StringJunky

If two or more people agree you have two or more data points which will increase the likelihood of something actually existing.

That's ok, but most people are not intellectual so it's not going to be a very effective tool in significantly altering the global or national statistics in favour of a scientifically held viewpoint. It merely serves as possible amusement for some of the scientifically-literate bystanders. A perfect example of an intellectual for which such a device would work ...he's not representative of the vast majority of people.

As one passed through one's extended life, via new age-enhancing science, one would find it's ultimately all the same old s**t but with different actors ...3 score and 10 or so years .is fine for me thank you very much!

No I didn't mean that. A thing must be able to exist outside an observer and can be measured agreeably by two or more observers to be defined as real ...there's two conditions. A single observer cannot. suffice. It is difficult and that was my stab at it. I think something exists if two people can share it in real time or measure it independently.

This is a valid point and not one I've really considered before. Critics also erroneously lump all theistic types with the conventional religious doctrines when they may in fact have their own personal unconventional religious view which can accommodate science fully without personal compromise.

That which can exist extant from an observer and can also be shared experientially, by whatever common means, between observers - if an object or phenomenon has a multiplicity of observers that agree about it's properties it can be said to be 'real'.

Yes, I can appreciate that this might be the case.

Could the starting positive points for a new poster be raised to 10 then that would help negate the effect Spyman writes about? This should be plenty of buffer for a few poorly-thought initial posts and keep a person in the positive. I, as a habit, tend to negate any negative points in starting posts or ones I don't think deserve them.

Might be a good idea to just have a general forum policy regarding modifying/repairing high voltage or gas equipment similar to that which already exists for medical matters or dangerous chemicals. The fact is if one has to ask how to fix this sort of equipment one doesn't understand how it works and hence prone to danger.

I'm not an electronics buff by any means but I know capacitors can be vary dangerous with charge in so I hope all knowledge and safety precautions will be acquired first before going near them in the TV.

In order to change someone's ideas you have to start from something which is mutually agreeable then work from there. Another thing is, conversion to one's position by the other will never occur at the time of discussion so being overly assertive is a waste of time. Deliver your position in a calm dispassionate manner in the hope that they will ruminate and absorb it later when they are in a state of solitary reflection. You have to present things in such a way that makes them feel that it is their realisation and not yours ...nobody likes to be told what to think.

If you really want to potentially live longer, walk more: "Medical Xpress)—Scientists from Aston University have discovered a potential molecular link between Irisin, a recently identified hormone released from muscle after bouts of exercise, and the ageing process. Irisin, which is naturally present in humans, is capable of reprograming the body's fat cells to burn energy instead of storing it. This increases the metabolic rate and is thought to have potential anti-obesity effects which in turn could help with conditions such as type-2 diabetes. The research team led by Dr James Brown have proven a significant link exists between Irisin levels in the blood and a biological marker of ageing called telomere length. Telomeres are small regions found at the end of chromosomes that shorten as cells within the body replicate. Short telomere length has been linked to many age-related diseases including cancer, heart disease and Alzheimer's disease." http://medicalxpress...ogical-age.html ...and eat less: "According to a study carried out by a team led by María Blasco, the director of the Spanish National Cancer Research Centre (CNIO) and head of the Telomeres and Telomerase Group, a sustained lowering of food intake over time results in an Increase of telomere length -- the ends of chromosomes -- in adult mice, which has a protective effect on the DNA and genetic material." http://www.scienceda...30123133852.htm

It doesn't matter, the intention of the thread was just to get people's personal idea of 'genius' and I wasn't looking for them to justify it and nor will I. I consciously resisted the urge to rebut what you said earlier about Da Vinci because I'm not looking for arguments. The more familiar you are with a person and their endeavours the more important they become to you. Unless one is omniscient one cannot know who the cleverest is/was because it is all relative to your own cognitive ability and knowledge.

So do I but some prefer those who scale the sheerest heights of a single discipline.

I don't think it will work because the internals of the shell are too convoluted, so much of the nutmeat and shell will be still attached together it seems. A vice and strong wirecutters seems to be the best way. It seems drying them enough until the nuts rattle inside is important too. From the accounts I've read it's the bitch of all nuts to extract.

Have you tried a vice? There might be an optimal position to crack them rather than hitting them randomly with a hammer. I'm not familiar with them though.

Yes, or that.

An example of freewill, in my opinion, is choosing to act, through cognition alone, contrary to strong instinctive influences e.g. " I really really want to sleep with that man/woman but I won't because I don't want hurt their partner"

I've killed all notification facilities on my pc and check manually When I'm ready ...they can rule your routine.

Why do you need notifying? You virtually live here.

Thanks. That brings me a little closer to getting to grips with the experiment.

So it takes lots of them to make the wave pattern just as if the photons were exchanged for electrons?

It's probably not a practically realisable question because an atom is so small, but according to theory would a single photon arriving at a photographic plate in the experiment only interact with one electron in an atom on it?

If we ignore the problems it can't be realistic. Anything with mass can't reach the speed of light let alone go faster. You'll just have to make something up absent of any proper science. Thinking fantastically, you could maybe have openings or vortices in space of some sort that provide shortcuts from one point in space to another effectively allowing much faster travel in terms of getting to a destination quicker..

What qualities did they possess that puts them above all others? I've always admired Leonardo Da Vinci because he seemed to be a prodigy at everything he put his hand to and advanced those fields as well which seems extremely rare. He had phenomenal imagination as well as technical execution. He married art and science without apparent internal conflict which I've never really been able to do ...to me they are at odds philosophically and I inhabit one state or the other generally. He was a great artisan with his hands as well. There are no right answers and this is not intended as an argument for one or another. I'm just interested in your opinion about who and what qualities makes that someone the height of human intellect or ability. Doesn't have to be in the field of science necessarily.