I have no idea what God is, so I can't hold a belief or non-belief in something, when I have absolutely no idea what that something is.

This should help...I believe this is the brand Transdecimal was talking about. Though it's a far cry from what you want to achieve (last paragraph of your OP) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypercolor